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
Pickups Ford F-Series Full-size pickup sales - F-150 best selling truck, but for how much longer??
550 messages, Last post on Nov 15, 2009 at 7:37 PM
You are in the Ford F-Series Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
Replying to: anythingbuttoy (Oct 24, 2007 4:40 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: 12ozcurls (Oct 24, 2007 9:03 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Oct 24, 2007 7:12 pm) Where's the logic? If you want us to believe what you say to be true there has to be some logic to it. From what you've been saying the IIHS is much more difficult than the test that the NHTSA does. If that is TRUELY the case, the Tundra should have had absolutely no problem passing the NHTSA test. Since it did not receive a five star rating from the NHTSA but did so from the IIHS, LOGIC would dictate that the NHTSA test as more difficult. Obviously your logic is flawed.
|
|
|
Replying to: obyone (Oct 25, 2007 3:08 am) You were quoting what I wrote about the side crash tests. What I wrote is exactly correct. However trucks are not tested yet for side impacts by the IIHS. There are no ratings for any of them. That doesn't mean that the NHTSA test, which is done, is any les outdated. The NHTSA it self says its own test is of little use in predicting suvivability in a side crash, You also don't unhderstand the ranking system of the NHTSA tests themselves. I'll leave it to the student to do the researach to find out why the top rated Silverado may only have 2% 'less risk of injury' than the Tundra in the NHTSA's frontal crash test. Here is the final nail in the coffin of the Federal Government's tests. They themselves admit that the testing that they do is of little use in predicting 'safety' because people are still being hurt severely even in their top rated vehicles beyond what the statistics would indicate. All you can really say is that a 4-5 star ranking is a passing grade 3 stars is marginal 1 and 2 stars ( there are NONE by the way ) is a failing grade. And these are all just recommendations. The rankings have no teeth to them. Now YOUR logic might make you believe that the Feds tests are more difficult but THEIR data and results lead THEM to a different conclusion.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Oct 25, 2007 4:52 am) The NHTSA frontal crash test was designed back in the 70s-80s when seatbelts were first put into wide usage. The vehicle is slammed into a barrier full front at 35 mph ( as if a driver drove squarely into a wall ). Essentially it tests the ability of the seatbelts to hold the occupants in place The IIHS test, which is the standard test in the rest of the world also, uses a 40% offset ( as if two drivers swerved out of the way but still hit headon about 40% of the way across the front of the vehicle ) and at a higher speed. This type of collision tends to tear the vehicles apart with multi-directional forces not just forward and back. It also throws the occupants around inside the cabin more than the NHTSA test, again not just forward and back. This is how you summarized both tests and your conclusion was that the NHTSA was an old test born in the 70s and not realistic as it tests only seatbelts while the IIHS represented more real world. Right? So again if the IIHS testing is so much harder that the NHTSA why couldn't the Tundra receive five stars? I mean geez if a Ford could do it... BTW I don't really expect an answer since Toyota engineers are still working on it.
|
|
|
...several crash test discussions in the Automotive News and Views Board. You can continue that line of debate there. kcram - Pickups Host
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Oct 24, 2007 7:31 pm) Pretty hard to win a marathon when you fall on your face coming out of the gate. This "Marathon" started about 1993 with the T100 and again in 2000 with the 1st gen Tundra, when can we "reassess" those launches? Or don't they "count"? "Little Things"??? I wonder how "little" you would think they were if the GMT900's had them. Funny how the new Tundra can have a dozen or so "not-so-little" issues in it's first year yet you consider them "little and they will get solved". Yet GM has very few issues with their GMT900's, yet they are still inferior? Typical Toyota fan logic. "Basic Superior Performance and Safety"??? Please tell me how the Tundra performs better (as a 1/2 ton truck, not a drag racer). And how is it safer than the GMT900's? (facts, not opinions please). The GMT900's have better payload and very similar (better in some configs) towing capacities. Safety features are just as good as well. At least I can get my payload into my bed without removing the tailgate first. And at least I can wipe my dash and set stuff on it without worrying about the paint rubbing off. Yep, top-notch quality there!!! If you don't think these quality issues with the Tundra will affect sales, you are dreaming. This news travels fast in this Truck segment and people will not buy a truck that cannot be used as a truck. I have a question maybe you can answer since you are a Toyota guy. Toyota's response to the tailgate issue was that it was not a load bearing component, therefore they recommend that you remove it when loading/hauling heavy stuff and also that you should never drive with it down with or without cargo on it. Yet they advertise and sell a bed extender on their accessories website??? Please explain that for me.
|
|
|
|
|
None of your business. Why do you ask? Lead Frycook at Mickey D's. 
|
|
|
Replying to: anythingbuttoy (Oct 25, 2007 2:31 pm) http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=124526 |
|
You are here:
Forums
Pickups Ford F-Series Full-size pickup sales - F-150 best selling truck, but for how much longer??
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Ford F-150
2010 Toyota Tundra
2010 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
2010 Dodge Ram Pickup 1500
2010 GMC Sierra 1500
2010 Nissan Titan
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
