I don't have any doubt the Myvi will be safer.

Ford isn't on that list, they don't produce/assemble in Malaysia. Why is it on the list for not being safe?

It's all very random and weird, sorry.

Yeah. Those would make up for a good headline. But if you bring such a headline, do you think you'll still get ads? Nope sir.

You can see sites as Paultan... the only place where they would actually criticize a car during a review is when another car is being reviewed. Say they review a Golf... then in that review they'd say it is a bit better than an Altis. In an Altis review it'd be better than a Golf. Car journalists are a bit useless, sadly, because most of them do want to get those nice all expenses paid trips to Europe, America, ...

The new Mazdas shouldn't be related to Ford anymore, right?

Nah. They do the same overseas. Everyone has mouths to feed.

ESP/VSC is more important than airbags, cause it can help avoid accidents. If you don't have an accident you don't need airbags.

As for overseas reviews ripping apart the Camry... yes, that would probably happen cause the specs are so ridiculously bad... there's no way reviewers can avoid being ridiculed and marked with a bad reputation if they don't bash the car for that.

What are you trying to say?

Many car makers have their own crash test facilities. Volvo has, Renault has (2006 they celebrated their 10000th crash), Mercedes has, Toyota has (a few), ... I suppose all major car makers have.

I recently saw this:
http://www.20min.ch/schweiz/basel/story/Un...eihung-21734569

What happened basically was that a woman was driving, her husband suddenly was unconscious, green in the face, tongue hanging out, and she tried to revive him, tried to help him breathe again by showing him. She couldn't stop at the road side thanks to construction works, and then entered a tunnel. Her heavy breathing led to her getting unconscious, and she crashed into a car coming the other way in the tunnel. She got rescued out of her car, then ran towards the car she crashed into. The driver of the other car died.

A judge found it wasn't her fault. Clearly not the other cars fault either.

As far as I can recognize the cars involved are a 2002 Renault Megane and a 2002 Citroen C3.

http://www.euroncap.com/tests/renault_megane_2002/146.aspx
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/citroen_c3_2002/133.aspx

5 stars vs 4 stars, and C segment vs B segment. The Citroen clearly was at a disadvantage, and the results show. Keep in mind that both cars are not too bad. But the safer car won. Especially for small cars a good safety rating is important, because they are at a disadvantage already when the rating is the same.

Korean cars used to be quite crappy. Not very reliable, not very good, poor resale value. The cars have improved a lot, but people change very slowly. They thing what was true 15 years ago still is true. That means resale value is a bit low. The cars themselves aren't bad. What also matters is the time of launch... i.e. a car that was launched 8 years ago, but is brand new, isn't as good as one that was launched 2 years ago and is 2 years old. (Though in terms of reliability and smaller problems the car from 8 years ago had more time to get those small problems fixed... that's why people say don't buy first batch).

It's hard to tell. There are different reasons for different ratings in different tests.

They may simply rate it differently, i.e. EuroNCAP stays within the class of cars. A A segment car has to withstand only an impact vs an A segment car in the test. If it were to crash into a big SUV things would look differently. ASEAN NCAP seems to put A and B segment cars in the same category...

They may have safety features missing, i.e. the Indian Polo came with 0 airbags. Even though the chassis, the steel etc. is the same as the European version with 6 airbags, it got 0 vs 5 stars. Without an airbag it didn't matter how strong the car itself is, you're going to hit the steering wheel and dashboard with full force, and that kills you. The Indian Polo was upgraded to 2 airbags (similar to how the Saga was upgraded from 1 to 2 when the crash test results came out), and now it is a safe car for frontal collisions.

They may have used fewer or less hot welding points, thinner/softer materials and miss elements to improve structural rigidity.

You might be able to compare the photos/videos of EuroNCAP crash tests vs those of ASEAN NCAP tests, to see if the structure is similar. And then use the EuroNCAP/ANCAP tests, if the safety spec is the same.

People say legislature is required for cars to be safe. I'd say Europe has one of the highest standard of safety for their cars. But it's not all due to legislature. For example, I have seen a base spec Mercedes Benz that comes with 1 airbag. 1 (!!!). That's not common, but it shows that car makers aren't forced by law to include many airbags (day time running lights are required by law though, as will be emergency city brakes AFAIK, and stability control?). The reason why 6 airbags are common is that customers demand that. Whereever possible, car makers do try to cut costs, even by leaving out safety/making it optional. Several cars, many perhaps don't come with side airbags for the rear passengers these days. They are optional (though not very expensive, say RM 800-1200 usually?).

Generally speaking without airbags a crash will be much more damaging than with, in the direction you are going. So say you are ALWAYS traveling alone, then for a frontal crash having only 1 airbag makes no difference. However for the passenger it's quite bad... I'd move the passenger seat as far back as possible if I don't have an airbag there.

For side impacts, the side and curtain airbags are crucial. Say you are driving through a junction, the traffic light says green. Someone coming from the side ignores his red light and drives into you. Not your fault, but he is well protected by his driver airbag, you, unless you have side and curtain airbags, aren't. Your head and body will be smashed into the windscreen or B pillar, which already will be pushed in thanks to the other car. Driver and passenger airbags are completely useless in this case (and vice versa).

What is needed is that ASEAN NCAP starts testing and rating side impacts as soon as possible, no punches held back. The results have to be shocking. If THAT happens and has an impact on buyers, we'll soon see many cars be equipped with 4 or 6 airbags as standard. Like how the Saga was immediately upgraded thanks to a very bad crash test result. For some cars of course that won't be possible easily (I'm thinking Vios), but that was Toyota's own mistake. Cars that are offered elsewhere with 6 airbags can be upgraded.
Unfortunately, ASEAN NCAP holds back on such damning results because that would hurt car makers. They are more concerned with the well being of Toyota than that of you guys.

@UbuntuClient: Those are long term endurance tests, not safety tests. Nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

And yes, car makers do those tests.

Safe driving is one part of the equasion. An important part, for sure. But not all dangerous situations can be avoided. People's reaction times and driving skills are not unlimited, and there are situations that ESP can get you out of that even a very skilled driver without ESP can't get out of (and I'm thinking racing driver skills). You simply don't have control over each wheel individually. And people's reaction time is higher than that of a computer.

I guess I'm driving a safe car. It's a Golf Mk 7, so it has traction control, stability control and ABS and a 5 star EuroNCAP rating. I've also got the optional airbag pack which adds 2 more airbags, for a total of 9.
The car is equipped with automatic emergency braking and adaptive cruise control via long range radar. (Yup, the system works. The car was once on the brakes while my foot was still moving there).
The car has lane keep assist to keep the car in the lane should I nod off. It's also a convenient feature cause it moves the steering wheel for you. Another feature that works very well.
Furthermore I have adaptive HID headlights, which vastly improve the light output during the night by being a) HID, b) on high beam all the time and just blocking out the places where other drivers are, so they don't get blinded and c) turning into corners.
There's the attention assist, which is supposed to tell me when I'm tired. Doesn't work on me. It notices when I'm talking to others, but not when I'm really tired. That's a waste of money.
Traffic sign recognition system will see and display speed limits, should I have missed them.
Multi collision brakes... if there is a crash, the car will engage the brakes after the crash so that I don't move on and crash again.

I think those are the main safety features? And yeah, the attention assist, adaptive HIDs, extra airbags, radar and lane assist did cost extra. They are not on the standard car.

Sometimes. Some things, a human can sense first and react to it before the car sees it coming. Other things (those that you can't predict because your view is blocked for example), the car reacts faster. An attentive, safe driver together with a car that also works to protect the driver is what works best. You shouldn't rely on either. Don't drive an idiot because you have a safe car, cause that won't protect you. But also don't drive an unsafe car just because you think you're a safe driver and that's all that's needed.

So...? Mine was produced late 2012, so it's one of the earliest Mk 7.

Aanyway, VW changes their car throughout the production run, for example the adaptive cruise control got a downgrade for the 2014 model year, they are using a cheaper, not so good radar now. And I don't like the latest refresh of the Discover Pro GPS unit. They dropped the buttons and dials which I use all the time and find super useful.

It's the 1.4 TSI, but with a 6 speed manual. Not my favorite manual gearbox (too much focus on easy to drive), but it does the job. It's a lot better than VWs 5 speed manual they offer with entry level engines, and obviously it's way way way way better than the manual box Perodua uses.

