3 Series, 3 Star Side Rating

B

Bryan330i

2
#1
Messages
1,617
Likes
0
Location
Dallas TX, Kennesaw, GA
#1
Damn, this surprised me, 2 stars lower than the Accord, Civic, Camary, and any Volvo. This is not good for a $40,000 car. What's going on here????

Safety Concern:Due to the intrusion of the left front door during the side impact test, the interior door panel struck the pelvis of the driver dummy, causing a high pelvic acceleration. High pelvic accelerations, in excess of 130 g's, have a higher likelihood of Pelvic fracture.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/NCAP/Cars/3186.html
 
MrElussive

MrElussive

2
#4
Messages
6,984
Likes
0
Location
New Jersey
#4
Well I just find it awfully hard to believe that they give some wack Kia minivan flawless ratings down the line (a company not known at all for safety) and they give a BMW (LEGENDARY FOR SAFETY) just an average rating. I think, being true hicks, they probably are biased towards big utility vehicles.
 
theBMWenthusiast

theBMWenthusiast

2
#6
Messages
1,570
Likes
0
Location
Orange County, California
#6
MrElussive said:
Well I just find it awfully hard to believe that they give some wack Kia minivan flawless ratings down the line (a company not known at all for safety) and they give a BMW (LEGENDARY FOR SAFETY) just an average rating. I think, being true hicks, they probably are biased towards big utility vehicles.
Click to expand...
im with you...BMW has legendary safety and i never even heard of this place to even test BMW's often
 
B

Bryan330i

2
#7
Messages
1,617
Likes
0
Location
Dallas TX, Kennesaw, GA
#7
I completely disagree on the basis here; you need to look at the facts guys and not your individual preferences. The purpose of controlled testing is to place each subject through the exact same test situation with the exact same force repeated consistently. You simply cannot make exceptions and say well lets hit BMW different and hope for a different result. Read the testing standards, they are very consistent and strong.

The CEO of GM called the testing standards unrealistic and not reflective of all crash scenarios.Yes, of course he would say this, how else would he explain the large number of poor scores.

The fact remains that 1980's, 1990's testing and safety days are past and obviously what once was for BMW safety is falling short in todays market- check the international testing sources.

BMW needs to take action on this; cars at half the price are scoring better.
 
Last edited:
E

epj3

Senior Member
#8
Messages
7,370
Likes
0
Location
Lancaster, PA
#8
Its not just that, the fact that bmw has had near-perfect crash test results in the past and are now getting just mediocre results is really really poor. I don't think i would be happy with any thing less than a 4 from BMW. These cars are constantly driven at well over 100mph in Europe. They NEED to be safe.

It would be like volvo getting anything less than a 5 for front crash impact ratings.
 
jrt67ss350

jrt67ss350

2
#9
Messages
1,831
Likes
0
Location
Winston Salem, NC
#9
epj3 said:
Its not just that, the fact that bmw has had near-perfect crash test results in the past and are now getting just mediocre results is really really poor. I don't think i would be happy with any thing less than a 4 from BMW. These cars are constantly driven at well over 100mph in Europe. They NEED to be safe.
Not just that, but new BMWs are by NO MEANS inexpensive vehicles. If I pay $50,000 and up for any new car, I expect it to be at the top of the game in safety. If I'm not compromising on how much money I'm spending on a car, then I expect no compromises in safety.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
codex57

codex57

2
#10
Messages
3,476
Likes
0
Location
Lincoln, CA
#10
The Gov't crash ratings are easier than the IIHS one. This has me worried. If BMW got 3 stars on the gov't one, who knows what the hell they'll get from the IIHS one.
 
aNoodle

aNoodle

1000 Post Club
#12
Messages
1,137
Likes
0
Location
Athens, GA
#12
Bryan330i said:
I completely disagree on the basis here; you need to look at the facts guys and not your individual preferences. The purpose of controlled testing is to place each subject through the exact same test situation with the exact same force repeated consistently. You simply cannot make exceptions and say well lets hit BMW different and hope for a different result. Read the testing standards, they are very consistent and strong.

The CEO of GM called the testing standards unrealistic and not reflective of all crash scenarios.Yes, of course he would say this, how else would he explain the large number of poor scores.

The fact remains that 1980's, 1990's testing and safety days are past and obviously what once was for BMW safety is falling short in todays market- check the international testing sources.

BMW needs to take action on this; cars at half the price are scoring better.
Click to expand...
A lot of manufacturers build to the test....big surprise....a certain barrier at a certain height at a certain angle...blah blah blah. A new test comes out and you find out how poorly the car may perform in different circumstances and how the tests don't really do a good job of rating overall safetyness.
 
codex57

codex57

2
#13
Messages
3,476
Likes
0
Location
Lincoln, CA
#13
aNoodle said:
A lot of manufacturers build to the test....big surprise....a certain barrier at a certain height at a certain angle...blah blah blah. A new test comes out and you find out how poorly the car may perform in different circumstances and how the tests don't really do a good job of rating overall safetyness.
Click to expand...
yeah, I remember this news station did a special report on it. Cut apart the bumpers to see how some manufacturers passed the test so well. Some just stuck a piece of foam rubber in the spots where they knew the test was going to hit. When they switched to offset crashes, the barriers missed the foam pieces and caused significant damages.

As for the BMW and its 3 stars, what the hell would a pelvic fracture do? Will that kill you?
 
B

Bryan330i

2
#17
Messages
1,617
Likes
0
Location
Dallas TX, Kennesaw, GA
#17
All of the full-size American brand trucks smash like a beer can in a crash. Ford (2004) and Dodge changed their design to perform much better, GM still has their head buried in the sand over the issue.

Look at the 05 Chevy van, and yes, that is 05, not 1975, or 1985, but 2005!
 

Attachments

codex57

codex57

2
#18
Messages
3,476
Likes
0
Location
Lincoln, CA
#18
Holy poo! That's horrible. Least no one buys the GM vans anyways. The Ford F series sold like hotcakes. Least the new one is a dramatic improvement over the old one.
 
///M SPEED

///M SPEED

2
#19
Messages
2,611
Likes
5
Location
Seattle Area
#19
Guess they feel no one really uses their legs so why have protection for them. Man, those are horrible. It is really when a super small car like the Mini can out perform a huge truck. Seems the American companies need to pull their heads out and take a look once-in-a-while.
 
D

deutsch100

2
#20
Messages
1,350
Likes
6
Location
San Fernando Valley, So. CA
#20
Bryan330i said:
All of the full-size American brand trucks smash like a beer can in a crash. Ford (2004) and Dodge changed their design to perform much better, GM still has their head buried in the sand over the issue.

Look at the 05 Chevy van, and yes, that is 05, not 1975, or 1985, but 2005!
Click to expand...
OMG...that is disgusting. I cannot believe that a 2005 vehicle, regardless of being a crappy American car, can perform so poorly in a crash test. Look at the convulted body. Mein Gott....eine Brezel [paranoid]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Top