OMG. Safe and sound choice turns out not safe and sound at all...what a revelation!
Toyota Rated Worst as U.S. Insurance Group Toughen, Oh Dear
|
|
 Dec 25 2012, 05:18 PM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
 
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012 
|
|
Quote|
|
|
|
|
Dec 26 2012, 12:44 AM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
Hey lunchtime, see that u still want to get to the bottom of Crash test result /safety rating for Peugeot 408...
Well if 308 EUROPE NCAP can be a near rating for 408 and accepted as comparable to IIHS, then as suggested by kadajawi, read below http://www.euroncap.com/results/peugeot/30...tlaunchmobile=1 And about a lot of cars makes were caught off guard... I believe that is precisely the purpose ? because accident always happen off-guard and IIHS as its name applies must be looking at what sort of insurance premium would be right , so risk management is indeed about that off guard chance of crash case case scenario? I dunno for sure ...just IMHO This post has been edited by EnergyAnalyst: Dec 26 2012, 08:59 AM |
|
|
Dec 26 2012, 10:58 AM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(lunchtime @ Dec 26 2012, 10:36 AM) I prefer the 308t but was told the horrible reliability of the 308t by the SA. Hey lunchtime, check back the thread at Peugeot 408, a link by another fellow P408 owner apart from myself has just posted the link of C-NCAP full report on 408. Check also 308 ANCAP score , again no 408 there at down under.His advice, go for the 408t instead since the ECU has been updated.  |
|
|
Dec 26 2012, 12:35 PM
Return to original view | Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
Reliability is a big world nowadays even for Toyota, dare I say?
|
|
|
Dec 26 2012, 05:18 PM
Return to original view | Post
#5
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(zweimmk @ Dec 26 2012, 03:42 PM) Well, a lot of car manufacturers design their cars to meet or exceed current safety standards set forth by regulation groups. So it's not surprising when something new comes along, a lot of cars either don't do very well or fail horribly. Also, from a business point of view, if it isn't an officially adopted test standard then there is no reason for them to implement the new criteria into their design and construction since its an additional cost. Oh my mistake ASSume is a bigger word!But cars which are sold in US must or will eventually undergo this new test standard but does that mean that this new test is also adopted in Euro NCAP? If not, then that means car manufacturers such as Peugeot, Renault etc are also susceptible to the same poor or marginal test results since these cars don't have to undergo the small overlap test. |
|
|
Dec 26 2012, 10:57 PM
Return to original view | Post
#6
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(zweimmk @ Dec 26 2012, 07:34 PM) That's the best you can come up with? Look Man U dunno I dunno for sure like IIHS showed when a car is not tested, they simply said it is not tested. So when you assume so much I just dunno how to make u see the light manAs Kadajawi has rightly pointed out, it cost money to develop safer cars and Peugeot isn't exactly in a position that can be called good and dandy thanks to their Euro woes and it's only logical to conclude that most manufacturers will develop cars to meet or exceed those safety standards that are already in place, anything extra is pretty much a bonus, and since this new test standard is currently only done as an option, there isn't any real incentive to do it because it's not a requirement. So until Peugeot, Renault, Skoda, Dacia, Alfa Romeo or any other Euro manufacturers have their car tested to this new standard, the logical assumption is that they will probably score poor or marginal, particularly if the car was launched, manufactured or sold prior to 2013 unless stated otherwise from authoritative sources. The 408 is crashed tested according to CNCAP standards and done in 2010. Is the CNCAP standards the same as Euro NCAP or ANCAP or IIHS or NHTSA standards? Unless they state it to be so, you can't claim the 408 to be as safe as any other 5 star crash test cars that's currently on sale in Europe, Australia or the US. It is not unreasonable to conclude that it should be a relatively safe car because it shares a modified version of the 308 DNA but you can't say it is for sure because there's no other crash data from more recognized institutions to back it up. Can other Peugeot/AR/Renault etc cars score well prior to this new small overlap test? Yes, the Euro NCAP is considered a stricter standard compared to the NHTSA standard but how well they would fare in the new small overlap test is anyone's guess. Added on December 26, 2012, 10:58 pm QUOTE(zweimmk @ Dec 26 2012, 07:34 PM) That's the best you can come up with? Look Man U dunno I dunno for sure like IIHS showed when a car is not tested, they simply said it is not tested. So when you assume so much I just dunno how to make u see the light manAs Kadajawi has rightly pointed out, it cost money to develop safer cars and Peugeot isn't exactly in a position that can be called good and dandy thanks to their Euro woes and it's only logical to conclude that most manufacturers will develop cars to meet or exceed those safety standards that are already in place, anything extra is pretty much a bonus, and since this new test standard is currently only done as an option, there isn't any real incentive to do it because it's not a requirement. So until Peugeot, Renault, Skoda, Dacia, Alfa Romeo or any other Euro manufacturers have their car tested to this new standard, the logical assumption is that they will probably score poor or marginal, particularly if the car was launched, manufactured or sold prior to 2013 unless stated otherwise from authoritative sources. The 408 is crashed tested according to CNCAP standards and done in 2010. Is the CNCAP standards the same as Euro NCAP or ANCAP or IIHS or NHTSA standards? Unless they state it to be so, you can't claim the 408 to be as safe as any other 5 star crash test cars that's currently on sale in Europe, Australia or the US. It is not unreasonable to conclude that it should be a relatively safe car because it shares a modified version of the 308 DNA but you can't say it is for sure because there's no other crash data from more recognized institutions to back it up. Can other Peugeot/AR/Renault etc cars score well prior to this new small overlap test? Yes, the Euro NCAP is considered a stricter standard compared to the NHTSA standard but how well they would fare in the new small overlap test is anyone's guess. This post has been edited by EnergyAnalyst: Dec 26 2012, 10:58 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2012, 12:56 AM
Return to original view | Post
#7
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=30
VW jetta and Hyundai sonata only get marginal rating I.e lower than acceptable rating for the small overlap crash test! http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=15 Look how Lexus 2 models also get poor rating for this test but I am also surprised to see Audi A4, Mercedes C class also get poor rating . BMW 3 series and VW CC also only get marginal rating... What's wrong with these 3 Germans (BMW, Mercedes, VW+Audi of same VW group). The only good European champion is Volvo S60... And Volvo is 100% owned by Chinese auto maker Geely. The world has changed indeed. |
|
|
Dec 27 2012, 07:27 AM
Return to original view | Post
#8
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(zweimmk @ Dec 27 2012, 02:12 AM) At least the VW Jetta and Hyundai Sonata are both EuroNCAP, ANCAP and IIHS certified to meet existing crash standards. Can you able to say the same about the Peugeot 408? I'll be happy to correct my statement if the P408 has been crash tested to either IIHS, euroNCAP or ANCAP requirements. If i follow your reasoning and your way of logic the absent of result is therefore poor result, are you suggesting those IIHS rating of not tested means poor?Nothing surprising about the result at all, it just shows that many car manufacturers design their cars around these crash standards and passing them with flying colors. If its not a requirement, there's little incentive to do extra, why add unnecessary cost when you don't need to? The same way I cannot show you P408 performance is the same way you have alos no ground to claim p408 is poor. if again folllowing your logic, " that many car manufacturers design their cars around these crash standards and passing them with flying colors. If its not a requirement, there's little incentive to do extra, why add unnecessary cost when you don't need to?" now tell me then, Since P408 is designed initially to be sold in China, hence peugeot get C-NCAP rating, and they are not made to be sold in Europe/USA and they are barely venturing into AUSTRALIA, what incentive Peugeot has to send P408 or testing in Europe or USA, we may see an ANCAP rating or Latin Cap rating only if Peugeot like your beloved VW or other Germans see an incentive to do so. |
|
|
Dec 27 2012, 02:37 PM
Return to original view | Post
#9
