INSURANCE INSTITUTE FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY

NEWS RELEASE

October 3, 2004
Monday, October 4, 2004, 10-10:30 am EDT (C) IA 5/Trans. 19 and again 10/4, 1-1:30 pm EDT (C) IA 5/Trans. 19; fed in rotation
NEW SIDE IMPACT CRASH TEST RESULTS:
SAAB 9-3 IS 1ST CAR TO EARN DOUBLE BEST PICK, 3 OTHER MIDSIZE CARS EARN GOOD RATINGS IN SIDE IMPACT TEST SIMULATING CRASH WITH SUV
ARLINGTON, VA Four of eight midsize cars earned good ratings in side impact crash tests recently conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. None of the cars received a poor rating. The 2004 Saab 9-3, 2004 Acura TL, 2004 Lexus ES 330, and 2005 Mitsubishi Galant are rated good for side impact protection. The 2004 Saab 9-5, 2005 Mercedes C class, and 2005 Volvo S40 earned acceptable ratings. The 2004 Jaguar X-Type is rated marginal (see 3-page attachment). The better performers among vehicles that earn good ratings are designated best picks. The Saab 9-3, which also earned a best pick designation in the Institutes frontal offset crash test, is the first car to earn this designaThe test represents what happens when a passenger vehicle is struck in the side by a pickup truck or SUV.
tion in both front and side crash tests. Its a double best pick.
Earning a double best pick is a rare achievement, says Institute chief operating officer Adrian Lund. The only other vehicle to have done this is the Toyota RAV4, a small SUV, and then only when it was equipped with optional side airbags. MORE
1005 N. GLEBE RD. ARLINGTON, VA 22201 TEL. 703/247-1500
FAX 703/247-1588 www.iihs.org

PAGE 2

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
The Institute didnt test 11 other midsize inexpensive to luxury car models because the manufacturers are making design changes to improve side impact performance. The Institute will test these models (see attachment for list) in the near future. Institutes side impact test is more challenging than federal test: In the Institutes side impact test, a moving deformable barrier strikes the driver side of a passenger vehicle at 31 mph. The barrier weighs 3,300 pounds and has a front end shaped to simulate the front end of a typical pickup or SUV. In each sidestruck vehicle are two instrumented dummies the size of a short (5th percentile) female, one positioned in the driver seat and one in the rear seat behind the driver. The Institutes test is more challenging because the top of the barrier is at the same level as the heads of the test dummies in the car, Lund says. This is the scenario in real-world side impact crashes where occupants heads are often struck by the intruding hood of an SUV or pickup. The federal governments side impact test uses a barrier representing a cars front end. In this test, theres no chance that the heads of the dummies in a struck vehicle will be hit by the intruding barrier. Saab 9-3 is top performer: All eight cars in this round of crash tests are equipped with standard side airbags with head protection. The Saab 9-3 has side curtain airbags that deploy from the roof as well as airbags that deploy from the side of the cars front seats to protect occupants chests. All 9-3s built after December 2003 have been modified to improve occupant protection in side impacts. The curtain airbag did a good job of cushioning the heads of both the driver and rear passenger dummies, Lund says. Plus injury measures recorded on the neck, torso, pelvis, and left leg of the dummies all were low. Saab can still make improvements to the 9-3s structure, but in all other areas this was very good performance. MORE

PAGE 3

Galant goes from poor to good: This is the second time the Institute has tested the Galant. The 2004 model earned a poor rating for side impact protection when it was tested earlier this year. While side airbags that protect only the torso were available as an option, head protection airbags werent available. If side airbags are optional, Institute policy is to test the vehicle without the option. The manufacturer may request an additional test with the optional airbags, but in this case Mitsubishi did not request the second test. The structure of the 2004 Galant performed very well, but without side airbags the driver dummys head was struck by the intruding barrier, Lund explains. There was a possibility of a serious skull fracture or brain injury. Rib fractures and other internal injuries also were possible. For the 2005 Galant, Mitsubishi added combination head and chest protection side airbags for front-seat occupants as standard equipment and asked the Institute to test the new model. The difference in the two tests is dramatic, Lund says. This time the driver dummys head was protected from impact with any hard structures, including the intruding barrier. Even though there was still the possibility of rib fractures or internal organ injuries, the forces recorded in these areas were lower than in the 2004 Galant. In the tests of both the 2004 and 2005 models, the rear dummys head hit the window frame and sill of the rear door, but these hits didnt produce high head injury measures. The Galant improved from a poor performer to one of the better performers in the side impact test. Mitsubishi should be commended for making side airbags with head protection standard in this relatively inexpensive car. The results for the Galant show that you dont have to spend a lot of money to get good protection in side impact crashes, Lund points out.

MORE

PAGE 4
Side airbags reduce risks in real-world crashes: Institute research shows that side airbags with head protection are reducing deaths by about 45 percent among drivers of cars struck on the driver side. Side airbags that protect the chest and abdomen, but not the head, also are reducing deaths but are less effective (about a 10 percent reduction in deaths). Before the availability of headprotecting airbags, there was virtually nothing to prevent peoples heads from being struck by intruding vehicles or rigid objects like trees or poles in serious side impacts. These crash test results confirm what the Institute found is happening in real-world crashes, Lund says. Side airbags designed to protect peoples heads can prevent very serious head injuries. This test is resulting in more manufacturers adding side airbags as standard equipment. Jaguar is rated marginal: Side airbags with head protection do a good job of protecting people in side impact crashes, but the side structures of passenger vehicles also need to be strong to prevent major intrusion into the occupant compartment. In serious side crashes some intrusion is inevitable, but it should be minimized. The Jaguars structure was marginal because the sill below the doors and the B-pillar between the doors were severely crushed. This contributed to high forces recorded on the torso and pelvis of the driver dummy, Lund points out. Head protection in the Jaguar was good, but a real driver might have sustained serious rib fractures, internal organ injuries, and possible pelvic fractures. How vehicles are evaluated: Each vehicles overall side evaluation is based on injury measures recorded on two instrumented SID-IIs dummies, assessment of head protection countermeasures, and the vehicles structural performance during the impact. Injury measures obtained from the two dummies, one in the driver seat and the other in the rear seat behind the driver, are used to determine the likelihood

PAGE 5

that the driver and/or passenger would have sustained serious injury to various body regions. The movements and contacts of the dummies heads during the crash also are evaluated. This assessment is more important for seating positions without head-protecting airbags which, assuming they perform as intended, should prevent injurious head contacts. Structural performance is based on measurements indicating the amount of B-pillar intrusion into the occupant compartment. Some intrusion into the compartment is inevitable in serious side impacts, but any intrusion that does occur should be uniform both horizontally and vertically and shouldnt seriously compromise the driver or passenger space.

End 5-page news release on side impact crash test results 3-page attachment: side impact evaluations of midsize cars VNR October 4, 2004 at 10-10:30 am EDT (C) IA 5/Trans. 19; and again at 1-1:30 pm EDT (C) IA 5/Trans. 19; fed in rotation
For more information go to www.iihs.org
ATTACHMENT: CRASHWORTHINESS EVALUATIONS, PAGE 1 OF 3
Side impact crash test performance
Midsize luxury cars 4-door models OVERALL SIDE EVALUATION
HEAD PROTECTION INJURY MEASURES STRUCTURE/ SAFETY CAGE

Frontal offset test

OVERALL FRONTAL EVALUATION
Head/neck Torso Pelvis/leg

NEWLY TESTED

ACURA TL
TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS 2004-05 models; test vehicle = 3,554 lbs.

Driver Rear passenger

BE P ST froICK ntal

LEXUS ES 330 G

TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS 2004 (mfg. after 4/2004)-05 models; avg. test vehicle = 3,487 lbs.

MERCEDES C CLASS

TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS 2005 models; test vehicle = 3,347 lbs.

SAAB 9-5

TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS 1999-2005 models; test vehicle = 3,505 lbs.

JAGUAR X-TYPE

TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS 2002-05 models; test vehicle = 3,585 lbs.

LEXUS IS 300

2002-05 models test vehicle = 3,395 lbs.
design changes underway; test in 2005

BMW 3 SERIES

2000 (mfg. after 11/1999)-05 models test vehicle = 3,347 lbs.

VOLVO S60

2001-05 models test vehicle = 3,422 lbs.

G A M P

GOOD ACCEPTABLE MARGINAL POOR NOTE: Order of vehicles reflects performance in side impact crash tests.
ATTACHMENT: CRASHWORTHINESS EVALUATIONS, PAGE 2 OF 3
Midsize moderately priced cars 4-door models

BLE DOU ST BE K PIC

STRUCTURE/ SAFETY CAGE

OVERALL SIDE EVALUATION

HEAD PROTECTION

INJURY MEASURES

SAAB 9-3
TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS 2004 (mfg. after 12/2003)-05 models test vehicle = 3,236 lbs.

ST BECK PI de si

VOLVO S40
NEWLY TESTED TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS

2005 models test vehicle = 3,245 lbs.

NISSAN MAXIMA

2004-05 models test vehicle = 3,472 lbs.

AUDI A4

2002 (mfg. after 2/2002)-05 models test vehicle = 3,569 lbs.

TOYOTA AVALON

2000-04 models test vehicle = 3,468 lbs. Note: 2004 Avalon is a current model through Dec. 2004

ACURA TSX

2004-05 models test vehicle = 3,278 lbs.

VOLKSWAGEN PASSAT

1998-2005 models test vehicle = 3,170 lbs.

INFINITI G35

2003-05 models test vehicle = 3,468 lbs.
ATTACHMENT: CRASHWORTHINESS EVALUATIONS, PAGE 3 OF 3
Midsize inexpensive cars 4-door models OVERALL SIDE EVALUATION

TOYOTA CAMRY

TESTED WITH OPTIONAL SIDE AIRBAGS 2004-05 models; test vehicle = 3,203 lbs.

HONDA ACCORD

TESTED WITH SIDE AIRBAGS (OPT. 2004, STD. 2005) 2004-05 models; test vehicle = 3,157 lbs.

MITSUBISHI GALANT

TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS 2005 models; test vehicle = 3,391 lbs.

SUBARU LEGACY

TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS 2005 models; test vehicle = 3,322 lbs.

G G G G

P G P G

M G P G

HYUNDAI SONATA/KIA OPTIMA
TESTED WITH STANDARD SIDE AIRBAGS Sonata 1999-05 models; test vehicle = 3,277 lbs. Optima 2001-05 models;

Driver

Rear passenger M

NISSAN ALTIMA

TESTED WITHOUT OPTIONAL SIDE AIRBAGS 2002-05 models; test vehicle = 3,095 lbs.

CHEVROLET MALIBU

TESTED WITHOUT OPTIONAL SIDE AIRBAGS 2004-05 models; test vehicle = 3,254 lbs.
TESTED WITHOUT OPTIONAL SIDE AIRBAGS 2002-05 models; test vehicle = 3,197 lbs.
DODGE STRATUS/CHRYSLER SEBRING
TESTED WITHOUT OPTIONAL SIDE AIRBAGS 2001-05 models; test vehicle = 3,126 lbs.

MAZDA 6

TESTED WITHOUT OPTIONAL SIDE AIRBAGS 2003-05 models; test vehicle = 3,137 lbs.
TO BE TESTED WITH OPTIONAL SIDE AIRBAGS 2005 models; test vehicle = 3,183 lbs.

SUZUKI VERONA

TO BE TESTED WITH OPTIONAL SIDE AIRBAGS 2005 models test vehicle = 3,385 lbs.

INSURANCE INSTITUTE FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY

NEWS RELEASE

September 7, 2003
VNR: Mon. 9/8/03, 10-10:30 am ET fed in rotation (C) Telstar 6/Trans. 22 Mon. 9/8/03, 1-1:30 pm ET fed in rotation (C) Telstar 5/Trans. 19
MAZDA6 GETS ACCEPTABLE RATING IN 5 MPH CRASH TESTS; 3 OF 6 VEHICLES TESTED HAVE POOR BUMPERS, AND DAMAGE TO SOME IS WORSE THAN TO EARLIER MODELS
ARLINGTON, VA Bumpers on the midsize 2003 Mazda6 performed reasonably well in 5 mph crash tests conducted recently by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, but results for five other vehicles were disappointing. The midsize 2003 Infiniti G35, the 2004 Nissan Quest minivan, and the large luxury 2003 Mercedes E class earned poor ratings for bumper performance. The midsize 2003 Saab 9-3 and the 2004 Toyota Sienna minivan were marginal. None earned a good rating. The Quest sustained far more damage than its predecessor model, which the Institute tested in 1999, dropping from a rating of good to poor. The 9-3 and the Sienna also performed somewhat worse than earlier designs.
5 MPH CRASH TEST RESULTS Front into flat barrier Large luxury car 2003 Mercedes E class $691 Rear into flat barrier $586 $529 $156 $1,824 $521 $1,152 $142 $1,599 $378 Front into angle barrier $978 $993 $724 $1,431 $398 $987 $771 $1,036 $771 Rear into pole $2,944 $1,313 $1,482 $1,988 $297 $688 $1,015 $1,367 $316 Total damage 4 tests $5,199 $3,013 $2,362 $5,922 $1,367 $3,207 $2,441 $4,547 $1,465 Average damage per test $1,300 $753 $591 $1,481 $342 $802 $610 $1,137 $366
Bumper rating POOR MARGINAL ACCEPTABLE POOR ACCEPTABLE MARGINAL MARGINAL POOR GOOD
Midsize moderately priced cars 2003 Saab 9-3 $Saab 9-3 $Infiniti G35 Midsize inexpensive car 2003 Mazda6 Minivans 2004 Toyota Sienna 1998 Toyota Sienna 2004 Nissan Quest 1999 Nissan Quest $679 $151 $380 $513 $545 $0
All repair costs reflect June 2003 parts and labor prices.

MORE

1005 N. GLEBE RD. ARLINGTON, VA 22201 TEL. 703/247-1500
FAX 703/247-1588 www.highwaysafety.org
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
The vehicles were tested in four 5 mph impacts front- and rear-into-flat-barrier plus front-into-angle-barrier and rear-into-pole. The tests assess how well bumpers can prevent damage in low-speed impacts, which are common in commuter traffic and parking lots. Average damage per test ranged from about $340 for the Mazda6 to $1,480 for the worst performer, the Infiniti G35. Three midsize cars: Among the midsize cars the Institute tested, only the Mazda6 is equipped with bumpers that do an acceptable job of protecting the vehicle from significant damage. In the front-into-flat-barrier test, damage was limited because the bumper is designed to absorb the energy of a minor impact and keep it away from the car body. Mazda engineers gave at least some thought to bumpers on the new 6, says Adrian Lund, chief operating officer for the Institute. In the front-into-flat-barrier test, only the relatively inexpensive grille and the foam inside the bumper had to be replaced. In contrast, the G35 sustained more than four times as much damage in the same four bumper tests. The G35s bumpers are a disaster, says Lund. Infiniti engineers attached an additional metal plate to the center of the rear bumper reinforcement bar to improve the cars performance in the pole test, but it didnt make much difference. There was extensive damage to body panels including a crushed trunk lid and floor pan. Even in the rear-into-flat-barrier test, which isnt as demanding as the pole test, the G35 sustained more than $1,800 damage. In this test, the bumper cover split and both rear fenders buckled. The Saab 9-3 was redesigned for 2003, but its bumpers didnt fare well in the Institute tests. One problem showed up in the front-into-angle-barrier test fixing the damage required removing the air conditioner condenser and the radiator just to replace the bumper bar. On average, the 9-3s bumpers allowed about $160 more damage per test than its 1999 predecessor.
One large luxury car: The Institute tested the new Mercedes E class, which was the second worst performer in this round of tests. Average damage per test was $1,300, and damage in the simplest front-into-flat-barrier test alone totaled almost $700. The front bumper on the E class is designed more for style than substance, Lund says. In fact, the front bumper reinforcement bar is actually positioned rearward of the leading edges of the headlamps. This is a terrible design considering that headlamps are safety equipment that should be undamaged in such low-speed crashes. There was almost $3,000 damage to the E class in the rear-into-pole test because the bumper failed to protect the cars expensive-to-fix fenders and trunk lid. Two minivans: The Nissan Quest is an all-new design for 2004, but Nissan engineers are going in the wrong direction in bumper design," Lund says. The previous generation Quest did a good job resisting damage in a minor fender-bender. But buyers of the new model could get hit with big repair bills because its bumpers dont bump. Damage to the new Quest was more than three times higher than the previous generation model. Repairs to the 2004 model topped $1,000 in three of the four tests. The Quest has a flimsy plastic reinforcement bar in the rear bumper that cracked in two in the flat-barrier test. Even in a minor bump at a fast walking speed, the rear body was crushed and the tailgate was dented, says Lund. The Sienna fared somewhat better, but its highest damage total was in one of the flatbarrier tests, which should allow the least damage. In the rear-into-flat-barrier impact, the damage was $1,000 more for the new Sienna than for the 1998 model. The rear bumper should protect the expensive rear tailgate and other sheet metal from damage in such a simple crash, Lund says. End 3-page release on 5 mph crash tests VNR 9/8/03, 10-10:30 a.m. ET fed in rotation (C)Telstar 6/Trans. 22; includes test footage VNR 9/8/03, 1-1:30 p.m. ET fed in rotation (C)Telstar 5/Trans. 19; includes test footage

Internet: www.highwaysafety.org