In any case, I wouldn't buy a car without the safety specs on my car anymore, except if it were a weekend car that mostly sees racetrack use. There it's ok, but as a daily driver it needs to have this safety stuff. It's not just safer, it's also much more comfortable.

Ah. I also only buy second hand... no way I can afford this car new (well, I don't want to anyway, with this car I'm soon free and only have to worry about maintenance, tax and insurance). The options did add a lot to the price tag. The safety tech not so much, that's quite affordable. But the GPS unit and some other options... those really add up. Hopefully I can drive this car for many more years

I hope there is a backlash. Buttonless cars don't make any sense, unless the car drives itself. But buttons require a lot less attention. There's a reason why many premium segment cars don't even have touchscreens. And on bumpy roads you'll hit anything but what you want to hit, while you can use the dials and buttons without even looking.

Leather seats on my car would have cost more than all the additional safety features. The radar, the lane assist, the additional airbags, ... Safety isn't that expensive, that's why Proton can offer it on their cars (not to the degree of the VW, but at least significantly better than what Toyota etc. offer). The question is if people demand it. Do they say... rather than bigger rims and a body kit and leather seats I would have safety features? If yes, manufacturers will offer it. Sadly Malaysia doesn't seem there yet.

The good news: When you crash, you're more likely to survive (unless hit from the side). The bad news: You're more likely to crash.

Make sure you get good tyres, replace them early enough. That helps.

That's like saying in the 18th century people survived too, right? Well, some did. Many didn't. But those that did, great for them. There are plenty of road related fatalities happening, and that number could go down significantly with safer cars. It has in places that moved on towards safer cars.

Anyway, many things contribute to safety. Good tyres (they are the only thing that make contact with the road!), safe cars that are good at surviving crashes, safe cars that are good at avoiding crashes (which honestly I prefer... it saves money, trouble, unnecessary injuries etc.), and of course safe drivers that don't fiddle with their mobile phone and that are courteous and care about others, too. Each of these things reduce the risk of something bad happening. Do as much as you can afford.

Everyone can be a safe driver.

Good tyres is also something most people can afford to do, even if that means not going for the largest, flashiest rims possible. Small steel rims do the job. Small rims lead to cheaper tyres, and steel rims are cheap so you can afford better ones, and afford to replace in time. I guess you all know this, but for example (in Germany) my Golf has 17" rims (15" would work too). But people have gone up to 20". For the price of 17" Dunlop SP Sport Maxx RT2 (probably what I'll be getting as my next set), which according to reviews are some of the best tyres out there, I can't even get 20" Nankang. Small rims mean you can afford good tyres. 15" Continental PremiumContact 5 are half as expensive as 20" Nankang, and Continental tyres with 20" cost 5 times as much as 15" ones. All for the same car that is. Maybe if others can see expensive tyres from a distance, people would be willing to spend on them. Maybe it's time to go back to white lettering on tyres...

Safe cars... if you buy a new car these days, there is almost _always_ an option that has good protection. Yes, that may mean you have to buy a Proton rather than a Japanese brand. So what. Proton offers cheap cars with 6 airbags and stability control. Now, higher end active safety features (automatic braking etc.) are only available on few cars, and they do cost more... The features themselves are relatively cheap, VW charges roughly RM 5k for lane assist and adaptive cruise control when you order these features with your new car. Also many cars from B segment up can be ordered with these features in other countries. It's a matter of customers demanding these things.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Feb 6 2017, 04:32 AM

Ok. Then we kind of agree anyway. What I say is when it is time to buy a new car, THEN make safety a key criteria, as there is usually a safe option that fits the budget.

Self braking has helped me already... it wouldn't have been a serious crash, but the car managed to react faster than I did. That is no surprise... humans have a very slow reaction time, the only advantage humans have is being able to see more/understand more and predict what is going to happen. However there are situations where you can't predict. That's where the computer helps.

Also the adaptive cruise control helps me save fuel and drive more consistent.

Lane assist has saved me a couple of times (keep in mind that I do sometimes drive 1500 km a day, and that it often is not possible to find a place to rest for 20, 30 minutes, sometimes even hours as lorry drivers are forced to rest at night here, and all car parks are completely blocked by lorries). There's no way I'd want to drive without it anymore. (And no, I don't drive any different from when I didn't have those assistants, guess I was lucky (and drove less back then). Also if I am this tired, I'll try to rest ASAP.

