should i be concerned?

[indigoblossom]

i drive a 2002 daewoo lanos and i cannot find any crash test rating info on the make/model.

my fiance says not to worry. he says that the safest element in a car is the driver (to some extent he is right, but there are other uncontrollable forces on the road) and that my car is probably on par with the safety standards of other cars in its class. i'm not convinced of this, at all.

daeqoo only produced cars for three years and on the various sites i've checked out, from what i gather, either they didn't perform vary many crash tests or the information just isn't available to the public. in the tests that i have found (which are for the larger and smaller model but not my midsize model) they only tested average to good on the portions of the crash test for which data is available.

this really bothers me, but it obviously won't make the case for getting a new car since my fiance is unconcerned. we can't really afford a new car, atm, anyhow, but in the near future we could.

am i being paranoid needlessly?

FWIW my toddler rides in a RA in my car, but i just ordered him another MA because the RA is about to expire. he also has a MA for my partners PT cruiser. unfortunately it doesn't make sense for us to switch cars because the cruiser is a business vehicle, emblazoned with the company's logo. sure, i could advertise while driving it but he actually does in-home estimates and needs the vehicle for work-related purposes more than i do.

 

[Connor's Mom]

HMMMM, not a car that I would personally drive. Especially from a safety standpoint.
I had a friend that had one and it was always broke down and she actually totaled it in a relatively minor side impact accident when it was only 3 years old.
I could not find anything as far as crash test ratings. If it was tested in the states would it not have to have NHTSA crash testing? Here is a 1999-2002 Daewoo Lanos Full Review. It didn't score very well, only a 32 out of a 100.

According to Australian NCAP crash testing the Lanos, depending on the make scored only from acceptable to a negative causing "risk of life threatening injury" with a total score of 7.29 out of a possible 34. It is in the middle area under "small cars".

Also found this listed on Wikepeida (Not much on these cars, lol) as far as safety:
In Australia, the 1997-2003 Daewoo Lanos was assessed in the Used Car Safety Ratings 2006 as providing "worse than average" protection for its occupants in the event of a crash.
Europe: models received the following European New Car Assessment Program (Euro NCAP) 1998 ratings.
Adult Occupant: , score 17
Pedestrian: , score 11 (pre-2002 rating)
In crash tests conducted by ANCAP in 1998 to EuroNCAP regulations RHD Lanos 3dr hatchback showed poor performance, scoring 0.31 out of 16 in offset front crash test and 6.98 of 16 in side impact test.
Russian magazine Autoreview tested LHD Chevrolet Lanos T150 sedan built by ZAZ in 2006. It scored 10.5 of 16 points in offset front crash test.

 

[indigoblossom]

oh dear - i am now significantly more worried. thank you for all the info...i will review it and then discuss with my fiance to see if he will find these findings a little more credible than my concerns.

he's a total logic and fact nut, so when i can give him proof in numbers, he usually acts. of course, the fact that there wasn't a lot of info on front-end collision testing was enough to worry me, and now i see why that information isn't widely available.

 

[indigoblossom]

i do have to say, though, that i've had no mechanical problems as of yet, and i don't mind the way it handles so i'd never considered it to be completely unsafe until i came on these boards.

i have been told by numerous people not to get into an accident because i wouldn't be able to find parts but they didn't scare me into thinking that i might not survive the crash or that my car would be totaled from a minor accident.

it has very low mileage on it and i wanted to get a few more years of it...and i may have to because i don't know when or how we'd get another vehicle but ugh. now i don't even want to drive it.

 

[scuby20]

my husband drives a 2001 3 door ( one is a hatchback) daewoo lanos...We haven't had any mechanical issues with it. He did get into a side impact accident (not his fault) at a low speed, and we were concerned it would be totaled because the value of the car is not a lot. If it were totaled, we could never find a car for the total value. His has low milage too. I HATE the car...though it gets great gas milage. If he didn't have to drive on I5 every day I wouldn't worry so much...but we too cannot afford a 2nd car payment, until we pay off the van, then we can get him something. I won't let him transport our daughter in it, unless it is an emergency...that is my own personal opinion though.

I i haven't found many test ratings on it either.

 

[Niea]

I understand the concern about driving a deathbox (I had a '98 Cavalier for 9 years!). . .but in the end you can only do what you can do. If buying another vehicle right now isn't possible, then you can only wait until it is. Or stop driving the car altogether, ya know?

To a certain extent, I do think it's true that the driver has the most chance of "making or breaking" the safety of the car. Sure, you can't control other drivers but you can control yourself. Doing simple things like properly restraining all passengers, not yakking on a cell phone or being otherwise distracted, not driving when overly fatigued, etc can go a long way.

There are also a lot of cars on the road that might have tested well at the time but are horribly unsafe compared to today's standards. My parents still drive a '84 Mercedes that I'm sure was considered extremely safe at the time. . but a lot has changed since then (airbags, headrests in the backseat, etc). My point is that your Daewoo, no matter how bad the crash data is, might still be better than a lot of vehicles on the road. Unless you're financially prepared right now to buy a vehicle that's only a couple of years old, you might actually be trading down by buying something else.

If I was in your position, I'd probably keep driving the car until you're in a better position to buy a new vehicle. I'd do as much as I could to keep as safe as I could by keeping my kids RFing as long as possible, staying alert and attentive while driving, keeping the car regurlarly maintenanced, driving with the headlights on during daylight, etc. And then I'd realize that at the end of the day, there's only so much I can do. . .and stop stressing over the make/model of my car.

 

[skaterbabs]

:yeahthat:

As much as we'd all like to have nice safe new cars, sometimes that's just not possible.

