@@justinnicholson4906 However it’s also raised several inches from the Legacy, you can see the bumper protrusion from the ram hitting just above the rocker panel on the Outback VS. further up the door on most of the other sedans. I’m no expert with this but that seems like it would just naturally provide an advantage in this scenario.
@@Poopsticle_256 The difference in suspension is only about 2 inches. That cant be accounted for in these tests regardless because these crash test cars are typically bare bones. Aka, they remove the engine, transmission and other components because it doesn't make any sense to destroy them in these tests. But either way, the ride height will be changed due to that. There are certain cost cutting methods that just can't be worked around, making all tests unfair to an extent. Not to mention hitting higher up, especially in a subaru with the locking pegs on the doors, should reduce the impact by using the door as a crumple zone.
@@justinnicholson4906 I suppose so, but when it’s a comparison between multiple different vehicles in a similar size category, it just seems off to me. Also, while hitting higher on the door would likely absorb more energy in an impact, wouldn’t it also increase the intrusion into the cabin, as opposed to essentially hitting the floorpan? Genuine question there
@@Poopsticle_256 Certainly could, but subaru doors act as steel cables when impacted. They have a peg that allows them to become under incredible tension to keep from coming to far into the cabin. The only reason they used the outback here is because it is nearly identical to the legacy, so ir doesn't make sense to use a legacy, and an outback for all of the crash test. Because keep in mind, this is just a few tests out of hundreds.
I did, Noticed how the Hyundai had a better time? its all because Hyundai hired a huge bunch of the Toyota Engineers to help make their brand the premium brand it is now. There might be a day when someone asks you want planet you were born on if you think Toyota is reliable, that's not today but if they keep going down hill they will ruin their reputation and eventually a huge chunk of the market share as a lot of automotive manufactures are looking to regicide them from their throne
The latest crash test regulations have been upgraded. The Malibu platform stays in 2015. It is an older version than other cars. However, when looking at actual accident cases, Malibu drivers say that they are all fine and that Malibu is strong. You can't judge a car just by looking at the iihs video. And Korean cars are for both domestic and for export use, and the external use is manufactured to pass the test in accordance with safety regulations.
Yes the Subaru has a greater ground clearance which means the rocket panel is higher and more leveled with the crash bar of a t-bond vehicle. So it provides a greater resistance. And Subaru does not position Outback as a full size sedan.
Yeah it’s a station wagon. I guess they chose the outback instead of the Legacy because the Outback is more popular, and there are pretty much no other affordable Wagons sold in the US so it makes a more interesting watch.
This is an unfortunate direction that cars are heading. Because of safety and love of SUVs/Trucks, vehicles on the road are getting heavier than 15 years ago. The leads to the National Highway authority to adjust the crash test to suit today's real-life-scenario. In respond, automakers will have to make their cars stronger and thus heavier which leads to ever heavier cars into the future. Then the IIHS will change the crash rules to be even more stringent. This cycle will continue to make vehicles heavier on the road.
@@adhirsh_ I suppose when battery tech improves and can be lighter then we could see cars losing weight again. automaker would love to reduce weight as that will reduce cost.
@@adhirsh_ I prefer low cars because they handle corners better. The IIHS has always slander to the Camry. And this VDO is trying to encourage you to buy the SUVs.
That Subaru should be in a separate video with wagons and SUVs. But we do see that a slightly lift vehicle may do better at this test because more of the frame is in the way. One I am interested to see and may do better is the new Toyota Crown. The lifted sedan may score just as well as the Subaru. Just saying. Even if these sedans aren't doing so well with this new test, personally I'd still get one over a crossover or an SUV due to fuel efficiency, simplicity, practicality, and space (as in, I don't take up space)
😢I just had car accident crashed by BMW X6 by side. My 2016 mini Cooper clubman has way more better than any one of those vehicles in the video. My mini was hit and slipped all most 2-3 meter. But My windows still well, only huge dent on driver side , and both front and left side airbags came out. My mini were diagnosed totally loss. Sad for this. I drove it more than 7 years. So So love my mini Cooper, mini as strong as a tank ❤❤thx !
Hyundai Sonata is one of the most underrated car in the world I don't know why I am driving Sonata since 2019 and I am so so satisfied and happy with sonata 😊
Increasing side safety of cars creates other safety problems because of thickening of pillars. Increased weight leads to worse fuel consumption, already degraded because of emissions controls. Instead, decreasing the threat of modern supersized pickup trucks and SUVs through tax/lincensing or simply enforcing the existing laws against illegal truck modifications would be a better strategy.
@@Sashazur Tried driving a hyundai elantra and the thing has thicker pillars on the sides of the windshield than most 2000’s cars, and the thing is a mid-sized sedan
Mashina olishda eng muhum jihat bu kuzuf tayota camry men oylagandek natija ko'rsata olmagandan afsusdaman videorolik uchun rahmat foydali video bo'ldi xamma uchun❤
Subaru legacy also got a good rating in later testing. Outback and legacy have the exact same platform so it makes sense they performed in the same way
I prefer low cars because they handle corners better. The IIHS has always slander to the Camry. And this VDO is trying to encourage you to buy the SUVs. The Camry has rear passenger airbags and the structure didn't collapse much. How can it be poor?
How come they don’t do tests where they allow a car to hit another car? That’s real life situations, I had a 2007 Toyota Camry and it held up really well. It was the special edition
Не совсем, субару в этот тест не вписывается, это машина с высоким клиренсом, основной удар пришёлся в порог, самую сильную часть авто, соответственно такого сильного удара по стойке не было. Джета также сюда не подходит, здесь должен быть Пассат вместо неё, Джета меньше сравниваемых авто и можно заметить, как удар пришёлся на заднюю стойку автомобиля.
These tests are somewhat deceptive. The battering ram that is suppose to be a car going at 35 mph does not have energy absorbent crumple zones or bumper. Just some solid material. If they wanted more credibility they would have used other cars to hit the parked test car.
IDK that the Camry did any worse than say the Civic. And the Subaru is in a totally different class. So basically all the cars tested here were Acceptable at best, and half fell into the poor category. I think they should rethink their testing strategy (or rather their round-up and how they score). This also sounds like it's some "independent" testing lab, not one like the NHTSA which does their own testing and has their own scoring (although maybe somewhat similar) and the one that most people go by. The issue with these tests is there can be variables that are not accounted for (such as the exact size and weight of the simulated vehicle that hits the car).
This test wasn’t reliable at all. The Subaru Outback is a crossover not a sedan, and all the sedans were in different trim level. There should be fairness in those aspects.
Rankings in my opinion: 1. Subaru (as expected from being a bigger vehicle) 2. VW (German engineering showed to provide more structural integrity to the car) 3. Toyota (lack of structural integrity has accommodated for more damage, but the crash test here shows the dummies could easily walk away) 4. Honda (exterior did not take as much damage, but the dummies were more vulnerable due to less structural integrity to the frame) 5. Hyundai (quite the opposite as the Honda, but is likely the dummies could walk away from the accident, but body, frame, and interior damage make this unlikely) 6. Chevy (extensive body, frame, and interior damage) 7. Nissan (extensive body, frame, and interior damage, and the dummies were a lot more vulnerable due to lack of structural integrity)
The Subaru Outback is believe it or not is built on the same platform as the Subaru Legacy. The only reason why the Outback did better than the Legacy is because It sits a little higher up than its sedan twin, and because of that there was a little less intrusion into the occupant compartment.
All these tests are unrealistic. People continue to die in crashes no matter what vehicle they drive, real crashes are a totally different thing, conditions vary, speed, road conditions, traffic, drivers reactions, drivers reflexes, drivers experience to dangerous situations, so no matter what I continue to buy Toyota, like other people trust others car manufacturers and we’re not thinking about these crash tests, because they are simply STUPID. Truck drivers get killed in a vehicle that may weigh 80,000 pounds and a deer comes across in front of the rig , and driver reacts poorly and flips the truck over, different that being t-boned but it’s in example that nobody is safe on the road where machines and operators interact with each other. Commit yourself to the Lord every day for he appoints the day we DIE, regardless of you driving a Subaru.
@@user-ok3jb4ep2s Subaru Outback - универсал, созданный на базе Subaru Legacy. Однако Subaru Outback предназначен для бездорожья, поэтому у него более высокий дорожный просвет. Однако это не внедорожник, хотя и может так выглядеть.
Hate to say it but the test have the impact zone set way too low. just take a look at those new suv, the top of hood is taller than the whole sedan. Test result changes dramatically with different impact zone.
I've always thought... if the vehicle gets a poor rating, then that manufacturer shouldn't be able to sell that car until it gets a better rating. This is consumer safety we're talking about.
That's according to government agencies. Talking to people on the street, you'll hear people call Altimas/Accords/Camrys as "small" cars, even by small (5'8" 140 lbs) guys.
These tests are not accurate the vehicle used to crash into these vehicles don't have crumple zones like vehicles do to absorb the impact so what do you think is going to happen?
Crying that im trying so hard and working yet I can’t afford a Camry , my dream car . Now im watching a video of someone destroying it . What an unfair world
I just got hit by a SUV Nissan 2016 when I was driving my Toyota Camry 2017 XLE Hybrid, all her airbags got deployed and my not I want to know she got a total lost and now I only wants to know is was a fail of airbags or the car need a worst impact.
