Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans Acura RL Acura RL
7343 messages, Last post on Dec 06, 2009 at 5:25 AM
You are in the Acura RL Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
There were recent postings on another forum about crash test comparisons between the Audi A6 and the M35 but no mention was made of the RL results which I will bring forward here as a reminder to RL owners that we ride in the very safest of vehicles on the road! The following is information from Honda months ago when tests were done on 18 different cars: The 2005 Acura RL earned the highest possible ratings awarded during the most recent frontal and side crash tests for all seating positions and rollover tests conducted by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Among the 18 vehicles tested, the Acura RL was the only vehicle to earn the top rating of “five stars” in all three categories. The RL is only the third vehicle in the history of the program to receive such high honors.
|
|
|
Replying to: jjacura (Jul 20, 2005 7:43 am) So in the only test (only apples-to-apples test available) all three cars have been tested in, ALL three passed with the highest score possible. In the other tests performed on the cars ALL three did very well; but no comparisons are possible due to the apples-to-oranges nature involved. Bottom line the RL aced all three tests its been in, and the A6 and M35 also aced the two tests they've been in. Can't wait to see the NHTSA tests on the A6 and M35 as well as the IIHS side test on the RL.
|
|
|
Replying to: msu79gt82 (Jul 20, 2005 9:25 am) I suppose it's possible that they may not all receive the absolute highest "best pick" ratings, since simulation isn't a perfect science, but it's close enough to ensure that these cars will all do relatively well. I'll be shocked if they don't all get the highest marks since it's the basic price of entry to succeed in the luxury performance category. With unprecedented active and passive safety systems, augmented by superior handling and driver ergnomics (to prevent crashes in the first place), these cars represent paragons of safety.
|
|
|
Replying to: cstiles (Jul 20, 2005 11:33 am) 
|
|
|
Replying to: msu79gt82 (Jul 20, 2005 9:25 am) I believe this is true with the exception of the M35 which did not completely ace the side crash test. The A6 was given the double recommendation for front and side whereas the M35 received the recommendation only for the front test. As already mentioned, the RL has not yet been tested for the side crash but did ace the frontal crash. Notably both Audi and Infinit invited (which means they pay for it and have some confidence for the results) the immediate testing for the side crash test. Since the RL and many others have not yet been side tested, Acura presumably did not invite the early testing nor wish to pay for it. |
|
|
Replying to: hendjaz (Jul 20, 2005 6:22 pm) I wonder if anyone has an opinion on which agency is more credible or carries the most weight. The government or the insurance industry? |
|
|
Replying to: jjacura (Jul 21, 2005 8:06 am) You mean who's the bigger crook? 
|
|
|
Replying to: jjacura (Jul 21, 2005 8:06 am) "Audi and Infiniti requested the front and side tests of these cars, and the Institute's policy is to grant such requests if a manufacturer provides reimbursement for the cost of the vehicles. " Evidently a manufacturer can expedite the testing if they pick up the costs of it. Otherwise that testing will happen later or maybe not at all as there seems to be a number of vehicles that have not yet been tested for the side crash. The press release notes that the Audi is only the fourth vehicle to get its "double best pick" (for front and side) while the Infiniti gets a single best pick, the same as the RL at this point since the RL has not yet undergone the side crash test. No idea which organization's testing is more reliable/credible.
|
|
|
Replying to: bodble2 (Jul 21, 2005 9:09 am) Well I'm not going to go there, since I am a Veteran and also worked for a major Insurance Co. (Why do I get the feeling you are really from say... Chicago and established residency in Canada about 1967. (Just Kidding!) JJ |
|
|
Replying to: hendjaz (Jul 21, 2005 9:49 am) I've had the pleasure of meeting and spending time with Brian O'Neill from the IIHS, along with visiting his test sites on two occasions. There is no question that IIHS is substantially ahead of NHTSA. O'Neill is passionate and almost crazy about safety. Ths same applies to his second in command--Adrian Lund. Especially with Bush in charge, NHTSA's funding is behind that of the IIHS, thanks to the insurers ponying up some big dollar support. IIHS's philosophy is to continue to push the envelope with testing methodology, so they force carmakers to progressively increase their own investments on behalf of safety. I wouldn't exactly compare O'Neill to Ralph Nader, but there are some similarities in terms of their tenaciousness in pushing for safety. Safer cars mean lower costs for insurers---so the industry has a vested interest in funding IIHS's mission. IIHS is ahead of NHTSA in so many areas it isn't even close---offset barrier testing at 40mph vs. non-offset testing, rollover methodologies for SUVs, head restraint standards, side impact protection, anti-theft technology, and even improved automotive repair standards. IIHS is also directly connected with testing completed in other industrialized nations around the world, and it is a leading member of RCAR (Research Council for Automotive Repairs). IIHS does not work with other governments. Although he won't publicly admit it, Dubya is not a big fan of NHTSA because it's efforts ultimately add costs to business. |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Acura RL
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
