Sunday, April 15, 2018

Wrecked IIHS Crash Test Suzuki SX4

Crash Test 2007 - 2010 Suzuki SX 4 / Fiat Sedici (before Impact) IIHS



The Suzuki SX4 was put through the barrier crash test IIHS recently concluded in the U S and Suzuki will be happy with the overall result.
The SX4 has received the highest possible rating in the Good side impact test, a feat achieved only by 3 cars of the 21 tested but the result was not so great in the test head restraint.
The SX4 tested at the test facility was IIHS fully loaded with all the safety features, including curtain airbags.
New crash tests of small cars right notes on front-end tests but many models need better side and rear protection against collisions.
ARLINGTON, VA Most new small cars now earn good ratings in frontal crash tests, but not when it is to the other and back hangs the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently completed front , side and rear tests of seven 2009 model small car Chevrolet HHR, Chrysler PT Cruiser, Ford focus, Hyundai Elantra, Saturn Astra, Suzuki SX4 and Toyota Matrix All earn the highest rating of good for occupant protection in collisions only the front SX4 and Matrix and its twin Pontiac Vibe also earn good ratings for protection in side crashes from the head restraints of seats evaluated, only those in the focus earn a good rating for protection of rear impacts the Institute also tested the Mini Cooper, a minicar that earns high marks for crashworthiness in and out, but not for side protection.
Automakers have made big improvements to small cars to better protect people in frontal collision, says Institute senior vice president Joe Nolan They also have added stronger structures and side airbags protecting the seed for in side crashes, which are tougher on smaller, lighter cars.


Eleven of the 21 models of small current car the Institute has rated earn good ratings for side protection This is a huge improvement over our last complete cycle of small car shock resistance evaluations in 2006, Nolan said, only 3 of 19 tested have earned a good rating in the assessment of the most got a bad grade side.
The Institute's side test is especially challenging for small cars because the barrier that strikes the test vehicle represents the front end of a pickup truck or SUV side air bags designed to protect the head are crucial because the barrier locks on the car side to the head of the two models which are positioned in the driver's seat and the rear seat behind the driver.
Side airbags were mostly optional in the 2006 round of small car tests, Nolan said A major change is that side airbags are standard in all seven small cars we tested this time.
Small cars have grown especially popular as gas prices fluctuate and consumers become more conservation-minded Nolan warns that even if the current models do a better job of protecting people in front, side and rear crashes than previous, small cars inherently offer less protection for the accident that larger, heavier cars It's not escape the laws of physics, Nolan said people in larger, heavier cars in accidents are better with other vehicles in accidents in one vehicle that people in small.
PT Cruiser earns poor ratings for side, rear protection The Chrysler PT Cruiser is the only small car in the series of recent tests to earn poor marks in both side and rear evaluations In the side test, measures recorded on the driver dummy indicate that in a real -World similar severity of accidents, fractures and internal organ injuries would coasts likely, with a possible fracture of the rear passenger dummy's head basin in contact with the C-pillar during the test because this car didnt side airbags integrated into the rear seats measures recorded on the dummy indicate that serious neck injuries and a fractured pelvis would be possible in a crash of this severity.



The headrest of the seat PT Cruiser are the only Institute tested this time winning the lowest rating of poor for occupant protection in collisions The rear seat head restraint combinations in the Chevrolet HHR and Suzuki SX4 earn the next lowest rating of marginal research to the larger group of 21 small models of cars today, the Institute has noted, the PT Cruiser still has the worst seat head restraint rating.
The PT Cruiser did not offer the same level of protection against accidents and other small cars, said Nolan For consumers who want to drive small cars, there are many good alternatives to the PT Cruiser, including six Top Safety Pick winners the Institute announced last month, there are many good choices, too, midsize and large cars.
Top Safety Pick recognizes vehicles that do the best job of protecting people in front, side and rear-end collisions based on good ratings in Institute tests Winners also must have electronic stability control ESC, which research shows significantly reduces crash risk small Car 2009 winners are the Honda Civic 4-door with the exception of model If, Mitsubishi Lancer and Toyota Corolla, all with optional ESC, and the Scion xB, Subaru and Volkswagen Rabbit 4 doors, all the standard ESC.
ESC should be standard among small cars in this series of tests, only the Chevrolet HHR and Pontiac Vibe standard ESC He n are not available at all on the PT Cruiser and optional on the rest, including the Vibe's twin Toyota Matrix ESC helps reduce rollovers, especially fatal single vehicle ones When ESC senses a vehicle becomes unstable, it is automatically activated to help the driver regain control and put the vehicle in the direction of intended travel ESC reduces the risk of accidents fatal overthrow by up to 70 percent Aren t cars involved in rollovers as often as SUVs and pickups, but when they do roll the consequences can be deadly, Nolan remarked smaller cars that need it most this collision avoidance function often don t have.
Rear crashworthiness needs improving Many car manufacturers haven t paid much attention to protection in rear crashes, compared with front and side, Nolan points out good seats headrests are essential to prevent injury blow the rabbit neck sprain or strain injury is the most frequently reported in the US When a car accident insurance claims is struck in the rear and driven forward, its seats accelerate occupants torsos term unsupported, the head will lag behind the movement of the torso forward, and the differential motion causes the neck to bend and stretch the higher the acceleration of the torso, the more suddenly the movement, more forces on the neck, and most likely a neck injury is to keep the head and torso moving together is essential to reduce the risk of injury for whiplash this, the geometry of a head restraint must be high enough to be adequate at the back of the head and the seat structure and stiffness characteristics must be designed to operate in conjunction with the HEA of restraints to support the neck and the head of an occupant, accelerating them with the torso as the vehicle is driven forward.
In the judgment and the heavy traffic of the suburbs, you are more likely to get in a rear-end collision than any other crash type, Nolan said is not a major engineering feat to design seats and restraints head that offer good protection in these common crashes for example, when Toyota redesigned the Corolla for 2009 it has integrated active head restraints to help guard against injury whiplash active head restraints are designed to move closer the back of the heads of occupants in the event of rear collisions.



Mini Cooper results This minicar was redesigned for the 2007 model year, and it got a good rating for frontal crash protection during a previous test new side and rear tests were conducted to evaluate other design changes for newer models This minicar earns a good rating for rear protection and an acceptable rating for side protection measures recorded on the driver dummy indicate that a fractured pelvis would be possible in a crash side of the same severity, but there little risk that other significant injuries would occur to the driver for the rear passenger, rib fractures and injuries to internal organs or would ESC is possible new standard for the 2009 model year.
How vehicles are evaluated Institute of the frontal crashworthiness evaluations are based on results of 40 mph frontal crash test decentered overall assessment of each vehicle is based on measurements of intrusion into the passenger compartment , measures of injury recorded on a Hybrid III dummy in the driver's seat, and analysis of the slow motion to evaluate to what extent the movement controlled by the dummy during the test restraint system.
Extra evaluations are based on performance in a crash test in which the side of a vehicle is struck by a barrier moving at 31 mph The barrier represents the front end of a pickup or SUV ratings reflect of injury measures recorded on two instrumented SID-IIs dummies, assessment measures against-head protection, and structural performance upon impact of the vehicle.
Protection against rear collision is evaluated according to a two-step procedure starting points for the ratings are measurements of the geometry of the headrest the height of a restraint and its horizontal distance behind the back of a man's head medium size seat headrests with good or acceptable geometry are dynamically tested using a model that measures the forces on the neck This test simulates a collision in which a stationary vehicle is struck in the rear at 20 mph Seats without good or acceptable geometry are rated poor overall because they can t be positioned to protect many people.


IIHS Crash Test Wrecked Suzuki SX4, IIHS, suzuki, accident testing.