IIHS Small Overlap Front Crash Test (2nd Attempt): Only Acceptable again.

[alseTrick]

I think most people are more familiar with NHTSA vs IIHS ratings.

I think most people don't even know there are multiple crash test methodologies.

 

[alseTrick]

At the next "reveal" for Model 3 it will be interesting to see if Elon repeats his usual spiel about Tesla making the safest cars on the road.

Of course he will. He's already commented on the 3s testing just a week or so ago.

 

[McRat]

...
2015 Chevy Volt "acceptable"

However the 2015 is a Top Safety Pick.

 

[electracity]

The Japanese built cars to do well on crash test, but after a number of years insurance data should that the cars were not particularly safe. They were criticised and then did better.

 

[jeffro01]

While I'm not trying to dismiss the IIHS testing methodology or results, nor am I defending Tesla's response to them, I do want to say that the real world crash examples have indicated time and time and time again that Tesla built cars are extremely safe and many people have walked away from accidents they may not have otherwise. Whether or not this matters to you over the results of a "independent" test, is entirely up to you.

As for me, I can say without question that I have never once had a concern for my, and my families, safety while in my Model S.

Jeff

 

[22522]

OK, so I watched some more because the seat belt thing bugged me. And I think I found something.

It sounds like you are saying a front impact should trigger the belt tightener first and the side airbags second.

So they need to change the timing either programatically, or with thresholds.

 

[MS16]

This is actually Tesla's third attempt at the IIHS test.

The first IIHS test was earlier in 2016. The results were not published per IIHS policy. If a company doesn't like the first result, IIHS lets a company make changes and re-test. Tesla made changes starting with Nov 2016 production. The Nov 2016 changes included lengthening the side curtain air bags.

The second test results were released in Feb 2017. That test was for Model S's built from Nov 2016 with the new side air bags. It failed to make the grade again during the second test but Tesla said it would make even more changes. "Tesla says it made a production change on Jan. 23 to address the head-contact problem, and IIHS will test the updated vehicle for small overlap protection as soon as it can be delivered."

The third test is what was released this week. It tested the vehicle with the changes made starting with Jan 23 production.

Two electric cars miss IIHS awards

My question is, how bad were the results of the first test for vehicles built before Nov 2016, with the shorter side air bags?

 

[anticitizen13.7]

While I'm not trying to dismiss the IIHS testing methodology or results, nor am I defending Tesla's response to them, I do want to say that the real world crash examples have indicated time and time and time again that Tesla built cars are extremely safe and many people have walked away from accidents they may not have otherwise. Whether or not this matters to you over the results of a "independent" test, is entirely up to you.

As for me, I can say without question that I have never once had a concern for my, and my families, safety while in my Model S.

Jeff

Actual personal injury and medical payment IIHS stats for people inside a Model S are significantly better than peer competitors BMW 5-Series and Mercedes E-Class:

Insurance loss information

Categorized under large luxury cars.

Tests only show how a car performs in limited specific situations. Real world results do matter.

 

[McRat]

Actual personal injury and medical payment IIHS stats for people inside a Model S are significantly better than peer competitors BMW 5-Series and Mercedes E-Class:

Insurance loss information

Categorized under large luxury cars.

Tests only show how a car performs in limited specific situations. Real world results do matter.

10 Safest cars for Personal Injuries per IIHS? Sports cars and pickups? Convertibles?

Vehicle                     Class         Claim frequency
Porsche 911 Carrera 2dr Midsize sports car 24
Porsche Boxster convertible Small sports car 31
Land Rover Range Rover 4dr 4WD Large luxury SUV 34
GMC Sierra 3500 crew cab 4WD Very large pickup 35
Porsche Cayman 2dr Small sports car 36
Chevrolet Corvette convertible Midsize sports car 36
Mercedes-Benz SL class convertible Midsize sports car 36
Porsche 911 Carrera convertible Midsize sports car 36
Chevrolet Silverado 2500 ext. cab 4WD Very large pickup 37
Tesla Model S 4dr electric 2WD Large luxury car 39

 

[mongo]

It sounds like you are saying a front impact should trigger the belt tightener first and the side airbags second.

So they need to change the timing either programatically, or with thresholds.

It's hard to draw a conclusion with YouTube level video. Even without a pre-tensioner, the belt should not extend during impact. It seems like either the mechanism is faulty/ not sensitive enough, the belt is slipping off the shoulder, or something else entirely (like observer error).

 

[anticitizen13.7]

10 Safest cars for Personal Injuries per IIHS? Sports cars and pickups? Convertibles?

Compare PEER vehicles.