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(zweimmk @ Dec 27 2012, 08:21 AM) You basically answered your own question about the P408, there's no incentive to test the car at all. But we already know that the CNCAP ratings BEFORE July 2012 is nowhere as strict as the EuroNCAP or IIHS or ANCAP ratings and it was tested way back in 2010, so need to say more? Why talk about the small overlap test when it isn't even on EuroNCAP standard yet. I really fail to undersand what is it that you are saying, first you claim Peugeot 408 may show poor result if given the same test either by IIHS or Europe Ncap or ANCAP, but where is the proof of your claim? Unless you can point it to me the source of reference, then you are then assuminghttp://www.chinacartimes.com/2011/02/15/c-...gher-standards/ http://www.caradvice.com.au/141978/chinese...coming-in-2012/ And as for the IIHS rating, the absence of test results means they either haven't gotten around to it or aren't testing for whatever legitimate reasons (older cars, cars not sold in America etc). So is it unreasonable to assume the result to be poor or marginal until proven otherwise? The same way that a defendant is innocent until proven otherwise. It's good to have a token of faith in whatever manufacturer you believe in, but look at what the facts are telling you and draw reasonable conclusion from it instead of just arguing for the sake of doing so. No incentive ? So it is alright for VW to ignore the forewarning by IIHS, when they do sell these models in USA where IIHS small overlap crash test apply and forewarned by IIHS and saying they have no incentive/no requirement IN THE MARKET THEY SELL THESE BABIES, they will stick to having just the Top Safety Pick choice award without wanting the Top Safety Pick + award? And it is not alright for Peugeot to not go for EuroNcap rating or IIHS at the market they don't sell 408 model, and ony get CNCAP from China when they do sell that baby?   Don't plea innocent as..." I didn't know...", read this http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr122012.html Caption: IHS gives manufacturers advance notice of planned changes. Automakers in the past have been quick to factor new IIHS evaluations into their designs, and many are on track to do the same with the introduction of the small overlap test and Top Safety Pick+. "We've seen automakers make structural and restraint changes in response to our small overlap test," Lund says. "Five manufacturers redesigned their midsize cars to enhance small overlap crash protection." Honda engineered both versions of the Accord to do well in the test. Ford and Nissan made running structural changes to 2013 models already in production. Subaru and Volkswagen changed airbag control modules on the production line so side curtain airbags would deploy for improved head protection. VW changed their air bag control modules....and thought it would suffice? no siree? As a consumer your self, do you feel fine with not requirement /not necessary from VW or any other maker for that matter? It is your life, your choice The small overlap test is imposed due to most accidental injury or dealth had been caused by less than or at 25% frontal collision (meaning hitting a lampost or a small tree or while steering and avoiding the obstacles in front of your car you managed to steered most but still leaves a smaller portion of object with collission impact ) as opposed to 40% frontal collision which is the normal test standard for frontal collision I wish I know how my Peugeot 408 will perform under such test, honestly I do but with no such test was performed, so I dunno what I still dunno, and IF really you have a source of reference to point to me how they perform fro small overlpa test? I want to know the truth with basis and not base on some smartass assumption. Poor?/Marginal?/Acceptable?/Good?Still I get no answer. Why C-NCAP 2010 never get updated to 2011, 2012? The only answer one can give is Honestly we dunno...any jumping into conclusion is another typical smartass assumption. Set aside model for a moment, in market that VW and Peugeot do compete with their models, can we refer to E-NCAP say for scoring of Polo/Golf/Jetta/Passat vs 206/207/208, 306/307/308, 405/406/407, etc. etc.? 508 vs Passat (both Earned 5 star E-Ncap) http://www.euroncap.com/results/peugeot/508/2011/433.aspx http://www.euroncap.com/results/vw/passat/2010/415.aspx But the details are more revealing Adult Occupant: Passat 91% vs 508 90% Child Occupant: Passat 77% vs 508 87% Pedestrian : Passat 54% vs 508 41% Safety Assist : Passat 71% vs 508 97% So you win some I win some, but note even in E-NCAP the result is 2010 for Passat and 2011 for 508, shall we also shoot E-NCAP like how you shot down C-NCAP for not revising with