"Bill Freeman" <bfree (AT) netzero (DOT) net> wrote

*Every* vehicle tested that did not come standard with side impact air
bags flunked the side impact test. Those with side impact airbags as
standard all passed. It was a side impact test and those without side
airbags were going to fail. I have no problem with that.

Since the Element has only an *option* of side impact air bags, the
insurance safety group doing the testing didn't test the model with
side impact airbags. And yes, it did flunk. Side impact air bags are
the whole point of the test. Seventy percent of the vehicles tested
flunked, along with the CR-V because side impact bags are only an
option.

But it did fairly well in the other tests. Front, Back, and offset
front impact stuff. Not bad for a new car in the first year of
production. For a car company like Honda, it would have made a lot of
sense, and showed concern for their customers to have just made the
side impact bags as standard.

And the maximum velocity question? I assume that is top speed, huh?
The aero dynamic qualities of the Element have to be right up there
with the Volkswagen Bus. Anything over 75 on a windy day would wear
you out. At the point where you go airborne, changing lanes
unexpectedly could be a problem. But what do you expect? It is a
utility vehicle you can sleep in. Not a racecar.

Get something lower to the ground with better wind and handling
characteristics. And side impact airbags, for safety.

Regards.

Fweem (AT) attbi (DOT) com (Old Bugger) wrote in message news:<ffe3337.0306292006.4e98fdc (AT) posting (DOT) google.com>...
FWIW, I drove an Element from Beserkeley up to Redding the other week.
Soon as I hit 505 at Vacaville I had to get up to 82-83 MPH, just to
cruise with traffic. Kept that steady speed the whole way, about 2-1/4
hours, had no issues, got about 27 mpg for that particular stretch.

Going "over the hill" from Redding to Arcata, on twisty 299, the
handling was all I could ask for. I'm not a patient driver, but the
boxy, too-tall Element did everything I asked on the curves.

Wish the CD player was somewhere other than the top of the dash,
though. After a couple hours it starts to heat up and skips.

According to this article
http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/n...m/id/37154.htm

I quote:
Quietness 4 4
Tire thrum evident on coarse pavement, but boxy design resists
intrusive wind rush until 70 mph. Engine gruff, throaty in rapid
acceleration and at higher rpm; manual-transmission 2WD version turns a
buzzy 3800 rpm at 75 mph.

End quote\

This has me concerned. My Nissan does about 2300 RPM at 75 MPH. Seems to me
that and engine that has to go more than 35% faster for the same distance
travelled will not last as long.

--
Stu

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 11:46:21 -0400, "Stu" <nobody (AT) nowhere (DOT) com> wrote:

My Civic does many more RPM's at 75 than a 6-speed Camaro does, but
I'd bet my Civic lasts longer!! Ahh, you say, but those are different
engines, designed for different applications. Exactly my point. Use a
car for it's designed purpose, and it will last just fine (as long as
it's not made by GM, after all, they apologized!! <jk>). Don't buy a
Suburban if you want to commute, don't buy a 2 seater if you buy
groceries with it.

Nate

Quoth b7917 (AT) aol (DOT) com (Bernie) in
news:7ffb3f3b.0306301004.7abcc930 (AT) posting (DOT) google.com:

That's what the MP3 player jack is for.

;^)