Saabnet.com: General BB Post: Re: IIHS has been in business since 1959!

General Bulletin Board

Search:

[Main General Bulletin Board | Post Followup | FAQ ] [ Prev by Date ] [ Next by Date ] Member Login / Signup [Most Recently Edited Saabnet.com Photo Galleries]
Re: IIHS has been in business since 1959!
Posted by James (more from James) on Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:17:42
In Reply to: IIHS has been in business since 1959!, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 05:37:52

yes, the last decade means 2000's.

IIHS introduced the SUV side impact test around 2002 or 2003 iirc. It was after the 9-3ss was designed, if not released. the 9-3ss was the first car to get 5 stars in it (iirc).

SAAB recognized the SUV-car compatibility problem in the early to mid 1990's + started testing how well the 9000 held up. It didn't! They fed this back to engineering. Hence 9-5.

For the 1990's the 9000 was an extremely safe car (note the repeated Folksam awards).

Safety had been of marginal concern to most manufacturers prior to the media hype generated by IIHS marketing it's results starting around 2000. Prior to that, the primary objective was to pass government tests, in many cases, as "barely" as possible to keep costs down. The big 3 fought raising roof strength standards (while Saab and Volvo exceeded the standards by a huge margin for ages)... a high school friend of mine was killed in a rollover from a roof collapse... roll a saab + that simply does not happen! Anyway, the number of cup holders + rolling/folding seats (that ejected passengers out the rear door) used to be far more important in marketing than safety ratings + that has changed to some degree... very few ads don't have "5 star safety!!" somewhere in there today...

The seat belt was of course another big step in safety, but that was quite a ways back... you will note that the big 3 were very slow to adopt shoulder belts + headrests in the back (certainly compared to european manufacturers)... nevermind all the brouhaha over the laws mandating seatbelt use...

The air bag was mandated in the early 1990's. Sure. A government regulation. Twin airbags not long after (1994). Actual safety and safety features are not entirely correlated.

Perhaps it's partly my perception of the situation, but my impression is that there has been an increased focus on safety starting in the past decade for many brands, if nothing more than because the test results have become so much more visible to the general public.

James...

posted by 216.59.228...

Posts in this Thread:

Cellphones and driving, Noel , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 06:28:12
- Re: Cellphones and driving, Craig, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:40:55
  - Re: Cellphones and driving, Justin VanAbrahams, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 15:32:40
    - Then ban all cops and military pilots, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 22:10:55
      - Ever drive with a cop?, nwas, Sun, 18 Dec 2011 09:47:20
        Where do you think the military pilots get their, Reality, Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:36:09
        Well, some of it anyway..., Noel , Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:36:29
        Agree! I've seen cops do stuff that'd get, Noel , Sun, 18 Dec 2011 11:40:39
      - Not too impressed cops/pilots - but speaking of Greek, AeroBaron, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 10:46:03
        The guy should be banned!, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:37:53
        Yep on nanny, and su stuff es mi stuff NM, AeroBaron, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:55:55
      - I hold a radiotelephone operator's license, JohnA , Fri, 16 Dec 2011 10:43:48
        Do you honestly believe that a summer job skill set, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:42:54
        truck drivers/taxi drivers etc don't need licensing, JohnA , Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:56:30
        Re: truck drivers/taxi drivers etc don't need licensing, Reality, Sat, 17 Dec 2011 07:09:06
        use of cellphone, JohnA , Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:36:50
        Gullible fools still needed in the Jury box, Reality, Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:56:54
- Here's a Study with N > 100,000,000, Reality, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:50:54
  - Dewey wins!, nwas, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:02:52
    - That's the exact position of the wannabe Nannies, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 22:18:56
      - Wrong, nwas, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:05:36
        Yes, You Are Wrong!, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:36:25
        Missing the point...., plap, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:43:21
        Yes, You Are Missing the Point, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 12:05:02
        Sorry, but you're still missing the point, nwas, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:06:31
        You have no legal right to be protected from anything, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:50:30
        Stop arguing for the sake of arguing!, Noel , Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:04:39
        Very good additional points, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:25:56
        Yawn, nwas, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:12:46
        Now you are speaking the truth, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:39:50
  - or maybe cars have gotten safer in the past decade, or, AeroEd , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 19:21:35
    - Don't ban those movies, Reality, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:11:46
      - Correlation does not imply causation, AdamB , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 02:38:42
        Re: Correlation does not imply causation, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 05:54:29
        Re: Correlation does not imply causation, AdamB , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:22:31
        Re: Correlation does not imply causation, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 22:41:43
        automotive safety..., James, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 03:54:21
        IIHS has been in business since 1959!, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 05:37:52
        Re: IIHS has been in business since 1959!, James, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:17:42
        Side tracking aside, you have it backwards again, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:20:31
        Re: Side tracking aside, you have it backwards again, James, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 13:22:37
        Re: Side tracking aside, you have it backwards again, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:31:00
        Re: Side tracking aside, you have it backwards again, James, Sat, 17 Dec 2011 06:02:55
        Re: Side tracking aside, you have it backwards again, Reality, Sat, 17 Dec 2011 07:33:57
        Re: Side tracking aside, you have it backwards again, James, Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:44:56
        Please do not mischaracterise my POV, Reality, Sat, 17 Dec 2011 21:44:42
        I apologize..., James, Sun, 18 Dec 2011 07:35:34
        Re: I apologize..., Reality, Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:48:37
        Accident fatalities, Noel , Sun, 18 Dec 2011 05:18:25
        Re: Accident fatalities, Reality, Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:56:36
        Re: Correlation does not imply causation, TML, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 06:05:11
        One more important assumption, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:14:47
        Re: One more important assumption, TML, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:04:22
        Re: One more important assumption, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:13:33
        Even a test like that assumes, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:07:28
        Re: Even a test like that assumes, TML, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:54:58
        Re: Even a test like that assumes, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:34:21
        once again, jeff in MD , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:47:03
        File that 3rd possiblity under "insigificant", Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:58:52
        Re: File that 3rd possiblity under "insigificant", James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:43:34
        Do you honestly believe, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:03:12
        Re: Do you honestly believe, James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:17:14
        Re: Even a test like that assumes, James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:12:08
        Thanks for pointing out Adeptation/Adaptation, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:47:39
        study link, jeff in MD , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:16:54
        another link, James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:37:26
        Re: Even a test like that assumes, jeff in MD , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 07:31:12
        Agree, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:53:20
        I'm not conviced there was a study to begin with, Noel , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:21:20
        need to do research, jeff in MD , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:24:46
        They all have the wrong assumption, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:20:32
        Re: They all have the wrong assumption, James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:50:11
        Re: They all have the wrong assumption, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:20:07
        Re: They all have the wrong assumption, James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:28:58
        Re: They all have the wrong assumption, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 22:03:24
        Cell phones not the only distraction!, Noel , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:37:07
        Exactly! What will they ban next?, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:50:45
        I kind of agree with you..., James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:02:20
        Re: I kind of agree with you..., Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 22:27:25
        Re: I kind of agree with you..., James, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 04:06:54
        "It's not the end of the world", Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 05:48:17
        I don't disagree..., James, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:36:07
        By that logic, Reality, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:51:31
        Re: Cell phones not the only distraction!, jeff in MD , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:47:56
        Texting probably the worst thing..., Noel , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:36:27
        round and around, jeff in MD , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:43:31
        Re: round and around, Noel , Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:53:54
        Re: round and around, Real, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 22:23:17
        dialing!, James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:55:37
        Voice Dialing and Voice to Text, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:10:25
- doesn't matter anyway, ryan, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 12:42:45
  - Texting while driving up 50 per cent in U.S., JohnA , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:01:15
    - Yet vehicular fatality did not increase, Reality, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:55:46
      - BTW, I don't smoke at all, Reality, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 19:01:47
        Re: BTW, I don't smoke at all, Ultimated , Thu, 15 Dec 2011 04:59:56
        Re: BTW, I don't smoke at all, Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 05:57:59
    - keep me AWAY from these people! n/m, JohnA , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:01:53
- Re: Cellphones and driving, JohnA , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 06:36:40
  - Re: Cellphones and driving, JerseySaab , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 07:48:41
    - I suspect the research is less than accurate., Noel , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:16:47
      - Re: I suspect the research is less than accurate., Judge Edo, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:56:22
      - Re: I suspect the research is less than accurate., Simon S, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 14:46:13
      - The truth - do your own test, nwas, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:15:28
        Exactly the opposite for me, Reality, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:06:33
        maybe you're a "supertasker"..., James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:28:56
        Hey, stop inflating my ego :-), Reality, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:27:29
        Re: Exactly the opposite for me, James, Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:24:13
      - Re: I suspect the research is less than accurate., JerseySaab , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:36:11
        Re: I suspect the research is less than accurate., JohnA , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 12:39:06
        Re: I suspect the research is less than accurate., JerseySaab , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:31:03
        Re: I suspect the research is less than accurate., JohnA , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:45:45
    - Re: Cellphones and driving, JohnA , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 07:56:05
      - Re: Cellphones and driving, JerseySaab , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 07:57:39
        Re: Cellphones and driving, Erik919kt , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:56:46
        Re: Cellphones and driving, TML, Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:33:06
        Re: Cellphones and driving, JerseySaab , Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:46:24

Members can receive an alert when someone posts in this thread.

Post a Followup

Prev by Date: Or in parking lot next to a fitness center., dmz789qqq, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 07:28:47
Next by Date: I don't disagree..., James, Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:36:07
Main General Bulletin Board

This is a moderated bulletin board - Posting is a privilege, not a right. Unsolicited commercial postings are not allowed (no Spam). Please, no For Sale or Wanted postings, SERIOUSLY. Classifieds are to be listed in The Saab Network Classifieds pages. This is a problem solving forum for over 250,000 Saab owners, so expect to see problems discussed here even though our cars are generally very reliable. This is not an anything goes type of forum. Saabnet.com has been a moderated forum since 1988. For usage guidelines, see the Saabnet.com Mission and Purpose Page. Please remember that you are not anonymous. Site Donations
Your address is: 54.234.42.16 - Using CCBot/2.0 - Logged.

Site Members do not see red text instructions, green links, and bottom of the page banners.
Click here to see all the Site Membership Benefits!

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2012 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.