Bad crash test results for 5-series!!!

[jareknyc]

I heard on news yesterday in my local news about the bed crash results, I don’t know why, they said that cheaper cars like kia and other low pricing cars are better in crash tests then the new bmw cars including 5 series and 3 as well yesterday I saw on yahoo.com a movie about the crash I try to look for it but I couldn’t find it what you guys think? :mad:

There you go i found it http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/crash_tes...CDFzPt3jbq188F

[cncmastr]

Originally Posted by jareknyc

I heard on news yesterday in my local news about the bed crash results, I don’t know why, they said that cheaper cars like kia and other low pricing cars are better in crash tests then the new bmw cars including 5 series and 3 as well yesterday I saw on yahoo.com a movie about the crash I try to look for it but I couldn’t find it what you guys think? :mad:

There you go i found it http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/crash_tes...CDFzPt3jbq188F

Ugh! What the heck!?

[jpm3]

yeah, saw that too

[2002 Tii]

VERY dissapointing to see the BMW get whacked in a crash test by a Korean car.

[JEllis]

Umm, I have to be honest. This has never been much of a deciding factor for me in sports oriented auto and it doesnt make me wanna a run out and buy a Kia for sure.


Jason

[jpm3]

Originally Posted by 2002 Tii

VERY dissapointing to see the BMW get whacked in a crash test by a Korean car.

Yup, when I saw the Korean car test before the 5 series. I was really surprised. Hopefully it does not apply to the rest i.e. 3s and Ms.

[lucid]

Although I woundn't discount the results, this test outcome has everything to do with the design of the test. It could simply be related to the location of the support beams in the doors or something, and the Kia's positioning might favor the test condition more than BMW's. If the test is representative of real life crashes, then BMW might need to do some redesign, but I doubt that they would have missed out on something like this in their own tests. If the test is not all that representative of real life crashes, then who cares, which is naturally what BMW is claiming.

[MI6]

My experience with the 5 series has been disappointing since the day it came out in 2003. The interior quality could not campare with my E39 540i and then there's the looks. So I am not surprised entirely by the results.

The E90/92 IMHO are built better, look way nicer and give you way better bang for the buck.

I could never understand the E60 530i people with their bigger car and initially......dinky 225HP engine....

Now the 535i is something else and the 08' facelift seems to have erased a lot of the earlier issues with the car.

[NavNurs]

Lets see the logic, cheap car = cheap to fix, expensive car = expensive to fix. Is this really a surprise?

[swamp2]

I heard the report on the radio as well. Was really disappointed. However the 3er looks like 5 stars for both rear side and rear front crash safety (source Yahoo Autos).

[888]

Originally Posted by lucid

Although I woundn't discount the results, this test outcome has everything to do with the design of the test. It could simply be related to the location of the support beams in the doors or something, and the Kia's positioning might favor the test condition more than BMW's. If the test is representative of real life crashes, then BMW might need to do some redesign, but I doubt that they would have missed out on something like this in their own tests. If the test is not all that representative of real life crashes, then who cares, which is naturally what BMW is claiming.

+1

BMW spokesman Thomas Plucinsky said the institute's test indicated the 5 Series has a strong body structure but the dummy was injured when it was hit by the arm rest. Plucinsky said BMW does up to 12 crash tests on all its cars as well as computer simulations of crashes.

"The issue is that depending on the location of seat, the location of dummy, the location of the sled, the results could change," he said. "This was one test on one day on one car."

[jtown]

Originally Posted by lucid

Although I woundn't discount the results, this test outcome has everything to do with the design of the test. It could simply be related to the location of the support beams in the doors or something, and the Kia's positioning might favor the test condition more than BMW's. If the test is representative of real life crashes, then BMW might need to do some redesign, but I doubt that they would have missed out on something like this in their own tests. If the test is not all that representative of real life crashes, then who cares, which is naturally what BMW is claiming.

I'm pretty sure the crash tests are set up to mimic a real life crash and if the support beams for the 5 are in the wrong place then that's prob why it did so bad.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by lucid

Although I woundn't discount the results, this test outcome has everything to do with the design of the test. It could simply be related to the location of the support beams in the doors or something, and the Kia's positioning might favor the test condition more than BMW's. If the test is representative of real life crashes, then BMW might need to do some redesign, but I doubt that they would have missed out on something like this in their own tests. If the test is not all that representative of real life crashes, then who cares, which is naturally what BMW is claiming.

