Randy G. wrote:
> "~^ beancounter ~^" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>World's Safest Autos >>> 2005
>>The are some surprising omissions from the list of winners. There no
>>Volvos, for example, among the winners. Volvo, which is part of Ford
>>Motor Company, has traditionally marketed its vehicles as being
>>"Volvo is lagging behind its competitors," said Russ Rader, a spokesman
>>for the Institute. Other car companies with strong reputations for
>>safety also did not have vehicles represented among the winners.
>>A spokesman for Volvo denied that the company's vehicles are any less
>>safe than the Institute's top-rated vehicles.
>>"Not true," Dan Johnston, a Volvo spokesman, said of the notion that
>>Volvo was "lagging" in safety.
>>"It's just a philosophy on safety that is different from building cars
>>to pass these kinds of tests," he said.
>>The company's cars are extremely safe based on Volvo's own tests and
>>they are built to protect occupants in real-world crashes, he said,
>>which are more complex events than a crash test could reasonably
> It would have been nice if you had quited the entire source of this
> information, or at least a link to the article.
> It states, "...for the Instutute." Could that be the "Insurance
> Institute for Highway Safety"? If so, IMO, they are a special interest
> group more aimed at serving the needs of the Insurance industry than
> the actual needs of drivers and the safety of the passengers of the
> vehicles that they test. If that is the case, I agree with the Volvo
> representative on this one. I have often seen footage supplied by the
> "Instutute" used in car company commercials stating that the vehicles
> are safe, but they cut off the crash test video just as the driver's
> area collapses as the front wheel is shoved past the door. They
> wouldn't allow this sort of editing if they were more concerned with
> our safety than their profits or existance.
> If memory serves, they were also behind a push to get insurance
> companies to raise rates or cancel policies on high performance sport
> motorcycles without regard to the actual accident statistics regarding
> the experience, training, safety gear, or age of those injured or
> killed in the accidents.
> Just my $.02
> __ __
> Randy & \ \/ /alerie's
> '90 245 Estate - '93 965 Estate
> "Shelby" & "Kate"
Very true on the point about certain manufacturere building their
vehicles to pass a specific type of crash test rather than real-world
scenarios. What would you rather be riding in during a severe multi-car
crash...a Honda Civic with a gold star rating or my XC 70? I have a
friend who, while on a trip back from Colorado in his Prius, hit a deer
and had to climb into the back seat to exit the vehicle because the
front doors were jammed closed. To tell you the truth, I don't think
that I've seen any compliments on Volvo crash-worthiness in the last
several years but, I'll tell you one thing...I HAVE seen a mangled
Accord on a flatbet hauler that still had the yellow plastic inside that
was used to cover up the deceased.