Safety Rating Information/Crash Safety Reports

[Matthew]

IBC Japan & Delica/Starwagon Crash Safety Reports

For member viewing/response etc.

It's a bit of a read and quite technical but a lot of info. Visit the sites and see for yourself.

Maybe don't read onward from here….

1987 - 1993 Mitsubishi Delica:

Australian rating: worse than average protection
http://www.atsb.gov.au/pdfs/ucsr_2005.pdf

Australian university study grouped the Starwagon in the 'inferior'
group.
It should be noted the Starwagon was one vehicle 'worse' than the 1989
-1992 Honda Civic.

http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/reports/muarc203.pdf

On the plus side (maybe), it was rated as more likely to cause injury in the
other vehicle vs. your yours...

[Green1]

If you look at the report it actually rates pretty decent in occupant protection, where it falls down is in the possible damage to other vehicles or people...

This means it fails in a category that isn't even tested in north america, and in which every truck and SUV on the road here also fails
it is impossible to have a vehicle this big and heavy that will not damage other people and vehicles if it hits. this really puts these vehicles in the same class as the SUVs around here (which really is no surprise)

[Matthew]

Any others have input/analysis/info?

[BCDelica]

Those result don't surprise many of us. Remember that 'any' crash test rating never includes driver habits and there focus on driving safe.

I have been trying to find an article I read on the Smart car and it's crash ratings. Very interesting how the testers (it was some car mag, not a Smart fans) talked about driver position and perception well driving a Smart lends itself to safer driving habits - small form factor and perceived venerability (something like that). All three vehicles in our driveway have the motor behind, or below, the driver - leading me to believe we view this forward driver position as an advantage. As I tease 2 close friend about there new full sized p/u's, a Dodge 1ton diesel and a Ford F450 (what a behemoth, but I'll admit I find it cool and would love to have a WVO powered one, you name it - it could pull it. Well both of them could, each has the torque of six Delica's) when they mention how save they feel in those vehicles. They are both cautious drivers, with out a doubt, but could this sense of 'security' lead to a moments inattention?

We believe our seating location in the Delica enhances our focus on the surroundings. Knowing that your vehicle has vulnerabilities lends itself, maybe, to a more regular focus on 'everybody's safety.

Heck, when I'm riding my bike nowadays I'm feel as venerable as a senior afraid to break a hip, and as a result am hyper cautious.

IMO

[Green1]

Ok, I'm going to have to admit that I was at least partially wrong here, I was stupid and assumed that the article was the same as the last one I saw... this one does actually rate the Delica poorly for occupant protection, the last 2 I saw rated it reasonably well for occupant protection... the common concern is damage to others, which as I pointed out earlier isn't even tested in North America, and pretty much all SUVs here would fail...
As for occupant protection, I can't say I feel vulnerable in the Delica, but I can say that I have a much better appreciation for my surroundings due to the excellent visibility out of the vehicle...
it should also be noted that the Delica has the same rating for occupant protection as the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla, neither of which have a poor reputation for crash ratings.

Other things worth noting, as taken from the report:

MYTH: You can take more risks if you’ve got a vehicle with safety
features – they will save you in a crash. FACT: While safety features
are more likely to increase your chances of surviving a crash, they
don’t make you indestructible. Safety features won’t necessarily save
you from death or serious injury, particularly if you’re speeding or not
wearing your seat belt.

And this is the big one... the single most dangerous component in any vehicle is the driver, they are the ones that cause crashes, not the vehicles.... for as much as we like to call them "accidents" I have never seen one, I've seen lots of crashes though, but every one I've seen could have been avoided by at least one of the drivers, and usually both. (I'm not saying there's no such thing as a truly accidental collision, just that they are rare, most are avoidable)
most vehicles these days are designed to limit a driver's perception of the road, from smaller windows and mirrors to drive-by-wire systems, ABS, traction-control, etc, it's refreshing to drive a vehicle that gives you the best possible chance of avoiding a hazardous situation before it becomes a collision.

