Small overlap test

krusty · 08-16-2012, 02:42 PM

The new BMW 3 series F30 doesn't score very well at all on the new "SMALL overlap test":

... which involves a front-end collision at the driver's front wheel at 40 mph. The wheel gets pushed back into the cabin. Quite shocking what happens to the car.

I might be wrong (or overly optimistic)... but I suspect that our Z4's would do better in such a test, because our bonnets are comparatively longer, and I doubt the front wheel would get pushed back as far as into the cabin itself.

For more detail, see:

http://www.f30post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=731114

krusty · 08-17-2012, 12:47 PM

Constructed a scaled mock-up ...

It shows that the Z4 ... even though it is a much smaller car ... has a FAR bigger gap between the front wheel and the passenger cell / driver.

Huz-Z · 08-17-2012, 01:02 PM

This is quite disappointing. My wife has been talking about getting a 3 series convertible next year, but based on this, I'd be concerned about the car's safety. More here:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...rticle4482506/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...rticle4482654/

kennyfrc · 08-17-2012, 01:10 PM

This is what happens when goverment regulation(CAFE) has manufacturers grabbing at straws to gain fuel economy!

Huz-Z · 08-17-2012, 01:34 PM

Although its a small car, I've always felt secure in my Z4, owing to its many airbags, low center of gravity and wide stance that give it great rollover resistance, and its welded-to-the-chassis roll bars and reinforced windshield frame that will support the weight of the car if it ever did roll. Anecdotal evidence of members here supports that view.

But the new 3 series seems poor in the safety department. And I value safety over fuel economy........

Finnegan · 08-17-2012, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyfrc

This is what happens when goverment regulation(CAFE) has manufacturers grabbing at straws to gain fuel economy!

I think you're on to something there. It's the "Law of Unintended Consequences."

Another example would be HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lane laws. These are supposed to encourage people to carpool, reduce gas consumption, reduction pollution. The reality, at least where I live (and other areas I've visited in NorCal), is that the HOV lanes get little use. The result being that it takes away a lane of traffic, which increases gridlock, stop and go, and results in more gas consumption and more pollution. It does exactly the opposite of what was intended.

Without getting to political, it's typical of a centralized planning (government) approach rather than a market-based approach to complex problems. Regulation isn't always bad (I prefer to not have lead in my food), but for complex systems, it doesn't work so well IMO. To put it another way, good intentions often pave the way to hell when implemented in this fashion.

estrovpa1 · 08-17-2012, 01:38 PM

I would like to know when the Insurance Institute proposed this new test standard and how this aligns with the design timeline of the cars tested. The Passat CC is an ancient platform and most definitely was not designed to perform well in this type of test.

Also disconcerting is the fact that the results make of point of highlighting the fact that these are "luxury" cars - insinuating that they should perform well when compared to "non-luxury" cars. What was not done is test non-luxury cars.

I can't wait to see how a Honda Civic does on this test or a Camry or Accord for that matter.

I would like to propose a test for the Institute where a thin rigid street pole is introduced into the mid-section of a car to simulate a sliding impact caused when a pedestrian enters a high speed intersection and causes a driver to swerve and slide into said post. I am sure this happens frequently and auto manufacturers should be protecting automobile occupants against such situations.

Huz-Z · 08-17-2012, 01:47 PM

The Globe and Mail article I linked above mentions that this indeed is a new test. but I suspect its similar to the long-standing offset crash test, but perhaps a more rigororous version of it. It would be interesting to see how these cars perform in that older test to see if the new cars are worse than older ones - or if the new test standard is higher than in the past.

krusty · 08-17-2012, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estrovpa1

Also disconcerting is the fact that the results make of point of highlighting the fact that these are "luxury" cars - insinuating that they should perform well when compared to "non-luxury" cars. What was not done is test non-luxury cars.

I can't wait to see how a Honda Civic does on this test or a Camry or Accord for that matter.

They've started with the luxury cars. The non-luxury cars are next in line to be crash tested ... and given the poor showing of the luxury models, I suspect the non-luxury models are going to perform even worse. Can you imagine what will happen to a small hatchback?

Finnegan · 08-17-2012, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krusty

They've started with the luxury cars. The non-luxury cars are next in line to be crash tested ... and given the poor showing of the luxury models, I suspect the non-luxury models are going to perform even worse. Can you imagine what will happen to a small hatchback?

I'm not thinking it will be pretty, that's for sure.

08-16-2012, 02:42 PM	#1
krusty Second Lieutenant 23 Rep 291 Posts Drives: Z4 coupé Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Australia iTrader: (0)	Small overlap test The new BMW 3 series F30 doesn't score very well at all on the new "SMALL overlap test": ... which involves a front-end collision at the driver's front wheel at 40 mph. The wheel gets pushed back into the cabin. Quite shocking what happens to the car. I might be wrong (or overly optimistic)... but I suspect that our Z4's would do better in such a test, because our bonnets are comparatively longer, and I doubt the front wheel would get pushed back as far as into the cabin itself. For more detail, see: http://www.f30post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=731114 Last edited by krusty; 08-16-2012 at 02:48 PM..
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

08-17-2012, 12:47 PM	#2
krusty Second Lieutenant 23 Rep 291 Posts Drives: Z4 coupé Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Australia iTrader: (0)	Constructed a scaled mock-up ... It shows that the Z4 ... even though it is a much smaller car ... has a FAR bigger gap between the front wheel and the passenger cell / driver.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

08-17-2012, 01:02 PM	#3
Huz-Z Brigadier General 851 Rep 4,057 Posts Drives: Z4 3.0si, 328 XDrive, X5 35i Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Canada iTrader: (0)	This is quite disappointing. My wife has been talking about getting a 3 series convertible next year, but based on this, I'd be concerned about the car's safety. More here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...rticle4482506/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...rticle4482654/ __________________ Huz-Z BMW Z4 3.0si Roadster. Montego Blue Metallic. Premium and Sport Package.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

08-17-2012, 01:10 PM	#4
kennyfrc First Lieutenant 18 Rep 376 Posts Drives: 2008 Z4MC Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: ATL GA iTrader: (1)	This is what happens when goverment regulation(CAFE) has manufacturers grabbing at straws to gain fuel economy! __________________ Toy: 2008 Silver Z4MC 300WHP/241TQ Mods: OEM Euro Headers, RPI Scoop Daily: 2010 Tacoma Double Cab
	Appreciate 0 Quote

08-17-2012, 01:34 PM	#5
Huz-Z Brigadier General 851 Rep 4,057 Posts Drives: Z4 3.0si, 328 XDrive, X5 35i Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Canada iTrader: (0)	Although its a small car, I've always felt secure in my Z4, owing to its many airbags, low center of gravity and wide stance that give it great rollover resistance, and its welded-to-the-chassis roll bars and reinforced windshield frame that will support the weight of the car if it ever did roll. Anecdotal evidence of members here supports that view. But the new 3 series seems poor in the safety department. And I value safety over fuel economy........ __________________ Huz-Z BMW Z4 3.0si Roadster. Montego Blue Metallic. Premium and Sport Package.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

08-17-2012, 01:38 PM	#7
estrovpa1 New Member 1 Rep 16 Posts Drives: Z4 2003, 535i 2008 Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Philadelphia, PA iTrader: (0)	I would like to know when the Insurance Institute proposed this new test standard and how this aligns with the design timeline of the cars tested. The Passat CC is an ancient platform and most definitely was not designed to perform well in this type of test. Also disconcerting is the fact that the results make of point of highlighting the fact that these are "luxury" cars - insinuating that they should perform well when compared to "non-luxury" cars. What was not done is test non-luxury cars. I can't wait to see how a Honda Civic does on this test or a Camry or Accord for that matter. I would like to propose a test for the Institute where a thin rigid street pole is introduced into the mid-section of a car to simulate a sliding impact caused when a pedestrian enters a high speed intersection and causes a driver to swerve and slide into said post. I am sure this happens frequently and auto manufacturers should be protecting automobile occupants against such situations.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

08-17-2012, 01:47 PM	#8
Huz-Z Brigadier General 851 Rep 4,057 Posts Drives: Z4 3.0si, 328 XDrive, X5 35i Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Canada iTrader: (0)	The Globe and Mail article I linked above mentions that this indeed is a new test. but I suspect its similar to the long-standing offset crash test, but perhaps a more rigororous version of it. It would be interesting to see how these cars perform in that older test to see if the new cars are worse than older ones - or if the new test standard is higher than in the past. __________________ Huz-Z BMW Z4 3.0si Roadster. Montego Blue Metallic. Premium and Sport Package.
	Appreciate 0 Quote