Last post on Apr 26, 2009 at 5:43 AM
You are in the Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hybrids Host for directions! discussion.
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Prius, Hybrid Cars, Car Buying, Hatchback, Sedan
May 21, 2008 (11:25 am)
You don't make any sense.
If you claim NHTSA is out of date, but that IIHS does it differently, yet both agree that Subaru tops the list for all models.
Lets see this Safecar.gov quote that all CURRENT government ratings are useless. Why are YOU quoting data from the 70's and 80's and saying I'm 30-years behind? They said no such thing in their 2005-2009 Plan,
Through the combined efforts of NHTSA, Congress, states, local law enforcement, public safety groups and industry, the nation has made major strides in reducing fatalities and injuries in motor vehicle crashes.
An effective way to help consumers enhance the market for safety is to provide them with more comparative vehicle safety information, including crash test ratings and available safety features. Increasingly, consumers are demanding such information and are basing their purchasing decisions on it.
So what exactly are you basing your safety assumptions on? The Informed for Life site claimed to use both NHTSA and IIHS government ratings, but in the end, they clearly just picked their own numbers.
Are you defending drum brakes as the epitomy of safety? Do all Toyotas come with standard 4-wheel ABS yet? I know in 2005 only the fronts were standard, with others moving to 4-wheel disk/ 4-wheel antilock long before them.
The only company I know that is behind the times on safety is Toyota. Even if they fixed the problem, they leave a foul taste in my mouth.
Clearly it is useless to argue against the propaganda minister in his own forum. It is clear that you have a predisposition to argue in favor of the Prius in spite of all available evidence.
#169 of 311 Re: seats [bigmclargehuge]
May 21, 2008 (12:08 pm)
"The only company I know that is behind the times on safety is Toyota. I'm sorry if I don't forget as easily as you that Toyota is willing to sacrifice people to sell cars. Just to remind everyone;
Even if they fixed the problem, they leave a foul taste in my mouth. "
Just to be fair, that article deals with the GEN 1 Prius, not the current model.
May 21, 2008 (12:36 pm)
It should also be noted that low 'rolling resistance' is also achieved to this day with narrower tires on the Prius than are used on the Corrola and Matrix. Despite being heavier than cars of its size, its tires are more in line with what is used on the Yaris. A car that gives up 400lbs to the Prius.
So technically, they are 'lower rolling resistance' because of surface area. Just not tread compound. For those that don't know; traction, breaking, and accident avoidance in general is improved as tread area is increased (so long as the tread is good). At the same time, fuel usage goes down.
They are still sacrificing safety in the name of the almighty
dollar MPG. The Prius drivetrain is not as impressive as you might think, considering all the other sacrifices they have to make to get over 40 MPG.
#171 of 311 Re: seats [bigmclargehuge]
May 21, 2008 (12:50 pm)
Why would you compare vehicles' safety ratings in two different classes to begin with?
May 21, 2008 (1:15 pm)
Why would you compare vehicles' safety ratings in two different classes to begin with?
Why would you compare MPG of vehicles of different types? That's where the Outback/Prius conversation started.
Then I was responding to a 'mathematical' comparison of the Outback vs. Prius safety, which like you say is bogus to begin with, but on top of that the math was bogus.
Then there's those that want you to believe that the government is trying to kill us all with faulty safety data. That the worst thing you could do is trust the NHTSA ratings. Its a conspiracy! I doubt that very much.
I think of the Prius as among the least likely vehicles out there to be able to AVOID an accident, let alone survive it. Its as stable as a pig on iceskates, with arthritis in the back feet.
Fortunately, the best mileage occurs in the city, where high speed crashes are less likely. And both major Prius wrecks I saw this year were on a 65mph highway.
#173 of 311 Re: seats [bigmclargehuge]
May 21, 2008 (3:15 pm)
Basic reading for comprehension might help..
In your quote it talked about the Yukon / Tahoe hybrids. It said nothing about the Prius. That was your own biased interpretation, incorrect BTW.
It said '...like other hybrids the Tahoe and Yukon are equipped with regenerative brakes that capture energy normally wasted during braking ....' PERIOD, new subject,
IT says nothing about the Prius and LRRT's.
#174 of 311 Re: seats [bigmclargehuge]
May 21, 2008 (3:43 pm)
2008 Corolla specs, Gen 9, are 185 / 65 R15 or 195 / 65 R15 depending on model
2008 Prius specs, Gen 2, are 185 / 65 R15 or 195 / 55 R16 depending on model
Regarding the NHTSA tests there's a long discussion on the website of the 'Enhancements' needed....Here's a sample
Eighty-seven percent of MY 06 vehicles received four- or five- stars for the driver.
Consequently, the side NCAP ratings are reaching the point of providing little discrimination
between vehicles. Since the fleet has changed both in terms of weight and front end
characteristics, and since the side impact occupant protection systems have improved over the years, it is necessary to revisit the design of the side test to better reflect what is occurring in the real world when serious injuries result.
Approaches to enhancing Side NCAP
The agency can use NCAP to encourage head protection by using the pole test
proposed for FMVSS No. 214 until such time as the rule is fully phased-in. This test
would continue to measure performance while at the same time indicate to consumers the importance of good head protection devices.16 Some research will be needed to develop a new rating system. Also, since both the ES-2re and SID-IIs dummies were specified for use in the proposed FMVSS No. 214 pole test, a decision will be made on whether one or a combination of these dummies would be used for ratings in the NCAP program.
Research that focuses on the assessment of the injury mechanisms in a fully equipped side impact air bag and window curtain fleet needs to be conducted. The purpose is to evaluate how serious injuries occur in a fleet fully equipped with inflatable head protection and develop test procedures to reflect these impact conditions. The outcome of this research could be used to further raise the level of side impact protection. More research is needed, as outlined below:
A new barrier test protocol. The research will evaluate the side impact crash
conditions that generate serious injuries to the occupants of the struck vehicles in
the new fleet. This includes examining vehicle orientation at impact, vehicle
trajectory at impact (e.g. barrier impact angle), and impact location.
Increase speed. This strategy would potentially address the serious injuries that
occur in the 21-25 mph delta-V range. The 21-25 mph delta-V range has the
highest number of serious injuries (5,638) in vehicle-to-vehicle side crashes.
Increase barrier weight, change geometry, and/or modify stiffness
characteristics. This is an opportunity to refine barrier characteristics as the fleet
changes. It is also a chance to evaluate the different MDB characteristics around
the world in hopes of developing one common barrier. This strategy could adopt
the IIHS barrier or build on previous research to develop other methods.
Use of new dummies, such as WorldSID. Considerable effort by industry and
governments has been devoted to development of WorldSID, a new 50th
percentile side impact male dummy. NHTSA is evaluating the WorldSID
dummy. If development progresses to the stage that it is ready for incorporation
into NHTSAs test dummy regulation (49 CFR Part 572), inclusion in side NCAP
Develop additional lateral injury criteria. If new dummies are used, the agency
would take full advantage of new dummy capabilities to measure additional
If you read the whole discussion you will see that they state that the test criteria were first set up in the late 70's. A few minor adjustments have been made since then but nearly the entire fleet is 4 or 5 star.
May 21, 2008 (3:50 pm)
Wow. Good job Sherlock. But you still go to the back of the class. Did you bother to read YOUR OWN POST that I was respoding to?
Golly Gee you're only 6-1/2 years out of date!!!!! You do realize that since the Gen2 came out there are no such thing as LRRT's on any of the OEMs. How can you make a post like that based on completely inaccurate data? Pretty soon it will be 2004 and you can bring yourself up to date.
In your own words you said "none of the Original Equipment Manufacturers used LRRTs." Incorrect BTW.
My only interpretation is that you are easily offended by someone who correctly challenges your own limited knowledge and misinterpretation of reference matierial. PERIOD. new subject.
May 21, 2008 (3:55 pm)
Corolla ACTUAL tire specs:
Yup, all bigger than the Prius tires.
And we're on Gen. 10 actually. Maybe thats where you got the wrong numbers quoting the car that was built in 2005.
May 21, 2008 (4:02 pm)
Give it up already. Speaking of poor reading comprehension, its only your own biased interpretation that is saying that the NHSTA is admitting their tests are useless. They said just the opposite.
Of course they want to improve year-to-year. How else would they make progress? Like they have over the last 30 years. They have improved, the tests have worked, and cars on average are safer. So they have to up the standards to discern the good from the average.
You said it was because they were admitting that people were dying because unsafe cars were incorrectly labeled. That's your own propaganda ministry at work, nothing more.
You'll never figure it out. I think somewhere in there you know you're flailing like you have a bag over your head. But if you to stay on the offense to save face... its not gonna work.