Last post on Dec 30, 2011 at 9:54 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Toyota ECHO, Chevrolet Aveo, Kia Rio, Nissan Sentra, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Toyota Yaris, Kia Spectra, Suzuki Forenza, Sedan
Dec 23, 2004 (7:58 am)
It's actually almost fascinating how poorly Kia cars perform on the IIHS tests. All quotes and statistics from the IIHS web site.
2001-2005 Kia Optima Side Test = POOR (w/SAB!)
2001-2005 Kia Optima Front Test = ACCEPTABLE
2004-2005 Kia Spectra Front Test = POOR
"The Kia Spectra's poor performance was a surprise," says Institute chief operating officer Adrian Lund. "Most manufacturers have figured out how to design vehicles to do a good job of protecting people in frontal crashes. Kia lags behind its competitors."
(if you were wondering, the last two Sephias/Spectras also received POOR ratings)
Kia lucks out, as there is no Kia Rio test on the web site, judging from the NCAP test, it would also undoubtedly be POOR.
No idea about the Amanti, but I think it got 4 stars all around on the NCAP tests. Disappointingly poor frontal crash ratings for such a large and heavy car.
The Kia Sedona and Sorento got ACCEPTABLE ratings, but the Sportage could only muster a MODERATE. Not a single Kia on the GOOD list, anywhere.
Well, fortunately for Kia, it's unlikely most buyers are going to be aware of the IIHS tests, since they aren't as popular as the star-based tests of the NCAP.
I've got a new motto for Kia: "We make the most unsafe cars on the road, and they also get poor gas mileage!"
Dec 23, 2004 (7:59 am)
I would really like to drive the Accent GT, it looks great, and sounds like fun.
I hope they bring the Micra, I love those little cars.
#2822 of 3871 Re: [muffin_man]
Dec 23, 2004 (8:55 am)
Car and Driver had a favorable 'Short Take' article on the Accent GT either in 04 or 03... if I have time I'll check the issue, it was a good read, and you'd probably find it of interest.
With respect to Kia's offset tests... yea, they kind of suck. The issue with the Sonata and Optima's POOR side impact rating, though, is the fact that the structure rated only a Marginal, and the drivers armrest was designed in such a way that it acted like a battering ram to the dummy's torso in the test. I'd bet that we see significantly better results when the new Sonata/Optima debut. And finally, all things being equal, I'd rather have the standard bag than not have one at all, even if the car gets a POOR.
Dec 24, 2004 (2:49 pm)
Well, safety (or lack of it) hasn't seemed to hold up Kia sales too much over the last few years. They may be the absolute worst, but that doesn't mean I'm not rooting for them. Every good car that comes out, forces another car to be better. Kia's current offerings aren't really forcing anyone to do anything.
I would rather have no side airbag and a GOOD, than a side airbag and a POOR. I would never buy or recommend a current Sonata or Optima to anyone, side airbags or not.
#2824 of 3871 Re: [muffin_man]
Dec 24, 2004 (3:59 pm)
We have yet to see how the Spectra's SABs and SACs affect the IIHS side impact tests. It could have a good result there.
#2825 of 3871 Re: [muffin_man]
Dec 25, 2004 (7:25 pm)
"I would rather have no side airbag and a GOOD, than a side airbag and a POOR"
I understand this, but the fact of the matter is that there is no car that has gotten a "Good" or even "Acceptable" without a side airbag of some sort. However, among "POOR" performers, I'd rather have one with a side airbag than without. That said, its not that hard nowadays to find a good value mid-size car with excellent side impact protection. The Accord LX and Camry LE are $20,900 and $21,200 with the equipment, and are very well rounded packages.
Yes, I realize this is a low-end car thread. To that point, I think you'll probably be wisest to choose the likes of a Mazda 3 or Toyota Corolla (whose transaction prices are lower than the 3s comparably equipped). The Corolla LE autos in my area that are sold with SAB/SAC also have ABS, cruise, 6 disc CD, and sticker at $17,650. Thats still a little high, but I feel a tremendous value. The Mazda 3i similarly equipped is about $18,000, and would be my personal preference over the Corolla, because of its more sporting/aggressive nature, similar economy, and more youthful styling. Not that I'm any kind of authority, but the Mazda 3i and Corolla LE are my personal picks for best in class at $18,000 and under.
The Spectras frontal offset results pull it out of the running where safety is concerned, IMO, and it continues to be difficult to find one in my area with ABS. So even at $14,500 with SAB/SAC, the value equation is called into question, because if you value the safety aspect, you're not getting much frontal impact return.
#2826 of 3871 Re: [alpha01]
Dec 26, 2004 (10:49 am)
Don't forget, the Civic (available for under $15k) has excellent frontal and side crash scores and is available with SABs as a low-cost option. Also the Elantra has standard SABs and has good IIHS and NHTSA crash scores and is widely available starting at about $11,000 well-equipped. The Aerio is another car with good crash scores (an IIHS "best pick") and an under-$15K price.
Dec 26, 2004 (4:50 pm)
I think that $15k was the threshold they established for this thread. That said I would also pick a Mazda 3 for a compact sedan under $18k.
I don't think the Spectra did particularly well on the NCAP's side impact test, even with side airbags - loser all around, even with side airbags.
Dec 27, 2004 (8:33 am)
The Civic is off my list because you cant get ABS unless you go with the EX trim line, and the side airbags are pretty useless in the Civic... they arent curtains, so forget about any protection for the rear passengers' heads, and they arent combo bags, so they dont protect the heads of the front seat occupants either.
The Civic's side airbag option is cheap because it offers added protection only to the chest of the driver and front passenger. Its the same type of moderately outdated bag that you could have gotten on a 98 Corolla, if you wanted it.