Making kids safer, one question at a time.  Welcome to the Car-Seat.Org community!   Motor Vehicle Crashes are the #1 cause of fatal injury for children and adults, age groups 1 to 34.   Selecting a safe car, minivan or SUV, plus correctly using child restraints and seatbelts may be the most important things you can do to protect your family.   Need help installing an infant, convertible or booster seat?   Looking for carseat reviews or compatibility advice? Need help buying the best and safest car seats for your baby, toddler or older kid?   No question is a bad one, so please click here to ask our experts a question and then join our friendly community of moms, dads, caregivers and advocates in the USA and Canada.   Thank you for visiting; buckle-up and drive safely!


 

Sponsored Ads

Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    Senior Community Member P1ally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    604

    Rear impact rating

    Every truck I look at has a poor rear impact rating.. (Like the 2007 Dodge ram 1500, and 2006 Ford F-150 crew cab). BUT I can't find any more info as to why it was poor.. Anyone have any info on IIHS rear impact ratings?

  2. # ADS
    Sponsored Ads
    Join Date
    April, 2001
    Location
    Car-Seat.Org
    Posts
    Many
     
     

  3. #2
    Guest
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,521

    Re: Rear impact rating

    I don't think the design the bed as a crumple zone. Cabin has no room for a crumple zone.

  4. #3
    Senior Community Member P1ally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    604

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Quote Originally Posted by codex57 View Post
    I don't think the design the bed as a crumple zone. Cabin has no room for a crumple zone.
    Bleh. How do you like your ridgeline? I'm trying DESPERATELY to talk my DH into one, as it seems to be what we both want- He wants a truck, I want him to not drive a death trap

  5. #4
    Carseat Crazy beeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    562

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Just as codex said, no crumple zone on the big 3. The frame rails are basically straight to the bumper, and the bumper brackets don't have much crumple ability (or much pulling ability ). A lot of trucks have a hitch receiver under the bumper, and they have even less give. Plus the box itself is pretty unsubstantial tin.

  6. #5
    Guest
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,521

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Quote Originally Posted by P1ally View Post
    Bleh. How do you like your ridgeline? I'm trying DESPERATELY to talk my DH into one, as it seems to be what we both want- He wants a truck, I want him to not drive a death trap
    Beat with an ugly stick. Otherwise, freakin' awesome! Gonna sell it soon to get a minivan.

    I'm not a truck guy, but the Ridgeline doesn't really feel like a truck cuz it's got a trunk. Drives more like a car too (handles better than the Lexus ). My only complaint is I wish the bed were 1 foot longer, but that's a pretty common complaint with all quad cab trucks. Bed extender makes it tolerable. Still light years better than, say, a Tacoma or Frontier.

    I've never gone mudding, but it handles great in the snow. Tahoe trips are gonna get interesting once we sell it and no longer have an AWD vehicle.

    Oh, and since we're talking rear impact safety, it seems quite safe. DW got rear ended once in it. Ended up replacing the bumper, but that's just cuz the other car's license plate frame's screw caused a tiny crack in the bumper. Otherwise, just some light scratches to the bumper. The Corolla that hit us was totalled. Front end squished all the way to the passenger compartment. DW said the seat and car spread the force of the hit quite well.

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    30

    Re: Rear impact rating

    I wouldn't consider most modern trucks a deathtrap by any means, regardless of their rear impact safety rating. I think those ratings give the wrong impression a lot of times.

  8. #7
    Admin - CPS Technician joolsplus3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Chesterfield, VA
    Posts
    21,249

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Can you link to what you're finding? I can only find the head restraint ratings on their main page...? http://www.iihs.org/ratings/default.aspx

    I thought that's all they rated, and it only has to do with head restraints being tall enough/close enough to the back of a tall person's head to actually catch the head.

    Then all these guys started going on about crumple zones and stuff, so I'm confused (how could 6 feet of truck bed NOT be reasonably protective, regardless of framing and crumple zones???)
    Julie
    CPST since 2003, pu"R"ple since 2008, three kids growing too fast since 1997, 1999 and 2006

    Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good

  9. #8
    Carseat Crazy
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    859

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Quote Originally Posted by P1ally View Post
    Bleh. How do you like your ridgeline? I'm trying DESPERATELY to talk my DH into one, as it seems to be what we both want- He wants a truck, I want him to not drive a death trap
    I know your question was for codex, but I'm jumping in too. My dad has a Ridgeline and we all love it. If I didn't need to to haul so many people, I would absolutely have one. Honda did an awesome job of overcoming the shortcomings of other trucks. The trunk in the bed is the best idea ever. The back seat folds up, giving a ton of inside storage room. Things like that make you wonder why other companies don't do the same thing. Dad's was rear ended similar to Codex's and it also just needed a bumper.

