[Warzau]

Now CST 950om review of SUVs

 

[bareyb]

Care to summarize the show? I wasn't able to catch it...

 

[DaleB]

bareyb

It's on 10 o'clock our time!

 

[BaldEagle]

Haven't seen it. Predict it will be something about SUV rollover problems.

 

[DaleB]

I just watched the introduction. It will be on crash safety, with accent on lousy bumpers. MDX should rise to the top if that's the topic!

 

[Warzau]

WEll to summarize it was about small SUV and the 5mph crash test and cost to fix. They tested Saturn VUE. Honda CRV , Land Rover Freelander and Subaru Forester. Here is a Link to the Site

 

[DaleB]

It always seemed ironic that the CRV and RAV4 have F/S spares on the rear that result in much damage in rear bumper tests because the spare damages the hatch..
They probably have no room underneath for a F/S spare.
The MDX has the room for a F/S spare, and has a donut!

 

[bareyb]

Re: bareyb

It's on 10 o'clock our time!

Argh! I still missed it anyway... I was watching some documentary on IFC and it just ended.

 

[DaleB]

It was only on the small SUVs and had bumper tests.
Next week crash tests on the same ones
(Land Rover Freelander, Saturn VUE, Honda CRV, and Subaru Forrester).

 

[Harry]

If you look behind your plastic bumpers you will find Honda designed a replaceable box section tube to take the impact. Cost should be very low in a slow speed oooopppsss.
Caught dateline last night. Wow, I'm glad I don't have a Freelander

 

[roadrunner]

I Like the Forrester

People always think I'm crazy when I tell them that my personal short list was between the MDX (not even out at the time) and the Subaru Forrester, It was a little smaller than I wanted but I thought it was a great vehicle and a very good value. The other main strike against it was a lack of dealers in our area.
That said, if I couldn't afford the MDX I would probably be driving a Forrester
Meep Meep

 

[DaleB]

I second that vote. They even made the lastest Forresters even nicer looking. Now they need a good 6 cylinder.

From a looks stand-point, I like the Mazda Tribute, but my interest ends there, but they at least offer a fairly good V6.

 

[Harry]

Hey Guys
I also considered the Forrester before I decided on the MDX. To bad they don't offer the 6 cylinder on this model. Anyways I also found it to be a bit to small. I love how easy it is to get into and out of the X. At 6'1" I can wear my cap
and not hit the roof.:4:

 

[wmquan]

There's a turbo-4 Forester for the Japanese market, and the rumors still pine for the turbo to come to the U.S. Don't know what that would do to the price.

Here is the IIHS press release on the bumper bash test of some small SUV's, including the Honda CR-V and the Subaru Forester:

http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2002/pr070202.htm

Here are the bumper bash results for all small SUV's:

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/low_speed_smsuv.htm

What is surprising is that while the bulk of the CR-V's high repair cost is for the rear bumpers, it did even worse than the previous generation.

Finally, a reminder that the MDX had the best bumper bash results of any mid-sized SUV tested by IIHS:

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/low_speed_midsuv.htm

 

[renov8r]

CRV fault in tire carrier...

There's a turbo-4 Forester for the Japanese market, and the rumors still pine for the turbo to come to the U.S. Don't know what that would do to the price.

Here is the IIHS press release on the bumper bash test of some small SUV's, including the Honda CR-V and the Subaru Forester:

http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2002/pr070202.htm

Here are the bumper bash results for all small SUV's:

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/low_speed_smsuv.htm

What is surprising is that while the bulk of the CR-V's high repair cost is for the rear bumpers, it did even worse than the previous generation.

Finally, a reminder that the MDX had the best bumper bash results of any mid-sized SUV tested by IIHS:

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/low_speed_midsuv.htm

The bumper did not fair well in the 'basher' test, but the pole test REALLY showed the flaw of the tailgate mounted spare. I expect JAOS or WAAG to devise a rear mounted 'guard' of some type post haste to address this.

 

[DaleB]

Somehow a torquey six cylinder seems to make more sense for an SUV than a turbo 4.

 

[donsev]

This has been discussed before (the last time the IIHS released SUV bumper test results), so at the risk of repeating myself. Why in the world does the IIHS use a *pole* barrier to test the rear bumper damage? When was the last time ANYONE backed into a 4 foot tall vertical pole? Don't the vast majority of rear end collisions involve a horizontal object of some sort (oh, I don't know, maybe like another BUMPER!)?

Consumer Reports uses a "bumper basher" device that they feel much more accurately reflects the type of damage likely to be sustained by the rear bumper.

Again, I am no fan of externally mounted spares, but I feel this test unfairly singles out those that do simply for the sake of selling news footage.

P.S. to those that HAVE backed into a 4 foot tall vertical pole, I have great sympathy for your lack of depth perception.

 

[DaleB]

You bring up a good point, and in fact during the front bumper tests they use a flat surface, and test at more than one angle.
Of course, a flat test on a rear bumper would mean the impact being spread over
a larger area and the resultant damage should be less. Less damage, lower repair costs, lower insurance costs....wait a minute what am I saying?

 

[paulp]

Here is the full video report on MSNBC's website:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/DATELINE_Front.asp

 

[wmquan]

This has been discussed before (the last time the IIHS released SUV bumper test results), so at the risk of repeating myself. Why in the world does the IIHS use a *pole* barrier to test the rear bumper damage? When was the last time ANYONE backed into a 4 foot tall vertical pole? Don't the vast majority of rear end collisions involve a horizontal object of some sort (oh, I don't know, maybe like another BUMPER!)?

Consumer Reports uses a "bumper basher" device that they feel much more accurately reflects the type of damage likely to be sustained by the rear bumper.

Again, I am no fan of externally mounted spares, but I feel this test unfairly singles out those that do simply for the sake of selling news footage.

P.S. to those that HAVE backed into a 4 foot tall vertical pole, I have great sympathy for your lack of depth perception.

While I've not backed into a pole, I can definitely see how it can happen. There are definitely parking spots around here that are littered with little signs on poles. Or signs in the middle of a lot, ready to catch unwary drivers.

IIHS also tests rear-into-angle barrier, so it's not just the pole test. The CR-V did crappy with that test too.

And, to add insult to injury, the CR-V did worse in both rear tests than the previous version. So Honda's definitely cheaped out on something, and it's not just the fault of the rear-mounted spare!