Comments on: IIHS: Camry aces side impact test, Zephyr disappoints http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html Car news, reviews, and specs for the auto-industry Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:21:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: workathome http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-228174 workathome Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:04:35 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-228174 workathome <a href="http://workathome.mycv.tv/" rel="nofollow">workathome</a> workathome workathome

]]> By: Dan http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-216861 Dan Tue, 08 Aug 2006 15:32:43 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-216861 [intentionally missing the point] If safety was really a priority on our roads, we'd all be driving caterhams. two caterhams hit, two suspensions broken with no passengers hurt. side impact head protection made via full face helmets and have you ever actually seen two caterhams collide on the road? didn't think so. [/missing the point] [intentionally missing the point]
If safety was really a priority on our roads, we’d all be driving caterhams. two caterhams hit, two suspensions broken with no passengers hurt. side impact head protection made via full face helmets and have you ever actually seen two caterhams collide on the road? didn’t think so.
[/missing the point]

]]> By: DCX http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-216557 DCX Tue, 08 Aug 2006 05:09:42 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-216557 Well Robert, if it's "so easy to build your car to meet IIHS crash standards" then why the hell doesn't Chrysler just DO IT then? Instead of being ridiculed like this? Well Robert, if it’s “so easy to build your car to meet IIHS crash standards” then why the hell doesn’t Chrysler just DO IT then? Instead of being ridiculed like this?

]]> By: John http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-216529 John Tue, 08 Aug 2006 03:42:51 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-216529 Don't get hit. Drive only when you are fully alert. If you are tired at 5:00 pm, don't go home. Stay at work and sleep on the floor. When you are refreshed, then you may drive home. Tell your wife you gotta sleep around for a few before you go home. Don’t get hit.
Drive only when you are fully alert.
If you are tired at 5:00 pm, don’t go home.
Stay at work and sleep on the floor.
When you are refreshed, then you may drive home.
Tell your wife you gotta sleep around for a few before you go home.

]]> By: Robert http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-216242 Robert Mon, 07 Aug 2006 18:45:05 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-216242 The problem with these tests (just like EPA gas mileage ratings) is that they are not always reflections of real-world conditions. For example, the Camry did well during side-impact, but that is with a known size barrier with certain shape characteristics and impact speed. Granted, the Caliber in many situations will probably fare worse than the Camry (it's smaller and its body structure is different), but it's so easy to build your car to meet IIHS or other crash standards while failing to ultimately protect an occupant in real-world situations, just as it's easy to build an engine/tranny combo that gets rated at 60/51, but returns 45 for most customers. At the end of the day, be sure you just don't get in an accident and be sure to have side airbags if you do, that's about all that matters with the types (and quality) of cars we have today. The problem with these tests (just like EPA gas mileage ratings) is that they are not always reflections of real-world conditions. For example, the Camry did well during side-impact, but that is with a known size barrier with certain shape characteristics and impact speed. Granted, the Caliber in many situations will probably fare worse than the Camry (it’s smaller and its body structure is different), but it’s so easy to build your car to meet IIHS or other crash standards while failing to ultimately protect an occupant in real-world situations, just as it’s easy to build an engine/tranny combo that gets rated at 60/51, but returns 45 for most customers.

At the end of the day, be sure you just don’t get in an accident and be sure to have side airbags if you do, that’s about all that matters with the types (and quality) of cars we have today.

]]> By: MGBYG http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-216227 MGBYG Mon, 07 Aug 2006 18:14:44 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-216227 The Big 3, er Big 7, are all self-regulated and generally do most of the crash work in CAD simulations using CATIA and FEA programs. But why they don't have some side work to run cars into barriers and have an Insurance Institute duplicate sled ram into the sides AND build-out for these tests? What's an extra 5 bucks and 3 pounds of sheetmetal per vehicle to get 5 stars to put in the ads?? True safety is one noble cause, but I am still shocked they haven't all made these tests a quick, cheap, and noble promotion vehicle. The Big 3, er Big 7, are all self-regulated and generally do most of the crash work in CAD simulations using CATIA and FEA programs.

But why they don’t have some side work to run cars into barriers and have an Insurance Institute duplicate sled ram into the sides AND build-out for these tests? What’s an extra 5 bucks and 3 pounds of sheetmetal per vehicle to get 5 stars to put in the ads?? True safety is one noble cause, but I am still shocked they haven’t all made these tests a quick, cheap, and noble promotion vehicle.

]]> By: jay http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-216206 jay Mon, 07 Aug 2006 17:47:18 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-216206 I like crashes too, as long as nobodies hurt and I'm not in one! Neon was terrible, and the Caliber slightly improves on it's gruesomness... slightly... I'm suprised at Zephyr though... to bad I like crashes too, as long as nobodies hurt and I’m not in one!
Neon was terrible, and the Caliber slightly improves on it’s gruesomness… slightly…
I’m suprised at Zephyr though… to bad

]]> By: al http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-216163 al Mon, 07 Aug 2006 16:42:32 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-216163 i like the crashes i like the crashes

]]> By: MKBruin http://www.leftlanenews.com/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints.html#comment-216158 MKBruin Mon, 07 Aug 2006 16:34:31 +0000 http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/08/07/iihs-camry-aces-side-impact-test-zerphy-disappoints/#comment-216158 Told you the Caliber was crap Told you the Caliber was crap

]]>