Honda Element IIHS Side Impact Test: POOR

T

Tim (3)

Usenet Archive
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
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
 
Tim said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Tim said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Tim said:
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest threads

Back
Top