157. Worst Crash Test Ratings of all Time Compilation 7 

This is very misleading. This is the small overlap test. Way to spam with your title

Somebody needs to design a U shaped airbag that deploys in the front driver's side corner for those front-offset crashes

2:24 Kia Soul - Kia takes your soul. (XD)

Ha at 4:20 the Buick encore side curtain airbags be like "have I missed it? Have I missed the battle?"

Who the hell drives into the corner of a building?

For some reason, these are really fascinating.

From 2:00 on the tests shown are the new IIHS "small overlap", impact with only around 20% of the front surface of the car. This test is not conducted by NHTSA. It is an independent non-profit organization conducting a non-recognized test. Very few manufacturers have designed their vehicles to excel at this criteria. But, in the "moderate overlap" of 50% of the front of the vehicle (which is performed by NHTSA), almost ALL cars do exceptionally well. The 20% small overlap test "misses" most of the crash structure of modern cars, allowing the impact to be absorbed much closer to the firewall and hinge pillar of the vehicle.

i feel like you could throw one of jupiter's moons at the iihs crash barrier and it would be fine

This video is rather misleading. The small overlap test the newer cars were subjected to is much, much harder than the 40% overlap test that is usually done. The cars that are shown here are probably much safer than most cars on the road in the US. It just shows that if a crash is unavoidable, the driver should hit the other car/object with as much of his car as possible. The bigger the overlap, the safer it is.

I'm an automotive engineer, we have a structural design built around IIHS'S tests. it passed and everything! we pitched it to 18 car manufacturers, designers and fellow engineers. No one is willing to buy safety these days. Airbags aren't everything.

Mazda CX-9 omg. it's horrible.

The small overlap tests in the later part of the video are much more rigorous than full frontal crash test at the beginning.

I just watched the 2012 Toyota Prius V and it deploys knee airbags, but also deploys the front tire for you legs as well.

People. Find the car, called "cherry amulet" and you'll see what failed crash test really is

Honestly Most of these cars are new Its 2014 and cars are still shit boxes

Just buy a good German car and you should be good

Love this series! I hope cars get better and because of this! :)

The 2013 Kia Soul got good rating in everything except the small overlap. The 2014 soul improved that.

Small overlap crash tests are not what cars are designed for. There is not a single car that passes that test, although the Mitsubishi Mirage (the last one) did quite well. But I think that is a coïncidence.

any Lada would get "suicide machine" rating among those "poor" ones lol

I was thinking about the Fit and Mirage to replace my junk Yaris, I am now thinking Civic.

Just by thinkin logic... how can new cars be more safer in crashes if there was a thinner metal and more plastics on their bodies? Only safety is smart electronics

I see so many here calling BS but the Camera doesn't lie. Can you respond in tenths of a second? No.

I don't really understand the rating... for example, if you see the Buick Encore/Opel Mokka in this video, the passenger cell looks quite horribly deformed after the crash. But if you see Euro NCAP videos, it's way better, and it's got excellent ratings there. Is this just an effect of the smaller overlap or are the tested cars completely different versions, like, say, Indian city cars? Can someone help me out please?

Car is not deadly but the driving style. The same as a person is not criminal but their actions are. Do you understand what that means at all? Or an electric car is not incompetent but some aspect is weaker.

I like how practicly all of these we're cars made in Asia.

I believe the most recent models shown use a test called "10% Overlap" which was previously to 2013-14 an untested crash angle. Most of these manufacturers have gone on to improve crash ratings for this particular test.

I'm surprised with the target they are using. Most accidents are with other vehicles which also have crumples zones like the test car, so why are they crashing cars into a solid object? Make the block big enough, a tank would fail this test.

It should be noted that most of these tests were the new small front overlap test. When many of those vehicles were designed years earlier, the manufacturers had no idea that they would be tested like that, and so many of them failed. Today, manufacturers are making more of an effort to get better results.

2:25 The head completely missed the airbag! Kia= Killed In Accident!!!