 

[indigoblossom]

I understand the concern about driving a deathbox (I had a '98 Cavalier for 9 years!). . .but in the end you can only do what you can do. If buying another vehicle right now isn't possible, then you can only wait until it is. Or stop driving the car altogether, ya know?

To a certain extent, I do think it's true that the driver has the most chance of "making or breaking" the safety of the car. Sure, you can't control other drivers but you can control yourself. Doing simple things like properly restraining all passengers, not yakking on a cell phone or being otherwise distracted, not driving when overly fatigued, etc can go a long way.

There are also a lot of cars on the road that might have tested well at the time but are horribly unsafe compared to today's standards. My parents still drive a '84 Mercedes that I'm sure was considered extremely safe at the time. . but a lot has changed since then (airbags, headrests in the backseat, etc). My point is that your Daewoo, no matter how bad the crash data is, might still be better than a lot of vehicles on the road. Unless you're financially prepared right now to buy a vehicle that's only a couple of years old, you might actually be trading down by buying something else.

If I was in your position, I'd probably keep driving the car until you're in a better position to buy a new vehicle. I'd do as much as I could to keep as safe as I could by keeping my kids RFing as long as possible, staying alert and attentive while driving, keeping the car regurlarly maintenanced, driving with the headlights on during daylight, etc. And then I'd realize that at the end of the day, there's only so much I can do. . .and stop stressing over the make/model of my car.

thank you.

i do do what i can


i don't know if anyone can answer this, but would it be safer for a 30lb two year old to FF in the center or RF on the passenger side? keeping in mind the type of vehicle i own...

he's FF now because i think the center is safest for him and he doesn't fit RF except in a convertible that only goes to 40lbs (currently we have a roundabout), as the larger convertibles interefere with the front seats. he's also very tall, and his head is at the top, if not slightly over the roundabout, which would make RF impossible, correct? i could put him on the passenger side when we get the new marathon, and i hardly carry passengers so that's not an issue, but that would frighten me because there'd be nothing substantial between him and another car if we got into a side impact.

 

[skaterbabs]

Rear facing is ALWAYS safer than forward facing assuming the child fits either way.

 

[indigoblossom]

Rear facing is ALWAYS safer than forward facing assuming the child fits either way.

really? because i always heard the center is safest and i'd think that would trump the benefits of RF (somewhat) because the children are offered more side protection.

in my car, i'd feel center is best, anyway but i definitely wanted other opinions. i do need to weigh my son again because he might already weigh more than the RF limit for his seat. i know he's at least 30 pounds but probably a bit more because he was 30lbs when we decided to put his seat FF, and that was a few months ago.

what about seat height? if his head is above the top, he can't RF anymore, right? i'll try the MA when we get it but if i remember correctly it was impossible to get a passenger in the front if that seat RF behind it. oh, actually...my fiance had to take his other MA out of his car today so i'll go check when i get my son down for his nap.

 

[skaterbabs]

Nope, RF outboard is still safer than FF center. This of course assumes two things:

1. the child meets the requirements for FF or RF
2. the seat installs equally as well in each position

that said, knowing what I know, if an install were to be less than optimum either way, I would suggest RF because at least that way the seat is still absorbing the majority of the crash forces.

Does that make sense?

A RF seat is outgrown by when there is less than one inch of seat shell above the child's head. For an older child the seat can be more upright, and having your passenger seat completely upright will give you more room as well. I've had many parents tell me a RF seat won't fit when it was simply a matter of putting the front seat upright. This is safer for the passenger in that seat as well, as being reclined increases the chances of serious injury in a crash.

 

[indigoblossom]

Nope, RF outboard is still safer than FF center. This of course assumes two things:

1. the child meets the requirements for FF or RF
2. the seat installs equally as well in each position

that said, knowing what I know, if an install were to be less than optimum either way, I would suggest RF because at least that way the seat is still absorbing the majority of the crash forces.

Does that make sense?

A RF seat is outgrown by when there is less than one inch of seat shell above the child's head. For an older child the seat can be more upright, and having your passenger seat completely upright will give you more room as well. I've had many parents tell me a RF seat won't fit when it was simply a matter of putting the front seat upright. This is safer for the passenger in that seat as well, as being reclined increases the chances of serious injury in a crash.

that makes sense, and i do understand the concept of RF and why it is the safest, in general. i just think a side impact would be a lot worse with him right next to the door because of my particular vehicle. doesn't mean i won't see how the marathon installs RF, though. the only time i tried it, i was pregnant and it didn't fit, so i opted for the roundabout, knowing he would outgrow it sooner.

and my son is too tall to ride RF in a roundabout. rearfacing a marathon in my car isn't simply an issue of adjusting the front seat into a more upright position, though. in order for a MA to fit RF in my vehicle, the passenger (or both passenger and driver) seat needs to be moved forward, so much so that an adult would have difficulty getting in, and if they did, their knees would be touching the dashboard/airbag.

 

[skaterbabs]

Remember, the MA can be a lot more upright now too.

Even in a side impact, RF is safer. The seat contains the child a lot better. Is there a Britax-familiar tech near you that can help you see if you can get the MA RF in the center?

 

[indigoblossom]

Remember, the MA can be a lot more upright now too.

Even in a side impact, RF is safer. The seat contains the child a lot better. Is there a Britax-familiar tech near you that can help you see if you can get the MA RF in the center?

that's true...i probably tried it in the recline position, knowing i'd use it RF for a newborn. i'm not sure about the techs but i'll look around if i don't seem to get a good fit. maybe it will fit in the center still...i really hadn't considered the uprightness of it (even though you probably already mentioned that once) and i haven't gotten around to trying out the other in my car yet because i've been sick and busy with school.