If the crash test results were rated excellent for the 5 series, you or I wouldn't be doing any analysis or questioning of the test, just praising it. We all become defensive and rationalize when the things that are important to us are questioned. It's called cognitive dissonance. When the the M3 gets a great review we praise the mag, the reviewer and especially the car. Have you noticed, we never question any praise the car receives. A bad review for a BMW and of course the reviewer was naive, the testing results poorly conducted and definitely biased. It's just human nature and I am one of the worst offenders. Oh ya, by the way, I bet they screwed up that test.

[carnuts3]

I'm sorry to say that BMW's response to the results was a defensive bunch of excuses in an attempt to cover their as..... The bottom line is that they can't afford to end up last in tests like these. If the test was conducted fairly and consistently across brands, BMW has no excuses ---- they need to improve their products.... period, end of story. Having an inexpensive, low-cost producer come out better in this test is embarrassing and just adds salt to the wounds.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by jareknyc

I heard on news yesterday in my local news about the bed crash results, I don’t know why, they said that cheaper cars like kia and other low pricing cars are better in crash tests then the new bmw cars including 5 series and 3 as well yesterday I saw on yahoo.com a movie about the crash I try to look for it but I couldn’t find it what you guys think? :mad:

There you go i found it http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/crash_tes...CDFzPt3jbq188F

This new test goes after something the IIHS has been worried about (financially, of course, though they're not inhuman) for well over a decade. However, it's an issue that's resolving itself over time, as all new and replacement SUVs now have front end designs that minimize the problem.

That said, it's still a problem, but the way to keep track of this is to go to the "Informed For Life" web site, where they take a look at all available safety testing results (plus car weight), and integrate those into a single score. They don't have these newest results yet, but will have them integrated soon, I'm sure.

Bruce

[ILC32]

Originally Posted by carnuts3

I'm sorry to say that BMW's response to the results was a defensive bunch of excuses in an attempt to cover their as..... The bottom line is that they can't afford to end up last in tests like these. If the test was conducted fairly and consistently across brands, BMW has no excuses ---- they need to improve their products.... period, end of story. Having an inexpensive, low-cost producer come out better in this test is embarrassing and just adds salt to the wounds.

Agreed.

My wife saw this last night on the news and she drives an E60. The news report made a big deal about how the Kia is safer than the much more expensive BMW. I like others believe that the test result does not truly reflect the safety of the car in a real world situation. That said, I told my wife that if she feels unsafe, we should dump the car.

I wonder whether efforts to reduce weight during the development phase are a cause of this test result.

[MI6]

Originally Posted by ILC32

Agreed.

My wife saw this last night on the news and she drives an E60. The news report made a big deal about how the Kia is safer than the much more expensive BMW. I like others believe that the test result does not truly reflect the safety of the car in a real world situation. That said, I told my wife that if she feels unsafe, we should dump the car.

I wonder whether efforts to reduce weight during the development phase are a cause of this test result.

+1

I strongly feel that BMW also considered the cost factor as well as weight factors on this.

I like the E60.........but.........I still feel the E90/E92 are better cars and I am 100% confident that the next-gen 5er will be a much better quality car in all areas- including safety......

In the meantime have your wife sit in the middle of the car when she drives............

[ruff]

Originally Posted by carnuts3

I'm sorry to say that BMW's response to the results was a defensive bunch of excuses in an attempt to cover their as..... The bottom line is that they can't afford to end up last in tests like these. If the test was conducted fairly and consistently across brands, BMW has no excuses ---- they need to improve their products.... period, end of story. Having an inexpensive, low-cost producer come out better in this test is embarrassing and just adds salt to the wounds.

Couldn't have said it better myself or agreed with you more. BMW enthusiasts don't seem to understand that rationalizing away BMW's problems and continuing to buy an inferior product, allows BMW to get away with high prices, poor crash tests, poorer service and worse reliability. Want the best engineered product BMW can produce, hold them to higher standard with your voice and your wallet. The BMW badge is not something earned through valor but simply purchased with a lot of money.

[rvacha]

Originally Posted by jtown

I'm pretty sure the crash tests are set up to mimic a real life crash and if the support beams for the 5 are in the wrong place then that's prob why it did so bad.

Actually the test in question was set up to mimic a real life SUV or truck. It didn't attempt to mimic a car at all. Arguably not terribly "real life" at all.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by ruff

If the crash test results were rated excellent for the 5 series, you or I wouldn't be doing any analysis or questioning of the test, just praising it. We all become defensive and rationalize when the things that are important to us are questioned. It's called cognitive dissonance. When the the M3 gets a great review we praise the mag, the reviewer and especially the car. Have you noticed, we never question any praise the car receives. A bad review for a BMW and of course the reviewer was naive, the testing results poorly conducted and definitely biased. It's just human nature and I am one of the worst offenders. Oh ya, by the way, I bet they screwed up that test.

I am not sure who you are referring to by "we". I suggest you speak for yourself only. I am not trying to be defensive. Why do I care about the 5 series? I don't own one and have no plans to buy one. As you can see in my posts, I have been critical of BMWs when they deserve the criticism.

Every test is a simulation. Simulations, by definition, attempt to model reality. That doesn't mean they are realistic or accurate. Just study the crash test designs the government was using 20 years ago. Do you consider them to be realistic? Not even the government considers them to be realistic as they have greatly improved upon them. The point is there is room for error in any such test. And, speaking as a scientist, n=1 does not exactly yield conclusive results.

All I am saying is that I am skeptical by training. And when I see people reaching significant conclusions like this because a single test of some kind yielded a certain result, I defer judgment. I need more data to be convinced. I need real crash data to supplement test data (with higher ns of course). What are the fatalities associated with side-impact crashes the 5 series has been involved with over the past 5 years? How does that compare the Kia's? (Although I agree that would not exactly establish cause and effect).

It sounds more like the press got a hold of a piece of information they would like to trumpet: "$25 car is safer than $60". Given the general standards of engineering associated with the two products, I have no reason to believe that is the case unless I see some data one can draw conclusions from.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by lucid

I am not sure who you are referring to by "we". I suggest you speak for yourself only. I am not trying to be defensive. Why do I care about the 5 series? I don't own one and have no plans to buy one. As you can see in my posts, I have been critical of BMWs when they deserve the criticism.

Every test is a simulation. Simulations, by definition, attempt to model reality. That doesn't mean they are realistic or accurate. Just study the crash test designs the government was using 20 years ago. Do you consider them to be realistic? Not even the government considers them to be realistic as they have greatly improved upon them. The point is there is room for error in any such test. And, speaking as a scientist, n=1 does not exactly yield conclusive results.

All I am saying is that I am skeptical by training. And when I see people reaching significant conclusions like this because a single test of some kind yielded a certain result, I defer judgment. I need more data to be convinced. I need real crash data to supplement test data (with higher ns of course). What are the fatalities associated with side-impact crashes the 5 series has been involved with over the past 5 years? How does that compare the Kia's? (Although I agree that would not exactly establish cause and effect).

It sounds more like the press got a hold of a piece of information they would like to trumpet: "$25 car is safer than $60". Given the general standards of engineering associated with the two products, I have no reason to believe that is the case unless I see some data one can draw conclusions from.

No offense intended, You always have excellent and informative posts. This just reminded me how we all rationalize things. Maybe I am over stating and you don't have this problem like I do. All I am saying is would you really defer judgement and need more data to be convinced of the tests if the 5 series had excellent crash ratings? I know I wouldn't. I would count it as fact and then point out to others how BMWs are one the safest cars on the road as evidenced by it's excellent crash ratings. Go figure. Heck, even Swamp had some mild concern about the tests and we know if he has even a mild concern about a BMW, it should be considered a real concern. On a side note, the 3series convertible also has less than stellar crash results.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by ruff

No offense, You always have excellent and informative posts. This just reminded me how we all rationalize things. Maybe I am over stating and you don't have this problem like I do. All I am saying is would you really defer judgement and need more data to be convinced of the tests if the 5 series had excellent crash ratings? I know I wouldn't. I would count it as fact and then point out to others how BMWs are one the safest cars on the road as evidenced by it's excellent crash ratings. Go figure. On a side note, the 3 series convertible also has less than stellar crash results.

No worries, it's cool. I don't know that I would expect the 5 series to have an "excellent" crash rating, or any specific rating according to the governments scale. However, in the absence of more relevant data, I would base my opinion on how safe it might be on the general standard of engineering I observe in the car. If I am of the opinion that, overall, if it is a well engineered product, I would assume that the safety aspects have been well engineered as well. That is still an assumption though. If I were really curious, and wanted a more factual assessment, I would look into actual crash data and so on.

I guess my point is that the government test protocols are rather questionable. Even if one is conviced that the design of the actual tests are realistic, n=1 is a show stopper. No scientist in his/her right mind would draw conclusions from a single data point--especially the kind of conclusion that will be disseminated to the whole public as a guideline. Imagine what would happen if drug studies were conducted that way!

With all that said, it might very well be that the Kia is safer than the 5-series for side impacts. But I think the chances of that happening is lower than the chances of BMW engineers designing and testing this thing right from a safety perspective, and I'll go with that unless the government comes up with comprehensive data that warrant the conclusion.