Very good and informative video. Thank you for posting it. Intelligent people will do something with it. Stupid people, like some in the comments, will be in denial. You have to be a complete idiot to criticize the test or the poster just because YOUR car does poorly in this test. BEING IN DENIAL DOES NOT MAKE YOU AND YOUR FAMILY SAFER! Learn from the test results and be a safe driver! (some people are so stupid that it's a miracle they reached adulthood)

In the real world, how frequently do collisions like this even occur? I mean striking an immovable object with the front driver side corner.

It's important to remember that IIHS isn't about safety, it's about the insurance industry rating cars as dangerous so they can charge higher premiums for covering them. Every time the auto industry gets cars to the point where they're routinely passing an IIHS test, they change the conditions to make it more severe. First it was increasing the speed from 30 mph to 35 mph. Then it was going from the fixed-barrier no-offset to two-car 40% offset tests. After it proved too expensive to keep using two cars for every test, they switched to using the deformable aluminum barrier with the 40% offset test, which they justified as providing a more accurate simulation of a crash than the rigid fixed barriers used by NHTSA with zero offset. Now they've gone back to rigid fixed barriers with a 10% offset, something that's essentially impossible to protect against because there's just not enough of the width of the car involved to absorb the energy. All in the name of taking more money from the motorist by raising insurance rates.

How often does such an impact really happen? In my eyes propaganda...

Shit I drive a '97 Sephia :/. Well I guess I am screwed then XD

Never crash cars that looks bad as heck.

Is this a collection of videos that just look bad, or is this based on their actual scores?

U FORGOT A FORD F-500 AND CHEVY ASTRO! HOW COULD U!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't think I will ever drive again! I was impressed by the CX-9 it really compacts itself and then flies in a million pieces. Sure wouldn't want my family in that one or any of these in this video.

Scotty kilmer should see this

OK that small overlap crash is brutal.... not sure what CAN pass.

Pop Eyed agreed!

The title isn't right, but the video is interesting....

smashing pumpkins

The most important safety component on any car is the nut behind the wheel.

volvo for lyf

If the driver knows how to drive, the car will be safe. The main problem is that people don't give a shit about safety and my life depending on those selfish idiots is a very frustrating fact.

思います。反対側にハンドルが付いている車を買う。 ナビゲーションシートは荷物にのみ使用します。これが安全策です。 I think. Buy a car with a handle on the other side. The navigation sheet is used for luggage only. This is a safety net.

To be fair, that minor overlapse crash destroys almost anything!!

First,Ford Sierra is for 1980's,and when you put today's 64km/h frontal offset crash test standard to examine this old car,it's not fair....so does BMW E30 or Mercedes W201 also would have bad results!Second,Ford Sierra and Ford Scorpio are two different cars !!

how about NOT crashing your cars into inanimate objects?

That is stupid that the Courier had no airbags. Someone said that the Courier had optional airbags. BULLSHIT!!! Airbag are required BY LAW and MUST be in EVERY vehicle they make!

Dude, you are mixing up tests.... In the old cars´ test, you are showing the "Medium overlap", which is Half a Hood, and for the new cars, you are showing the "Small overlap", which is a quarter of the car´s width. Both are totally different, and before there was not even a Small overlap test...

realy in France we have sellers Who said " idéal jeunes conducteurs" ( Nice for à first car and young drivers ) with goods prices .... ( a car not expansive to buy) ok but if you look the results in crash test you by à rearse !!!!! the price of à life is........ € ???? i prefer my Childrens with good shoes than this car "Nice for a begener" ( look the SAXO crachtest) sorry for my english but you know frenchies are good but clever !!!!!! hum i y me a bad driver but a good daddy ( i hope) kisses for all

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-1hqDSRrPM-k.html 2015 Kia soul is doing much better than this earlier version.