latest? check 206, 207 and 208 vs genenerations of polo http://www.euroncap.com/supermini.aspx?dontlaunchmobile=1 samething u win some I win some. but notice how Polo used to be 3 star and 4 star earner in 1997, 2000 and 2002 before they moved up to 5 star in 2009 and P206 areted 4 in 2000 but 207 rated 5 in 2006. Again the latest rating for Polo is 2009 while 208 is 2012, should we shoot E-NCAP again? Added on December 27, 2012, 2:41 pm QUOTE(kadajawi @ Dec 27 2012, 12:27 PM) If I recall correctly at least EuroNCAP buys the cars themselves. So they only test cars that are on sale somewhere in Europe and relevant/interesting enough to be tested (i.e. Chinese cars are sold in so small numbers that they are irrelevant, but it is very interesting to see how they do). These tests aren't cheap. The only thing that manufacturers can do is do their own tests according to EuroNCAP standards. They may do so to prove that the car does indeed adhere to high safety standards. I believe Proton claimed the Exora was tested and would have received a 4 star EuroNCAP rating. But of course there is doubt that the car may have been tampered with. For example Brilliance reworked the BS6, send the car for a test (but not directly by EuroNCAP) and received a result that was significantly better... like 3 stars or so. But would all cars sold be made this good? Who knows. (In this case probably not, because what would they do with the leftover stock?). CNCAP is still useful though, as you can see how other cars performed. The Avanza is for example a 3 star car, the Proton Gen-2 too. When the Peugeot easily gets 5, you can at least see that it is a significant improvement. And if they also have tested the 308, and it gets similar results, it at least hints that the 408 would do similar too, in EuroNCAP (always under the condition that they have the same or better safety features). Renault is mostly a maker of budget family cars. Think Proton or Perodua. Affordable and sensible. Their crazy sports cars are just because they are French... there's always a bit of French crazyness.  See Citroen, who had finished developing a small car, that was absolutely competitive, and then decided to not build it because it was too conventional. It wouldn't destroy the competition. Or Renault, who built a family van... that was really just a Formula 1 car in a van shell.Anyway, Renault tries to be the maker of sensible, affordable cars that are also adhering to high safety standards. Others have since followed suit, of course, since it sells cars. But Renault was first, at a time when it was believed that only expensive cars can be safe. Actually the Myvi AFAIK does have 4 airbags. Low for German standards, but not that bad. It is also not that cheap, since the Yen is quite strong and the car is built in Japan (unlike the Yaris/Vios which is made in some cheap labour European country). But it's true, the only person I know who ever bought one in Germany was an American who only used it for town use. She did like it though, but before she drove the Citroen Tiara (AX?). Foreign maids are very, very rare though. I know that had we gotten a maid for my father we would have spent around RM 10k per month. And that wouldn't be full time. Normal employees don't earn that much. And if you are cash strapped you'll probably just buy an old second hand car, though they aren't very safe. (Many have been scrapped in the last scrapping scheme though, where you were paid to scrap your old car if you buy a new one).  At least you are objective and keep your mind open, unlike someone  using the same some one link caption: "Until now only the American crash testing authority tested for rear end safety, but with China adding the test in and also the effects on female passengers in a crash, it appears that C-NCAP is going to be among the strictest testing bodies in the world in the next few months. Added on December 27, 2012, 2:51 pm QUOTE(Myoswee @ Dec 27 2012, 11:38 AM) A friend of mine once told me so we will be super fxxxx smart to buy what then you reckon? Proton and Perodua?Either you are fxxxx rich or fxxxx stupid to buy a foreign brand in Malaysia  Just found out in US a V6 Camry 10 air bags selling for USD 30k.  This post has been edited by EnergyAnalyst: Dec 27 2012, 02:51 PM |
|
|
Dec 27 2012, 04:38 PM
Return to original view | Post
#10
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(kadajawi @ Dec 27 2012, 03:36 PM) I think he says no one can say how the car will perform, except perhaps for the manufacturer. I beg to differ with some statement here Lets take the example of Toyota. The Camry has been developed with many safety features. It may not be a terribly safe car, but hey, at least something. But when it comes to Malaysia, they remove most of the features, even though development costs have already been paid, and it is clear that this tech saves lives. But there is no incentive to put this stuff into the Malaysian Camry, since there are no incentives to do so. It doesn't drive sales, and there are no rules and regulations that force them to put this tech in. Other manufacturers sometimes act similarly. Now there is an incentive to make the cars also safe in small overlap tests, as a result cars will get safer in those tests. I doubt the manufacturers were given a lot of advance notice... maybe a few months. Depending on how far along a car is in the development cycle that may be enough to make the necessary changes, or it may not be. VW did as much as they could given the short time frame. The next version will certainly do better. I think it is relatively reasonable to assume that it won't do so well, since manufacturers tend to do only as much as necessary (with the exception of Volvo). E-NCAP was relatively strict all the time, they always tested at the same speed. What changed was the requirements such as good pedestrian protection, or certain safety features that are needed for 4 or 5 stars. From pre-2012 C-NCAP to post-2012 C-NCAP results there is a big jump, since they moved from 56 to 64 km/h. @Zenix: TÜV is required for _all_ cars. Every 2 years the cars have to be checked if they are road worthy. Older cars obviously have more problems (even though features like airbags or good EuroNCAP ratings aren't required). Newer, safer cars are usually also in better condition, because, well, they are newer. It might be more sensible to buy a new cheap car (like a Fiesta, Yaris etc.) with warranty and on installment rather than an old second hand car that has to be constantly fixed, where taxes are higher etc. The new car will probably be much safer too. Ample or not ample notice, is it a few days, few weeks, few months? how do we know this thing for sure? We only know IIHS indeed give notice, so how individual manufacturer react to it and what did they do in short or long notice, again I will not assume, has indeed make the difference Honda engineered both versions of the Accord to do well in the test. Ford and Nissan made running structural changes to 2013 models already in production. Subaru and Volkswagen changed airbag control modules on the production line so side curtain airbags would deploy for improved head protection. If sales is the motivation, Suzuki stated in Nov 2012 that they are pulling out from USA market, what incentive do they have to become the surprised top scorer in this small overlap test? You have stated 'I think it is relatively reasonable to assume that it(referring to Peugeot 408) won't do so well, since manufacturers tend to do only as much as necessary' Thoughout the thread, I have not made any single claim that Peugeot 408 will do better , I have repeated said what it has is C-NCAP scoring (ok 2010-lah) of 47.1/51 max oint and gotten a 5 star but on how it will perform fro small overlap tesyt, i have repeated say I dunno. I question those who said because of xxx, therefore it is reasonable safe to assume that P408 won't do well Why? who are we, a bunch of amateurs can say something that like that with so much zest and conviction. Where is our humility? For a change , why not we do what IIHS do , see link below http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=40 see far right, under column 'Front small overlap' IIHS humbly mentioned Not tested when the model was not tested for Small Overlap test, can we all live with that because the recognized professional authority body never state assume this or assume that. So can we all stop making assumption? because ASSUME as they say, is making an ASS out of U and ME. I rest my case |
|
|
Dec 27 2012, 04:53 PM
Return to original view | Post
#11
