Cadillac SRX First Generation Forum - 2004 - 2009 Discussion, SRX-Unsafe? in Cadillac SRX Forums; Originally Posted by Sal Collaziano
Why should a luxury car's bumper be less effective than otherwise? Why should there be ...
Why should a luxury car's bumper be less effective than otherwise? Why should there be $4000.00 damage to a luxury car's bumper and fenders as opposed to another car's bumper and fenders - of the same impact?
They are just trying to save money where they can. Have you seen the new Chryslers, and some Fords, they use styrofoam under a simple piece of soft moulded plastic bumper. That news report simply stated that the bumpers are just "cheap." Many older cars had great bumpers (our Pontiac) that had little gas charged shocks built into the actual bumper to absorb impact, then they just pop out again! I was rear-ended 10 years ago, hard enough to shake me up pretty good, and NO damage. They tested the bumpers at a "fast walking pace" which is apparently the average speed for a traffic "fender bender" and many new cars failed the test! I think the reason for the failures are the new crumple zones. Once a dealer told me about the new Malibus and how just a little rear impact, for eg, caused a ripple right down alongside the entire length of the car, both sides! Damage=car totalled! Cars are now designed to completely absord the impact so the occupant doesn't! And IMO, this contributes to higher insurance costs, and a larger repair bill for you and me.
Well, if it comes down to me or the car absorbing the energy, I'll sacrifice the car. You are absolutely right about energy absorption. The car is designed to absorb the energy of a collision to protect the occupants.
The old style steel bumpers with the shock absorbers "absorbed" some energy, but mostly they slowed down the transfer of momentum to the car body. They worked, but they had one big problem. They were HEAVY!
Styrofoam, egg-crate plastics & other modern marvels do a better energy absorption job and weigh a whole lot less (better gas mileage). But they are the sacrificial lambs in a collision.
the car being a absorber should be a last resort, the bumper should take a 5-10mph crash without the whole thing crumpling
the comment about insurance companies charging more to insure because it costs more to fix. this is partly true, but fixing the car is nothing $$$ wise to fixing a person in a huge crash, id take a safer but more expensive car to fix, money is only money after all.
You poor lost souls in these test it is not an issue so much of the amount of damage that is done but rather how much it cost to fix what has been done. The SRX is not crumpling up in the front but to replace the bumper and such is expensive because the parts are and it is a luxury car.
The SRX may have less damage but may cost more that a substantially damage Cavalier because of parts and etc. will not be that high for a Cavalier.
The quantity of production also has a lot to do with the price of parts. The less something is made, the more it usually costs. A bumper cover for a Cavalier that has a production of, say 150,000 should cost less than a cover for a Seville that had a yearly production of 24,000.
What kills me about those tests is the one where they purposely back into a pole. :disappoin Then make NO MENTION that the SRX has a standard back-up sensor so this won't likely ever happen (unlike the competition).
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has the SRX as a best pic. I even saw a special on the news about mid sized suv safety the SRX was best of 5 or 6 different competitors. As for the DeVille check mor closlye the late 2003 release has new crash test ratings of 4 stars frontal passenger and driver. I am aware of the 1 and 3 star for it earlier, which was shameful. I am glad though that it is not true anymore of the DeVille.