watever it is,drive safe people,betting on money/car to your life is ,,worthless,,,just remember regardless the size of crumple zone or chassis toughness(it can help to save weight),,,even if u remain physically untouched,,,,whiplash(speeds higher than 80kph) could kill you, ,at higher speed,regardless of the car's braking handling performance,,we r human,,our reaction time is too poor,,,even f1 driver keeps practicing before the race,,,we r just some normal road drivers,,,we won't have their skill,,or learn all of sudden,even still,,reaction time,,it determines your fate,,,i know some will argue mercedes will do safety stuffs(like auto steer),,,but tat's just mercedes n not even the e class,,drive carefully,,just know this,,,most of people whom lost their life in accidents don't know it's coming,,they feel totally secure n safe,,till sumthing happen,,maybe due to your fault or others(lower speed,,the better control u have and lower crash speed=crash test result)

This is BS, no car is designed to protect the driver well in a high speed front corner impact like that. What this crash test appears to be simulating is a corner impact with a concrete median at highway speeds. In such a crash, you will be killed instantly no matter what you're driving, and the maker of this compilation just picked the cars he liked least. Were this a legitimate front impact test, all cars (except perhaps the 1996 Hyundai) would've done great. Pick any car out of any drive way, and do this to it, and the result will be the "worst crash test rating of all time." Should manufacturers start engineering for this type of crash? Sure. Should the NHTSA require passing corner impact tests in order to be street legal so the industry shapes up? Sure. Should random RU-vid hacks be making compilations that deliberately make it look like certain cars that people already dislike (and so smashing them horribly will get views) are more dangerous than others in that respect? No. Any car will crumple like a tin can and kill the driver in this situation, whether its a $100k Mercedes or a $10k Geely.

And what is Ford Sierra doing here ? Your are comparing 33 years old car (Sierra was first realeased in 1982) with modern cars ! I had two Fords Sierra (2.3D, 2.0), 2 accidents (none of my fault) and survived both without a scratch. Please do not tell that Sierra was a bad or an unsafe car !

3:43 - Holy shit, that was our rental car when we visited the U.S. last fall and drove from the airport in Newark to Wisconsin and back. Now I get why cars made for the American market feel so hollow - because they are. It's like the passenger cell is part of the crumple zone. Compared to that my 1998 VW Golf MK4 is solid as a rock at the core - and still only had a medium/average rating, I believe.

It's really not fair to call these crash tests the worst of all time. Small overlap tests, which are what were used here from the Audi onward are brutal because they bypass the crumple zone protection of the car that would normally come into play in a full frontal collision, which is what was used in the first few cars. The tests are NOT the same. Not even close. To lump a (at the time of publishing) production model IS250 or a Camry, which are some of the safest cars in existence, into the same video as a 20+ year old Rover 100 (which was already rubbish in 1997) when the crash test methodologies between the two are nothing like eachother, is highly misleading. You as a channel devoted to crash tests should know this.

What speed are these cars doing? Why are the majority of the catastrophic failure collisions conducted against a solid, sharp object? These don't look much like the ANCAP and Euro NCAP tests where we get to see data and the frontal collisions are conducted against partial offset, deformable crash barriers.

This IIHS crash test is very unrealistic, 1/10th of the car (or less) hits non deformable obstacle (90 degrees)...

Limit all cars to 25mph top speed. Think of all the lives that would be saved. If it would save just one life, wouldn't it be worth it? Of course it would.

and this is why I own a Subaru Legacy,2.5i 31 MPG and overall rated good. And priced very nice.

Mazda CX-9 holy shit. It just flattened the front seat. Like holy fuck never getting a Honda, Toyota or Mazda

They always test pickups trucks with empty boxes, imagine you carry 1500 lbs in the back, or a 3 tons fifth wheel or trailer everybody is dead.

