Sunday, March 28, 2010

Will Nissan Qashqai be the Euro NCAP Safest Car of 2010?

I've bought a Nissan Qashqai Acenta 2010. Due for delivery 13 July 2010! It was between Qashqai and the Renault Megane Expression Mk3. Earlier I discarded, for various reasons, the Vauxhall Astra mk6 Exclusiv, VW Golf S mk6 and Honda Insight SE mk2 (all have 90% Adult safety score).

I reckon the Nissan Qashqai 2010 will win the Euro NCAP award for safest 2010 car in January 2011 (VW Golf won the award in 2009). Why?

The new Nissan Qashqai model was released for sale in the UK from 1st March 2010. It has a new bonnet which will probably exceed the 60% Euro NCAP Pedestrian Safety score (up from 18 points or 49.6% (equivalent) in the 2007 Euro NCAP test). The Qashqai should keep its 5* rating post 2012. If, when it is re-tested in 2010, Qashqai achieves 67% or more Pedestrian Safety it will have an overall Euro NCAP score of 84.7%. This score will beat the VW Golf Mk6 84.6% overall safety which won the 2009 Euro NCAP Safest car award. So Nissan Qashqai 2010 could be the 2010 Euro NCAP safest car!

From the Nissan Qashqai 2010 model Electronic Stability Programme (ESP) is standard (required in 2012 for 5 star Euro NCAP rating).

Source: crabsallover March 2010

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Future Car Safety ideas from Nissan

pdf: August 2006 Safety Activities Technology Overview.

Based on the concept of “Real World Safety,” Nissan is working to create safer automobiles with the goal of halving the number of automobile accident fatalities or serious injuries involving its vehicles by 2015 as compared to 1995. Already, Nissan has made significant progress – with occupant protection technologies such as SRS airbag systems and Zone Body construction, hazard evasion technologies such as ABS and VDC, and driving support technologies such as AFS – reflected in a 27% reduction in fatal and serious injuries involving Nissan vehicles in 2004 compared to 1995. However, further work is needed to counter an upward trend in the total number of accidents and create a safer “automobile society.”

Topics covered in this excellent overview include:-

  • Distance Control Assist System
  • Intelligent Cruise Control with low-speed following capability
    • If there is a vehicle in the lane ahead, the system uses data from a radar sensor installed in the front bumper to control following distance appropriately in accordance with the preset cruising speed (about 40 to 100km/h). If there is no vehicle ahead, the preset cruising speed is maintained. The low-speed following mode operates at speeds under about 40km/h to maintain an appropriate following distance in congested traffi c, thereby helping reduce the driver’s workload.
  • Adaptive Front Lighting System (AFS)
    • Most pedestrian fatalities occur at night, so improved visibility is vital to help avoid such accidents. Nissan’s AFS automatically swivels the angle of AFS lamps (located in the headlamps) in the direction the vehicle is turning, based on steering angle and vehicle speed, thereby helping to reveal obstacles in the vehicle path.
  • Xenon headlamps
    • For improved visibility, Xenon headlamps produce bright white light that is close to sunlight in color. This powerful yet natural looking illumination enhances confi dence for night driving safety.
  • Rear View Monitor
  • Side View Monitor
  • Around View Monitor
  • Lane Departure Warning
  • Lane Departure Prevention
  • 4 Wheel Active Steer
  • Electronic Brakeforce Distribution (EBD)
  • Anti-lock Braking System (ABS)
  • Brake Assist
  • Vehicle Dynamic Control (VDC)
  • Intelligent Brake Assist
  • Front Pre-Crash Seat Belts
  • Zone Body construction
  • Front-seat Active Head Restraints

Saturday, March 13, 2010

Electronic Stability Control (ESC)


Electronic stability control could prevent nearly one-third of all fatal crashes and reduce rollover risk by as much as 80%; effect is found on single- and multiple-vehicle crashes.

ARLINGTON, VA —An extension of antilock brake technology, electronic stability control (ESC) is designed to help drivers retain control of their vehicles during high-speed maneuvers or on slippery roads. Previous research found significant effects of ESC in reducing the risk of fatal single-vehicle crashes. Using data from an additional year of crashes and a larger set of vehicle models, researchers at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety have updated the 2004 results and found that ESC reduces the risk of fatal multiple-vehicle crashes by 32 percent.

The new research confirms that ESC reduces the risk of all single-vehicle crashes by more than 40 percent — fatal ones by 56 percent.

The researchers estimate that if all vehicles were equipped with ESC, as many as 10,000 fatal crashes could be avoided each year.


I assume this refers to USA data.

"The findings indicate that ESC should be standard on all vehicles," says Susan Ferguson, Institute senior vice president for research. "Very few safety technologies show this kind of large effect in reducing crash deaths."

Availability varies: ESC is standard on 40 percent of 2006 passenger vehicle models and optional on another 15 percent. It's standard on every 2006 Audi, BMW, Infiniti, Mercedes, and Porsche. Another 8 vehicle makes (Cadillac, Jaguar, Land Rover, Lexus, Mini, Toyota, Volkswagen, and Volvo) offer at least optional ESC on all of their models. But ESC, standard or optional, is limited to 25 percent or fewer models from Chevrolet, Dodge, Ford, Hummer, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Saturn, Subaru, and Suzuki.

After studies in 2004 by the Institute and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, some manufacturers announced plans to make ESC standard on all SUVs. The percentage of SUV models with standard ESC has been growing faster than for cars.

As a stand-alone option, ESC costs from about $300 to $800, but it can cost more than $2,000 on some models when packaged with other equipment. A potential problem for increasing consumer awareness is that automakers market ESC by various names including Electronic Stability Program, StabiliTrak, or Active Handling.

"When ESC is optional, this hodgepodge of terms is bound to be confusing," Ferguson points out. "It's good that some of the major manufacturers have pledged to make ESC standard on their SUVs in the next few model years, and it should be standard on cars and pickup trucks too."

How ESC works: Antilock brakes have speed sensors and independent braking capability. ESC adds sensors that continuously monitor how well a vehicle is responding to a driver's steering wheel input. These sensors can detect when a driver is about to lose control because the vehicle is straying from the intended line of travel — a problem that usually occurs in high-speed maneuvers or on slippery roads. In these circumstances, ESC brakes individual wheels automatically to keep the vehicle under control.

When a driver makes a sudden emergency maneuver or, for example, enters a curve too fast, the vehicle may spin out of control. Then ESC's automatic braking is applied and in some cases throttle reduced to help keep the vehicle under control.

ESC is relatively new. Only in the last few years have researchers had sufficient data to analyze its effects on real-world crashes. The new Institute study is based on data from the federal Fatality Analysis Reporting System and police reports of crashes in 10 states during 2001-04. Researchers compared crash rates for cars and SUVs without ESC and the same models in subsequent years when ESC was standard (note: some vehicles with optional ESC were included in the no-ESC group because so few buyers choose this option).

More effects of ESC on SUVs: The data in the Institute's 2004 study weren't extensive enough to allow researchers to compute separate risk reduction estimates for cars and SUVs. However, this was possible in the broader analysis that's just completed. While both cars and SUVs benefit from ESC, the reduction in the risk of single-vehicle crashes was significantly greater for SUVs — 49 percent versus 33 percent for cars. The reduction in fatal single-vehicle crashes wasn't significantly different for SUVs (59 percent) than for cars (53 percent).

Many single-vehicle crashes involve rolling over, and ESC effectiveness in preventing rollovers is even more dramatic. It reduces the risk of fatal single-vehicle rollovers of SUVs by 80 percent, 77 percent for cars.

ESC was found to reduce the risk of all kinds of fatal crashes by 43 percent. This is more than the 34 percent reduction reported in 2004. If all vehicles had ESC, it could prevent as many as 10,000 of the 34,000 fatal passenger vehicle crashes that occur each year.

Insurance claims show effects on collision losses: The results of the Institute's studies showing significant reductions in serious crash risk are reflected in some insurance losses. According to a new analysis by the Highway Loss Data Institute, an affiliate of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, losses under collision coverage are about 15 percent lower for vehicles with ESC than for predecessor models without it. However, ESC doesn't have much effect on property damage liability claims or the frequency of injury claims. These findings track police-reported crashes, which show little effect of ESC on the risk of low-severity multiple-vehicle crashes.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

All Good Whiplash scores


More results from Audi, Volvo, Saab,....

Thatcham Research News gives all tests on all cars to 2008

The Effect of Head Restraint Geometry


A research project was undertaken by Thatcham to examine head restraint geometry (the size and shape of the restraint and its position relative to the occupant's head) and its ability to lock. By measuring the 'geometry' of the head restraint - the distance between the top of the head restraint and the top of an average person's head and the distance between the back of the head and the head restraint front surface - a 'geometric' plot can be calculated.

Using one of four 'zones', a head restraint can be then rated as 'Good', 'Acceptable', 'Marginal' or 'Poor'. The rating given depends upon the restraint's size and shape, its adjustment, and whether it locks in the 'up' position. Research has shown that a locking head restraint offers more protection than those that do not lock and that they are more likely to remain adjusted once set.
The work undertaken by Thatcham and other research centres in Canada, US and Australia has resulted in a new international procedure for the static rating of head restraints. Published under the auspices of RCAR, the Research Council for Automobile Repairs, it is the first time a safety rating procedure has been harmonised throughout the world and is influencing vehicle designers to place 'Good' geometry onto their list of safety priorities.

Head Restraint Geometry Ratings have been published for a number of years and now form an integral part of the Thatcham 'Rear Impact Protection' ratings. 

What is Whiplash and how to adjust your head restraint?


What is Whiplash?

Whiplash, although officially classed as a minor injury, can lead to long painful and debilitating symptoms for many years. Not uncommon in frontal and side crashes, whiplash most often occurs in low speed, rear crashes. The injury mechanism of whiplash is poorly understood, so it is the subject of intense global research. Recent work has focused on the possibility of nerve damage in the spinal canal, face and joints due to the rapid acceleration of the body relative to the head.

Mild symptoms involve stiffness and tenderness of the muscles in the upper back and neck, headaches and dizziness. Such cases are classed as short term and can last up to three months. More serious, long term cases can involve permanent impairment, neurological and musculoskeletal injures. Whiplash is difficult to diagnose and difficult to treat, and is also expensive. Soft tissue neck injuries currently cost British insurers nearly £2 billion annually and account for over 80% of the total cost of personal injury claims.

How to Adjust Your Head Restraint

To be effective, a head restraint must be as close to the back of the head as possible (touching is best) and the top of the restraint should be as high as the top of the head. Remember it is a head restraint, not a headrest.





Good

Bad

Good

Whiplash by car search

Whiplash protection on Superminis is at best 'moderate'


source: Thatcham

New Car Whiplash Ratings

Safety: You now have a choice (at almost every price range)

Wide Choice of 'GOOD' Seats
With improvements in seat and head restraint design for protection against whiplash injuries drivers now have an even wider choice of seats to protect their necks, thanks to Thatcham's continued testing of vehicle seats. However small cars still do not offer enough protection — and they need it most.
Small City cars still need better seats
With environmental and cost pressures becoming ever greater, very small or City cars are becoming increasingly popular. City cars are designed for the urban environment and spend the majority of their time in traffic — and this is where most whiplash injuries occur, due to low speed shunts. 

But no City cars have a seat and head restraint rated as 'GOOD' for protection against whiplash injuries, even though these are some of the latest designs. These cars need the best protection because they are smaller and lighter and more susceptible to high forces in a rear end crash. These City cars are not equipped to protect their occupants' necks when they have to absorb the crash energy from larger, heavier vehicles.

The only two City cars to achieve an 'ACCEPTABLE' rating were the Renault Twingo and the Smart Fortwo. The majority of the other nine City cars were rated as 'MARGINAL', with the current Ford Ka and Fiat Panda rated as 'POOR'. Even the recently released Fiat 500 — new for 2008 — only achieved a 'MARGINAL' rating. 


Fiat 500
Fiat 500: MARGINAL
Neck protection is not much better in the class above. Two thirds of the Supermini cars were rated as 'MARGINAL' or 'POOR'. Renault is leading the way with the Clio and Modus seats rated as 'GOOD'.

Renault Clio
Renault Clio: GOOD
Neck protection, but at a price!
For Small and Large Family cars, such as the Ford Focus or Mondeo, the situation is better. Over two thirds of these have seats rated as 'GOOD' or 'ACCEPTABLE'. For the SUVs and Executive cars the majority of seats rate as 'GOOD'. Examples are the Peugeot 4007 and the BMW 5-Series. Buyers seeking a 'GOOD' rated seat for whiplash protection now have a wider choice than ever. But they are forced to spend more in order to achieve protection from a minor crash.

BMW 5 Series
BMW 5 Series: GOOD

2008 Model Year

Thatcham has been testing seats since 2001 for their ability to protect the occupant from whiplash injuries. The 2008 Model Year testing again confirms manufacturers from around the globe are listening to Thatcham and introducing new seat designs that can protect their occupants from whiplash injuries. Now over one third of all new seats are rated as 'GOOD'. Only 16% are rated as 'POOR' and these are mostly older designs due for replacement.
Model Year 2005 and 2008 Ratings Pie charts

Most improved seat

For the last three years of Thatcham testing, BMW seats have never achieved a 'GOOD' rating. In Model Year 2008, BMW have finally achieved a 'GOOD' rating for the new 5-Series, X3 and X5 seats demonstrating that they have finally begun to accept the importance of whiplash protection. BMW now join Mercedes and Audi in offering their drivers protection from whiplash injury.

Car-crash test dummy
5-Series seat with Pro-Active Head Restraint achieves a GOOD rating





BMW 5 Series: GOOD




Fiat 500: MARGINAL

Euro NCAP's Top Five Safety Achievers of 2009


  1. VW Golf VI
  2. Honda Insight
  3. Toyota Prius
  4. Hyundai i20
  5. Toyota Avensis
  6. Volvo XC60
  7. Opel/Vauxhall Astra


source: http://www.thatcham.org/pressroom/pdfs/ENCAP_Top_Five_Safety_Achievers_2009.pdf
Embargoed until: 10am, 28 January 2010

Effectiveness of ESC to prevent car skidding - Euro NCAP tests


Electronic Stability Control (ESC) OFF / ON - shows effectiveness of ESC to prevent car skidding. All cars tested by Euro NCAP.


Comments by crabsallover.



Euro NCAP say ' ':-


'Electronic stability control (ESC) 
is an active safety technology that improves a vehicle's dynamic stability by detecting loss and supporting the regain of control of the vehicle. ESC does not protect occupants in a crash, but helps to avoid the crash in the first place.

Euro NCAP for the first time has tested the ESC performance (crabsallover says 'highly recommended videos of car skids when ESC On or Off') of all cars crash-tested in 2009, we provide this data for your viewing. 2009 was also the year when we included ESC fitment as an essential part of Euro NCAP’s assessment leading to the overall award rating. Until 2009, we carried out a yearly survey of ESC fitment across all car brands. The ESC survey for 2008 is available here.

How effective is ESC? 
ESC is a proven safety system. At least 40% of fatal road accidents are the result of skidding. International studies show that ESC reduces skidding accidents between 25% and 35% depending on road conditions.
How does ESC operate? 
When ESC detects a loss of steering control, ESC automatically applies the brakes to help manoeuvre the vehicle where the driver intends to go. Braking is automatically applied to individual wheels depending on the situation. ESC normally consists of the electronic systems of traction control and ABS using several sensors such as steering wheel angle sensor, yaw rate sensor, lateral acceleration sensor and wheel speed sensor to monitor the vehicle’s direction of travel and the driver’s intended course. ESC cannot be retrofitted and needs to be fitted before sale.'

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Top Toyota officials to testify at Senate 2nd March

Toyota officials will get a further grilling at the US Senate (Guardian 2 March).

What evidence is their that the recalls are not solving the Toyota acceleration problems? More News about Toyota safety concerns. (Google News).

Jay Rockefeller, chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, said that the documents raised questions about whether the company put profits over customer safety. Opening the hearing, which has been called to examine several safety recalls of more than six million Toyota vehicles in the US, Mr Rockefeller said: “It is clear that somewhere along the way public safety took a back seat and corporate profits drove the company's decisions.”

The hearing coincided with the release of new data by the US Department of Transportation that the number of deaths linked to possible unintended acceleration in Toyota vehicles in the US has risen to 52, a significant increase on previous estimates of up to 34 deaths.


Toyota issued a first recall of "runaway vehicles" last autumn after reports of accidents in which cars accelerated out of control. A second recall followed in January. The company has insisted that the problems were a result of misplaced floor mats or poorly designed pedals. But many drivers and experts believe that problems with the company’s electronic throttle control system may be responsible.

At the hearing, Senators were shown a document the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), showing that it had investigated Toyota's electronic throttle control system as far back as 2003, after a number of reported problems in Camry sedans.

The document noted an increase in complaints of unwanted acceleration in Camry models after 2002, when the electronic throttle control system was first installed. It said that the electronic control module could be to blame, adding that pedal misapplication, or driver error, was "unlikely".

The NHTSA didn't identify a defect trend and closed its investigation in July 2004. The agency "found nothing abnormal in the control pedal configuration", according to another document published by the committee.

In prepared testimony to the committee, Toyota executives also repeated assertions made by the company last week that they did not believe the problem of runaway cars was because of a fault in the electronic systems of Toyota vehicles.

Takeshi Uchiyamada, executive vice president of Toyota and chief engineer on the Prius, said: “I want to be absolutely clear: as a result of our extensive testing, we do not believe sudden unintended acceleration because of a defect in our ETCS (engine throttle control systems) has ever happened.”

In his closing remarks, Mr Rockefeller called for strong legislative action including a requirement for all US vehicles to be equipped with brake override technology that will stop a car when both the accelerator and brake pedals are activated.

Ray LaHood, the US Transportation Secretary, told the committee that the Obama Administration was considering such a proposal. "We are looking at the possibility of requiring the brake-override systems in all (cars)," Mr LaHood said.

Toyota has already announced that it will install the override systems on all new models sold in North America and was installing them on seven existing models. 

Mr Rockefeller also called for a requirement for manufacturers to provide hardware to read the “black box” data recorders in their vehicles.

The committee heard that plaintiffs' lawyers and their clients in car-accident cases have been unable to gain access to access to black-box data because Toyota’s North American unit has only one decoder to read the data and will not share it with others.

Ford, General Motors and Chrysler have black-box formats that can be read using readers available comercially.

Mr Uchiyamada told the Committee that Toyota would provide three black box readers to the NHTSA. Others would be made available later.

The committee hearing coincided with sales figures showing that Toyota’s US sales fell fell to 86,240 vehicles in February, a drop of 11 per cent on the same period last year, but short of the 26 per cent forecast by some analysts.


Source: The Times 3rd March