A new study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety reveals that many mid-sized SUV are lagging behind in side impact safety. The IIHS recently put several SUV through a series of front, side and rear crash tests, with only two receiving the Institutes’s highest side impact rating.
General Motor’s SUVs performed the worst, with the Chevrolet Trailblazer, GMC Envoy, Isuzu Ascender and Saab 9-7X all receiving ”Acceptable” front crash ratings, “Marginal” side impact ratings and the lowest rating of “Poor” for rear whiplash crashes.
Chrysler’s Jeep Grand Cherokee performed better with ratings of “Good” in both front and rear impact tests, while it received a “Marginal” in side impact.
The Toyota 4Runner did well in front and side impact test, earing ratings of “Good” in both, but only managed a “Poor” rating in the rear impact test.
The Nissan Pathfinder was one of the top performers, receiving “Good” ratings in front and side impacts and “Marginal” in the rear whiplash crash test.
Ford’s Explorer earned a “Good” front impact rating, ”Acceptable” in the side impact test and “Poor” in the rear whiplash test.
10/11, 10:35 AM
posted by:
LamborghiniZ
The GMT-360 offerings are tried and true GARBAGE. Seriously! If you need to buy a GM SUV, get a ****in’ Acadia/Outlook, or even a Tahoe/Yukon. **** the Trailblazer/Saab 9-7X/Ascender/Ranier/Bravada/Envoy. It’s ****ed up and pathetic they have so many iterations of an awful vehicle, and it’s insulting that it’s still on the market. It’s a vehicle from another era, and it was bad when released, and god AWFUL now. Not sure why anyone would choose this over an Acadia..you can’t even sit in one of the seats for more than 10 minutes w/o being uncomfortable. I know, I was in one for an 10 hour drive once…pure hell.
10/11, 11:10 AM
posted by:
Jon
^ Agreed. Definitely technology from yesteryear. Still many Trailblazers around in rental lots. And have you seen the price of one that’s only a year old? Talk about depreciation.
10/11, 11:35 AM
posted by:
Franq
Curious about Audi Q7
10/11, 11:37 AM
posted by:
jackjimturkey
I’m going lambda. Some defensive driving might help
10/11, 11:51 AM
posted by:
CA36GTP
The GMT-360s are going away, keep your panties on. They weren’t that bad when they first came out, but they were definitely strung out for a year or two too long, and rebadged 16 times too many.
There is a 2003 Envoy SLT in my family, it is a great SUV. The safety could be better, but it is very comfortable and the engine is great. I wish the transmission was geared better and it didn’t feel so lumbering, though. I guess I’m just not a SUV person.
The Acadia is leaps ahead of the previous SUV era. The 3.6L doesn’t have as much raw power, but the 6-speed makes it seem like it does.
10/11, 1:11 PM
posted by:
autonut
The entertaining part of this is that most of customers who purchased those vehicles did it for safety reasons. Well, the good news it is still OK to ram the tree head on not sideways.
10/11, 1:11 PM
posted by:
LamborghiniZ
Jon: True that, the very definition of bad depreciation.
10/11, 1:19 PM
posted by:
CTS DRIVER
still has a better side rating than my 525i, which is just plain scary considering i thought i was safe in it.
with properly adjusted head rests the whiplash factor is a minimum, or a big ole trailer hitch.
besides this is last months news.
10/11, 1:26 PM
posted by:
autonut
Hey CTS get that tree concept Toyota when it will come here: you’ll be the magnet for SUVs, but you’ll be safe!
10/11, 1:34 PM
posted by:
Htay5500
4runner ftw.
10/11, 1:46 PM
posted by:
anyclearer
I like how this article didnt say anything abotu gm’s new line up of suv’s. instead just talked about ones on their way out. How bout keeping the articles about whats new…….if a cars been out for YEARS, im sure we already know the crash test. Test and give info thats up to date with new suvs.
10/11, 2:35 PM
posted by:
LP640
apparently the Q7 has some serious safety issues does anyone have any info on this?
10/11, 4:19 PM
posted by:
Deanster
I don’t know, since it’s car-based. Plus it’s German. You know those krauts, they rarely **** up these days
10/11, 4:44 PM
posted by:
injunraiv
This was apparently a test that exceeded all government regulations on crash worthiness. I’m not surprised the Trailblazer/Envoy did poorly – they were the oldest designs tested. The world has progressed a lot since 2002…
10/11, 4:50 PM
posted by:
jackjimturkey
deantj: the “Krauts’” last mistake was invading stalingrad
10/11, 7:58 PM
posted by:
autonut
Are ****ting me? Google 1972 Olympic games
10/12, 12:14 AM
posted by:
sharpie
Yep, it shows you that 5-year product cycle is a good thing. It also shows how fast technology advances. It still amazes me why people would buy a Ranger or Trailblazer. If I were the factory worker, I’d go on strike for that!
10/12, 8:48 AM
posted by:
Get Real
I’m waiting for a Smart car, it will keep me safe.
10/12, 9:34 AM
posted by:
CA36GTP
Let’s all buy Prius’s instead! I’ve always wanted a car that needs to be towed after a 10mph traffic light fender bender!
10/12, 11:26 AM
posted by:
jackjimturkey
autonut: you got me
10/12, 11:34 AM
posted by:
Impulsive
‘jjm’, I got you too … these latest BMWs are UGLY … that’s one HUGE mistake.
10/12, 1:31 PM
posted by:
jackjimturkey
?