![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Why did Honda not request that the test be conducted again WITH the air bags? It makes me wonder whether the side airbags are really effective in protecting the driver. A company that promotes an image of its cars as being among the safest on the road ought to take steps to improve the vehicle's safety, or demonstrate that it IS safe when the airbags are installed. |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
The Honda Element EX received a grade of "poor" on the side impact test conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. "DRIVER ... major torso injuries would be likely ... Serious neck injury also would be possible." Here is the URL: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fr...side/s0308.htm The IIHS Report notes that the tests were conducted *without* the optional side-impact air bags: "NOTE: The Element tested was not equipped with the optional side airbags. When side airbags are optional, the Institute tests vehicles without this option. If a manufacturer offering optional side airbags requests the Institute to conduct an additional test of a vehicle with this option and agrees to reimburse the cost of the vehicle, a second test is conducted. Honda did not request such a test." Why did Honda not request that the test be conducted again WITH the air bags? It makes me wonder whether the side airbags are really effective in protecting the driver. A company that promotes an image of its cars as being among the safest on the road ought to take steps to improve the vehicle's safety, or demonstrate that it IS safe when the airbags are installed. Wanting to buy an Element, but waiting.... Tim |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Yeah, they key words there being "Insurance Institute". Sounds like another excuse to charge higher premiums for SUV owners. Funny how the NHTSA (Nation Highway Traffic Safety Administration) which is a branch of the US Department of Transportation gave the 2003 Element 5 stars for the driver's side impact. That's a better rating than the 2003 Accord which got 4 stars. The only score worthy of concern was the rollover test where it got 3 stars. But come on, it's a SUV, drive it with that in mind and rollover is not a problem. If you really want safety though, then get the CR-V. It got 5 stars for both frontal driver and passenger collision and 5 stars for driver and rear side impact. It's also got 3 stars rollover but as I said above, it's an SUV. Drive it properly and this won't be a problem. "Tim" <anon (AT) anonymous (DOT) com> wrote in message news:MPG.1a902e7bb283f5dd989682 (AT) news (DOT) comcast.giganews.com... The Honda Element EX received a grade of "poor" on the side impact test conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. "DRIVER ... major torso injuries would be likely ... Serious neck injury also would be possible." Here is the URL: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fr...side/s0308.htm The IIHS Report notes that the tests were conducted *without* the optional side-impact air bags: "NOTE: The Element tested was not equipped with the optional side airbags. When side airbags are optional, the Institute tests vehicles without this option. If a manufacturer offering optional side airbags requests the Institute to conduct an additional test of a vehicle with this option and agrees to reimburse the cost of the vehicle, a second test is conducted. Honda did not request such a test." Why did Honda not request that the test be conducted again WITH the air bags? It makes me wonder whether the side airbags are really effective in protecting the driver. A company that promotes an image of its cars as being among the safest on the road ought to take steps to improve the vehicle's safety, or demonstrate that it IS safe when the airbags are installed. Wanting to buy an Element, but waiting.... Tim |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
Tim <anon (AT) anonymous (DOT) com> wrote: Why did Honda not request that the test be conducted again WITH the air bags? It makes me wonder whether the side airbags are really effective in protecting the driver. A company that promotes an image of its cars as being among the safest on the road ought to take steps to improve the vehicle's safety, or demonstrate that it IS safe when the airbags are installed. Why? To find out if there is any difference, so you don't have to wonder any more. The first year models are usually not the best. |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
Snip I still think the Element is one kick-ass car, you want safety............ get a Mercedes or a Hummer! Joe |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
The Honda Element EX received a grade of "poor" on the side impact test conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. "DRIVER ... major torso injuries would be likely ... Serious neck injury also would be possible." Here is the URL: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fr...side/s0308.htm The IIHS Report notes that the tests were conducted *without* the optional side-impact air bags: "NOTE: The Element tested was not equipped with the optional side airbags. When side airbags are optional, the Institute tests vehicles without this option. If a manufacturer offering optional side airbags requests the Institute to conduct an additional test of a vehicle with this option and agrees to reimburse the cost of the vehicle, a second test is conducted. Honda did not request such a test." Why did Honda not request that the test be conducted again WITH the air bags? It makes me wonder whether the side airbags are really effective in protecting the driver. A company that promotes an image of its cars as being among the safest on the road ought to take steps to improve the vehicle's safety, or demonstrate that it IS safe when the airbags are installed. Wanting to buy an Element, but waiting.... Tim |
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
My Honda bike failed the side impact test too.... Now what's up with that? A conspiracy perhaps? |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |