Choices are becoming overwhelming, but the funny thing is we very much went back-to-basics, and got a no-nonsense wagon with AWD. Kind of like Subaru's first, the GL 4WD back in 1973.
Yes, we have been operating on a backup server for a couple of days now. Hopefully, either later today or tomorrow the switchover to the zippy-fast (there I go with the technical terms again) server will take place.
Also, Jeanine/prlady1 has some current requests for anyone interested. You can read about them in Talk to the Press in Smart Shopper.
Forester did improve but not as dramatically as CR-V. I'm sure Honda will play that up in marketing, while neglecting to add that what it is playing is catch-up. CR-V the only one to get "good" ratings for all injury categories, Forester didn't, sorry to say. Forester's much higher rating in bumper testing gives them the even score, I guess.
CR-V is 150 lb. heavier, further emphasizing Forester's superior power-to-weight ratio, even while retaining the last-gen Phase II EJ25. RAV4 the only one lighter, fares much worse in crash tests. Forester truly emphasizes the "S" in "SUV."
I'm waiting for tincup47 to hop in and defend the Freelander's showing. Also waiting to see what the Santa Fe/Tribscape fans will add in that forum.
It'll be funny to see how Honda fans take the news, because they really played down the importance of IIHS' tests after the Marginal rating of the last model.
You can still see the old results. Forester was already Good, and got even better. Honda had plenty, plenty of room for improvement. Of particular concern was the head injury likelihood on the old models.
Any how, it's paradoxical (*) that the Forester has the cheapest-to-repair bumpers yet aces the safety tests as well. All while using lighter aluminum. How'd they do that? :-)
-steve Ouch ! Glad to hear you're on the road to recovery.
-juice On the new bumpers, in a word, engineering. There's an awful lot that could be done that doesn't get done because the bean counters and the marketing guys don't want it that way...
Did you guys catch the bit about the Saturn bumpers being designed specifically to fool the rear pole test ? The put an 8" long piece of energy absorbing foam dead center in the rear bumper, right where the test impact occurs. First go round, the damage appeared to be minimal, but then the IIHS discovered the foam bit, so they repeated the test slightly offset. Second go round resulted in a poor rating. Subaru and Honda use foam across the entire bumper. How much extra does the full length foam cost per unit, really ? I bet it's under $10.
This is the kind of dishonest shenanigans that has become endemic here. Why are the American makes still running around trumpeting repackaged 20 year old engine designs (e.g. Duratec, Northstar), when the Japanese, and to a lesser extent the Europeans have moved beyond them ? OK, I'm generalizing, but am I being unfair ? We hear a lot of whining about gov't regulations and emissions controls and all the rest, but the other guys manage to meet those standards and often exceed them at lower cost.
With the foreign makes now aggressively going after the bread & butter segments, the big TWO had better get their acts together pronto (see Business Week article mentioned a few posts up for details.)
Note to the big TWO, and corporate America in general: Spend more time on product, less time on image and lobbying, and no time on slimy accounting tricks or "clever" shortcuts like the bumper foam above, and most if not all of your problems will go away. Oh, and you might want to dump the 7 and 8 figure salaries top management gets while you're at it... Spend the money on R&D for a change.
I bet it's more like 38 cents for that extra foam. But multiply that by 100,000 units, and the bean counters will choose to save the $38 grand (and give themselves bonuses).
-juice Actually, the foam would cost them a little something - my family's in plastics you may remember, has been for 50 years.
High density, energy absorbing foam is more costly than the more generic kinds, especially in the thicknesses and lenghts that they would require for the bumpers. A 100.000 unit run might sound like a lot, but it really isn't in the plastics business. Think of how many styrofoam cups get produced each year. That's volume.
The molds are also quite expensive, as are the presses, especially the really big ones capable of handling a big mold.
We've made the liners for Riddell football helmets for decades. Relatively small runs, multiple foam types, dye cut in our case to specific sizes and shapes, impact our production costs.
My wife's Saturn SL got rear ended a few years back by an older Mustang 4 cylinder. The Saturn had no damage whatsoever (verified by a decent repair shop). The Mustang, however, had everything smashed in the front - headlights, radiator, bumper.
Granted, it was maybe a 15 mph crash, but I was quite thankful that no one was hurt.
Indeed, avoiding personal injuries is always priority 1.
There are at least 2 differences between your case and the one I mentioned: 1) your wife drives an SL not a Vue, and 2) from your description, the accident your wife was in involved all or most of the bumper.
This is very different from the "post" test, where only a small section of the bumper has to absorb the impact. The shenanigans I mentioned were specifically intended to cheat the post test on the Vue.
15mph is going pretty good. Glad everyone was alright. We got tagged at a stoplight in our Forester, don't know the speeds, but there's no visible damage to our rear bumper.
Yeah, I know they're different instances, vehicles, etc. I just was throwing out an example of a rear end collision. And that perhaps (IMO) at one time Saturn spent the money on a safety item, even on a cheaper vehicle.
In my example, (again IMO) the Ford did what it was designed (I hope at least) - it crumpled. The Saturn didn't have to absorb much since the Ford was the path of least resistance.
I agree about the 'corners' cut to save $$ and fool the test. That just isn't right. Makes you wonder if they only put half a cross bar in the door for the side impact protection.
Enjoyed your last couple of posts re corporate responsbility and Saturn's disingenuousness.
Also would like to say thanks for making a good product. I wore Riddell helmets as a high schooler in the late '70s - early '80s. Wore their cleats too, though I think they've been out of footwear for a number of years now.
I am a great admirer of Subarus and am glad to see the great result they got. The Freelander did well in the area that Land Rover cared most about, Injury Measures. With 3 goods and an acceptable in those categories, they equalled the Subaru results. I think the one thing everyone should see as a positive sign is that all the retested vehicles improved their scores, which indicates that the manufacturers are taking safety seriously. The low speed tests have always penalized vehicles with rear mounted spares, so single out the more off-road worthy vehicles for bad publicity. Freelander had to mount it on the tailgate to maintain a decent departure angle for off-roading. It is also much more convenient if you get a flat tire off-road. But overall, LRNA was satisfied with the results, but I'm sure they intend to improve in the next test..
Papa Bear: had you tried my stuffing-the-cups idea? ;-)
Someone plowed into my Forester, and I was OK, as was Hadji, who was properly restrained. Coincidentally, it was a Saturn. I lost my bumper and got a ding on the quarter panel, but she lost the whole front end.
But that's typical, the car behind will take the brunt of the damage, especially when you take dive/squat into consideration.
I think the Euros are just as far ahead in engine tech as the Japanese. Heck, so is Ford for that matter, but only in Europe. European and Asian customers are a more demanding lot with regard to such technology, while Americans favor ride comfort and safety in mass. So why bother updating the tech over here, or offering what is available elsewhere, when there is more profit to be had with the old stuff? No one complains, right? Isn't hurting sales either, eh? I mean, where is Subaru's VVT here in the States? Where is its 6-speed? Its dual range? Its manually controled center diff? Its Sportshift? (Ok ok, we finally get that!)
American car buying priorities don't favor engine and drivetrain technology, or suspension tech either. And what is available is marketed as premium, even though it is available as standard on the same cars in other parts of the world. But our cup holders hold a super big gulp.......
can you post the names and their respective guesses? To all...if you are willing to pass my resume around (IT), please send an email to bluerex02@yahoo.com Thanks Serge(on the dole!)
Slowly coming around. Beginning to drive Beth crazy as I want to 'help' around the house, and I think she would prefer that I either go back to bed, or leave and go to work!!!
Edmunds server is in worse shape than I am at the moment!! ;-)
I watched the 'basher' results last night on the news. It is indeed good to see that all are improving with time. But it does make you wonder as to how much design is going into specifically passing the test, as opposed to a true overall improvement.
I understand that the market demand is a big factor. Super big gulps lol ! And sure, Subaru for one could do more, although they're way ahead of the American makes selling in their class in general. But on the other hand, Honda and Toyota are moving their engine tech into the mainstream, heck, even the Sienna gets VVT now. Subaru won't be far behind.
Also, it's not true that consumers drive innovation. Manufacturers do. Consumers generally are not positioned to grasp what the possiblities are (unless they're offered in other markets). They merely vote with their dollars among the choices presented. So it's up to the manufacturers to decide what product combinations to offer. A lot of times they get it wrong or base their decisions on dubious, or disingenious, reasoning, as in the examples I mentioned.
