It's the other way round. Driving a safe car (within budget) is common sense.

@jolokia: Very doubtful that an impact on the front right side of the car would make the car collapse on the LEFT side around the B pillar, leaving the FRONT of the car more or less intact. Or rather that is impossible.


http://miros-road-safety.blogspot.com/2008...ta-vios-at.html

The damage to the Golf looks very much like the damage to this Vios. What happened? The Vios crashed into a tree, sideways. I'm fairly sure that that is what happened to the Golf. You can also see how the side airbags were deployed in the Golf, again, something that wouldn't happen if the impact had been on the right side of the Golf where it should have happened according to the description and according to the damage to the Vios.

http://digital.nstp.com.my/nst/books/13072.../index.html#/7/
There is another photo of the Golf. Sadly it sits behind a stupid paywall that blocks after having seen the page for a few seconds... maybe someone can get a direct link to the image in the meantime (for example with adblock plus). In any case, there was only one impact, and it was on the left side of the Golf. No clue how that could have happened, but side impacts are more serious than frontal impacts. Apparently in this case the protection wasn't good enough. What does surprise me is how POOR the Vios did. For the Vios it was a frontal impact, for which the Vios should have decent protection. It also doesn't look that damaged. Yet the driver died?!

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Jul 27 2013, 11:28 PM

Great illustration. I think dares angle makes sense, however I think the right of the Vios should have been the point of impact, but that wouldn't work. The Metro pic doesn't show any damage apart from the side impact, so that is where the Vios had hooked in.

I doubt the Golf was out of control, it should have ESP and handle well enough. Getting it to go completely sideways isn't easy.

While the damage does look a bit odd, I suppose it could be possible. The Vios isn't per se a weak car, it just lacks in side protection and skid protection.

I've had an accident at such an angle before (but from back to the front), the damage to my Citroen was relatively big (bad angle I suppose...) compared to the damage to the other car that hid my side (Focus). Both cars are from the early 00s. The speed was low so not much happened, even the side airbags didn't have to deploy, neither did the front airbag of the Focus. That the Vios didn't suffer so much damage doesn't surprise me, that the driver died does. The speeds must have been rather high... probably the Vios going around the speed limit perhaps, the VW since it was trying to overtake more? I can imagine that due to the angle the Vios was redirected, and the driver must have hit the airbag at a suboptimal angle and moved on into the A pillar or something like that.

The Golf position really confuses me. I can see how the Vios was redirected a bit towards the center of the road, but the Golf? The Vios must really have hooked into the Golf and sent it backwards, but it is a lighter car...

If the Golf driver had gone for a straight head on collision, with as much overlap as possible, perhaps everyone could have survived (well, at least those in the Golf, due to it being the bigger car).

Keep in mind the smaller the overlap, the more serious the accident, because it is much tougher on the car/crumple zone. Unless you drive that Suzuki D segment car or a Volvo (or an ancient Citroen DS). Those cars have systems to redirect the car in a small overlap crash.

But the Golf was damaged only on the left side, which would indicate that unless the Golf had done a 180 (which is pretty unlikely, unless they pulled the handbrake perhaps) the Vios would have to have hit the Golf with it's left side too. And even so, a frontal collision should be fine for a Vios. It is a bit softer than the Fiesta, but it's still okayish. I could imagine that the driver missed the airbag, or not have worn seatbelts. Or the crash happened at a too high speed, but then we should be seeing more damage to the Vios.

It's a puzzle. It's fun (as macabre as it may sound).

I disagree. It simply wasn't a straight on side impact, but at an angle. I simply don't understand how it could have crashed into the side when it was a head on collision. That makes little sense to me.


That test is usually done at 50 km/h... looking at how crushed that Golf is the speed must have been much higher.

If it were a pole impact it would be more like this:

The car would have to have a much clearer mark. This test is done at 29 km/h, so at normal speeds on that sort of road the car should have been sliced through...

So what?

These two crashed into each other:



No chance of survival whatsoever in the Bel Air.

Wira:


Fiesta:


The point is to pick the car that, under the same circumstances, offers the (almost) best protection. Not all crashes are between lorry and car. And if you crash into a Wira for example, your chances of survival are simply much better in a modern safe car than a Wira or Iswara. There is no guarantee to survive, but the chances are higher. That was the point of this thread, and all that you have managed to show is that there can be freak accidents.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Aug 3 2013, 01:31 AM

You just don't understand, or don't want to, right?

I am saying old cars in general are not safe. And by old I mean old designs. It doesn't matter if it is still produced. A 2013 produces Iswara would still be very dangerous. The same goes for an old Mercedes, Volvo, ... Any old car is dangerous, period. That is the point. I do have crash test results for the Wira, and it is a popular car in Malaysia. No point showing people a car they have never seen is unsafe. (btw. the Trabant isn't so bad... It simply won't reach a high enough speed ).

Did EuroNCAP really test the Beetle? Can you show me any proof? I'd like to see photos/videos of that. They only started testing in 1997... and cars that were already on the market and then tested were quite bad. Especially some small Rover which was essentially a car from the 70s with few visual changes.

DSG can hardly cause accidents. Toyotas are much more prone to that. Brake failure, accelerator stuck, ...

F1 drivers are strapped to ridiculously safe (and expensive vehicles). They are wearing proper gear that protects them. That's why they can survive. Look at MotoGP and how they crash there. Then look at how many bikers in Malaysia die in crashes that are nowhere near as bad. It is the protective gear...

The safety features are meant to make a car safe at reasonable (legal) speeds. Other cars without may not be. Being a safe motorist means driving attentive, at reasonable speeds, in a car that is safe. The combination of those things are what greatly improves your chances.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Aug 3 2013, 01:34 PM

How should the gearbox jam in the middle of the highway? If that is possible, can't a torque converter jam up too? Stop dreaming up things that never happened, or give me any proof that the gearbox ever jamed while driving. If you are referring to that incident in Australia, well, that driver was driving a MANUAL car. The original article also referred to problems with diesel cars... which is again troublesome cause the car that crashed was a GTI. It doesn't run on diesel, it's a petrol.

http://www.carsguide.com.au/news-and-revie...elated_to_death
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/06/s...esel-injectors/

Oh and btw.? The driver who died seems to have been on her cell phone while she died. Maybe she shifted into the wrong gear while talking...? In any case, that incident had NOTHING at all to do with DSG problems.

Also, as for having a choice: There are owners of Wiras who are millionaires. Yet they refuse to upgrade to, say, a 208, Fiesta, Polo, Preve, Focus, Golf, Prius, Forte, ... those are not very flashy cars. They don't draw much attention. They are also not very expensive (to them). But yet they refuse to upgrade.

Also many buy a Vios, City, Altis, Camry for example (or for that matter an Elantra... though not many buy those), when there are alternatives that offer much better protection. Do you lose a bit in convenience? Yes, perhaps, though not so much with a Preve, and it depends on where you stay. Do you lose a bit in RV? Yes, depending on the model. A Camry drops like a stone too... compared to other D segment cars maybe not so much, but it isn't that good. And if you can afford a Camry... shouldn't you be able to pay a bit for servicing and be able to bear the drop in RV? If not... why buy an expensive car in the first place? If you can just afford a car, then you can't afford it.

The point is to simply take safety into consideration, and we are living in the year 2013. There are alternatives.

And yes, in some regions conti manufacturers are no better than the Japanese are here. Especially in Latin America VW etc. offer death traps under their brand. Thing is... we are in Malaysia. And here it is T&H who are the worst offenders (Perodua and in parts Proton too, but at least they are in a price bracket where there is no competition).

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Aug 3 2013, 05:16 PM

Then they will suffer. But to be honest I see more reckless kapcais, Myvis etc.

Different things protect the driver. An attentive driving style noticing what is going on around him, who drives appropriately and is prepared for emergency situations. Safety systems that pay attention and a car that handles good enough to react in emergency situations (ESP for example helps). Good passive safety that, if everything else fails will protect you as good as possible. Clearly the car is a part of it all.

Just look at the case that started this thread. The most innocent persons involved in the accident were the ones who died. Because they were driving the wrong car. So IF you have the chance then at least pay attention, inform yourself and chose wisely. Your budget is 80k and you want a Vios? Spend less and buy Preve CFE. Even if it is a but more costly to run, even if the resale value isn't so good and it is a bit more troublesome... You have spent less in the first place for a safer car.

And ideally one day the Vios will be at the same standard as all the other brands. If people boycott it for now.

How to hit the side of a car on a straight road? It's wet, so I suppose the Iswara lost control? ESP could have helped... (though maybe better tyres would have been enough).

I'd expect them to rank as follows:
1. Preve CFE (the only car with side impact protection and stability control, also C segment, so has advantages through that too)
2. Honda City (best frontal protection amongst the rest, higher spec got stability control)
3. Nissan Almera (did well overseas, though it is much better speced. Still, frontal impact protection should be superior to the Vios at least, perhaps even to the City. The 1 airbag version should be at the very bottom)
4. Toyota Vios.

Where the Alza ranks in all of this... who knows. But... in less than one month we should know, because ASEAN NCAP is releasing the next round of crash tests, and it will probably include the Alza, and perhaps even the Almera and Preve.

Keep in mind that the Preve CFE is on a nearly conti level of protection, miles ahead of any of the other cars in your list.

As for budget, the Kia Rio should be well within your budget, or, if you are ok with manual, the Fiesta LX hatchback. Of course resale value for a manual Fiesta will probably be not good at all, and the Rio is sold out for the next half year or so (though that indicates good resale value in future). Both cars are rather small though compared to the rest, especially the Preve.

If you care about safety and (probably) reliability a second hand Prius C could be worth searching for. A 2012 one could fit in your budget, it is reasonably safe and at least the big brother is by far the most reliable Toyota there is, perhaps even the most reliable car on sale, period. The Prius leads all the statistics in terms of reliability and is popular with taxi companies around the world.

Ford Focus and Fiesta not in the list? 2 of the safest cars in their class? That's a bit surprising. Maybe they couldn't be bothered? The Myvi is in there, so it can't be hard to fulfill the requirements...

The problem with the list is that we don't know what cars are actually on the list. What about less popular models? Are the not there cause they are safe or cause they were just forgotten by JPJ?

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Aug 17 2013, 07:15 PM

Yes, but of all cars, why would the Fiesta LX 1.4 hatchback and the LX 1.6 sedan be mentioned as insufficient? One has 7 airbags, the other 7 airbags and ESP. Seems like they never updated the list after the cars were upgraded.

I think a list of all cars (including those that passed), with info why a car wasn't accepted would make more sense. Like this it seems rather weird to me. Maybe those older spec cars didn't fulfill the requirements, but newer ones do. But the way the list is now people would just avoid the Fiesta and Focus, even though the ones you can get right now are fine.

And how can the Rio NOT fulfill the requirements? JPJ should explain a bit.

I'm not saying install side airbags and it's fine. I'm saying don't have side airbags and there's no way you'll do well. Like... having a bungee cable when bungee jumping won't _always_ keep you alive, but not having one will most certainly result in your dead. That sort of thinking.

I think that the place where a car is produced only matters to a small degree (how well it is put together, how good the employees are/if they make mistakes). The spec thing is more referring to the equipment and the standards the cars are produced to. The latter we can't see easily, but we know the safety equipment cars have. That is known to us.

Basically it is simply more likely that a EU spec car, even when manufactured in Thailand, will be safer than an ASEAN spec car (i.e. one that lacks most safety features).

Btw. didn't the Fiesta did similar in ASEAN NCAP as it did in EuroNCAP? That suggest it is built to similar standards, at least in safety relevant areas. But until the car is tested we won't know if a EU spec ASEAN made car is as good as the real deal. But it is more likely.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Aug 18 2013, 08:51 PM

I believe the Honda Goldwing has airbags. Also there are helmets and biking suits with airbags, and of course wearing the right suit (no one does in Malaysia) helps a lot. Just watch MotoGP... if they would drive wearing the stuff Malaysian bikers wear... (of course their racing suits are extremely expensive).

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Aug 19 2013, 11:21 AM

The problem is we don't know. Perhaps Volvo is missing from the list cause they were too insignificant to be even asked. I don't see Bufori either, or Lotus. Or Chery (on my mobile, so I didn't check). Are they safe? Especially the latter.

We also don't know why the Ford models aren't rated safe. Were they simply not tested? Or did they fail? Where did they fail?

Yes, but don't forget Germans have sun too. And that's when they take out their bikes for a joy ride, dressed up like the Michelin Man. A friends friend was once saved by his expensive protective gear. Some car driver opened his door, the biker had to make an evasive maneuver and crashed. Without he may have died. Of course this gear is expensive, and the main reason to ride a bike here is to save money. Not as a hobby for rich people who want to enjoy life.

Slightly different testing conditions, different rating. I think the photo can tell us quite a bit if the car is made the same way. The difference is often how the results are interpreted.

I wish EuroNCAP would update their old test results to also show what the current rating would be. As far as I understand with the exception of a few added tests (ESP and whiplash) the tests are the same.

End of this month there should be the next batch of ASEAN NCAP results...

Since they constantly keep updating their standards...

But I'd expect EuroNCAP and ANCAP to be very strict, and ASEAN NCAP basically seems to copy them, so they are strict too (for the tests they do). IIHS and NHTSA (?) are pushing it a bit by doing small overlap tests now, which are much tougher on the cars (imagine some big metal plate pushing on your chest with 2 kg, and a nail pushing on your chest with 2 kg. The nail may make a hole in you, the plate won't).

One good example was the rail found on truck trailers to prevent cars driving under it. They may work fine when the car hits then trailer with the full front of the car, but if the overlap is small the rail will give in.