Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





CR-V vs Escape

1132133135137138278

Comments

  • icvciicvci Posts: 1,031
    Check out the IIHS site. Even after a "marginal" showing in the latest crash test, the CR-V is still rated higher than the Escape.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,252
    "[W]hen side airbags are optional the Institute tests vehicles without this option. If a manufacturer selling optional side airbags requests the Institute to conduct an additional test of a vehicle with this option and agrees to reimburse the cost of the vehicle, a second test is conducted."

    More: NEWS RELEASE

    Steve, Host

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • icvciicvci Posts: 1,031
    What's your point steve?
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,252
    That was in response to your comment: But, Honda didn't send them a CR-V with side bags so, we don't know how it faired.

    Some may wonder why CR-V's with side air bags weren't tested, and the reason is because they aren't standard (except on the EX?) and because Honda didn't pay for a side air bag equipped CR-V to be tested.

    Steve, Host

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • k2rmk2rm Posts: 205
    I see, so as long as the CRV scores better than the escape you are happy. It doesn't matter whether the score is good, acceptable, marginal or poor. As long as it is better than the escape there is no reason to criticize the vehicle? The only reason why I posted that link was to show the incredible difference between vehicles with and without side airbags.
  • icvciicvci Posts: 1,031
    I'm sorry, I guess I didn't see the huge difference you were talking about. My CR-V still has an excellent crash worthiness rating even when it doesn't have side bags. But it does so that's even better. Basically, I was only looking at the CR-V as it related to the Escape (cuz that's what this thread is about) and, it seemed to do quite well(in comparison).

    Personally, I think it's a good idea to make them an option, not everyone wants to pay the extra cash.

    Steve, that explanation was in the original link and I wasn't sure why you highlighted it. Sorry if I came off as being insolent.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,213
    "This is getting to be just like the old AMD/Intel benchmark wars where chips would be modified just to do well on the tests. Little attention was paid to real world performance."

    Right. I posted an article a while back (which everyone apparently ignored) which showed how the structures of SUV's are becoming more rigid so they do well in crash tests (and arguably in real world crashes). This is all fine and dandy, but the increased rigidity is causing more damage to smaller vehicles and the people who are in them. Not fine and dandy.

    An effort is underway to do something about this by lowering the front frame members in SUVs to be more compatible with a car (something which Ford has been doing for years in their larger models by the way).

    This new IIHS test was rumored to prove that a higher bumper will inflict more damage than the NHTSA's lower bumper test. It seems to have worked, although the story I watched about it on TV said that it may be some time before it is perfected.

    "What's your point steve?"

    Ford paid for the extra test and Honda didn't. Apparently they didn't test an EX either. In fact, For was the only company to pay for the extra test according to the article.

    Also of note, the CR-V's side air bags only protect the thorax area. The Forester and Escape side bags protect from the thorax to the head.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,213
    "My CR-V still has an excellent crash worthiness rating even when it doesn't have side bags."

    How is a marginal rating "excellent" all of a sudden?
  • k2rmk2rm Posts: 205
    Baggs, icvci said his had side airbags so most likely it would score better than "marginal." Unfortunately we won't know for sure until one equipped with side airbags is tested.

    I wonder if this test will be only performed on SUV's, seems like the results for cars lower to the ground would be downright scary.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Thanks K2rm,

    Results from that one are very interesting. It's nice to have a "second opinion" on side impacts. The IIHS test seems to give a better indication of what would happen if you get t-boned by a tall vehicle. The NHTSA test uses a barrier that is more in line with a car's height. The tests differ in the size of the driver, as well.

    As for testing with and without airbags, it seems that some here are trying to put a moral spin on the decision to retest. I don't think that is going to lead anywhere. It's pretty obvious why Ford elected to have the Escape retested and it has nothing to do with moral obligations. We have no idea why Honda chose not to retest their vehicles.

    As for the results, we know that the CR-V scored better than the similarly equipped Escape. We do not know how well the CR-V with airbags would fare. Speculation on the subject might be fun, but, in the end, we still won't know.

    Steve - The CR-V EX has standard side airbags. They are an option on the LX model. (You seemed unsure on that.) Baggs is correct that they are a seat-deployed bag intended to protect the body and keep the body upright. However, it does not directly protect the head.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    It's interesting that they included the JD Powers survey results in that press release. Side airbags seem to be gaining in popularity, but there are still few who purchase them as options.

    This matches pretty well with something Honda found in their home market. For a while, they offered a free airbag or free CD player. They were very frustrated to find that an overwhelming majority took the CD player.