[Matthew]

Well... we'd all like to think we are superior drivers. Poll anyone behind the wheel and they'll tell you they are better than the average driver. So who is the average driver?

I definately agree with you that there are no accidents but a whole lot of collisions.

As much as visibility is a factor in protecting yourself it can't always save you from the mad granny driving her SUV. The numbers are what they are. I haven't had time to read through the whole paper in the link but like was pointed out the Delica is as safe as several listed every day drivers we all see around. I'll need to take some time to figure out what the stats really are based on the formulas they are using.

Before I get slammed... not knockin' the beloved Delica, just trying to ensure the fam's safety and make sure we all get the best available info. Playing the devils advocate so to speak for the sake of constructive debate. Still love the little lego-moblies.

[mararmeisto]

Considering the Japanese have been building vehicles for the North American market for more than 25 years (to our standards), I would suggest that these vehicles are no less 'safe' than those you'd find available here.

There's good comments over on ivoac.ca to the effect that a Toyota 4Runner for example is a 'safe' vehicle for the NA market (because they were initially sold here so they must conform to our standards), but a Toyota Hilux Surf is probably 'not so safe' because it's more than 15 years old (due to importing law) and it was made for the Japanese market, and blah, blah, yadda-yadda - it's the same vehicle, different badge is all!

Regardless, as indicated in other posts in this thread, it doesn't matter how 'safe' a vehicle is - it's the driver which makes the biggest difference. To borrow a line from the gun lobby (and it really is the truth although I'm not supporter of the gun lobby): "Cars don't kill people, bad drivers kill people." That's not to say a vehicle won't malfunction, but most collisions tend to be the fault of the 'bags of mostly water' in the driver's seat (see ST:TNG: Home Soil).

[SpyderCS]

On a search for crash test videos the only one that I could find that was partially applicable is for the 2006 L300. In a head on, it looks like a pretty rough ride for the front seat occupants. So, what is the likelyhood that one will be in a high speed head on collision? Of course, the answer to that is in our own personal driving habits. Are we typically racing along the coquihalla at the bear snow shed? Or are we spend far more time doing sunday driving style?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=JpP06lotEuE

[DelicaMark]

Okay I am officially going to avoid a head on collision. That looks like the driver would likely not have legs after a crash like that.

I believe that Josh has experienced a head on collision. I am not sure if it was a total head on or more like a hit on the front corner and then slide down the side of the van. I am pretty sure that everyone was "okay". http://www.delica.ca/forum/icbc-and-acc ... tml#p10548

-Mark

[mararmeisto]

Ouch! Doesn't indicate the speed, but regardless, that dummy looks like he's missing his kneecaps. And got a bump on the chin from the steering wheel. Reminds me of what I've always thought of VW vans.

And I agree with the other post - mental note to self: don't get in a head-on collision.

[sahdot]

Yikes! Niek posted this link on a UK site last summer. I was going to post it in this thread, but I thought it too disturbing.

There are similar ones all over the web, and only one conclusion can be drawn from these videos: do not, under any circumstances, lend your van to these guys!

vinlar1.jpg (36.53 KiB) Viewed 10864 times

-jim

[Miloki]

"On a search for crash test videos the only one that I could find that was partially applicable is for the 2006 L300. In a head on, it looks like a pretty rough ride for the front seat occupants."
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JpP06lotEuE

Okay, that freaked me out more than a little - almost enough to make me forget about buying a Delica! But then two things occurred to me:

The idea behind offset crash tests is that they simulate the likely collision pattern - driver's side to driver's side - BUT driving a Delica here, their driver's side will hit your passenger side - so you WON'T experience the same ride as the driver dummy in the crash test. Your passenger, on the other hand...

The second thing that occurred to me is that after riding motorcycles for a couple of decades, it doesn't make much sense to start worrying about crash test results - ever notice that nobody bothers to crash test bikes? LOL

So my quest for a Delica continues!

[loki]

also that is a plain l300 no bull bars and pretty low to the ground, I know in my Deli most things I see will wedge under my front end and the forces of the impact will become angular and much less dangerous, but you are right crash tests are for dummies LOL.