Honda Element IIHS Side Impact Test: POOR

The Honda Element EX received a grade of "poor" on the side impact
test conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

"DRIVER ... major torso injuries would be likely ... Serious neck
injury also would be possible."

Here is the URL:

http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0308.htm

The IIHS Report notes that the tests were conducted *without* the
optional side-impact air bags:

"NOTE: The Element tested was not equipped with the optional side
airbags. When side airbags are optional, the Institute tests
vehicles without this option. If a manufacturer offering optional
side airbags requests the Institute to conduct an additional test
of a vehicle with this option and agrees to reimburse the cost of
the vehicle, a second test is conducted. Honda did not request
such a test."

Why did Honda not request that the test be conducted again WITH
the air bags? It makes me wonder whether the side airbags are
really effective in protecting the driver. A company that promotes
an image of its cars as being among the safest on the road ought
to take steps to improve the vehicle's safety, or demonstrate that
it IS safe when the airbags are installed.

Wanting to buy an Element, but waiting....

Tim

 

Does that same paper list SB results as the following? Bucs beat Raiders.





How to turn off 'Maintenance Required" light:

1. Hold trip/reset button on dash
2. Turn key to "ON" or start engine
3. Hold button til light goes out

 

Why? To find out if there is any difference, so you don't have to wonder
any more.

The first year models are usually not the best.

 

Why? To find out if there is any difference, so you don't have to wonder
any more.

The first year models are usually not the best.

 

Why? To find out if there is any difference, so you don't have to wonder
any more.

The first year models are usually not the best.

 

Yeah, they key words there being "Insurance Institute". Sounds like another
excuse to charge higher premiums for SUV owners. Funny how the NHTSA
(Nation Highway Traffic Safety Administration) which is a branch of the US
Department of Transportation gave the 2003 Element 5 stars for the driver's
side impact. That's a better rating than the 2003 Accord which got 4 stars.

The only score worthy of concern was the rollover test where it got 3 stars.
But come on, it's a SUV, drive it with that in mind and rollover is not a
problem.

If you really want safety though, then get the CR-V. It got 5 stars for
both frontal driver and passenger collision and 5 stars for driver and rear
side impact. It's also got 3 stars rollover but as I said above, it's an
SUV. Drive it properly and this won't be a problem.

 

Yeah, they key words there being "Insurance Institute". Sounds like another
excuse to charge higher premiums for SUV owners. Funny how the NHTSA
(Nation Highway Traffic Safety Administration) which is a branch of the US
Department of Transportation gave the 2003 Element 5 stars for the driver's
side impact. That's a better rating than the 2003 Accord which got 4 stars.

The only score worthy of concern was the rollover test where it got 3 stars.
But come on, it's a SUV, drive it with that in mind and rollover is not a
problem.

If you really want safety though, then get the CR-V. It got 5 stars for
both frontal driver and passenger collision and 5 stars for driver and rear
side impact. It's also got 3 stars rollover but as I said above, it's an
SUV. Drive it properly and this won't be a problem.

 

Yeah, they key words there being "Insurance Institute". Sounds like another
excuse to charge higher premiums for SUV owners. Funny how the NHTSA
(Nation Highway Traffic Safety Administration) which is a branch of the US
Department of Transportation gave the 2003 Element 5 stars for the driver's
side impact. That's a better rating than the 2003 Accord which got 4 stars.

The only score worthy of concern was the rollover test where it got 3 stars.
But come on, it's a SUV, drive it with that in mind and rollover is not a
problem.

If you really want safety though, then get the CR-V. It got 5 stars for
both frontal driver and passenger collision and 5 stars for driver and rear
side impact. It's also got 3 stars rollover but as I said above, it's an
SUV. Drive it properly and this won't be a problem.

 

The NHTSA (http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/2385.html) makes this
remark about the Element:

"During the side impact test, the head of the left rear passenger
dummy struck the side upper interior structure, causing a high
head acceleration. Head impact events resulting in high
accelerations have a higher likelihood of serious head trauma."

It's not clear whether the driver's side airbags were used in that
NHTSA test, sparing the driver from similar injury. But in the
Insurance Institute's side-impact test, where side airbag were not
used, the driver crash dummy's head strikes the door window sill.

(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0308.htm
)

With respect to the Insurance Institute's objectivity which you
seem to doubt; I'm inclined not to be cynical about the Insurance
Institute. They don't pan small SUVs across the board but give the
Subaru Forester, for example, good safety ratings. The Honda CRV
gets good grades too except for the side-impact where it is only
Marginal. Here's the URL to the SUV comparisons:

(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_smsuv_ove
rall.htm#crv
)

Most importantly, the IIHS tests of the Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute,
first without side airbags and then with them, show how side
airbags can raise the side-impact test results from Poor to Good.
Here's what the IIHS had to say about the side airbags in the
Escape/Tribute:

"DRIVER. The dummy's head [in the Tribute/Escape] was cushioned
from impact with any hard structures, including the intruding
barrier, by a combination head/torso airbag that deployed from the
side of the driver seat."
(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0310.htm
)

So I come back to my original question for Honda: WHY DID HONDA
NOT HAVE THE IIHS RUN THEIR TESTS ON THE ELEMENT A SECOND TIME
USING SIDE AIRBAGS? Does the design of the Element's side airbag
cause it to deploy too low relative to the driver's head to offer
adequate protection? Would a second test with side airbag have
shown that the design of those side airbags makes them relatively
ineffective?

What's stopping Honda from outfitting the Element (and the CRV)
with a better side airbag, like that in the Escape/Tribute, "a
combination head/torso airbag that deployed from the side of the
driver seat" ?

Tim

 

The NHTSA (http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/2385.html) makes this
remark about the Element:

"During the side impact test, the head of the left rear passenger
dummy struck the side upper interior structure, causing a high
head acceleration. Head impact events resulting in high
accelerations have a higher likelihood of serious head trauma."

It's not clear whether the driver's side airbags were used in that
NHTSA test, sparing the driver from similar injury. But in the
Insurance Institute's side-impact test, where side airbag were not
used, the driver crash dummy's head strikes the door window sill.

(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0308.htm
)

With respect to the Insurance Institute's objectivity which you
seem to doubt; I'm inclined not to be cynical about the Insurance
Institute. They don't pan small SUVs across the board but give the
Subaru Forester, for example, good safety ratings. The Honda CRV
gets good grades too except for the side-impact where it is only
Marginal. Here's the URL to the SUV comparisons:

(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_smsuv_ove
rall.htm#crv
)

Most importantly, the IIHS tests of the Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute,
first without side airbags and then with them, show how side
airbags can raise the side-impact test results from Poor to Good.
Here's what the IIHS had to say about the side airbags in the
Escape/Tribute:

"DRIVER. The dummy's head [in the Tribute/Escape] was cushioned
from impact with any hard structures, including the intruding
barrier, by a combination head/torso airbag that deployed from the
side of the driver seat."
(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0310.htm
)

So I come back to my original question for Honda: WHY DID HONDA
NOT HAVE THE IIHS RUN THEIR TESTS ON THE ELEMENT A SECOND TIME
USING SIDE AIRBAGS? Does the design of the Element's side airbag
cause it to deploy too low relative to the driver's head to offer
adequate protection? Would a second test with side airbag have
shown that the design of those side airbags makes them relatively
ineffective?

What's stopping Honda from outfitting the Element (and the CRV)
with a better side airbag, like that in the Escape/Tribute, "a
combination head/torso airbag that deployed from the side of the
driver seat" ?

Tim

 

The NHTSA (http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/2385.html) makes this
remark about the Element:

"During the side impact test, the head of the left rear passenger
dummy struck the side upper interior structure, causing a high
head acceleration. Head impact events resulting in high
accelerations have a higher likelihood of serious head trauma."

It's not clear whether the driver's side airbags were used in that
NHTSA test, sparing the driver from similar injury. But in the
Insurance Institute's side-impact test, where side airbag were not
used, the driver crash dummy's head strikes the door window sill.

(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0308.htm
)

With respect to the Insurance Institute's objectivity which you
seem to doubt; I'm inclined not to be cynical about the Insurance
Institute. They don't pan small SUVs across the board but give the
Subaru Forester, for example, good safety ratings. The Honda CRV
gets good grades too except for the side-impact where it is only
Marginal. Here's the URL to the SUV comparisons:

(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_smsuv_ove
rall.htm#crv
)

Most importantly, the IIHS tests of the Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute,
first without side airbags and then with them, show how side
airbags can raise the side-impact test results from Poor to Good.
Here's what the IIHS had to say about the side airbags in the
Escape/Tribute:

"DRIVER. The dummy's head [in the Tribute/Escape] was cushioned
from impact with any hard structures, including the intruding
barrier, by a combination head/torso airbag that deployed from the
side of the driver seat."
(
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/side/s0310.htm
)

So I come back to my original question for Honda: WHY DID HONDA
NOT HAVE THE IIHS RUN THEIR TESTS ON THE ELEMENT A SECOND TIME
USING SIDE AIRBAGS? Does the design of the Element's side airbag
cause it to deploy too low relative to the driver's head to offer
adequate protection? Would a second test with side airbag have
shown that the design of those side airbags makes them relatively
ineffective?

What's stopping Honda from outfitting the Element (and the CRV)
with a better side airbag, like that in the Escape/Tribute, "a
combination head/torso airbag that deployed from the side of the
driver seat" ?

Tim

 

I agree that the first year models are not the best. I believe the best
Honda vehicle is the last one in a series such as a 1997 Honda Accord. It
was the last one in that series and I rarely have seen any negative things
written about a 1997 Honda Accord in this newsgroup. I have seen lots of
negative things written abut the 1998 Honda Accord which was the first
model in that series.

 

I agree that the first year models are not the best. I believe the best
Honda vehicle is the last one in a series such as a 1997 Honda Accord. It
was the last one in that series and I rarely have seen any negative things
written about a 1997 Honda Accord in this newsgroup. I have seen lots of
negative things written abut the 1998 Honda Accord which was the first
model in that series.

 

I agree that the first year models are not the best. I believe the best
Honda vehicle is the last one in a series such as a 1997 Honda Accord. It
was the last one in that series and I rarely have seen any negative things
written about a 1997 Honda Accord in this newsgroup. I have seen lots of
negative things written abut the 1998 Honda Accord which was the first
model in that series.

 

It's funny how everyone is so concerned with "safety". Many of my friends
and even my own father killed in car accidents, the first thing that comes
to mind is when your tickets punched, that's all she wrote. My concerns is
with the 4x4 effect, where you see these 4x4 pickups blasting down the
highway during a blizzard, just because you have it, you just don't push it.
If your hit broadside....you ain't got a lot of anything between you and the
accident, I wouldn't put much faith in an airbag protecting my head, when
the rest of my limbs are crushed and or severed.........................

Just suppose though that they start putting motorcycles through these
"safety" tests, OH MY GOD! SAVE ME!

I still think the Element is one kick-ass car, you want safety............
get a Mercedes or a Hummer!

Joe

 

It's funny how everyone is so concerned with "safety". Many of my friends
and even my own father killed in car accidents, the first thing that comes
to mind is when your tickets punched, that's all she wrote. My concerns is
with the 4x4 effect, where you see these 4x4 pickups blasting down the
highway during a blizzard, just because you have it, you just don't push it.
If your hit broadside....you ain't got a lot of anything between you and the
accident, I wouldn't put much faith in an airbag protecting my head, when
the rest of my limbs are crushed and or severed.........................

Just suppose though that they start putting motorcycles through these
"safety" tests, OH MY GOD! SAVE ME!

I still think the Element is one kick-ass car, you want safety............
get a Mercedes or a Hummer!

Joe

 

It's funny how everyone is so concerned with "safety". Many of my friends
and even my own father killed in car accidents, the first thing that comes
to mind is when your tickets punched, that's all she wrote. My concerns is
with the 4x4 effect, where you see these 4x4 pickups blasting down the
highway during a blizzard, just because you have it, you just don't push it.
If your hit broadside....you ain't got a lot of anything between you and the
accident, I wouldn't put much faith in an airbag protecting my head, when
the rest of my limbs are crushed and or severed.........................

Just suppose though that they start putting motorcycles through these
"safety" tests, OH MY GOD! SAVE ME!

I still think the Element is one kick-ass car, you want safety............
get a Mercedes or a Hummer!

Joe

 

I love my wife and kids, and want to make sure that whatever car
we're driving is safe and fun and economical -- so I'll pass on
the Hummer and the Mercedes .

The Element is definitely a fun vehicle --great for a trip to the
beach for example-- but it has only come close to being a safe
car by 2004 standards. A superior side airbag like the one in the
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute would put the Honda Element in the
"Good" category on both the side-impact and frontal impact
collisions. There's no decent reason for Honda to have used a
dinky side airbag.

Nothing's stopping you from buying one of the Element models
without side airbag if you're giving more weight to fun than to
safety. That's your prerogative. I'm not saying all models
should have side airbags (though that's not a bad idea). But if
I'm going to pay extra for the model with side airbags, they
should work and work well. They should be more than "window
dressing".

Tim

 

I love my wife and kids, and want to make sure that whatever car
we're driving is safe and fun and economical -- so I'll pass on
the Hummer and the Mercedes .

The Element is definitely a fun vehicle --great for a trip to the
beach for example-- but it has only come close to being a safe
car by 2004 standards. A superior side airbag like the one in the
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute would put the Honda Element in the
"Good" category on both the side-impact and frontal impact
collisions. There's no decent reason for Honda to have used a
dinky side airbag.

Nothing's stopping you from buying one of the Element models
without side airbag if you're giving more weight to fun than to
safety. That's your prerogative. I'm not saying all models
should have side airbags (though that's not a bad idea). But if
I'm going to pay extra for the model with side airbags, they
should work and work well. They should be more than "window
dressing".

Tim

 

I love my wife and kids, and want to make sure that whatever car
we're driving is safe and fun and economical -- so I'll pass on
the Hummer and the Mercedes .

The Element is definitely a fun vehicle --great for a trip to the
beach for example-- but it has only come close to being a safe
car by 2004 standards. A superior side airbag like the one in the
Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute would put the Honda Element in the
"Good" category on both the side-impact and frontal impact
collisions. There's no decent reason for Honda to have used a
dinky side airbag.

Nothing's stopping you from buying one of the Element models
without side airbag if you're giving more weight to fun than to
safety. That's your prerogative. I'm not saying all models
should have side airbags (though that's not a bad idea). But if
I'm going to pay extra for the model with side airbags, they
should work and work well. They should be more than "window
dressing".

Tim