    My dad is a truck guy and works with manly truck men. It was comical because they started out giving him grief, but then ood and awed over all the neat stuff. His is a bit less ugly since it has a billet (sp?) grill and is black (everything looks good in black).

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    58

    Re: Rear impact rating

    I'd also like to see where you saw rear crash ratings - I'd like to look up the results for my truck

    As others have said, pickups typically are body-on-frame with two very stiff frame rails running the length of the truck. They're not designed as crumple zones. They're designed to never ever bend during normal & severe use (plowing snow, off roading, pulling trailers that weigh more than the truck, etc.)

    I don't know crash data, but have heard multiple stories of cars getting smashed up pretty bad from rearending a pickup, and the truck just needs a new bumper.

    I could believe that a ridid frame like that would make impacts more severe, but the higher mass of a truck would make it less severe (for the truck occupants, not the car hitting them) so I'm not sure if you'd be better off in a truck or not.

    Ridgeline is different though. It does have something that resembles frame rails, but its really more like a unibody with structural members throughout cab, floor, pillars, bed rails, etc. I could believe that they could have designed this structure with crash performance in mind (crumple zones), but it may also be less likely to get away with just a new bumper after being rear ended.
    DD 7/07, DD 10/09
    2002 Silverado 2500HD crew[open][Marathon FF][Advocate RF]
    2011 Odyssey [open][MyRide65 FF][Advocate RF] /[open back row]

  11. #10
    Carseat Crazy beeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    562

    Re: Rear impact rating

    i would have no concern with there being no "crumple zone" in the rear, as far as getting crushed, as there are 6 to 11 feet of solid frame, based on the length of the truck, it's just the length of the crash isn't stretched out (all the more reason to keep RF ) There is a crumple zone in the frame on the front end, so there is an amount of protection there.

  12. #11
    Senior Community Member P1ally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    604

    Re: Rear impact rating

    I was looking on www.informedforlife.org

    My concern with trucks isn't just rear impact, it's side too. The F-150 didn't have side airbags AVAILABLE until 2009. Like WTF?!? You couldn't even get it as a premium option? Ugh. Also, the Ram 1500 gets poor side impact ratings, even with air bags (which are impossible to find until the 2009 model).

    I've heard a lot of the "Oh trucks are safer than cars, my truck would survive any crash, I don't believe the crash test ratings" stuff from multiple people this week, but the fact is that they don't perform nearly as well as cars or SUV's the exact same tests. I think people who drive big trucks say that stuff to make themselves feel better about the truck they already own, but it's misinformation..

  13. #12
    Admin - CPS Technician joolsplus3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Chesterfield, VA
    Posts
    21,249

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Oh, yeah, crash test ratings for trucks are surprisingly horrible. Though getting better... a couple years ago there was some expose on how Volvo's have good roof crush strength test, and Ford trucks (same parent company for both vehicles) have horrible ones, and some higher-up guy was like, oh, I'd never buy the truck, no way, no how (higher rollover risk plus weak roof= potentially deadly combination)

    I was just answering the specific rear impact question, because I am pretty sure the headrests are all that get tested right now, and mostly only based on height and distance to head, not even real crash tests, in most cases.
    Julie
    CPST since 2003, pu"R"ple since 2008, three kids growing too fast since 1997, 1999 and 2006

    Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good

  14. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    30

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Quote Originally Posted by P1ally View Post
    I've heard a lot of the "Oh trucks are safer than cars, my truck would survive any crash, I don't believe the crash test ratings" stuff from multiple people this week, but the fact is that they don't perform nearly as well as cars or SUV's the exact same tests. I think people who drive big trucks say that stuff to make themselves feel better about the truck they already own, but it's misinformation..
    I don't own a big truck, I own a small car. I wouldn't delude myself into thinking that it is safer, whatever the ratings suggest. For some reason crash tests are rarely done with multiple vehicles and when they are the evidence against small vs large is apparent. Just look at a video of a toyota camry vs toyota yaris. The yaris has a 4 star frontal and yet gets obliterated by a sedan. Imagine a truck... Those safety ratings are a crock.

  15. #14
    Admin - CPS Technician LISmama810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chicago-ish
    Posts
    12,178

    Re: Rear impact rating

    We looked at Chevy, Ford, and Dodge, and IIRC, Dodge was the only one with headrests in all seating positions.

    There are no safety ratings on my truck vecause they're not required at that size. So I have to rely on ratings for the smaller models and extrapolate from there.

    I know that bigger does not necessarily equal safer, but man, its hard not to FEEL safe in that thing. It also feels better knowing that my kids are more than six feet from the point of impact in a rear-end crash.

    I can't say exactly how our truck would perform against a concrete wall, but I'll take my chances against a Prius.

    (That's not meant as a dig on small cars. I would rather own a Prius than a Ram. I'm just saying that in real-world driving conditions, I'm not too concerned.)

  16. #15
    Senior Community Member P1ally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    604

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Quote Originally Posted by VCSdadBear View Post
    I don't own a big truck, I own a small car. I wouldn't delude myself into thinking that it is safer, whatever the ratings suggest. For some reason crash tests are rarely done with multiple vehicles and when they are the evidence against small vs large is apparent. Just look at a video of a toyota camry vs toyota yaris. The yaris has a 4 star frontal and yet gets obliterated by a sedan. Imagine a truck... Those safety ratings are a crock.
    Safety ratings are a crock? I disagree. The ratings aren't based on the damage to the car (because that's not important), it's about the level of injury to the passengers..

    The side impact tests that the IIHS does are not car vs car. It's a barrier that is simliar to an SUV.

    I'm not going to dispute that a small car vs truck= truck wins. Yeah I'm aware. Idk about where you live, but here it's not just sedans and ONE truck on the road. It's big trucks and SUVs everywhere. Imagine truck vs truck, ya know?

  17. #16
    Senior Community Member P1ally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    604

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Quote Originally Posted by LISmama810 View Post
    We looked at Chevy, Ford, and Dodge, and IIRC, Dodge was the only one with headrests in all seating positions.

    There are no safety ratings on my truck vecause they're not required at that size. So I have to rely on ratings for the smaller models and extrapolate from there.

    I know that bigger does not necessarily equal safer, but man, its hard not to FEEL safe in that thing. It also feels better knowing that my kids are more than six feet from the point of impact in a rear-end crash.

    I can't say exactly how our truck would perform against a concrete wall, but I'll take my chances against a Prius.

    (That's not meant as a dig on small cars. I would rather own a Prius than a Ram. I'm just saying that in real-world driving conditions, I'm not too concerned.)

    You have the 2010, right? I know side airbags became standard in 09, and frontal crash tests for the other Rams are good.

  18. #17
    Admin - CPS Technician LISmama810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chicago-ish
    Posts
    12,178

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Yeah, roll-over is pretty crummy, though.

    I'd definitely want something with side airbags regardless of how big the vehicle is or how it rates. (I know that's not always a possibility, but if it came down to one with, one without, that would likely be a deciding factor.)

  19. #18
    Senior Community Member P1ally's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    604

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Quote Originally Posted by LISmama810 View Post
    Yeah, roll-over is pretty crummy, though.

    I'd definitely want something with side airbags regardless of how big the vehicle is or how it rates. (I know that's not always a possibility, but if it came down to one with, one without, that would likely be a deciding factor.)

    This is my problem right now.. DH wants a 2007 ram (we can't afford any newer) and I can't find one with side airbags.

    He's looking at ridgelines right now though

  20. #19
    Guest
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,521

    Re: Rear impact rating

    Black DEFINITELY makes the Ridgeline look better. The red looks good too. Not that fond of the others, altho the lighter you go, the more details it exposes which makes the truck uglier.

    But it's FREAKING usefull. Flip up rear seats with a totally flat floor, that sliding center console, etc. I love how they deliberately made it wide enough for a mountain bike in the rear (also fits certain 50" tvs INSIDE the box, like the Vizio my parents got) or how the bed grooves were designed to maximize the # of dirt bikes you can fit back there.

    No, you can't tow a giant trailer or boat or anything, but if it's just dirt bikes or jet skis, you're good. It's not a do everything truck, but if you don't need it to do everything, what it's good at, it's VERY good at.

    Oh, and if you like to tailgate, the trunk actually has a drain in the corner. You can fill it with ice and beer, and at the end of the day, just pull the plug and drain out all the melted ice.

Similar Threads

  1. forward/rear facing vs. side impact support
    By Unregistered in forum CAR SEATS - General Child Safety Seat Questions, Help and Advice
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-27-2010, 05:51 PM
  2. Question rfing during rear impact crash?
    By rachel in forum CAR SEATS - General Child Safety Seat Questions, Help and Advice
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 09-09-2009, 07:39 PM
  3. Question Rear-side impact airbags? Yay or nay?
    By mayamama in forum Car and Vehicle Safety
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-08-2009, 12:07 AM
  4. Rear facing safer in side impact...
    By tl01 in forum Carseat Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-06-2008, 07:20 PM
  5. Is rear-facing safer in a side impact collision?
    By oxeye in forum Car and Vehicle Safety
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-11-2007, 06:55 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •