Last post on Dec 02, 2004 at 7:02 AM
You are in the Future Vehicles - Archived Discussions
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Future Vehicles Host for Directions! discussion.
What is this discussion about?
Kia Spectra, Kia, Sedan, Wagon
#380 of 431 Re: Crash test results [backy]
Oct 04, 2004 (2:20 pm)
I wonder if the rating scale is consistent to compare vehicles from one year to the next?
I mean, is it possible that a "5" from 2 years ago could equal a "4" today due to the scale sliding upwards due to other new innovations?
I'm aware that each "star" represents a certain percentage of certainty for a serious injury. Supposedly a "5 star" rating says that you have a 10% chance or less of getting injured in a 35mph crash, a "4 star" gives you an 11-20% chance, etc. I wonder if the severity of the test crashes has changed in any way to make the results worse?
If the current Spectra rates worse than the current Elantra.... now THAT would be interesting. I'd have to wonder what the devil did Kia do to the primary Hyundai design to get those ratings.
EDITED POST: I just came back from the http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov site, and it does indeed look like they're comparing 2005-to-2005 apples-to-apples. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. I wonder if Hyundai / Kia will look into this discrepancy between the two vehicles?
EDITED POST 2: The picture of the Elantra shown on the nhtsa site matches the picture of a 2004 Elantra on the North American Hyundai site exactly. The VR-360 degree view of the 2005 Elantra on the primary Hyundai site (worldwide.hyundai-motor.com) however has a very different front end on it. The "still" photo on this site shows a 2004, but the QuickTime 360 view shows a somewhat different car. Is the 2004 and 2005 Elantra truly the same car? Is it possible that they've changed the basic Elantra platform in some fashion in 2005, and a 2004 model slipped in under the nhtsa radar as a 2005? Something's slightly weird here!
#381 of 431 Re: Crash test results [spectraman]
Oct 05, 2004 (2:25 am)
NHTSA tested the '04 Elantra earlier this year because of changes that affect crash protection. To my knowledge they have not tested the '05--why would they, as there are no major changes for '05? However, I don't know of any changes in the NHTSA procedures in the past six months or so that would affect the comparison between the Spectra and Elantra.
#382 of 431 Re: Crash test results [backy]
Oct 05, 2004 (1:24 pm)
Here are some additional results for the 2004 Elantra from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety website:
They don't have results for a 2004.5 Spectra, so I'm assuming that these results are the closest there are until an official test is done.
The results are *not* good when compared to the small cars like the Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla, and Ford Focus. The primary reason for the Elantra's low scores are due to late-firing front airbags. They tested the car three times with similar results, so it doesn't appear to be a fluke. We can only assume that the Spectra's airbag system is using componentry similar to the Elantra.
The IIHS ratings are supposedly more stringent than the NHTSA ones, so the dismal showing of the Elantra (and Spectra?) does dismay me. What does everyone else think?
#383 of 431 I'm gonna wait for the actual 2004 1/2 Kia Spectra
Oct 05, 2004 (6:51 pm)
crash test to decide on that. Hyundai Elantra and Kia Spectra components may differ just enough of a tad to make a difference. I'd love to see how the new-world order Kia Spectra fares in it's crash tests, indeed. Let's get crashing, crash test dudes!
#384 of 431 Re: Crash test results [spectraman]
Oct 05, 2004 (11:03 pm)
A few clarifications:
* the IIHS test results for the Elantra don't really cover 2004 models, so I don't know why they claim to. Notice that the vehicle tested was a '01 GLS. The ratings cover Elantrans manufactured before September 2003. That means they cover few if any '04 Elantras.
* the IIHS did test a '04 Elantra early in 2004. In that test, a fuel leak was found. A recall was issued for the problem in April 2004. I asked the IIHS why they haven't released the tests on the '04 Elantra yet and they told me they don't give that information to the public.
* the results on the '01 GLS were due not only to a late deploying driver's airbag, which occurred on two of three tests, but also due to the driver's seat track moving forward. Hyundai redesigned the seat track in 2002.
* If in fact the Spectra's air bag components are the same as those on the Elantra, we don't know if they are the same as on the '01 Elantra that was tested by the IIHS. A Hyundai representative told me that the '01 Elantra used the same air bag sensors as the Sonata, and that Hyundai couldn't find a problem with the airbags that caused the late deployment.
#385 of 431 Re: Crash test results [backy]
Oct 06, 2004 (6:03 am)
Thanks for the additional input Backy.
Be sure to post any new findings you discover.
Oct 13, 2004 (6:57 pm)
I would take the NHTSA tests with a grain of salt. There seem to be wide variences in those tests, and Im not sure why. For example, Toyota has never altered the rear door structure of the Camry, be it the door itself, or the impact beams. And yet, the 2002 and 2003 Camrys scored a 5 star for rear passengers, with the 2004s scoring 3. What caused the drop? Me thinks its NHTSA's antiquated barrier, antiquated test methodology, etc. Additionally, the NHTSA star rating for side impact does NOT factor in head injury. So, the Sephia basically scores a 3 for rear passengers based on chest/torso protection, and the Elantra scores 4 on that count, again for the rear passenger. But what about the Head Injury Measure? The Kia provides a curtain to cushion the blow, and the Elantra, nothing. Factoring in a Head Injury measure, the Elantra might TRULY only be a 3 star performer, for example, but consumers would never know this if they didnt drill down further in the NHTSA report.
As to why NHTSA doesnt include its HIC measure in the side impact, is beyond me. Are people's heads inconsequential? I feel like theres a very vital organ in mine, though some would argue...LOL!
always a pleasure,
#388 of 431 Re: backy [alpha01]
Oct 13, 2004 (11:46 pm)
I agree, all these tests should be taken with a grain of salt. But consider the Spectra vs. Elantra side rear results:
Spectra: HIC 458, TTI 78, Pelvis 109 g's
Elantra: HIC 540, TTI 69, Pelvis 93 g's
So the results are actually pretty close, with the Elantra better in two out of three measures--clearly the SACs in the Spectra did help. Maybe the Spectra was at the upper end of 3 stars, and the Elantra at the lower end of 4 stars. But how about the frontal results, where the Spectra didn't do as well as the Elantra? It's just not a good trend. Typically new designs from automakers show improvement over previous designs, not go backwards.
#389 of 431 Lack of advertising support for Spectra
Oct 22, 2004 (12:11 pm)
Is it just me, or has any one else noticed that there seems to be little or no TV and magazine advertising support for the new Spectra?
The sales of the Spectra in September '04 belie the quality and fun-of-ownership of this new great little hauler.
MONTH OF SEPT YEAR-TO-DATE
Model 2004 2003 2004 2003
Spectra 4,480 5,071 33,641 55,114
Notice this September quote from Mr. Butterfield *omits* any reference to the Spectra:
"With 70-percent of sales coming from Optima, Sedona, Sorento and Amanti, this richer product mix demonstrates how consumers' view of the Kia brand has dramatically changed," said Peter M. Butterfield, Kia Motors America's president and chief executive officer. "These products showcase Kia's unique ability to deliver high-quality, well-designed vehicles across numerous segments, all at a tremendous value."
I can only assume that Kia is waiting for production and arrival in the dealerships of the new Spectra5 to happen before they launch a major ad blitz for the Spectra.
If that assumption *isn't* true, then what are they waiting for?!?!?!?