B

The poor results caused by the fact that most of the tests are 15% offset crash (aka "small overlap"). This test always shows very poor results with just any car, as the energy passes the engine and the crash bars in the front an goes right into the A-pillar and the front wheel - which is therefore almost always pushed into the cabin, while the A-pillar is collapsing. Check 5:05 to see how small the overlap is and how the crash barrier misses engine block and most of the energy absorbing front structure of the car. Modern cars are optimized to withstand a 40% offset crash and perform fairly well. With the new small overlap crash tests (additionaly used since about 4-5 years) the energy is concentrating on a much smaller area - thus puts about 5 times more stress to the car at the same speed. See here for more: www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/ratings-info/frontal-crash-tests

🥶 I could only manage 3 minutes 32 seconds I couldn't watch anymore

What?Toyota Corolla?Is that Marginal rating?Why you included that in this video?

While I do think there is great value in conducting any type of crash test..this type of crash test can be somewhat misleading. Especially from 2:00+. This offset or staggered crash test was born because this is the way most head on collisions happen. But they are crashing these cars into solid fixed structures with smaller cars being very offset because they are using the same track for all cars. I really get the impression that the conditions are being fudged so that the IIHS can get the results they want. I dont think that most head on collisions are going to be as violent as they want us to think. Jmho

Very misleading content as in the real world cars tend to hit cars not immovable objects, any vehicle produced would fail this test, crumple zones only work when in contact with another crumple zone.

Since the invention of the cell phone, I drive a big lifted 1 ton dually diesel with steel beam reinforcement under the front bumper, and a big winch and brush guard in front of that. Text all you like.

Any best crash test ratings??

4:30 toyota prius :3

Excuse me, but the video has a fake title because there is an optical illusion, that the crashes are to the front, but there are to the side front. So, you don't give us the cars' ratings, you just show us from a back camera a side front crash, that seems front crash and gives us a wrong view.

ANCAP in Australia does not conduct this test and some of the cars rated poor in the overlap test, have been rated 5 stars by ANCAP this overlap test is silly! I mean not everyone is gonna hit trees!

Why is it that the cheep Chevy Cruze had side curtain airbags deploy but the expensive Lexus didn't?

*_why cant they demo a head-on CENTER collision? O_o_*

3:05 is safety too!

I like the merkur xr4ti. Looks like the firewall would end up in the trunk in an accident.

SUVs seem less secure than they feel

Hyundai Tucson: and here's your airbag.... aaaaand it's gone..

I owned a 1994 vw Corrodo, I wrecked it into freeway retaining wall at between 75 and 80 MPH. This was at about a 45 to 60 degree angle with no breaks. It does not get more solid than concrete, and it actually happens a lot. I survived, without major injury and so did everyone else in the car. I literally walked away from it. So did everyone else who was in the car. The cars you see here, its not even 50MPH. When two cars collide in off set head on collisions, its not going to be one car doing 35 into concrete like seen here. Its going to be two cars, weighing more than one ton, both doing 35 or more, probably more which at the point of impact, would be 70 mph. The way these cars are acting in these tests above, it means they are well more than death traps, they are body manglers.

Cochinada de autos modernos todos dicen que son seguros pero se descomponen rápido y la mayoría de estos Crash test son fatales

Car Companies Are All About Luxury But Not Safety

how much does it pay to ride in one of these?? I know some people that would make great test subjects!!!

Many of those were small overlap crash tests, which pretty much all cars failed at some point until they started to improve it in recent times...

Majority are those softy Japanese and Korean cars.Only one German car.

One of those sierras got frank williams paralyzed.

all of the ones after the half way mark are the 10% small overlap test, its a new test and very few have passed it

Must suck to be the dude who has to clean up all of this.

The second test was from the iihs the insurance institute for Hilary safety.

This test is quite demanding but on the road is a situation that can occur and manufacturers must prepare their cars for the worst, it seems to me that implementing what is important is saving lives

10% overlap has always poor results... this are not the worst, this is almost the standard for this test so far...

4:42 That's not the Corolla Axio that's the US market Corolla

Wow I don't get it, why are they doing so poorly?

seems these are not the worst of all time as the title suggests. better luck understanding fact over perception next time.

2:13 And the Camry still kept the #1 spot in America

all 2015 model cars are now passing this overlap test