In the Sept. issue of Popular Science magazine there is an article on the full size pickup crash test results. It compares the Insureance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) ,who's results we all heard on nightline or whatever news program that was, against the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) aka government crash test. The results of NHTSA were exactly opposite of IIHS. There are alot of differences in the test a few are NHTSA does full head on collision, 35mph, and tests damage on the dummies. IIHS does offset frontal, 40mph, and tests structual damage only. Have you ever heard of a 5 star gonverment rating? Ford f-150 is the only truck who received it. Personally to me the IIHS test seems to be more realistic because of the offset impact but they don't analyze the data on the crash test dummies like NHTSA. It's about a 3 page article and pretty interesting. The governmet test can be found atwww.nhtsa.gov

 

Yes, unfortunately the Government tests are very unrealistic as most accidents do not involve an impact where the force is spread evenly along the entire front of the vehicle. This is the easiest test to design for. The Governments tests are designed to not offend the domestic car manufacturers and only indicate relative performance in an unreal test. The 5 star rating is nothing more than an advertising plum. Don't bet your family's safety on it.

More realistically the front of a vehicle in a head on crash will only partially impact. The force is much greater on the impact area and is more difficult to design for. Ford knows this of course and is well able to design vehicles which can pass the offset test. They don't however because it eats into their profit margin. They figure most F150 buyers are too loyal or "just plain stupid" to care about a test like this.

The IIHS offset test better represents real world crashes and many vehicles (including heavy ones) can pass it. This test is also is used in Europe rather than the watered down US Govt. test.

After seeing the results at this site. http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2001/pr060401.htm I will not get into another F150!

 

Bud995,

Very interesting. A new member pops up, and makes one of his first posts one that states he will never get another F150....

Anyway, I believe there are flaws in both tests, especially the Insurance Institute. I have been in or seen about half a dozen head on collisions in my lifetime (I was never at fault or driving in any of them). The problem with the Institute's test (and why IT is the one that is completely unrealistic) is that a partial-head on collision does not occur while the vehicle is chained and locked to a track underneath that forces it to travel in a straight line both before, DURING, and after the collision. If you have ever seen a partial-head on, you will notice that the cars are not left in the middle of the intersection like with a full-head on, but that they have "spun out" significantly. This "spinning out" absorbs significant amounts of energy that are directed towards the structural integrity of the truck in the Institute's test.

 

New member, but it does not change the fact the F150 crumbled like a tin can. The IIHS test is a very good representation of what may happen in a test and points out how little protection the F150 will provide in an accident. (Including the late deploying airbag). And yes, you are correct that when two vehicles collide there are many variables which no test can simulate, but the fact the F150 crushed its occupants does not speak well of its design.

Remember than many vehicles pass the IIHS test, and Ford is quick to use IIHS results in advertising when it suits them. Ford has access to world class engineering but choose not to use it when designing the F150 instead opting for a cheap design.

Fortunately I joined this forum and saw the results before I made the mistake of purchasing the F150. I will be going elsewhere and riding in a vehicle that I don't have to make excuses for.

CYA


QUOTE]Originally posted by cpadpl


Bud995,

Very interesting. A new member pops up, and makes one of his first posts one that states he will never get another F150....

Anyway, I believe there are flaws ... (Stuff deleted.) [/QUOTE]

 

bud995,

If indeed you are interested in the online community here, even if you are not an owner, I do not mean to discourage you from taking part here. I was just "noticing" coincidences, which may or may not mean something. All too often, someone pops up out of the blue and says the equivalent of "Ford sucks" or "I used Mobil 1 and now I get 10,000 miles to the gallon," and you have to wonder about the motivation behind the post. Enough said about that.

My point was I don't think any test can be completely conclusive. Just because Ford did badly in one test does not mean that you can conclusively state that their design is "cheap". As for your knowledge about their intentionally obviating a world-class design for a cheaper one, I would like to know if you read or heard that from Ford or whether you surmised it. And, I might add, in addition to being only one test, it was performed ONE time. Something no one seems to make mention of is that the T*yota had its WHEEL come off during the crash. What kind of safe design is that? I've never heard or seen of a wheel coming off in head on or partial head-on collision.

All I'm saying is one test, performed one time does not sign and seal the deal regarding which is the safest vehicle to travel in. And do you think that Ford is the only one who is quick to us IIHS
stats for its own good if it suited them? It seems like you're mind was made up BEFORE this whole crash test thing that you had something against Ford.

Anyway, no "obnoxiousnous" intended if you are indeed not a clandestine "Ford basher". Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and mine differs from yours. I'm glad you were able to get use out of this site before you "made the mistake of buying a Ford" (since you consider it a dangerous vehicle). And for heaven's sake, don't think about getting an Explorer...

 

Yea both tests suck and are unrealistic. I want to see them line a Ford and a Toyota up head to head, and see who comes out on top, or better yet an F150 against one of those foriegn compact cars. I would take the ford any day. Oh and bud995 quit your whining!

 

Tell everybody how the ford supercrew did there Mr. Bud995.

It did great...thats how!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Cpddpl, I am not responding in this forum because I am a Ford basher. I was seriously considering the F150 as I have owned several Ford's in the last 20 years. After being in in low speed accident in a Honda (which I and my daughter were hurt) I bought a Ford Taurus to replace it because it was one of the safest cars on the road at the time.

It is upsetting that Ford would build a vehicle which would completely fail in this test. I say again in agreement with you that no test will simulate any actual crash, but the IIHS is a very good predictor on how it will behave. Yes Ford is a world class designer, but the F150 does not behave in a world class manner. The only reason I can see for Ford in not putting a safety cage in the F150 is for money reasons. They probably felt the target market for the F150 is not concerned so they left out this unseen cost. Certainly the responses I have seen in this forum reflect that link of thinking as many F150 owners here don't seem bothered by the F150's sorry performance. Of course I don't have any proof of this, but it would not be the first time that Ford made this type of decision.

I am surprised at how many on this Forum will dismiss the IIHS test as being non-relevant, unfair, and unrepresentive and will defend Ford at all costs. I hope they are never in an accident in it. Yes the Toyota lost a wheel, but its passengers could walk away from the crash. I would rather face that scenario rather than being crushed and trapped in the F150.

 

Please note that Ford out-performed all of the other three in full head-on collisions... basically, that means that if you're going to hit someone, make sure it's head-on, not off-set.

Personally, I'll take my Ford over any smaller vehicle... it's simple physics. And, like they said above, pit the tundra against my F-150 and let's see who comes out on top.

-Joe-

 

I don't want this to happen to me. I dont know that it would but it is a frightful senario.

There is however a vast difference in damage with the NHTSA test.



A 40mph offset crash with an immovable object is not a common real world crash. Logic dictates that such a collision would likely be the result of driver error or equipment failure. There are all sorts of things to run into on our roads and highways. There are of course trees to run into as well as other vehicles that may cross the center line and collide but that will not playout like this IIHS crash. The IIHS crash however could be compared with hitting bridge support beams which is something I have seen happen so I don't think the test is completely flawed.

I was in a very serious accident in my '97 F-150 2WD Reg Cab last winter and the only injury I suffered was a sprained thumb when the steering wheel was jerked out of my hands by the impact. The truck did what it was designed to and absorbed the force of the impact. When I knew I was going to be hit, I closed my eyes right before the impact but was suprised when I didn't feel anything. It was very loud but I was simply moved in my seat a bit and I opened my eyes as I slid about 100ft down into a ditch.

My Truck:


I think that the Ford engineers can and now will build an F-150 that provides fuller occupant protection. I also feel that they should.

 

Only the extended cab 4door model failed that test. The Super Crew with its additional pillars passed with flying colors as did the standard cab. Bud995 should do some more research before trolling for responses.

 

Looks like your truck held up well. Just 2 ?'s for ya what did you hit and how fast were you going when you hit.

 

Norm, where did you find that info? I looked on the IIHS site and only found the mention of the extended cab test. Wouldn't suprise me if they didn't make other models tested so obvious...
Just because somebody purports to be organized for the good and safety of the public doesn't mean they wont' skew or color facts...

I remember a certain major network news program "helping" certain vehicles "blow up" (they didn't mention their assistance when they reported that the vehicle tended to explode). I also remember the almighty Consumer Reports actually trying to flip a Suzuki jeep, and everyone there on the Consumer Reports footage cheered when it was finally flipped, and were shouting "you did it, you did it."

 

I was hit by a Geo Tracker. Not sure how fast she was going. I was going somewhere between 30-40mph whe she hit me. It was a right angle impact,90 degree, not head on. She had lost control and crossed over from the southbound side of the interstate and ended up on the northbound side where I was. She crossed 3 lanes of traffic and hit me.

 

Until the crash test was public, I was blissfully ignorant of several 'features' of my last two Fords (both F-150's):

-The bumpers are ornamental

-There are no fender liners (unless you really think that poorly-fitting plastic under the front fender would do ANYTHING structurally) -- to help protect my legs in an offset collision.

-The rear bumper assembly damages easily (~$850 for a 'touch-n-go' dispute at an intersection)

-There is nothing behind the bed sides to prevent anything other than a kid on a bike from penetrating the side if T-boned.

These trucks are, indeed, BIG -- but they're sure not Strong.

What I DO get from being up higher than most vehicles is Visibility (able to see what the driver ahead sees -- when the driver ahead sees it), and the promise that the front end of my opponent will lower than my seat if he hits me -- or under my frame if I hit him.

Let the games begin.