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 Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Safety & Crast Test Ratings
114 messages, Last post on Mar 19, 2007 at 4:46 AM
You are in the Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: jaxs1 (Aug 16, 2006 7:39 pm) We're not talking about the safety cage collapsing or the engine ending up in the front seat. The test failures are very specific injuries on a very specific body part caused by one piece of the car hitting the occupant. Change the angle or speed and it's likely that won't happen. Then there's the variability of the test itself. If they ran multiple tests on multiple cars at different angles and speeds and they all showed injuries then that would support your theory but they don't do that. Better yet - where is the data that shows real world injuries are directly proportional to the safety ratings? |
|
|
Replying to: jaxs1 (Aug 16, 2006 7:39 pm) That still doesn't make sense to me. Yes a real crash can be worse, but the chances of it being similar to those of the tests are very, very slim. So why then do you care if the vehicle you buy has one more star than the other in a controlled crash? Are you also willing to bet that all parts of the higher rated vehicle are safer than those of the lower rated one? While you think about that keep in mind that auto makers do design specific parts of their vehicles to pass those tests with flying colors and that in no way means the entire vehicle has been engineered that way. A more rigid front end can also put the person being hit at greater risk but the two testers don't tell you that. They just want more stars and "Good" ratings to show up. But at what price? I just feel that too much is made of these tests given that they only account for a small percentage of real world scenarios. Modern autos are very complex and we can't evaluate one hugely complex system based on a controlled scenario. I know it's morbid but we'd be better off if they would study real crashes and the real injuries from them. At least then you'd get to see how it perfoms outside of the vacuum. |
|
|
I guess I will say this over and over again. Please, take a look at the difference between a 4star and a 5 star crash test rating. The Fusion is NOT a death trap that some want so badly to portray. Acceptable does not mean DEATH TRAP. Now, granted a 5 star would have been better for media reasons. I am a little dismayed at Ford for not doing better.. BUT the Fusion is a great car. Handles fantastic, looks are killer, interior quality is top notch, fit/finish is top notch. Priced thousands less than competition. Besides sales are humming right along too... So, I guess those who try to frighten people away aren't doing so good. You also may want to take a look at all the other vehicles that don't make 5 star ratings. You may be surprised.. Now move on.. I guess since the Fusion is proving to be a reliable vehicle, some have to find something wrong.. 
|
|
|
Replying to: scape2 (Aug 16, 2006 7:56 pm) When the tests are great, they tout them in ads. Otherwise they say things like "The tests results are not important." "Our vehicles meet all federal safety standards, blah blah blah." Maybe they will make changes to the 2007 or 2008 models and they will be retested with a better result. If it was really close to getting 5 stars, then it won't take any massive changes to make the difference. The early PT Cruisers had so-so test results and after a couple years they were retested with good results. |
|
|
Replying to: scape2 (Aug 16, 2006 7:56 pm) And I say over and over: nobody here says it is a death trap. All we say it is subpar to its competition and current market expectation in this area. General market expectation is that every new vehicle that size should get "good" in frontal and side impacts. Good in rear would not hurt, either. Fusion has worse scores than over 10-year old Stratus! Competition already proved they can build better for the same money (Malibu w/airbags, G6 w/airbags, Sonata) - for someone with safety as a primary criterion, there is no compelling reason to buy Fusion. By the way - the argument about "real life" mentioned by others is simply laughable. NHTSA and IIHS represent industry's consensus regarding how vehicle safety is measured - they are not perfect, but are agreed to be done fairly and impartially. When Taurus aced NHTSA, five stars were put on every single ad they printed, but now for Fusion "it is not a real-life scenario". You buy Fusion because it drives well - great. I might as well. My point is, you already have one, but if Ford wants to move beyond diehard Ford fans and those who look at handling before anything else, they better get on drawing board now. There are only so many that would buy that car for its driving - others will look at those tests and may get deterred. I'm posting here not to beat on Fusion - I'm actually concerned. Ford does notr have a best track record in product improvement. They tend to develop something and run it until it dies of hunger. I'm just hoping Fusion will have a different fate. I wish them well, but to get there they have to realize that current chassis needs quick structural improvements, not just new interior or lights at the next face lifting cycle. |
|
|
|
|
It really does not matter much what YOU or even I think of the crash results. It DOES matter what the target market thinks. Right now, the Fusion/Milan are virtual sellouts. Once the initial market has been satisfied, the Ford Motor Company may find itself with a problem, as there ARE people who will reject the vehicles because of the crash testing results. How many? That's the rub. |
|
Ford cannot gloat over a 5star crash test rating for the Fusion. My issues is take a look at how many vehicles new and older that are on the road that don't have 5 star crash test ratings. 4 star does not mean complete and utter failure. I believe consumers are smarter and will read the difference between 4 star and 5 star. And with all the Fusion/Milan have to offer will buy them.. Looks like they are with sales anyway.. 
|
|
|
My real world experience is that people are interested in safety and will ask if certain features are present. But crash test performance rarely if ever comes up. If the side airbags are there, thats generally good enough. Don't forget that safety features are just as much a marketing tool as iPod jack or Bluetooth phone etc. Some marketing genius convinces you that you can't buy a car unless it has a certain crash test rating or certain safety features. You are convinced of this even if you were never in a side impact or drove your last 10 years without ever activating the ABS. Some people want leather in their car, some people want side airbags. All I know is I have no trouble selling Fusions for $19,800 MSRP without side airbags or abs. Mark |
|
|
|
| Don't get used to it. Ford is putting side airbags in ALL Fusions soon. There is a reason. If they didn't think it necessary, they would NOT be doing it. | |
|
|
|
Replying to: johnclineii (Aug 18, 2006 3:33 am) Yeah, they think it's necessary because everyone else is doing it. Big deal. Haven't we beaten this topic to death only a few months ago?
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Safety & Crast Test Ratings
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Ford Fusion
2010 Mercury Milan
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