The more variables the cars have in common as far as size class, type (sedan, coupe, etc), price/TCO, the more likely the comparison reflects the actual safety of the car rather than factors like the skill of the driver pool for a particular car or average miles driven per year.

 

[Az_Rael]

Actual personal injury and medical payment IIHS stats for people inside a Model S are significantly better than peer competitors BMW 5-Series and Mercedes E-Class:

Insurance loss information

Categorized under large luxury cars.

Tests only show how a car performs in limited specific situations. Real world results do matter.

Those numbers make me wonder if Teslas are just some sort of collision magnet, though one that keeps the occupants safe.

 

[McRat]

Compare PEER vehicles.

The more variables the cars have in common as far as size class, type (sedan, coupe, etc), price/TCO, the more likely the comparison reflects the actual safety of the car rather than factors like the skill of the driver pool for a particular car or average miles driven per year.

I can tell you why a Porsche convertible has far fewer injuries than Teslas, but I think that you are bright enough to figure it out. It's got nothing at all to do with cars.

Comparing peer cars tells you only about cars when cars are not the issue.

HINT: A 200+ mph stick only ZR1 was cheaper to insure than a Camaro that cost 1/4 as much.

 

[SMAlset]

Property damage, personal injury, medical payments, and bodily injury are all in the substantially better to average (yellow) range in that chart so that's good to see.

However, collision (physical damage to your car if you are at fault) and comprehensive (theft or non-crash related damage) are Substantially Worse compared to other cars -- how could those numbers improve? Safer driving by the driver is the only way I see Collision being changed since the driver of the vehicle was deemed at fault. Theft probably isn't of the car itself (considering its a Tesla) but things in your car and non-crash would cover a lot of other circumstances like hail damage, water damage, etc. which you might not have a lot of control over.

 

[FlatSix911]

Actual personal injury and medical payment IIHS stats for people inside a Model S are significantly better than peer competitors BMW 5-Series and Mercedes E-Class:

Insurance loss information

Categorized under large luxury cars. Tests only show how a car performs in limited specific situations. Real world results do matter.

Interesting results ... The Tesla Model S performs far worse than the Volvo sedan and wagon

 

[steveho]

One can imagine that a minimal difference in approach angle of the wheel will be magnified once the wheel is fully crumbled up against the back of the wheel well and thus yield different results.

If that's true, and it had that much of a difference in the Model S, then how did the other cars REALLY do? If the other cars had a slightly different approach angle, would they have been "acceptable" instead of "good?" If so, then the test is invalid. Perhaps they really need to do each test twice and average both.

 

[trils0n]

nteresting results ... The Tesla Model S performs far worse than the Volvo sedan and wagon

It has considerably more collision and comprehensive claims. But LOWEST personal injury and medical payments of large luxury vehicles. So it seems like Tesla drivers crash all the time, but end up safe. Bodily injury claims are average (so Model S isn't great for the occupants of the other vehicle in the accident).

 

[ggnykk]

Ever since I saw the first MS display 'skateboard' in the Tesla store I have been wondering why the front bumper was so narrow compared to the car, would this be sufficient in an overlap crash?
View attachment 234343
Any experts here? Would be interested to hear how you think the car would behave if inner bumper reinforcement reached all the way out?

You can look at 0:52 of this IIHS video for reference. A lot of car that got good rating for the small overlap test just do a slight extension/ reinforcement for a tiny portion of the bumper. There are usually other reinforcement made for structures in front of the A pillars as well. But you can see that some manufacturer just want to spend the least amount of money to pass the test, rather than doing a comprehensive reinforcement of the crash frame/structure.

 

[ggnykk]

Makes me curious how my 2015 pre-facelift Model S would have fared in such a test, had it been tested. There may or may not have been any production changes in seatbelts, seats, airbags, frames, etc., you name it, that could have affected the test result. Unfortunately, there is likely no way to find out.

Look at the IIHS page for Model S (2017 Tesla Model S). The "Small overlap front" tap clearly say that anything before September 2016 structural change isn't tested. So it is fair to assume that any Tesla made before September 2016 doesn't have the "acceptable" rating.

 

[ggnykk]

Those numbers make me wonder if Teslas are just some sort of collision magnet, though one that keeps the occupants safe.
View attachment 234451

I think the "Collision" number is so high is because Tesla repair can only be done in super expensive Tesla-approved shops. Secondly, it is because of the demographics of Tesla drivers, predominantly male drivers in their 30s and 40s, all high risk group to drive aggressively. The high "Collision" red numbers doesn't made Tesla is bad in crash in terms of protection, as it is clearly shown in low green numbers in "Personal Injury".