How about those pickup crash test results???????

picturethis

I don't consider the Tundra an import because it is built here in the USA by American workers. And don't think for one second that all of the material is from Japan either. And Toyota has plenty of engineers that are Americans who have graduated from American universities. As someone else pointed out, there is alot of "sharing" now days (for example: the Toyota Corolla and the Chevrolet Prism are built at the same factory).
I do think the Tundra is slightly more refined than the Ford F150 or the Sierra/Silverado, but it is also more expensive for what you get (4-wheel disc brakes are not even standard on the Tundra).
I own a Mazda B-series truck right now (1990) and it has served well, but it is time to upgrade to a full-size truck. There are only three to choose from but it is tough! They all have their pros and cons. I have ruled-out the Ram because the old design is being replaced, so that leaves the F150, Sierra (I prefer it to the Silverado on appearance), and the Tundra (I know it is smaller, but it is still a considerable upgrade from my Mazda and would be plenty of truck for me). I don't think this test will affect my decision much, but maybe Ford will offer a great deal to keep sales up.

mbaudibest1

so the test is a scam because the trucks werent crashed with dirt or other junk in the back? i suppose, then, that the minivan crash test scores should be disgarded because they didnt test vans with childsized dummies in the back seats? that' what minivans are designed for, right? every 40 mile /hr crash test should be tested in the way that the particular car is designed for. so you want them to ignore consistency and controlled variables that can be kept constant between all vehicles? your whole point about performing an offset frontal crash test with junk in the payloads is a pretty weak statement. all the impact force in a FRONTAL crash test is centered around the front half of the vehicle. it wont matter what's in the back in a frontal collision. the best thing to do if you are carrying a payload is to tie the stuff down. things will fly around and hit people in a collision no matter what make of truck if they arent secured extremely well.

ryanbab

thats not my truck

I read that on another board

he said his bodyshop guy told him 16-20K to fix

chevytruck_fan

I thought you had a black truck but thought I got mixed up

picture this, by the epa I don't think the tundra is considered domestic because of its low us canadian component %

redsilverado

glad you liked my point of view, but being that you only own a car, I doubt that what you are saying is of any use to people who drive pickups(except those who will argue for the sake of being anal)and it shows that what was said was way over your head. if you don't see my point of view to your liking, then feel free to ignore it. no one person here is a spokesman that everyone is going to agree with. let us know about that important dash monitor though, cause that is real important to all car owners. also let me point out(in case you have trouble reading) that this topic is about trucks, not minivans, so why would we want to get into testing minivans? I guess I just don't understand the foreign car owners these days.

wkand

Many of you have scoffed at the Toyota's superior so-called kinematics rating and have chosen instead to bank on the injury results (Chevy, no injuries, Toyota, right leg). Allow me to make a case for the kinematics.

First of all, one thing I think we'd all agree upon is that every crash is unique and the best you can do when testing is to try to create a realistic simulation. Given that, you have to be careful how you interpret the results when extrapolating to real life crashes. This is why the institute puts so much stock in the COMBINATION of maintaining the integrity of the safety cage AND maintaining control of the driver/passenger's movement during the crash. One without the other is a formula for disaster. To illustrate, consider two extreme examples:

1. In this example, let's assume the safety cage is perfectly maintained during a crash, but the driver is not belted. When the crash occurs, the driver's body will maintain the velocity both he and the truck were travelling just prior to the crash until something stops him (dash, door, whatever). Since the driver's motion is completely out of control, it's a matter of chance as to how badly he will be injured. Maybe he'll be lucky enough to run smack into the air bag, maybe not.

2. In this example, let's assume that the restraint system keeps the driver's movement to a minimum and under control during the crash, but that the cabin fails and basically smashes the driver. The best restraint system in the world wouldn't make a difference here.

These two extreme examples illustrate the importance that both maintaining the integrity of the safety cage and controlling the driver's movement play in preventing injuries during a crash.

Now on to the test results for the Chevy and the Tundra. The Chevy achieved poor results in both a) maintaining the integrity of the safety cage and b) the kinematics (or maintaining control of driver movement). The Toyota, on the other hand, achieved good results in both of these categories. While it is true that in this particular test, the Chevy Dummie was not injured, you need to keep in mind that one important purpose of the test is to help determine how the vehicle will fair in similar real-world crashes.

Because the Chevy's cabin was not as well maintained and the driver's movement was not well controlled, I would contend that similar real-world crashes are likely to produce a greater number of injuries in the Chevy than in the Toyota and that the Chevy injuries will be less predictable due to the more random movement of the driver during the crash.

Put another way, if this test were performed thirty separate times for both the Chevy and Tundra (with slightly varying speeds, slightly different offsets, etc.), I'd expect the Tundra dummy to fair consistently well even if that meant occasionally coming out with a bum leg whereas I'd expect the Chevy Dummie's injuries to be more frequent and more random.

Kinematics may be a funny word to some of you Chevy owners, but don't worry, you won't be able to say it correctly anyway after your head flies out the driver's side window during a crash.

quadrunner500

Tundra:
INJURY MEASURES: RIGHT LEG/FOOT MARGINAL Measures taken from the head and chest indicate low risk of injury. However, forces on the right tibia indicate the possibility of lower leg injury.

Silverado:
INJURY MEASURES: GOOD Measures taken from the head, chest, and both legs indicate low risk of injury. Head acceleration from the shoulder belt housing contact was low.

'Nuff said.

redsilverado

i think the intelligent members here see what your last post says to the "T". it's the "SEDAN" dwellers who can't comprehend what this is really about. of course, 1or2 tundra owners see some sort of victory(hmmm) in this test but i don't think they count.

abc246

Well put. Silverado no injuries, Tundra injuries. Funny how the Tundra poeple are not posting numbers from the govs test. Where the Tundra rated lowest.

I am surprised at how much poeple do not like items made in the USA. I have found that the USA marking means good quality.

Kinematics? Are you guys kidding? Leave the numbers to poeple that know how to study them. Don't fool yourself, use the color codes.

abc246

The pictures tell the story. I doubt that the firewall is pushed in on the Chevy Celebrity. The car looks like it has no damage past the front wheel. The drivers side looks like no damage at all. I am surprised she broke her leg. It did a great job, not even considering the height difference. That car had very good crash scores on the govs test.

If it were a head on collision, things would be much different. I bet she would have been killed. It is scary, but we are driving things that are very heavy and can kill people more easily than a car.

wkand

quad sites one of the four rated categories and ignores the other three (which in, by the way, Chevy scored marginal, poor, and poor respectively).

You must be the guy in the story who after receiving a bag of dung as a Christmas present concluded that there was a Pony around the corner.

In any case, you won't have to worry about YOUR head falling out the side window during a crash since it's obviously stuck firmly in the sand.

redsilverado

insults? words of a loser there pal.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAA

wkand

Damn, Red! A little sensitive aren't you? (please don't take that as an insult)

I think my previous post was mild by comparison to others in this group, but in the interest of PC, below is a re-posting without the sarcasm.

*****
quad sites one of the four rated categories and ignores the other three (which in, by the way, Chevy scored marginal, poor, and poor respectively).

I don't believe it is prudent to focus solely on the one category that was favorable to the Chevy and ignore all of the rest.

bamatundra

Well said. I honestly do not know what owning a pickup has to do with interpreting crash test results. Some people are sensitive about their vehicles rating poorly and are obviously very defensive about it.

It is obvious to me that the people who designed and ran the test are best able to interpret the results. The Toyota rated GOOD and the Chev rated Marginal. 'Nuff said.

quadrunner500

>I honestly do not know what owning a pickup has to do with interpreting crash test results.<

I agree with you! That's why you should leave the editorial (as I have) to the experts, who rate Tundra MARGINAL, and Silverado GOOD on injury protection.

'Nuff said.

eric2001

Is that all the manufacturers could improve on each vehicle's safety, AND SHOULD DO SO. I was hit a few months back and walked away. I hope that none of you have to find out first hand what your vehicle will or won't do for you in an accident.

Next question; Why didn't they test these vehicles with a full passenger compartment. I would like to know if the other passengers were safe. I am not the only one in my truck 100% of the time. Many people do use them for their families, and that does matter!
-Eric

wkand

There is something to be said for going through life ignoring any information that is negative or contrary to one's own opinion. I suspect it does reduce stress.

I would have loved to see how Quad would have defended the ol' side impact exploding GM truck models during the years '73 to '86. Probably would have homed in on and repeatedly posted something like:

"Both the driver and passengers were cooked evenly and thoroughly in the GM trucks. -Nuff said"

What does nuff mean anyway? I had assumed that it was your abbreviation for enough, but since you've already closed at least three of your postings this way and continue to spew forth.....

By the way, does anyone know when the $1000.00 certificates will be sent to side impact exploding truck owners? Just curious.

ryanbab

no talk about the "real world" crash i posted about?

Pics and all

How would the tundra have faired?

Ryan

wkand

I have no idea how the Tundra would have faired; I've seen no side impact test data and it's impossible to extrapolate the offset data to such an extreme.

I think side impact are the worst kind of crash when the impact is on the same side as the driver or as the passenger when there is one. Your truck looks pretty good, but I doubt a passenger would have faired as well as you did. There is just not enough material/room to absorb the energy between the person and the other car in same side collisions.

ryanbab

Thats not my truck

I got all the info from another board

ryanbab

you can talk and talk and talk about these crash tests but when a real world crash comes up and there is info and pics no one wants to say anything

redsilverado

last time i checked, this topic was covering the recent crash test involving the latest model pickups, not the '73-'86 chevy. are these old trucks being brought up because someone is having a hard time with the fact that the tundra was marginal and the chevy rated good? it would be ok with me to bring it up, as long as we can talk about the tundra's deficiencies during those years as well,Dohh, just remembered, toyota wasn't making the tundra back then. so my next question is, who is toyota copying?

chevytruck_fan

no matter what you anti-americans try to say about the 73-87 trucks, they were the longest lasting trucks on the road in the time period, and part of the reason GM can claim longest lasting trucks on the road because 60% of 73-87 Chevy trucks are still on the road, and you can see it by your daily commute, you will see tons of these a day as faily commuters-their great trucks, and the amount of explosions while bad was not that much higher than the rest of the trucks.

PF_Flyer

Pointing towards a single "real world" crash as evidence really doesn't prove anything one way or ther other. To make a valid comparison, you would have to look at identical, not similar, crashes involving other vehicles. And that's just not possible, because in the "real world" it never happens the same way twice. You can't make a valid comparison that way. So you do the EXACT same thing to different vehicles and you see what happens.

I have to agree with the opinion that what's going on here is that some people aren't happy with the results of the test and are looking for ways to find a result that fits their view. Hopefully the manufacturers are looking at the test results with an eye towards improving on areas that need improvement. I DOUBT that they're sitting around saying, "the test was no good because it's not the 'real world'"...

PF Flyer

Host

Pickups & News & Views Message Boards

obyone

cause it's not a NHTSA test. Rather performed by an unrecognized source of unsubstantiated information. The press exposure was minimal. Don't think it will significantly change the dismal sales of the Tundra nor affect Ford more than what Firestone has already done. Simply put, people could care less about the results and will proceed to buy what they want.

If there was any ballyhoo, it was limited to discussion in this corner of the web...nothing more.

obyone

It is evidence of what I've posted. I rest my case.

redsilverado

a whole lot now is it? there are more sedan owners in here than pickup owners.

BWAHAHAHAHAAA

PF_Flyer

In the interest of keeping this thing contained, and since it's being discussed in another topic (Tundra vs Big 3), I'm going to close this one down. No sense in duplicating things...

PF Flyer

Host

Pickups & News & Views Message Boards