Too often the manufacturers want to hide behind "market factors". In practice, they have a great deal of influence over those factors, if not outright control. Who decided to reposition the lowly pick-up truck as a macho status symbol anyway ? IMHO, the reality is that American management is still too short-sighted, too image-conscious, too self-centered ("where's MY parachute") and not steeped in their product to the same extent as the Japanese and Europeans.
"Engineering doesn't matter." "Perception is reality." But engineering does matter when the market conditions change and suddenly you can't meet demand because your 20 years behind. Then they'll wail about "unfair competition" and shift the lobbying efforts into high gear. It doesn't have to be that way.
And all this time I thought it was our incoming line being slow!
Being "old school", I find VVT to be fascinating engineering. I tend to believe most companies use these as Marketing advantages and pretty soon, companies can become non-players if they don't keep up. Think of all the neat things that are now common, ie. 4 valves/cylinder, disc brakes, 5 speed MT(now moving toward 6), etc. However, there are times where it's all marketing hype with no real world value.
jfl - I think you can distinguish between "innovation" and "novelty". You're right, a lot of stuff is used to gain marketing advantage that has little real world impact on the "user experience", be it with cars or electronics or what have you. These are the things I toss in the "novelty" pot. Ho hum, another gimmick... yawn...
Innovations are improvements that change what a product can deliver to the user. VVT, in at least some of it's various incarnations, has the potential to let you "have your cake and eat it too" - gobs of low-end pull without sacrificing high-end power, decent gas mileage and good emissions to boot. Unfortunately, innovation is a lot harder to come by...
all - Sorry to everybody for my growling tone here lately. I'll lighten it up a bit
Thanks for listening, and the appreciation on the football helmets, too !
Base on how our HelpDesk works at work... "I'll be there in a minute" = Don't expect to see them until 3-4 hours later. "We'll have it done in half and hour" = It'll be working in 3 days. Since "soon" is not definitive, my guess would be "Gee I don't know, but any day now". Oh, "day" = 24hrs. divided by 30mins. times 3days.
Ken says July 15, 8 lbs even Bob says July 4, 8 lbs 8 oz Serge says July 12, 8 lbs 5 oz Jim says July 17, 7 lbs 14 oz Paul H. July 18, 7 lbs 11 oz Kate, July 14, 8 lbs 10 oz Dave, July 7 9 lbs Cali Doug, July 18, 8 lbs 2 oz Papa Bear, July 20, 8 lbs 3 oz James July 19, 7 lbs 8 oz Dennis July 17, 8 lbs 4 oz Karen, July 20, 6 lbs 5 oz Mark July 15, 6 lbs 4 oz Lark July 12, 6lbs 10oz Hutch July 31, 236 lbsB Frank July 17, 7 lbs 3 oz
On tech - I'd like to see Direct Injection technology become more popular. Better emissions, efficiency, and specific output. AVCS also, of course. But in this market, it's almost more government driven (i.e. CAFE) than anything else.
By the way, I just got a call from the Hamster Protection Society, a subsidiary of that Bunny Club that made Subaru ban the hare ads, and they're asking us to cease and desist on any and all criticism of the poor critter. And they don't want to see Edmunds release him or her into the wild, either! ;-)
Comments
Choices are becoming overwhelming, but the funny thing is we very much went back-to-basics, and got a no-nonsense wagon with AWD. Kind of like Subaru's first, the GL 4WD back in 1973.
-juice
Ross
Bob
..Mike
Also, Jeanine/prlady1 has some current requests for anyone interested. You can read about them in Talk to the Press in Smart Shopper.
Oh yeah...nice quote, juice! :-)
CR-V is 150 lb. heavier, further emphasizing Forester's superior power-to-weight ratio, even while retaining the last-gen Phase II EJ25. RAV4 the only one lighter, fares much worse in crash tests. Forester truly emphasizes the "S" in "SUV."
I'm waiting for tincup47 to hop in and defend the Freelander's showing. Also waiting to see what the Santa Fe/Tribscape fans will add in that forum.
Ed
You can still see the old results. Forester was already Good, and got even better. Honda had plenty, plenty of room for improvement. Of particular concern was the head injury likelihood on the old models.
Any how, it's paradoxical (*) that the Forester has the cheapest-to-repair bumpers yet aces the safety tests as well. All while using lighter aluminum. How'd they do that? :-)
-juice
* Proper usage, Mike and Loosh?
-juice On the new bumpers, in a word, engineering. There's an awful lot that could be done that doesn't get done because the bean counters and the marketing guys don't want it that way...
Did you guys catch the bit about the Saturn bumpers being designed specifically to fool the rear pole test ? The put an 8" long piece of energy absorbing foam dead center in the rear bumper, right where the test impact occurs. First go round, the damage appeared to be minimal, but then the IIHS discovered the foam bit, so they repeated the test slightly offset. Second go round resulted in a poor rating. Subaru and Honda use foam across the entire bumper. How much extra does the full length foam cost per unit, really ? I bet it's under $10.
This is the kind of dishonest shenanigans that has become endemic here. Why are the American makes still running around trumpeting repackaged 20 year old engine designs (e.g. Duratec, Northstar), when the Japanese, and to a lesser extent the Europeans have moved beyond them ? OK, I'm generalizing, but am I being unfair ? We hear a lot of whining about gov't regulations and emissions controls and all the rest, but the other guys manage to meet those standards and often exceed them at lower cost.
With the foreign makes now aggressively going after the bread & butter segments, the big TWO had better get their acts together pronto (see Business Week article mentioned a few posts up for details.)
Note to the big TWO, and corporate America in general: Spend more time on product, less time on image and lobbying, and no time on slimy accounting tricks or "clever" shortcuts like the bumper foam above, and most if not all of your problems will go away. Oh, and you might want to dump the 7 and 8 figure salaries top management gets while you're at it... Spend the money on R&D for a change.
-juice
High density, energy absorbing foam is more costly than the more generic kinds, especially in the thicknesses and lenghts that they would require for the bumpers. A 100.000 unit run might sound like a lot, but it really isn't in the plastics business. Think of how many styrofoam cups get produced each year. That's volume.
The molds are also quite expensive, as are the presses, especially the really big ones capable of handling a big mold.
We've made the liners for Riddell football helmets for decades. Relatively small runs, multiple foam types, dye cut in our case to specific sizes and shapes, impact our production costs.
Better yet - let them wear those helmets! ;-)
-juice
Granted, it was maybe a 15 mph crash, but I was quite thankful that no one was hurt.
-Brian (papabear)
There are at least 2 differences between your case and the one I mentioned: 1) your wife drives an SL not a Vue, and 2) from your description, the accident your wife was in involved all or most of the bumper.
This is very different from the "post" test, where only a small section of the bumper has to absorb the impact. The shenanigans I mentioned were specifically intended to cheat the post test on the Vue.
15mph is going pretty good. Glad everyone was alright. We got tagged at a stoplight in our Forester, don't know the speeds, but there's no visible damage to our rear bumper.
In my example, (again IMO) the Ford did what it was designed (I hope at least) - it crumpled. The Saturn didn't have to absorb much since the Ford was the path of least resistance.
I agree about the 'corners' cut to save $$ and fool the test. That just isn't right. Makes you wonder if they only put half a cross bar in the door for the side impact protection.
-Brian
Brian-
when you mentioned that, I actually wondered even worst. They might have painted "cross bars" on the doors and there you have it, cross bars.
-Dave
Also would like to say thanks for making a good product. I wore Riddell helmets as a high schooler in the late '70s - early '80s. Wore their cleats too, though I think they've been out of footwear for a number of years now.
Ed
Someone plowed into my Forester, and I was OK, as was Hadji, who was properly restrained. Coincidentally, it was a Saturn. I lost my bumper and got a ding on the quarter panel, but she lost the whole front end.
But that's typical, the car behind will take the brunt of the damage, especially when you take dive/squat into consideration.
The wife is 1cm dialated, for those in the pool.
-juice
Ed
American car buying priorities don't favor engine and drivetrain technology, or suspension tech either. And what is available is marketed as premium, even though it is available as standard on the same cars in other parts of the world. But our cup holders hold a super big gulp.......
KarenS/Host
*Restraining from disclosing my personal labor horror stories.*
To all...if you are willing to pass my resume around (IT), please send an email to bluerex02@yahoo.com
Thanks
Serge(on the dole!)
Ross
Edmunds server is in worse shape than I am at the moment!! ;-)
I watched the 'basher' results last night on the news. It is indeed good to see that all are improving with time. But it does make you wonder as to how much design is going into specifically passing the test, as opposed to a true overall improvement.
Steve
Also, it's not true that consumers drive innovation. Manufacturers do. Consumers generally are not positioned to grasp what the possiblities are (unless they're offered in other markets). They merely vote with their dollars among the choices presented. So it's up to the manufacturers to decide what product combinations to offer. A lot of times they get it wrong or base their decisions on dubious, or disingenious, reasoning, as in the examples I mentioned.
Too often the manufacturers want to hide behind "market factors". In practice, they have a great deal of influence over those factors, if not outright control. Who decided to reposition the lowly pick-up truck as a macho status symbol anyway ? IMHO, the reality is that American management is still too short-sighted, too image-conscious, too self-centered ("where's MY parachute") and not steeped in their product to the same extent as the Japanese and Europeans.
"Engineering doesn't matter." "Perception is reality." But engineering does matter when the market conditions change and suddenly you can't meet demand because your 20 years behind. Then they'll wail about "unfair competition" and shift the lobbying efforts into high gear. It doesn't have to be that way.
I think it is doing a hampster version of a worm impression...
No legs. ;-)
-Dave
Bob
My OB runs the AutoX faster than it.
-Dave
bit
bit
-Frank P.
Ross
Being "old school", I find VVT to be fascinating engineering. I tend to believe most companies use these as Marketing advantages and pretty soon, companies can become non-players if they don't keep up. Think of all the neat things that are now common, ie. 4 valves/cylinder, disc brakes, 5 speed MT(now moving toward 6), etc.
However, there are times where it's all marketing hype with no real world value.
My $0.02.
Innovations are improvements that change what a product can deliver to the user. VVT, in at least some of it's various incarnations, has the potential to let you "have your cake and eat it too" - gobs of low-end pull without sacrificing high-end power, decent gas mileage and good emissions to boot. Unfortunately, innovation is a lot harder to come by...
all - Sorry to everybody for my growling tone here lately. I'll lighten it up a bit
Thanks for listening, and the appreciation on the football helmets, too !
Base on how our HelpDesk works at work...
"I'll be there in a minute" = Don't expect to see them until 3-4 hours later.
"We'll have it done in half and hour" = It'll be working in 3 days.
Since "soon" is not definitive, my guess would be "Gee I don't know, but any day now".
Oh, "day" = 24hrs. divided by 30mins. times 3days.
-Dave
Bob says July 4, 8 lbs 8 oz
Serge says July 12, 8 lbs 5 oz
Jim says July 17, 7 lbs 14 oz
Paul H. July 18, 7 lbs 11 oz
Kate, July 14, 8 lbs 10 oz
Dave, July 7 9 lbs
Cali Doug, July 18, 8 lbs 2 oz
Papa Bear, July 20, 8 lbs 3 oz
James July 19, 7 lbs 8 oz
Dennis July 17, 8 lbs 4 oz
Karen, July 20, 6 lbs 5 oz
Mark July 15, 6 lbs 4 oz
Lark July 12, 6lbs 10oz
Hutch July 31, 236 lbsB
Frank July 17, 7 lbs 3 oz
On tech - I'd like to see Direct Injection technology become more popular. Better emissions, efficiency, and specific output. AVCS also, of course. But in this market, it's almost more government driven (i.e. CAFE) than anything else.
By the way, I just got a call from the Hamster Protection Society, a subsidiary of that Bunny Club that made Subaru ban the hare ads, and they're asking us to cease and desist on any and all criticism of the poor critter. And they don't want to see Edmunds release him or her into the wild, either! ;-)
-juice
Ignorance IS bliss!
Cheers!
Paul
-Dave
;-)
Ross
Well ain't that a funny bunny, Ross.
-juice
BTW, Edmunds seems to have hired new rodents to run the wheel.
Ross
Bob
-juice
-Dave
The Fast One:
The Insecure One:
The know-it-all that delegates: