I have to laugh when I read this junk. :nutty:
Toyota third place in the "Performance" category? Behind Porsche and BMW?
"Oh, Cindy...what a powerful Camry you drive! 180hp ... WOW! The ultimate performance car! I want one!"
Link: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/news/2009/01/2009-car-brand-perceptions-survey/top-five-in-brand-perception/brand-perceptions-top-5.htm
SAFETY
Volvo 71%
Ford 19
Honda 18
Toyota 16
Mercedes-Benz 15
Mercedes in 5th place? Mercedes blows Ford, Honda and Toyota away and is definitely even ahead of Volvo in terms of safety. Sure, Volvo is living off that perception but what the fuck are Ford, Honda and Toyota doing there? :nutty:
QUALITY
Toyota 32%
Honda 24
Mercedes-Benz 23
Lexus 20
Cadillac 17
Cool. Mercedes above Lexus. I ain't complaining! :thumbsup: :wtf:
VALUE
Honda 29%
Toyota 27
Kia 27
Hyundai 20
Ford 19
PERFORMANCE
Porsche 29%
BMW 28
Toyota 22
Chevrolet 20
Ford 17
What the fuck is Toyota doing in 3rd place!? What friggin performance cars do they even offer? Oh wait, the FWD Camry V6 and Toyota Avalon! DAMN!!! :nutty:
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY/GREEN
Toyota 48%
Honda 31
Chevrolet 11
Ford 11
GMC 11
This has to be a joke, right? GMC, Ford and Chevrolet!? When I think of these brands I think that they sell and produce more SUVs than sedans, especially GMC! Who the fuck was surveyed here? GMC employees? :huh:
DESIGN/STYLE
Lexus 32%
Cadillac 26
Jaguar 23
BMW 21
Mercedes-Benz 19
So we know that GMC is green and Lexus is very stylish. Got it. :rolleyes:
TECHNOLOGY/INNOVATION
Toyota 34%
Cadillac 22
Lexus 22
Honda 21
BMW 19
First off, Toyota and Lexus are the same damn thing. Second, they're not very innovative. I don't know what they're doing up so high. Not sure about Cadillac but Honda seems to be a bit sleepy these days in that department. BMW can work. Mercedes-Benz is missing. :nutty:
Honestly, this has to be joke, right? GMC = green? :wtf:
You're just mad that Honda/Toyota beat MB in everything but one category and that MB didn't even place in the top 3 in any category. :lol:
Quote from: thecarnut on January 23, 2009, 04:45:02 AM
You're just mad that Honda/Toyota beat MB in everything but one category and that MB didn't even place in the top 3 in any category. :lol:
Let's be realistic here.
Mercedes-Benz RAPES Toyota in safety. That is a FACT. No other brand has really done more for safety than MB. I am not claiming this because I like MB, it's a fact. I can back up my claims too.
Mercedes-Benz has generally more favorable designs than Lexus. Lexus = sleeping pill. There is nothing stylish about their mish-mash design accumulations from different brands. A Lexus ES stylish? An LX or GX stylish? Sorry, I have to LOL at that. :nutty:
Mercedes-Benz also has many cars that are "environmentally friendly" if you want to use that term, they're just not sold in the US, so I can understand that perception therefore. But how does Toyota place so high despite selling tons of gas-guzzling SUVs? What's the difference between Toyota and Mercedes in that regard? They both sell a lot of gas-guzzlers in the US. Oh wait, Toyota has that little piece of crap called the Prius! All is forgiven! They can sell a 12 mpg V8 Landcruiser but if they sell a Prius it's all cool, bro. :ohyeah:
Next, Toyota and Lexus are innovative? That has to be one of the most retarded perceptions ever. BMW, Mercedes, heck even Citroen or Renault have a lot of innovations. I guess these brands don't go around advertising this - unlike Toyota and Lexus, which do this all the time (even here in Europe). Let me tell you something. Nobody here in Europe really cares if Lexus talks about how "they invented hybrids and how clean and good for the environment they are". Most people here can think a little deeper and they'll figure out that this is nothing but marketing BS.
Toyota sporty? Behind BMW and Porsche? I don't need to say anything here.
Sucks that the people surveyed here have no fucking clue about cars. That PISSES ME off. That's why I am mad. :thumbsup:
At least it was amusing. I mean GMC is environmentally friendly, right? My neighbor drives a Prius! What a moron! I am going to go to the next GMC dealership and purchase a big block V8 Yukon Denali and I won't feel guilty about it. Why? It's good for the environment. Consumer Reports says so! :ohyeah:
You're overestimating the average car shopper. :huh:
People are so misinformed about cars, and I'm sure dealerships aren't helping either, with their shading advertising, trying to move cars out the door.
This just shows how far perception is from reality. Kind of neat to see, actually. Looks like M-B needs to reinvent its ad campaign, because I'd guess 90% of the results were directly dependent on the ads the respondent had recently seen.
Quote from: MaxPower on January 23, 2009, 05:19:59 AM
This just shows how far perception is from reality.
+20
MBs blow, whats the difference between a Lexus ES and a Benz E-Class? A couple dozen thousand bucks if you ask me
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 04:40:10 AM
I have to laugh when I read this junk. :nutty:
Jeez, Fanboy calm down. :rolleyes:
All Consumer Reports is doing is publishing the results of a survey. If you don't like the results of the survey don't blame CR. In fact, don't blame the poll repondents. Blame Mercedes Benz. If their cars and trucks are truely the pinnacle of automotive excellence you believe them to be there are only a couple of reasons why that isn't shown in the survey.
1. You are in the minority in your general perceptions and the majority or respondents had good reason to believe otherwise.
2. If Mercedes Benz makes products that are the leaders in those categiories they obviously have failed to convince the motoring public of that fact.
In any case don't blame the respondents to the survey. If they had said MB was the leader in those categories they would be smart, savvy consumers and we couldn't be having this conversation, Right?
Some of the categories I even agree with. Tell me Wimmer, how would you rate the American Market in terms of "green" car companies. Remember, Mercedes doesn't have the same line-up over here.
MB can build the best cars in the world but, if nobody perceives that, MB is a failure.
The only part that worries me is the relative sportiness of Toyota. People actually think they're sporty? Compared to what?
A Camry that can hit 60 mph in under 6 seconds isn't exactly the pinnacle of sportiness. Maybe it has to do with NASCAR.
Quote from: Byteme on January 23, 2009, 08:43:58 AM
Jeez, Fanboy calm down. :rolleyes:
All Consumer Reports is doing is publishing the results of a survey. If you don't like the results of the survey don't blame CR. In fact, don't blame the poll repondents. Blame Mercedes Benz. If their cars and trucks are truely the pinnacle of automotive excellence you believe them to be there are only a couple of reasons why that isn't shown in the survey.
1. You are in the minority in your general perceptions and the majority or respondents had good reason to believe otherwise.
2. If Mercedes Benz makes products that are the leaders in those categiories they obviously have failed to convince the motoring public of that fact.
In any case don't blame the respondents to the survey. If they had said MB was the leader in those categories they would be smart, savvy consumers and we couldn't be having this conversation, Right?
Like I said, I am not taking this survey very seriously but it does bother me that consumers think certain things about certain brands.
Please explain to me for example how Toyota is considered a sporty brand right after Porsche or BMW? They sell ZERO sports cars anymore. Doesn't make sense. Did a bunch of Supra fanboys participate in this survey or something? :huh:
Next, please tell me how Toyota can even be considered in the "environmentally friendly" category when they sell V8 SUVs and pickups that get piss poor fuel economy. Worse, how does GMC make it into that same category. Do you know what I noticed? Every manufacturer in the "green category" offers at least one or several hybrid models. That's a pretty pathetic way to rank a brand in terms of environmental friendliness. There's nothing green about a Cadillac Escalade hybrid of a GMC Yukon Denali hybrid.
:rolleyes:
Quote from: Tave on January 23, 2009, 08:55:32 AM
Some of the categories I even agree with. Tell me Wimmer, how would you rate the American Market in terms of "green" car companies. Remember, Mercedes doesn't have the same line-up over here.
Yes, I know that. MB sells fuel-inefficient models in the US.
So does Toyota (and Lexus). Looks like the "hybrid hype" is working though. Toyota sells thousands of SUVs and pickups with big, inefficient V6 or V8 engines and yet they are perceived as green because of the Prius? :nutty:
Hell, why not throw in Mercedes there as well since we can make a similar argument. MB sells tons of gas-guzzling cars in the US but they have a couple of relatively efficient diesel models like the E-, ML-, GL- and R- BlueTec. Probably because consumers still associate diesels with "dirty". Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if one of the retards who participated in this survey told me that a 12 mpg V8 Landcruiser is more "green" than a GL320 CDI. :nutty: :thumbsup:
Quote from: the Teuton on January 23, 2009, 09:35:46 AM
The only part that worries me is the relative sportiness of Toyota. People actually think they're sporty? Compared to what?
A Camry that can hit 60 mph in under 6 seconds isn't exactly the pinnacle of sportiness. Maybe it has to do with NASCAR.
I think we have to ask ourselves why didn't Ferrari and Lamborghini make the list, as after all, they tower over Porsche and BMW in the performance department. The key IMO is as you state: "relative" sportiness.
Toyota has a penchant for putting their 270 hp 3.5L V6 in anything from the Rav4 to the Highlander, and the new 5.7L V8 has reoriented a lot expectations for full-size trucks and SUVs. They're not hot rods, but they are generally at the top or share the top spot (at least for acceleration) in their respective classes. I don't think any bread-n-butter automaker puts as much horsepower in as many models as Toyota.
As to M-B? They carry the cache of luxury in the US; not performance, not quality, not value, not safety, not technology. Luxury. If M-B wants to extend beyond that station, that's M-B's responsibility, not the public's.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 09:44:44 AM
So does Toyota (and Lexus). Looks like the "hybrid hype" is working though. Toyota sells thousands of SUVs and pickups with big, inefficient V6 or V8 engines and yet they are perceived as green because of the Prius? :nutty:
Toyota's best-selling models over here are the 4-banger Corolla and Camry.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 09:41:22 AM
Like I said, I am not taking this survey very seriously but it does bother me that consumers think certain things about certain brands.
I would disagree with some of the results also, but in the greater scheme of things who cares and so what.
What I find amusing is how you work your self up into a lather everytime someone says something even slightly negative about Mercedes Benz products. In the final analysis they are an average to slightly better than average car greatly overpriced and not very good looking (styling is subjective).
Quote from: Tave on January 23, 2009, 09:46:26 AM
Toyota's best-selling models over here are the 4-banger Corolla and Camry.
Yes, but they also sell a lot of gas-guzzling SUVs and pickups. Why are these left out of the equation?
I don't know the figures but I am willing to bet that the best-selling Mercedes' in the US are the C-Classes, which are relatively efficient bar the C63 AMG.
If you want theoretical "green car brands" then we should look at Suzuki, Daihatsu, Fiat...brands that build relatively small and efficient cars. :huh:
Daihatsu and Fiat aren't even available in the US.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 09:50:16 AM
Yes, but they also sell a lot of gas-guzzling SUVs and pickups. Why are these left out of the equation?
Because every major player in the American market offers a gas-guzzling SUV or pickup. :nutty:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 09:50:16 AM
Yes, but they also sell a lot of gas-guzzling SUVs and pickups. Why are these left out of the equation?
Not really. Only the Tundra and Sequoia can really be considered gas guzzlers, but they are way down in the their respective classes in terms of sales volume.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 09:50:16 AM
Yes, but they also sell a lot of gas-guzzling SUVs and pickups. Why are these left out of the equation?
Toyota has done a commendable job of convincing North Americans that they are a company that is all about fuel efficiency.
Quote from: Byteme on January 23, 2009, 09:49:11 AM
What I find amusing is how you work your self up into a lather everytime someone says something even slightly negative about Mercedes Benz products.
Do I get worked up everytime somebody says something bad about MB? No I don't. :rolleyes:
I only get annoyed when somebody makes a claim about Mercedes which is totally not true and which I can back up with facts. I am after all an MB fan and read a lot about them. I know the history and a lot of their achievements. When clueless people ignore this and go ahead and make a stupid claim, that's when I get pissed.
Like this whole BS issue about Toyotas being safer than Mercedes'. Sorry, but that pisses me off. Toyota might get their four or five stars in a crash test but they're designed to pass here. Mercedes-Benz has a whole division dedicated to safety, a safety engineering team that strives to build the safest cars on the planet. Toyota is a complete joke in this regard.
Quote from: Tave on January 23, 2009, 09:52:18 AM
Daihatsu and Fiat aren't even available in the US.
Yes, but these brands, especially Daihatsu, have generally built well-behaved cars with small and efficient engines.
Quote from: Tave on January 23, 2009, 09:52:18 AMBecause every major player in the American market offers a gas-guzzling SUV or pickup. :nutty:
So we therefore can call Chevy, Ford and GMC green? Got it. :rolleyes:
Quote from: GoCougs on January 23, 2009, 09:53:54 AM
Not really. Only the Tundra and Sequoia can really be considered gas guzzlers, but they are way down in the their respective classes in terms of sales volume.
Still. These cars exist in the Toyota lineup and should be used in the equation.
I suppose all that Prius hype is helping too. :lockedup:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 09:54:36 AM
Do I get worked up everytime somebody says something bad about MB? No I don't. :rolleyes:
I only get annoyed when somebody makes a claim about Mercedes which is totally not true and which I can back up with facts. I am after all an MB fan and read a lot about them. I know the history and a lot of their achievements. When clueless people ignore this and go ahead and make a stupid claim, that's when I get pissed.
Like this whole BS issue about Toyotas being safer than Mercedes'. Sorry, but that pisses me off. Toyota might get their four or five stars in a crash test but they're designed to pass here. Mercedes-Benz has a whole division dedicated to safety, a safety engineering team that strives to build the safest cars on the planet. Toyota is a complete joke in this regard.