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(zweimmk @ Dec 27 2012, 04:17 PM) Why would I need to provide you any proof? The car is not tested with the latest EuroNCAP standards therefore I can claim that it is a safe car in accordance to CNCAP 2010 standards. That's all and end of story. I can't proof that it won't pass EuroNCAP crash standards sure, but the fact remains, it hasn't been tested so what else is there to say except that it's not a EuroNCAP 5 star crash test car. Dear Mr Zweimmk.Yes, Peugeot could have designed the P408 to EuroNCAP standards right at the beginning but until it has been tested and proven to be so, all you have is just conjecture. There's also the possibility that they've reinforced the car structure over the years to meet newer and tougher safety standards sure, but again until proven to be so... you get the picture. As for the rest your type out, you're basically grasping at straws here. All you have only proven is that car are safer with each passing year and that manufacturers will adjust and modify their car structure accordingly. And yes, I'm completely fine with the fact that my Passat might not receive a good score in the new small overlap test because it was assembled before October of 2012 but at least I'm satisfied that it meets EuroNCAP 5 stars crash testing. If I had bought my current ride in 2013, then I would not be happy if the car did not receive a good score in this test segment, but that's a different story altogether. And do you know what the difference is with EuroNCAP 2010 and 2011? I sure as hell don't but at least I can reasonably conclude that the majority testing criteria should largely be evolutionary rather than revolutionary based on this this article, but surely not major enough to warrant a big fuss over. But it's not the same with CNCAP before July 2012, the frontal test speed is different, there is no pedestrian safety testing and no rear end test etc, it's a completely different animal compared to the EuroNCAP standards. I'm done trying to explain every single sentence to you, you don't even understand where I'm coming from in the first place so why bother arguing when you don't even understand the context of the argument? I'm more amazed that you label me as not being objective and close minded, LOL!You made claim statements a lot but fail to provide proof, is it a habit or are you born that way? As I've said, I never claim p408 is a better scorer in small overlap test, it is you who claim it is reasonably poor perfomer, when I ask proof, so you now say why should I. I can only conclude so far you have been a Peugeot basher. I am delighted that you are happy with your VW, I am not VW basher myself. Because a world is big enough place for both of us. unlike you who decidedly not want a Pug for life, I may get my self a VW one day when I retire, perhaps a Polo. In the end, as each and everytime we debated, you will state i am done with you. Is that how you end all your debate, leaving the party when you have created a controversy and simply walk away? My advice to you, I reckon you will not take it, is teach your self humility, or acquired it, it will make world a better place. |
|
|
Dec 27 2012, 05:52 PM
Return to original view | Post
#12
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(zweimmk @ Dec 27 2012, 04:53 PM) Not really, the facts have been presented clear enough that most people should understand where I'm coming from. Obviously, it's not clear enough OK then I am sensitive you said and still i don't get your meaning you said. Great start from being humble! Whatever it is and for what it is worth. Merry belated Xmas if u celebrate it, if not happy holiday and Happy New Year! Drive safe always as all these crash test videos, etc. show despite having the best cars in the world, one still can succumb to injury or worst when it crash but we can't please them all can we?Added on December 27, 2012, 4:55 pm I think I've already made my case clear enough. There's no controversy at all, you're being overly sensitive here and I can't help it if you don't get it at all. So why waste time trying to convey my point any further when it's not getting its message across anyway? Might as well just move on rather going back and forth over the same issue over and over again. |
|
|
Dec 27 2012, 06:03 PM
Return to original view | Post
#13
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(zenix @ Dec 27 2012, 04:41 PM) Kinda an AM FM situation. I am Glad that it amuses you. Take a seat and enjoy the show! Oh oh oh no it already ended? Common people !They're both radio signals but having a 92.9FM doesn't mean it works as 92.9AM hard to judge. |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 28 2012, 01:09 AM
Return to original view | Post
#14
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
Looking at things from another lens. http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/composite http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4707.pdf This post has been edited by EnergyAnalyst: Dec 28 2012, 01:20 AM |
|
|
Dec 28 2012, 09:06 AM
Return to original view | Post
#15
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(cybermaster98 @ Dec 27 2012, 01:08 AM) The ratings for moderately priced cars in the US. We need to keep in mind that the Camry tested here was the US version with the full 10 airbags and VSC. Malaysian version 2.5V only has 4 airbags and no VSC. That makes Malaysian Camry owner even more worrisomehttp://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=30 |
|
|
Dec 28 2012, 10:21 AM
Return to original view | Post
#16
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(lunchtime @ Dec 28 2012, 10:04 AM) Spot on, zweimmk. Check with cybermaster for Kia's SC. Buy him cyber-lunch or something? ! Else wait for CKD Mazda CX5 ? Did they say how cheaper it will be, am shopping for a SUV too for 2013.However after viewing the euroncap website, the KIA sportage looks the best for buck car at the moment. I was told the newer engines Sportage will be available in Mac 13, and waiting period is 3 months. Saw the CX-5 as well, it is better than the Sportage by just a point, but pricewise, it is almost 20k more. But this will change if the new CRV comes with 6 airbags. I wonder how are Naza Kia's and Mazda's SC, good or fxxked up?  As for the Pugs, I supposed it will have to wait, need a SUV at the moment.   |
|
|
Dec 28 2012, 12:53 PM
Return to original view | Post
#17
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(lunchtime @ Dec 28 2012, 11:13 AM) CKD CX5 will likely be a stripped version. And the CBU CX5 scored just a point higher than the Sportage but its $20k more. I do have my reservations with KIA, and factoring in Naza. Makes me ponder many many times. How competent are the SCs? http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-...e-Compact-SUVs/Not looking for sedans and MPVs after watching the euroncap videos. The major concerns are side impacts. Scary. http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-...y-Compact-SUVs/ Perhaps the above will help? Since safety is paramount to you, you can look at the scores there. US News described their methodology as below http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/methodology/ ''•Safety. The safety score is based on a compilation of scores from leading safety rating sources, including the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.'' In affordable Compact SUV category, Kia Sportage ranked #6 score better in safety i.e. at par with Honda New CRV ranked #4 , Subaru XV ranked #6 at the same platform with Sportage and VW Tiguan ranked #11. All 4 Models gets 9.8 score for safety. which is better than Mazda CX 5 ranked #2, Ford New Escape ranked #1, and Hyundai Tucson ranked # 9 at 9.4 score. But if your pocket is swell, can look at Volvo XC60 ranked #3 in luxury compact SUV category also scoring 9.8 in safety comparable with the Germans BMW X3 ranked #5, and Audi Q5 ranked #2 . Happy test driving them all! and please share your after thoughts even though some models like the new CRV, Subaru SV, Ford New Escape you can only do in 2013( like I have planned to ) before making your choice, if you can wait and tahan  This post has been edited by EnergyAnalyst: Dec 28 2012, 03:20 PM |
|
|
Dec 28 2012, 02:34 PM
Return to original view | Post
#18
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
QUOTE(cybermaster98 @ Dec 28 2012, 01:52 PM) Most of those who bought the new Camry in Malaysia are not those who actually bothered to scout around and try out other D segment makes out there. Many of them actually went for the brand and the after sales record that comes with it. And im very sure most of them dont even know what Stability Control is and thus wouldnt mind not having it. Agree, Typical play safe mentality, all forsaken in the pursuit for Good Resale Value and Durability while paying high prices and in return Get Ripped Off with Compromises here and there.Hey Cybermaster98, would you help out lunchtime there, he is pondering about Naza Kia service, care to comment? This post has been edited by EnergyAnalyst: Dec 28 2012, 03:22 PM |
|
|
Dec 29 2012, 02:38 AM
Return to original view | Post
#19
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
LATIN NCAP RESULTS FOR 2012
Honda City June 2012 Verdict : 4 star for Adult Occupant, score : 12.03/16 4 Star for Child Occupant, score : 37.99/49 Attached thumbnail(s) 
|
|
|
Dec 29 2012, 02:41 AM
Return to original view | Post
#20
|
|
Senior Member
4,133 posts Joined: Oct 2012
|
LATIN NCAP RESULTS FOR 2012
Ford Fiesta June 2012 Verdict : 4 star for Adult Occupant, score : 12.87/16 4 Star for Child Occupant, score : 37.80/49 This post has been edited by EnergyAnalyst: Dec 29 2012, 02:47 AM Attached thumbnail(s) 
|
| Change to: |  0.0743sec
 0.79
 7 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 12th December 2025 - 05:53 AM |
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025 IPS, Inc.