    Honda recently released a crash-alert system with the Inspire (a suped-up and loaded version of the US Accord), but the technology costs quite a bit. That story with the CD player vs airbag was one of their concerns with launching the new system.
  • icvciicvci Posts: 1,031
    Baggs, it was excellent before, what changed since the side impact test? Nothing.

    Ford paid for the extra test and Honda didn't. Apparently they didn't test an EX either. In fact, For was the only company to pay for the extra test according to the article.

    They all paid for the test. Ford paid twice.

    An effort is underway to do something about this by lowering the front frame members in SUVs to be more compatible with a car (something which Ford has been doing for years in their larger models by the way).

    Funny, the Excursion bumper was just about eye level when I was driving my Civic.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,252
    Makes sense that they'd test the "base" model, since it's cheaper and the IIHS is paying for the test cars. Or didn't they, Icivi? I'm getting more confused :-) [Edit] The FAQ page at the IIHS says "The Institute buys the vehicles we crash test directly from dealers."

    That said, it appears that the optional side air bags for the basest base CR-V only adds a couple hundred dollars to the price. Seems like cheap insurance.

    Steve, Host

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • icvciicvci Posts: 1,031
    I'll apologize again : )

    The institute buys their vehicles. So I was wrong, they didn't all pay for the test. Ford went the extra mile and shelled out the $2X,000 for the side bag equipped Escape.

    I wonder why Honda didn't. Not enough that I want to hear speculation, I just wonder why they didn't. I'm going to email them and ask.
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Steve is correct on who pays. The IIHS pays for the first round. If you want another, you reimburse them for the costs. I'm not sure if this means they pay for the vehicle, or the whole testing process (including the vehicle).

    Ivcvi - The bumper of the excursion is high, but it has a blocker beam set low and behind the bumper. This prevents it from riding up over a car in the event of a crash. This and other designs have been used by many others. It's called "crash-compatibility". This issue has been a design consideration for many vehicles including the M-Class, MDX, Pilot, and a few others.

    I'm not clear on why Baggs links this to the rigidity of a vehicle's chassis, though. Crash compatibility has more to do with the height of the vehicle's center of mass. They seem like two separate issues to me.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,252
    I think you're thinking of the NHTSA that does the other crash tests. I should check their faq before I stick my foot in it, but I think they get their cars "free." Benefits of being a federal agency I think.

    Meanwhile, no soup for you! ;-)

    [edit] Ah, nope, the NHTSA buys their cars too. Oh well.

    Steve, Host

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • icvciicvci Posts: 1,031
    I spent some time in France two years ago and trucks on their roads looked much friendlier. The bumbers were all really low and all had reflective tape on them. But, those were big trucks, not SUVs. In two weeks I saw one Cherokee.

    And the drivers used those little flashy things to indicate which way they were turning and they used the left lane for passing only. Oh if we were only as considerate as the French. (You won't hear that often.)

    An off topic question. Does anyone else get really ticked when smokers cash their butts out their windows? I hate it. Like they figure it's not littering.
  • odie6lodie6l Hershey, PaPosts: 1,078
    I've actually seen a person dump and entire trash bag worth of butts and ashes onto cars of people that did that. Lets just say he got fined for litterbugging, but so did everyone he did it to...lol.

    Odie
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    scrambling to somehow jumble the IIHS test.. The CRV without side airbags finishes with an overall Marginal rating, the Escape with side air bags finishes with a Good rating.. k2rm Jun 17, 2003 1:05pm Here is the link again Honda fans!
    Also, what happened to the Element?? I thought all Honda products were engineered perfect?? LOL@!! Just like the Pilot that failed here at Edmunds too!!! LOL!! I love the internet.. Nonone can stop you from spreading information!!
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,213
    "I wonder if this test will be only performed on SUV's, seems like the results for cars lower to the ground would be downright scary."

    I was thinking the same thing. I recall reading that they are eventually going to test cars and that this test was really designed to "scare" people (manufacturers included). Or at least open their eyes.

    "I'm not clear on why Baggs links this to the rigidity of a vehicle's chassis, though."

    I don't know why I did that because they don't really have much in common. Sorry about that. The rigidity issue is separate.

    However it is something to be wary of. As more and more vehicles are engineered to perform better in these tests, more and more people could potentially be put at risk.

    icvci,
    I can't stand the flying butts either. Especially when the windows are up, and non-recirc air is on causing the smell to come inside the cabin.

    We should be allowed to throw lit firecrackers at their cars. :)
  • mikefm58mikefm58 Posts: 2,882
    "scrambling to somehow jumble the IIHS test.. The CRV without side airbags finishes with an overall Marginal rating, the Escape with side air bags finishes with a Good rating.. k2rm Jun 17, 2003 1:05pm Here is the link again Honda fans!"

    I believe the test simply pointed out the fact that side impact air bags make a HUGE difference. I fail to see your point in regards to k2rm's post. Did you mean icvci's post at 12:44?
  • icvciicvci Posts: 1,031
    scrambling to somehow jumble the IIHS test.

    How so? Even after the CR-V without sidebags, did marginal (opposed to the Escape which did poor), it still places higher on their list than the Escape. Without a doubt it would be much higher were it tested with the sidebags. I don't think any vehicles rating was actually worsened by the test.

    No scrambling. Just wondering why you're gloating when your vehicle is still pulling up the rear.

    Notice how the Pilot article is news. If it was an Explorer everyone would figure it's supposed to happen and it wouldn't be a story.
  • icvciicvci Posts: 1,031
    I can't stand the flying butts either. Especially when the windows are up, and non-recirc air is on causing the smell to come inside the cabin.

    I hear that! I've got my little girl in the back and my car fills up with the stench of someone else's habit. Yuck! I want to make bumper stickers that say "My World Isn't Your Ashtray" But, I'm sure I'd get death threats. I think a web site with real pictures of smokers littering would be nice. List littering smokers by state, vehicle type, or color or plate number. A Hall of Shame of sorts.

    I've heard of states considering deposits on butts, that's be nice. A nickle a butt.
  • joey2brixjoey2brix Posts: 464
    I think the insurance companies picked on the fastest growing SUV segment: the mini-suv to send a message. Make side curtain air bags standard equipment. Since some models have them, there's no excuse now that all the models are in or going into their second generation redesign.

    The poor Element will always have a problem in a severe side impact: no "B" pillar will always give you a weaker impact point.
  • scnamescname Posts: 296
    The glass easily breaks even before head hits them ,I don't think its a killer.

    The test is conducted at 90 degree angle, impact in the middle of passenger compartment. In any other circumstance I don't think the head will hit the airbag in the Escape so perfectly. The longer horizontal air bag in CRV may povide more benefits in all those other situations IMHO.
  • scnamescname Posts: 296
    the car hit is not traveling forward, how likely is that in the real world. This test is designed by dummies.

    And they disconnected the front air bag.
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,213
    "In any other circumstance I don't think the head will hit the airbag in the Escape so perfectly. The longer horizontal air bag in CRV may povide more benefits in all those other situations IMHO."

    Wait a minute, crash test results might not represent real world situations?

    No way! I can't believe it! Quickly, someone call CR to see what the official ruling is on all of this nonsense?! ;)

    Back on topic...

    I have to disagree because the Escape's side air bag is designed to protect the head. The CR-V's is not.

    How can something that is not able to protect the head actually better at protecting the head than something that is able to protect the head?
  • baggs32baggs32 Posts: 3,213
    "the car hit is not traveling forward, how likely is that in the real world. This test is designed by dummies."

    The car hit in their offset frontal crash is not moving either. It's like hitting a parked car that is butted up against a very rigid wall. How many times do you think that happens in the real world?

    Blame it on the same dummies I guess.

    I think scname is my new best friend around here! :)
  • vrmvrm Posts: 303
    ICVCI wrote: "I wonder why Honda didn't. Not enough that I want to hear speculation, I just wonder why they didn't. I'm going to email them and ask."

    I would not hold my breath waiting for a respones from Honda! They do not have to answer any emails. They are too busy plotting the exponential revenue graph i.e. their vehicles sales are up by double digits this year.

    This is what always puzzled me about Honda: Their vehicles have not been the leaders in safety (except Odyssey). The sheet metal they use is "weak" as compared to the big three in Detroit. Yet buyers seem to disregard all this.

    To make matters worse, Honda has never made safety a design priority (except Odyssey). Maybe this will change with renewed interest in IIHS crash tests and more emails to Honda.

    ICVCI please let us know if you get a response from Honda :)
  • varmintvarmint Posts: 6,326
    Joey2brix - I think the IIHS is sending a message, but keep in mind they have their own agenda. Reducing injury claims is good for their bottom line. Scaring people into buying safety equipment is a profit generating move. They aren't singing [non-permissible content removed]-ba-ya as they slam the dummies with a truck-shaped barrier weighing 3,300 lbs.

    In the case of the CR-V, side airbags are available on every vehicle. People choose not to buy them. I believe that is true for most newer vehicles. Manufacturer offerings are not the issue. Educating the consumer and getting their priorities straight is the issue.
Sign In or Register to comment.