Never tried that, though I'd expect understeer. I think It'd corner better than a car without stability control though.

Not every day. But usually 4 times a year I do. Every day I drive 190 km... in the morning 85, in the evening after a long work day another 85.

I can drive properly without the safety features, and I don't drive differently. I have caught the car last minute before I had the safety tech. Maybe it's just me, but sometimes I nap away even though I'm fully awake just minutes earlier, and can't even sleep if I try to. I try not to rely on the safety tech, cause I know there can be a road section without markings, there can be dirt in front of the camera, or really heavy rain/fog can disturb the system too... . But so far this tech has worked almost always (there's also a little icon telling me when it sees road markings). Even if you only ever need it once, you'll be glad that you've had it when that time comes.

And what the reviewer is saying is what I am trying to say, too. I'd like to add that you never know when you may need it. You may be the best, safest, most attentive driver in the world. But at some point you may get distracted, you may be a bit tired and can't find a place to stop/don't realize you're getting tired. Something completely surprising and unexpected can happen... remember the poor cop that had something drop from a lorry in front of him? How can you predict that happening? The computer would slam the brakes much faster than a surprised human being can.

Btw., we do have reached the point where some self driving cars are safer drivers than humans. Tesla is there for example, and Google is years ahead of Tesla.

Oh, and I'd like to know: When you change lanes, do you turn your head to the side to see if there's a car in the blind spot?

Yes. Nice to have. It doesn't take any responsibility from the driver though.


Interesting question. For fun reasons I'd go with the Evo, for safety reasons with the Suprima/Preve (the structure is stronger, the airbags help too). Also the Proton, being new, should be more reliable/less problematic.

As for getting out of dangerous situations/handling... you may have picked a bad example, because Proton already handles relatively well, even without the electronic aids.

Are the brakes actually better? Plenty of modern family cars have stopping distances that would make Porsches from past decades green with envy.

Honest I have no idea which would be better at getting you out of bad situations, I suppose that also depends on the driver (normal drivers may be better with VSC, while more advanced drivers, perhaps with track experience, may be better in the Evo), on the situation, road condition, ... like on snow the AWD will help you more than VSC does. etc.

Haha. I like to shift gears. More fun. Sometimes auto would be nice, but getting auto means giving up fun. I can't use the stick anymore. But the lane keep assist and adaptive cruise control can be deactivated/overridden. Usually when driving with adaptive cruise control my foot is still on the pedal, so I can override it whenever I want. For example when it slows down even though I have the intention to overtake and just want to get closer to the car up front because someone else is overtaking me.

Haha. I don't say it's a die die must have, but when you have the option to get it, because you're getting a new car anyway, and your budget includes options that have it, then do consider. Plus in combination with an automatic gearbox some adaptive cruise control systems also work in traffic jams. Let the car handle all that stop and go. (VW still requires you to push a button to get going again, so that you pay some attention).

The EVO is an exceptional car though. There are cars with VSC that still manage to topple over, but without it would be even worse. That's what VSC does. It makes things better, within limits. If the cars handling is crap and dangerous, it will make it less crap and less dangerous. It won't turn it into a Ferrari that's glued to the ground. But since every bit helps... Anyway, most people who buy non-VSC cars are not going for EVOs, they are going for some Myvi, or Vios, or even Camry. Those cars don't handle well. They should have VSC. When talking ordinary cars, VSC is useful. Even if you only trigger it once, that one time might make all the difference. Same thing with all the other assistants.

For the Golf, I rarely trigger the VSC. It once happened driving through what seems to have been a small puddle on the highway, at maybe 110 or 120, going straight. Not sure what would have happened without VSC. But otherwise I have to try to trigger it on snow or ice, never been able/daring enough to push the car so hard in normal conditions that it'd go to work. So I feel that limits despite only having 205/55 R16 on the car are pretty high. My previous car, on 195/55 R15 had significantly lower limits IMHO (still high enough IMHO, and it was more comfy). I'm suppose the EVO has even higher limits.

This post has been edited by kadajawi: Feb 12 2017, 02:19 AM