Maybe Mercedes is wasting money on inefficient projects that aren't returning the money to them that are put into the projects?
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 23, 2009, 09:54:13 AM
Toyota has done a commendable job of convincing North Americans that they are a company that is all about fuel efficiency.
Toyota does everything right, marketing-wise. That's why they supposedly have the best quality products with powerful yet efficient engines and they're safe for the environment.
Honestly, let's troll it up for another brand. Subaru's US plant (Indiana that it shares with the Camry) is the most environmentally clean plant in the nation. I don't hear anyone clamoring about that one, though.
BWAHAHA. So Wimmer is pissed off that Diahatsu and Fiat weren't included in a Consumer Reports survey of American buyers...
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 23, 2009, 09:54:13 AM
Toyota has done a commendable job of convincing North Americans that they are a company that is all about fuel efficiency.
Toyota, well Lexus (same thing), is trying to trick us Europeans into believing their hybrids are so green and efficient. I love how they shove down our throats how the LS600h is the "most fuel efficient car in its class". What class?
The LS600h is not worthy of being compared to an Audi A8 W12 BMW 760Li, much less the S600. Nobody buying a V12 Audi, BMW or Benz A8/7/S is going to give a damn about fuel economy. The way I see it, Lexus simply used the poor fuel economy of these three cars to make the fuel economy of the LS600h "look good".
Like I said, Wimmer, Toyota is a marketing giant.
Quote from: Tave on January 23, 2009, 09:58:55 AM
BWAHAHA. So Wimmer is pissed off that Diahatsu and Fiat weren't included in a Consumer Reports survey of American buyers...
:rolleyes:
I never said they should be rated by American buyers, I said if you want "efficient brands", brands that have continually built small and efficient cars, then Fiat, Suzuki and Daihatsu for example would fit in almost immediately, especially Suzuki and Daihatsu (Fiat had some pretty sporty and fuel-inefficient executive cars in the 1970s and 1980s).
Your point is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. :huh:
Quote from: Tave on January 23, 2009, 10:03:57 AM
Your point is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. :huh:
Of course it is irrelevant if these brands are not sold there (except Suzuki). Come to think of it, ask these Consumer Report participants what they think about Suzuki and they will probably ask, "Suzi who?" :mask:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 09:56:33 AM
Still. These cars exist in the Toyota lineup and should be used in the equation.
I suppose all that Prius hype is helping too. :lockedup:
Yes, they should, but in the US alone in 2008 Toyota sold at least 1,100,000 Corolla, Camry, Yaris, Rav4 and Prius
Tundra and Sequoia? About 200,000. So the answer is really vehicles in the market, not models in the lineup.
As to Toyota being a joke regarding safety? Nah - in relative terms they're probably doing a better job than M-B in that they provide relatively safe vehicles at a
much lower price point than M-B (at least in the US).
Quote from: GoCougs on January 23, 2009, 10:07:15 AM
As to Toyota being a joke regarding safety? Nah - in relative terms they're probably doing a better job than M-B in that they provide relatively safe vehicles at a much lower price point than M-B (at least in the US).
But how does this make them
safer?
And can someone explain to me how GMC made the "green list"? :huh:Got to go eat now...
This is a survey about perception. From where does perception come? Ideas, messages, experiences. From where do most ideas, messages, and experiences come? Marketing!
The Prius is the single iconic car of the green motoring revolution, regardless of its actual impact on the environment. From advertisements, celebrity endorsements, and the lack of other similar vehicles in the early stages of hybrid vehicles, Toyota easily created the perception that it, because of the Prius, was the most "green" company. And how are GM and Ford chipping away at that distinction? By introducing "greener" versions of their gas guzzlers with huge fanfare and marketing gimmicks. The more ads on TV we see for hybrid Tahoes, the more we think GM is a green company, even though the hybrid Tahoe still gets relatively crappy gas mileage.
Toyota's perception of sportiness is also similarly constructed--through NASCAR, and through body kits on the Corolla-S and Camry SE. If someone sees a Corolla that looks sporty then chances are they'll perceive it as being sporty, even if it has that anemic four-banger under the hood.
It's a perception survey, not a reality survey. Perception and reality are not always the same thing.
I actually agree with a lot of this list. This thread is just sad. I didn't anyone could be such a blatant fan boy.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 09:54:36 AM
Do I get worked up everytime somebody says something bad about MB? No I don't. :rolleyes:
I only get annoyed when somebody makes a claim about Mercedes which is totally not true and which I can back up with facts. I am after all an MB fan and read a lot about them. I know the history and a lot of their achievements. When clueless people ignore this and go ahead and make a stupid claim, that's when I get pissed.
Like this whole BS issue about Toyotas being safer than Mercedes'. Sorry, but that pisses me off. Toyota might get their four or five stars in a crash test but they're designed to pass here. Mercedes-Benz has a whole division dedicated to safety, a safety engineering team that strives to build the safest cars on the planet. Toyota is a complete joke in this regard.
And Toyota doesn't have a safety department? And they don't strive to make safer cars too? How are they a joke??
I think even more frustrating than someone bad mouthing Mercedes is someone trying to speak knowledgeably about engineering when they don't have a clue of what goes on in the safety department of Toyota. :evildude:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 10:09:12 AM
But how does this make them safer?
And can someone explain to me how GMC made the "green list"? :huh:.
Good and plentiful advertisements.
The poll results to me are bizarre. How on god's green earth does Mercedes, the absolute innovator of safety technology place behind Ford and Honda, two companies who have done relatively little, then place ahead of Lexus in quality. Perhaps right now Mercedes are built better and maybe even suffer from even fewer electrical failures, but Mercedes just got off of an 8 year trip down the road of electrical fail. Since when is the consumer that quick to forgive?
This poll IMO is worthless anyways. If you own A Mercedes, or any high end vehicle similar to it, or are in the position to do so, chances are you're going to rank them higher than Ford or Toyota. I would venture to say we have a case of the consumer ranking what they own above the rest, and I am willing to bet many, many more Camry owners participated than say, S550 owners.
Oh, and Lexus stylish? Give me a break.
P.S. Wait, wait a fucking second. How the fuck does LEXUS rank higher than JAGUAR in style? Are we that diluted, that somehow the tacky interiors and generic Japanese exteriors exude elegance and style not matched by JAGUAR? Category 14 WTF.
You guys need to calm down before you give yourselves an aneurism.
I remember a Toyota commercial that was going on and on about how Toyota was "working hard to magnify the positive, and reduce the negative". It's that kind of vague but relentless marketing that keeps Toyota at the top. They have people convinced a V6 Camry is sporty, when a V6 Accord makes more power, handles better etc.
Quote from: MaxPower on January 23, 2009, 10:12:39 AM
This is a survey about perception. From where does perception come? Ideas, messages, experiences. From where do most ideas, messages, and experiences come? Marketing!
The Prius is the single iconic car of the green motoring revolution, regardless of its actual impact on the environment. From advertisements, celebrity endorsements, and the lack of other similar vehicles in the early stages of hybrid vehicles, Toyota easily created the perception that it, because of the Prius, was the most "green" company. And how are GM and Ford chipping away at that distinction? By introducing "greener" versions of their gas guzzlers with huge fanfare and marketing gimmicks. The more ads on TV we see for hybrid Tahoes, the more we think GM is a green company, even though the hybrid Tahoe still gets relatively crappy gas mileage.
Toyota's perception of sportiness is also similarly constructed--through NASCAR, and through body kits on the Corolla-S and Camry SE. If someone sees a Corolla that looks sporty then chances are they'll perceive it as being sporty, even if it has that anemic four-banger under the hood.
It's a perception survey, not a reality survey. Perception and reality are not always the same thing.
Great post.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 10:09:12 AM
And can someone explain to me how GMC made the "green list"? :huh:
What do you think the "
G" in
GMC stands for :wtf:
Quote from: MrH on January 23, 2009, 10:13:16 AM
And Toyota doesn't have a safety department? And they don't strive to make safer cars too? How are they a joke??
Obviously Toyota has a safety department. My point is that MB has done more for safety than other brands. Toyota was more known for building reliable and durable cars, but in terms of safety they've never enjoyed that reputation that Mercedes-Benz has. They've also not been known to strive to make the safest cars.
Furthermore Toyotas in Europe tend to get rated poorly in terms of stopping power (brakes). This also affects many Lexus products. Isn't good braking part of the safety equation?
I'm also so sick of the Lexus ads here that talk about how safe Lexus are (with systems blatantly copied from Mercedes like PRE-SAFE or active seat belts). Toyota and Lexus are marketing companies. Bullshitting people at its finest.
Quote from: MrH on January 23, 2009, 10:13:16 AMI think even more frustrating than someone bad mouthing Mercedes is someone trying to speak knowledgeably about engineering when they don't have a clue of what goes on in the safety department of Toyota. :evildude:
:rolleyes:
Quote from: AltinD on January 23, 2009, 11:07:49 AM
What do you think the "G" in GMC stands for :wtf:
Guzzler? :huh:
Quote from: Submariner on January 23, 2009, 10:18:53 AM
The poll results to me are bizarre. How on god's green earth does Mercedes, the absolute innovator of safety technology place behind Ford and Honda, two companies who have done relatively little, then place ahead of Lexus in quality. Perhaps right now Mercedes are built better and maybe even suffer from even fewer electrical failures, but Mercedes just got off of an 8 year trip down the road of electrical fail. Since when is the consumer that quick to forgive?
Excuse me? Ford is one of the safety innovators. Where do you think seatbelts, airbags, and safety glass came from?
Mercedes-Benz may have been the first in Germany to install airbags (1980), but Ford had them in cars as early as 1971, and GM in 1973.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 23, 2009, 11:15:00 AM
Excuse me? Ford is one of the safety innovators. Where do you think seatbelts, airbags, and safety glass came from?
Padded Dashes in 1957.
Speaking of Mercedes and surveys here's an interesting article from CR from last October. Note that is was from the data owners of the cars themselves provided CR.
2008 Annual Car Reliability Survey: Gas-saving models in the lead
Fuel-efficient vehicles are a very reliable segment overall, European cars are improving, and, on average, Ford continues to build the most reliable American cars. These are the key findings from Consumer Reports latest Annual Car Reliability Survey. This year we had responses on more than 1.4 million vehicles (model years 1999 to 2008) owned or leased by our subscribers.
A total of nine hybrid models for which we have sufficient data rated above average in predicted reliability, most from Japanese automakers. From the Family Cars category, the Toyota Prius, the Toyota Camry Hybrid, and the Nissan Altima Hybrid, as well as the luxury Lexus GS 450h Hybrid sedan are all among the most reliable. The Lexus RX 400h and the Toyota Highlander Hybrid are among the most reliable in midsized SUVs, while the Ford Escape Hybrid and Mercury Mariner Hybrid small SUVs rated above average in predicted reliability. The Honda Civic Hybrid is also above average. In addition, conventional gas sippers such as the Honda Fit, Scion xD, Smart ForTwo, and Toyota Yaris had few problems.
Ford?s three nameplates ? Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury ? lead the domestic automakers and continue to pull away from the rest of Detroit. Except for some truck-based vehicles, almost all Ford products are now average or better. Excluding those, Ford?s reliability is now on par with good Japanese automakers. The Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan continued to rank among the most reliable family cars. The freshened Ford Focus sedan rated above average, a vast improvement from when the new model debuted in 2000 with below-average reliability.
European automakers, particularly Mercedes-Benz, showed signs of a comeback. Six Mercedes models, including the redesigned C-Class and E-Class (V6) sedans and the ML350 SUV have improved to average reliability and are now recommended. Last year, no Mercedes models had average or better reliability and so could not be recommended.
Still, Japanese cars are the most reliable overall, leading 15 of 16 categories in Consumer Reports? predicted reliability ratings. The Scion xD has the best predicted reliability score for all new cars with about 80% fewer problems than the average model.
Oh well, I would like to see what the Consumer Reports Perception survey will say for 2010.
Here is a potential teaser below...
Most Environmentally Friendly
1) Bugatti 73%
2) Ferrari 44%
3) Lamborghini 43%
4) Bentley 33%
5) Porsche 12%
Sporty
1) Lexus 90%
2) Toyota 89%
3) Kia 73%
4) Hyundai 72%
5) GMC!!!!
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 11:11:26 AM
Toyota was more known for building reliable and durable cars, but in terms of safety they've never enjoyed that reputation that Mercedes-Benz has.
Obviously they enjoy a
better reputation than Mercedes-Benz. :lol:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 04:40:10 AM
Mercedes in 5th place? Mercedes blows Ford, Honda and Toyota away and is definitely even ahead of Volvo in terms of safety. Sure, Volvo is living off that perception but what the fuck are Ford, Honda and Toyota doing there? :nutty:
I can personally vouch for the Acura TL being an extremely safe car. Ford has been getting a lot of 5-star safety ratings as well, and I'm glad people seem to be noticing.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 11:11:26 AMI'm also so sick of the Lexus ads here that talk about how safe Lexus are (with systems blatantly copied from Mercedes like PRE-SAFE or active seat belts). Toyota and Lexus are marketing companies. Bullshitting people at its finest.
:rolleyes:
I remember a NA print ad for RX300 back in the "glory" days of C&D, bragging about how advanced the vehicle was for having rain-sensing wipers.
Even the Golf was offering that as an option back then. :lol:
Oh and it was so funny the conclusion of some Brit chaps while reviewing Lexus's self-parking option: "If someone has great eye-hand coordination to be able to properly use the sytem, wouldn't need it in the first place ..." :wtf:
Quote from: AltinD on January 23, 2009, 11:07:49 AM
What do you think the "G" in GMC stands for :wtf:
For an all truck company, their MPG's are actually quite good. That is, relative to other trucks, not cars.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 23, 2009, 11:15:00 AM
Excuse me? Ford is one of the safety innovators. Where do you think seatbelts, airbags, and safety glass came from?
Mercedes-Benz may have been the first in Germany to install airbags (1980), but Ford had them in cars as early as 1971, and GM in 1973.
ESP?
Crumple Zone?
ABS?
Brake Assist?
Collapsable steering column?
Seatbelt pre-tensioners?
And weren't seat belts developed by Volvo?
Quote from: Submariner on January 23, 2009, 06:26:37 PM
And weren't seat belts developed by Volvo?
Yes! Nils Bohlin, an engineer working for Volvo, invented the three-point safety belt. It was standard equipment in the 1958 Volvo PV544 which was the first car ever to have three-point safety belts.
As a result, EVERY car on the road today has a little bit of Volvo engineering in it!
Cheers,
Madman of the People
Quote from: Madman on January 23, 2009, 07:12:32 PM
Yes! Nils Bohlin, an engineer working for Volvo, invented the three-point safety belt. It was standard equipment in the 1958 Volvo PV544 which was the first car ever to have three-point safety belts.
As a result, EVERY car on the road today has a little bit of Volvo engineering in it!
Cheers,
Madman of the People
Thats what I thought.
Not trying to defend Mercedes, but they did refine crumple zone technology. Honda and Toyota copied the design.
At least that is what a Mercedes rep told me when I worked at an MB dealer.
Quote from: JWC on January 23, 2009, 08:02:32 PM
Not trying to defend Mercedes, but they did refine crumple zone technology. Honda and Toyota copied the design.
At least that is what a Mercedes rep told me when I worked at an MB dealer.
They did invent it, yes.
what about Mercedes vs Honda safety?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 23, 2009, 04:54:24 AM
Let's be realistic here.
Mercedes-Benz RAPES Toyota in safety. That is a FACT. No other brand has really done more for safety than MB. I am not claiming this because I like MB, it's a fact. I can back up my claims too.
Mercedes-Benz has generally more favorable designs than Lexus. Lexus = sleeping pill. There is nothing stylish about their mish-mash design accumulations from different brands. A Lexus ES stylish? An LX or GX stylish? Sorry, I have to LOL at that. :nutty:
Mercedes-Benz also has many cars that are "environmentally friendly" if you want to use that term, they're just not sold in the US, so I can understand that perception therefore. But how does Toyota place so high despite selling tons of gas-guzzling SUVs? What's the difference between Toyota and Mercedes in that regard? They both sell a lot of gas-guzzlers in the US. Oh wait, Toyota has that little piece of crap called the Prius! All is forgiven! They can sell a 12 mpg V8 Landcruiser but if they sell a Prius it's all cool, bro. :ohyeah:
Next, Toyota and Lexus are innovative? That has to be one of the most retarded perceptions ever. BMW, Mercedes, heck even Citroen or Renault have a lot of innovations. I guess these brands don't go around advertising this - unlike Toyota and Lexus, which do this all the time (even here in Europe). Let me tell you something. Nobody here in Europe really cares if Lexus talks about how "they invented hybrids and how clean and good for the environment they are". Most people here can think a little deeper and they'll figure out that this is nothing but marketing BS.
Toyota sporty? Behind BMW and Porsche? I don't need to say anything here.
Sucks that the people surveyed here have no fucking clue about cars. That PISSES ME off. That's why I am mad. :thumbsup:
At least it was amusing. I mean GMC is environmentally friendly, right? My neighbor drives a Prius! What a moron! I am going to go to the next GMC dealership and purchase a big block V8 Yukon Denali and I won't feel guilty about it. Why? It's good for the environment. Consumer Reports says so! :ohyeah:
Acura is the ONLY brand to have every sedan a 5 X 5 star line up. Every NHTSA crash is 5 stars in every category, every car. Also all suvs are 4 X 5 star with the rollover 4 star/border line 5
Also the ENTIRE line up is a BEST PICK by the IIHS... NO manufacture comes close especially as a percentage...100% X 2 crash tests in unbeatable...
sure so and so did this in the past... for now, ACURA IS KING OF SAFETY
Quote from: YO on January 23, 2009, 09:27:40 PM
Acura is the ONLY brand to have every sedan a 5 X 5 star line up. Every NHTSA crash is 5 stars in every category, every car. Also all suvs are 4 X 5 star with the rollover 4 star/border line 5
Also the ENTIRE line up is a BEST PICK by the IIHS... NO manufacture comes close especially as a percentage...100% X 2 crash tests in unbeatable...
sure so and so did this in the past... for now, ACURA IS KING OF SAFETY
I'd rather die in something somewhat good looking than seal my fate in one of Acura's ass ugly cars.
Quote from: YO on January 23, 2009, 09:27:40 PM
Also the ENTIRE line up is a BEST PICK by the IIHS... NO manufacture comes close especially as a percentage...100% X 2 crash tests in unbeatable...
Subaru.
Quote from: YO on January 23, 2009, 09:20:39 PM
what about Mercedes vs Honda safety?
I don't doubt that Honda or Toyota build safe cars, but the real safety innovator was and still is Mercedes-Benz. No other brand has done more for this criteria and they still do. Just a day ago I was in a cafe reading the latest Autobild magazine about the new E-Class in depth. It's literally the safest car in the world - even "safer" than an S-Class. The good news is that PRE-SAFE, which debuted in the S-Class, is now available in the E-Class and will filter down through the entire MB lineup.
From a historical perception point of view, I would expect people to know this. But since most people don't care about history or heritage, they obviously will never know these facts about Mercedes. Hence they make totally stupid comments like Lexus being just or more prestigeous than BMW or Mercedes. :nutty:
So what you're saying is that MB's living on past accomplishments because competing products today are actually safer? I agree.
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 08:09:58 AM
So what you're saying is that MB's living on past accomplishments because competing products today are actually safer? I agree.
I am saying that MB has done more for this criteria than Toyota or Honda. I am saying that MB has a history, then and now, of producing safe cars.
I've never heard of Toyota or Honda being the benchmark for safety? :rolleyes:
Add to that countless safety innovations.
And all of a sudden Toyota and Honda are perceived as being safer or more safety oriented than MB? Somebody needs to get smacked. Seriously.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 24, 2009, 08:15:57 AM
I am saying that MB has done more for this criteria than Toyota or Honda. I am saying that MB has a history, then and now, of producing safe cars.
I've never heard of Toyota or Honda being the benchmark for safety? :rolleyes:
Yet I see the Camry and Accord doing better in crash tests than the E-Class.
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 08:17:42 AM
Yet I see the Camry and Accord doing better in crash tests than the E-Class.
Source?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 24, 2009, 08:18:08 AM
Source?
The Accord is an IIHS Top Safety Pick for its top performance in three crash tests; the E-Class has only "acceptable" side-impact protection.
Accord:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=276
E-Class:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=315
E-Class gets four out of five stars for frontal protection from NHTSA, the other US safety agency. Camry gets five.
E-Class:
http://www.safercar.gov/portal/site/safercar/menuitem.db847bd57e3dc1f885dfc38c35a67789/?vgnextoid=c95df2905bf54110VgnVCM1000002fd17898RCRD
Camry:
http://www.safercar.gov/portal/site/safercar/menuitem.db847bd57e3dc1f885dfc38c35a67789/?vgnextoid=c95df2905bf54110VgnVCM1000002fd17898RCRD
The Accord and Camry aren't even the best among $20,000 sedans, yet they both did better than the E-Class.
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 08:17:42 AM
Yet I see the Camry and Accord doing better in crash tests than the E-Class.
In 2005, a report from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety declared the Mercedes E-Class to be the car with the best occupant safety in the U.S.
This debate is getting pointless. The only thing that can be said definitively is that this poll, like many of CR's polls are worthless.
Quote from: Submariner on January 24, 2009, 08:40:29 AM
In 2005, a report from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety declared the Mercedes E-Class to be the car with the best occupant safety in the U.S.
Then in 2006 they started doing side-impact crash tests and the picture looked a bit less rosy.
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 08:42:03 AM
Then in 2006 they started doing side-impact crash tests and the picture looked a bit less rosy.
Ahhh.
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 08:09:58 AM
So what you're saying is that MB's living on past accomplishments because competing products today are actually safer? I agree.
Are you saying that you will suffer less in case of an accident in a Toyota then in a comparable sized Mercedes (or other premium European cars)? Good luck with that.
Quote from: AltinD on January 24, 2009, 11:13:15 AM
Are you saying that you will suffer less in case of an accident in a Toyota then in a comparable sized Mercedes (or other premium European cars)? Good luck with that.
That's what the crash tests indicate, yes. Audi has strong safety ratings, but not MB or BMW.
Not true... suburas are NOT 5 stars in ALL FIVE categories... only Acura can say that...
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 06:55:14 AM
Subaru.
yes...5 years ago
Quote from: Submariner on January 24, 2009, 08:40:29 AM
In 2005, a report from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety declared the Mercedes E-Class to be the car with the best occupant safety in the U.S.
This debate is getting pointless. The only thing that can be said definitively is that this poll, like many of CR's polls are worthless.
Quote from: YO on January 24, 2009, 01:30:43 PM
Not true... suburas are NOT 5 stars in ALL FIVE categories... only Acura can say that...
Subarus are all IIHS Top Safety Picks, which is the part of your post I quoted.
Don't lie... I wrote " 100% X 2 crash tests" in the qoute you highlighted in your post
GO TEAM GO!
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 06:55:14 AM
Subaru.
"Also the ENTIRE line up is a BEST PICK by the IIHS... NO manufacture comes close especially as a percentage.."
That's incorrect, as I said. I'm sorry I couldn't correctly translate the gibberish part that followed.
Hey Wimmer, did you skip my post about all of Ford's safety innovations? They kind of eclipse any safety innovations M-B has come up with.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 24, 2009, 04:17:09 PM
Hey Wimmer, did you skip my post about all of Ford's safety innovations? They kind of eclipse any safety innovations M-B has come up with.
I saw it, and I have to disagree. I am sure Ford contributed their share but MB is still the king in this regard. :ohyeah:
65 Years Ago Today: The Start of Safety Development at Mercedes-Benz Exactly 65 years ago, the recruitment of the inventive genius B?la Bar?nyi saw the start of systematic passenger car safety development at Mercedes-Benz. The crumple zone, safety steering column, steering wheel impact plate and side impact protection are examples of the pioneering inventions for which this first Mercedes safety engineer was responsible. To this day they provide the very basis for modern automobile technology, and show how closely the development of vehicle safety is linked to the history of Mercedes-Benz. With innovations such as the sandwich concept of the A-Class or the preventive protection system PRE-SAFE, the Stuttgart automobile brand continues to be the pacemaker in this field.
Initially the department for safety development, which was formed on August 1, 1939, only consisted of four employees. It was headed by the Austrian-born engineer B?la Bar?nyi (1907?1997), who had previously been employed by the "Society for Technical Progress" in Berlin and submitted more than 150 patent applications for automobile and vehicle designs during this time.
The cradle of passenger car safety technology was a wooden hut measuring around 100 square metres at the edge of the Mercedes plant in Sindelfingen. Here Bar?nyi and his personnel devoted themselves to improving occupant protection. Just one year after taking up his post, this impassioned engineer attracted attention with his first prototype featuring an "accident-resistant" floor assembly, rigid passenger cell and special side protection. Within a short time this prototype was followed by other trailblazing inventions. "To this day vehicle safety is based on the foundations that B?la Bar?nyi laid", says Dr Rodolfo Sch?neburg, Head of Safety/Vehicle Functions at the Mercedes-Benz Technology Center.
B?la Bar?nyi developed the principle of the crumple zone during the 1940s; it was patented in August 1952 and first entered series production in 1959, in the Mercedes-Benz 220 (W 111). By the time he went into retirement at the end of 1972 this pioneer in passenger car safety had submitted patent applications for more than 2500 inventions.
In subsequent years Mercedes engineers have continued to set standards in the field of vehicle safety with trailblazing new developments such as belt tensioners, the airbag, the anti-lock braking system (ABS), Brake Assist and the Electronic Stability Program (ESP?). Nowadays these systems are standard equipment in all passenger cars bearing the Mercedes star, as well as those of numerous competitors.
Mercedes specialists also showed great creativity and expertise with the patented sandwich concept of the A-Class in 1997. It was on this basis that a compact car with the occupant safety typical of a Mercedes was able to be designed for the first time. For the new A-Class to be launched in autumn 2004, Mercedes-Benz has developed the sandwich concept even further and combined it with the latest protection systems.
(http://www.driveandstayalive.com/images/mercedes_historical_hot-wtr-rckts-for-propul-2_766649B2004F4954_med.jpg)
Mercedes-Benz has been conducting crash tests regularly in Sindelfingen, which have served as the launch pad for pioneering work in the field of passenger car safety. Originally, hot-water rockets were used to propel the test cars.A new era in passenger car safety began with another Mercedes-Benz development in 2002, the preventive occupant protection system PRE-SAFE, which is standard equipment in the S-Class and will also become available for other Mercedes models in future. PRE-SAFE is able to recognise an impending accident in advance and immediately goes into action to prepare both the occupants and the car for an imminent collision, for example by pre-tensioning the seat belts as a precaution.
Even 65 years after the formation of the first department for passenger car safety, innovations such as this underline the leading position of Mercedes-Benz in this important area of automobile technology.
(http://www.driveandstayalive.com/images/mercedes_a-class_2004_766660B2004F4955__small.jpg)
In 1997, the groundbreaking sandwich concept featured in the A-Class made it possible to combine compact dimensions with Mercedes? renowned safety standards for the first time.Link: http://www.driveandstayalive.com/info%20section/news/individual%20news%20articles/x_040727_65yrs_safety-at-merc.htm
Mercedes-Benz Safety InnovationsHave you ever wondered where various features found in your car came from? Chances are they were originally Mercedes-Benz innovations. I suppose this shouldn't be too surprising, as the automobile as we know it could also be considered an innovation created by Mercedes-Benz's predecessors - in 1886, both Carl Benz and Gottlieb Daimler independently, and unknown to each other, developed the first self-propelled, gasoline-powered vehicles to be offered for sale. They were competitors until their two companies merged in 1926.
Mercedes-Benz has not made a large fuss about its innovations, and has licensed them for use by competitors. Here are a few examples:
``Safety cage'' construction with front and rear crumple zones: Possibly the most important innovation in automobile construction from a safety standpoint, this is now used in nearly all cars and trucks. It was was first developed by Mercedes-Benz in 1951. A reinforced structure surrounds the passenger cabin, and the structure of the front and rear parts of the car is designed to deform in a controlled way to lessen impact forces transmitted to that central structure and further protect occupants.
Anti-lock brakes were first used in Mercedes-Benz cars in 1978. They have been standard equipment on all Mercedes-Benz cars since model year 1989. The acronym ``ABS'', coined in 1972, did not originally stand for ``Anti-lock Braking System'' as one might expect, but ``Anti-Blocking System.''
Traction control: Introduced in 1986 to reduce wheelslip in wet or icy conditions.
The first air bags offered in the North American market were in Mercedes-Benzes in 1988.
Stability control: The Electronic Stability Program - ESP - in which electronic controls for the engine, traction control system, and ABS system, augmented by sensors for fore-and-aft and lateral acceleration and deceleration all communicate in order to determine if the car is entering an out-of-control state, and decrease engine power and direct braking force on specific brakes to regain control was a Mercedes-Benz innovation in 1995. Other manufacturers have developed similar systems, but if it says ``ESP'' and is not on a Mercedes, it's licensed from Mercedes.
Brake Assist: Now used by many other manufacturers, this uses sensors in the brake system to determine if the driver intends to stop quickly, and, if that is the situation and the brake pedal is not being pressed hard enough for maximum effect, boosts braking force. The ABS system prevents wheel lockup. It was first used by Mercedes-Benz in the 1997 model year.
Notice how more and more cars have auxiliary turn signals in their outside rear-view mirrors. First used by Mercedes-Benz a few years ago. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Not everything related to automotive safety was a Mercedes-Benz innovation. The three-point safety belt was developed by Volvo. But Mercedes has been using them since 1968, and they have been standard in the front seats since 1973, optional in the rear outboard positions since 1974, and standard in the rear outboard positions since 1979. Use in the rear center position, if applicable, has been since the mid-1990s.
Source: http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/03/11/010089.html
This link below lists some other achievements (with a bit of Volvo bias thrown in).Mercedes Benz Safety - Luxury Features That Protect YouYears ago, you really had one choice when it came to a safe cars - Volvo. Nobody else had the reputation for safety they did. There was even a joke in a Dudley Moore movie that a Volvo ad should say, "We're boxy, but we're safe." But these days, Mercedes-Benz safety is up there with the best...and it has really always been that way.
Mercedes-Benz formed its own department for safety development 65 years ago, headed by Austrian engineer Bela Barenyi. That department became a hotbed of innovation for the carmaker. Here's just a short list of Mercedes-Benz safety innovations that we all pretty much take for granted in modern cars:
* A safety steering column to protect the driver
* Crumple zones in various areas of the vehicle (which was in production by 1953)
* Side impact protection
* Airbags
* Anti-lock brakes
* Seat belt tensioners
Those features demonstrate that Mercedes-Benz is really the source of modern automobile safety. They pioneered over 2,500 car safety inventions.
In 2003, Mercedes introduced the PRE-SAFE system in some of its cars, which took Mercedes safety to another level. The system is designed to sense that an accident is imminent. When it does, the system swings into action to protect the driver and passengers. The simplest example is tightening the seat belts for extra protection, but that's only one step the system takes.
The system is based on the concept that a panic stop, skid or rapid evasive maneuver signals an impending collision. At that point, the PRE-SAFE system prepares the vehicle for impact, and prepares various aspects of the passenger cabin to be a safety cocoon. Seat belts tighten, headrests adjust automatically to help minimize neck injuries, windows and sunroofs close, seat air cushions inflate to keep passengers snugly in place.
The Mercedes safety engineers even help protect kids. Their Automatic Child Seat Recognition (ACSR) system senses when a child safety seat is installed in the front passenger seat, and turns off the airbag.
Mercedes has essentially created a real-life super car that lives up to the science fiction images we have seen on movie screens. The effect is drivers who walk away from accidents remarkably unhurt. In 2005, a report from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety declared the Mercedes E-Class to be the car with the best occupant safety in the U.S.
Mercedes makes a car that is easy to drive. There's no substitute for driver decisions and judgment in avoiding accidents. But what happens when the driver is not at fault? Accidents happen, even when we're driving safely and defensively. When they do, your Mercedes will protect you better than any other car on the road...except maybe for a Volvo.
Source: http://ezinearticles.com/?Mercedes-Benz-Safety---Luxury-Features-That-Protect-You&id=1852137
Furthermore, I have a lot of books about Mercedes-Benz that also highlight other safety innovations. Sure, other brands contributed a fair share to improving the safety standards in automobiles, but MB by far has done the most.
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 08:25:44 AM
The Accord is an IIHS Top Safety Pick for its top performance in three crash tests; the E-Class has only "acceptable" side-impact protection.
Accord:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=276
E-Class:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=315
E-Class gets four out of five stars for frontal protection from NHTSA, the other US safety agency. Camry gets five.
E-Class:
http://www.safercar.gov/portal/site/safercar/menuitem.db847bd57e3dc1f885dfc38c35a67789/?vgnextoid=c95df2905bf54110VgnVCM1000002fd17898RCRD
Camry:
http://www.safercar.gov/portal/site/safercar/menuitem.db847bd57e3dc1f885dfc38c35a67789/?vgnextoid=c95df2905bf54110VgnVCM1000002fd17898RCRD
The Accord and Camry aren't even the best among $20,000 sedans, yet they both did better than the E-Class.
In Europe the E-Class gets 5/5 stars in its crash test overall score and does very well in other safety criteria.
Furthermore the Camry and Accord you are talking about are NEWER than the W211 E-Class. Heck, maybe Honda or Toyota even studied the W211 E-Class and analyzed its safety systems. They must have (Toyota) because they sure as hell want to make their GS more competitive...
Whatever works. If Toyota can look at an MB and make it safer, then all power to them, no? The goal of safety isn't to boast about who did it first, it's to sell the safest product.
lets live in the now...
2009 TL 5 Stars all 5 tests /Best Pick IIHS
2009 RL 5 Stars all 5 tests / Best Pick IIHS
2009 TSX 5 Stars all 5 tests /#1 in class and Best Pick IIHS
2009 MDX 5 Star in 4 crash tests, 4 star rollover/ #1 in class and Best Pick IIHS
2009 RDX 5 Star in 4 crash tests, 4 star rollover/ Best Pick IIHS
TODAY... RIGHT NOW... ACURA!!!
why the hell they don't advertise this... just doesn't make sense...
Quote from: ifcar on January 24, 2009, 02:06:43 PM
"Also the ENTIRE line up is a BEST PICK by the IIHS... NO manufacture comes close especially as a percentage.."
That's incorrect, as I said. I'm sorry I couldn't correctly translate the gibberish part that followed.
"2009 TL 5 Stars all 5 tests"
Not true.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 24, 2009, 04:17:09 PM
Hey Wimmer, did you skip my post about all of Ford's safety innovations? They kind of eclipse any safety innovations M-B has come up with.
Did you skip mine? They kinda eclipse everything Ford has done, especially given Ford had nothing to do with the Seat belt, and the airbag was designed by man with no affiliations to Ford and originally marketed to Chrysler.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on January 24, 2009, 04:25:46 PM
* A safety steering column to protect the driver
* Crumple zones in various areas of the vehicle (which was in production by 1953)
* Side impact protection
* Airbags
* Anti-lock brakes
* Seat belt tensioners
Airbags aren't MB's doing.
Quote from: Submariner on January 24, 2009, 08:52:18 PM
Did you skip mine? They kinda eclipse everything Ford has done, especially given Ford had nothing to do with the Seat belt, and the airbag was designed by man with no affiliations to Ford and originally marketed to Chrysler.
AirbagsAn American inventor, Dr. Allen S. Breed, invented and developed a key component for automotive use: the ball-in-tube inertial sensor for crash detection. Breed Corporation then marketed this innovation first in 1967 to Chrysler. A similar "Auto-Ceptor" crash-restraint, developed by Eaton, Yale & Towne Inc. for Ford was soon offered as an automatic safety system in the USA, while the Italian Eaton-Livia company offered a variant with localized air cushions.
Airbags for passenger cars were introduced in the United States in the mid-1970s, when seat belt usage rates in the country were quite low. Airbags were marketed as a convenient alternative to seat belts, while offering similar levels of protection to unbelted occupants in a head-on collision.
Ford built an experimental fleet of cars with airbags in 1971, followed by General Motors in 1973 on Chevrolet vehicles.SeatbeltsThe idea for the seat belt, for common use in airplanes, was first created by Seth H. Stoner. He was in the Navy during World War II. He was a Lt. Commander based in Washington and primarily focused on how to reduce the number of accidents and fatalities of pilots taking off and landing on aircraft carriers. He worked with a team of safety engineers and the seat belt was the result of their work. The seat belt did not appear in cars until later in the 1950s.
Edward J. Hock invented the safety belt first used by the Ford Motor Company as standard equipment, while he was on active duty with the military as a flight instructor. In 1955 his idea was accepted by the naval authorities, and Hock was awarded $20.50 for his invention. The original schematic and blueprints shows that he utilized scrap parachute strapping to implement his idea. He was never awarded anything other than the $20.50 award, a letter of recognition, a picture with military "brass", and a newspaper article to his credit.
The three point seat belt (the so-called CIR-Griswold restraint) was patented in 1951 by the Americans Roger W. Griswold and Hugh De Haven.
Saab was the first car manufacturer to introduce seat belts as standard in 1958. After the Saab GT 750 was introduced at the New York motor show in 1958 with safety belts fitted as standard, the practice became commonplace.
Nils Bohlin of Sweden invented a particular kind of three point seat belt for Volvo, who introduced it in 1959 as standard equipment. Bohlin was granted U.S. Patent 3,043,625 for the device.
In 1955 Ford offered for the first time lap belts as an option. In 1956, largely at the insistence of executive Robert McNamara, seat belts were offered for consumer automobiles within the "Lifeguard" safety package. The safety device was met with ridicule by others in the industry, but it caught on with the public. By 1964, Most U.S. automobiles were sold with standard front seat belts; rear seat belts were made standard in 1968.
Quote from: HEMI666 on January 24, 2009, 09:48:52 PM
Airbags
An American inventor, Dr. Allen S. Breed, invented and developed a key component for automotive use: the ball-in-tube inertial sensor for crash detection. Breed Corporation then marketed this innovation first in 1967 to Chrysler. A similar "Auto-Ceptor" crash-restraint, developed by Eaton, Yale & Towne Inc. for Ford was soon offered as an automatic safety system in the USA, while the Italian Eaton-Livia company offered a variant with localized air cushions.
Airbags for passenger cars were introduced in the United States in the mid-1970s, when seat belt usage rates in the country were quite low. Airbags were marketed as a convenient alternative to seat belts, while offering similar levels of protection to unbelted occupants in a head-on collision.
Ford built an experimental fleet of cars with airbags in 1971, followed by General Motors in 1973 on Chevrolet vehicles.
Seatbelts
The idea for the seat belt, for common use in airplanes, was first created by Seth H. Stoner. He was in the Navy during World War II. He was a Lt. Commander based in Washington and primarily focused on how to reduce the number of accidents and fatalities of pilots taking off and landing on aircraft carriers. He worked with a team of safety engineers and the seat belt was the result of their work. The seat belt did not appear in cars until later in the 1950s.
Edward J. Hock invented the safety belt first used by the Ford Motor Company as standard equipment, while he was on active duty with the military as a flight instructor. In 1955 his idea was accepted by the naval authorities, and Hock was awarded $20.50 for his invention. The original schematic and blueprints shows that he utilized scrap parachute strapping to implement his idea. He was never awarded anything other than the $20.50 award, a letter of recognition, a picture with military "brass", and a newspaper article to his credit.
The three point seat belt (the so-called CIR-Griswold restraint) was patented in 1951 by the Americans Roger W. Griswold and Hugh De Haven.
Saab was the first car manufacturer to introduce seat belts as standard in 1958. After the Saab GT 750 was introduced at the New York motor show in 1958 with safety belts fitted as standard, the practice became commonplace.
Nils Bohlin of Sweden invented a particular kind of three point seat belt for Volvo, who introduced it in 1959 as standard equipment. Bohlin was granted U.S. Patent 3,043,625 for the device.
In 1955 Ford offered for the first time lap belts as an option. In 1956, largely at the insistence of executive Robert McNamara, seat belts were offered for consumer automobiles within the "Lifeguard" safety package. The safety device was met with ridicule by others in the industry, but it caught on with the public. By 1964, Most U.S. automobiles were sold with standard front seat belts; rear seat belts were made standard in 1968.
Uh...that's what I said. And again, Ford had nothing to do with them.
How is when and who introduced what even relevant today? The perception that Ford cars are safer seems to be accurate regardless of who was more innovative.
Quote from: 2o6 on January 24, 2009, 09:08:16 PM
Airbags aren't MB's doing.
True.
I believe they were the first European brand to offer them in their cars though.
I always knew Toyota was better than those overpriced and over hyped Mercedes. Now this list just confirms it. Thanks Consumer Reports.
Quote from: Onslaught on January 25, 2009, 07:08:24 AM
I always knew Toyota was better than those overpriced and over hyped Mercedes. Now this list just confirms it. Thanks Consumer Reports.
:lol: