Road & Travel Magazine

   
RTM WWW



Automotive Channel

Advice & Tips
Auto Products
Buyer's Guides
Car Care & Maintenance
Car of the Year Awards
Insurance & Accidents
Legends & Leaders

New Car Reviews
News & Views
Planet Driven
Road Humor

Safety & Security
Sex Drive
Teens & Tots
Used Car Buying
Vehicle Safety Ratings
What Women Want
Vehicle Model Guide

Travel Channel
Adventure Travel
Advice & Tips
Airline Rules
Bed & Breakfasts
Cruise Lines
Destination Reviews
Earth Tones
Health Trip
Hotels & Resorts

Luxury Travel
News & Views
Pet Travel
Safety & Security
Spa Reviews
Train Vacations & Tours
Travel Products
Virtual Vacations
What Women Want
World Travel Directory
Contact Us
Advertise with Us
Car of the Year Awards
Contact Us

Editorial Calendar
RTM Press Kit
Spokesperson
2005 Small Car Crash Test Ratings

NEW FRONTAL OFFSET CRASH TEST RESULTS:
ONLY 2 OF 5 SMALL CARS EARN GOOD RATINGS; 1 IS POOR

The Mazda 3 is the best performer and the Kia Spectra is the worst in a recent series of frontal offset crash tests conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The Mazda 3 earned a good rating and the added designation of "best pick" for frontal crash protection. The Hyundai Elantra also earned a good overall rating, but only after three tests revealed two design problems that led to recalls. The Suzuki Forenza and Saturn ION are rated acceptable, and the Kia Spectra earned the lowest rating of poor.

"The Kia Spectra's poor performance was a surprise," says Institute chief operating officer Adrian Lund. "Most manufacturers have figured out how to design vehicles to do a good job of protecting people in frontal crashes. Kia lags behind its competitors."

The Kia is the first vehicle the Institute has rated poor in a frontal crash test since 2001.

The ratings reflect performance in a 40 mph frontal offset crash test into a deformable barrier. Based on the results, the Institute evaluates the crashworthiness of passenger vehicles, assigning each vehicle a rating from good overall to poor. The better performers among the vehicles with good ratings receive the added designation of "best pick." If a vehicle earns a good rating, it means that in a real-world crash of similar severity a belted driver most likely would be able to walk away with only minor injuries.

Mazda 3 is top performer: This car is a new design for 2004. It replaces the Mazda Protege, which was rated acceptable for frontal crashworthiness. In the test of the Protege, there was moderate intrusion into the driver's footwell area, which contributed to high forces recorded on the dummy's right leg. There also was some rearward movement of the instrument panel during the crash.

"In contrast, the Mazda 3 is one of the best performers in its class in the frontal test," Lund points out. Measures taken from the head, neck, chest, and both legs of the driver dummy indicate low risk of injury.

Lund adds that "the Mazda 3's structure held up very well and there was very little intrusion into the occupant compartment. This is the only 'best pick' in this newly tested group of small cars."

Elantra is tested three times: When the Institute tested the Elantra in 2001, it earned a poor rating mainly because its airbag inflated late, resulting in high forces on the dummy's head. Hyundai redesigned the frontal airbags for the 2004 Elantra and asked the Institute to test the car again.

(CONTINUE...)

Copyright ©2008 ROAD & TRAVEL Magazine. All rights reserved.