Safety questions

Hazelandlucy · Apr 26, 2014

I am debating between three cars - Volvo XC70, the Acura MDX, or the Infiniti QX60. I love the Volvo, but it's a smaller car than a big SUV and I worry what will happen if I am hit by one - everyone seems to be driving huge cars!

I also like the Infiniti, but it only got 4 out of 5 stars on the frontal collision. Should I be concerned? It also has not taken the small overlap test.

The MDX has 5 stars on everything (besides rollover, which I guess no SUV gets 5 stars) and a good small overlap rating. Does this make it much safer than the other two? Its my least favorite!

Thank you!

cantabdad · Apr 27, 2014

The NHTSA frontal collision test is not as challenging for automakers as the IIHS small overlap. Many vehicles are able to get a 5-star frontal rating. I wouldn't necessarily rule out the Infiniti on that basis alone, but you can certainly do better if safety is the overriding consideration, and frontal crashes are an important category.

The XC70 seems like it hasn't been tested, but its siblings the XC60 and XC90 both aced the IIHS tests, which is remarkable given that the XC90 design is many years old (most carmakers had to redesign their vehicles to pass the small overlap test, and even then some fell short). Volvo also has a highly rated forward collision avoidance system. The curb weight of the XC70 is also similar to the other 2 vehicles, even though it may feel smaller.

CarSafetyGuy · Apr 27, 2014

Maplesmom said:
I am debating between three cars - Volvo XC70, the Acura MDX, or the Infiniti QX60. I love the Volvo, but it's a smaller car than a big SUV and I worry what will happen if I am hit by one - everyone seems to be driving huge cars!

I also like the Infiniti, but it only got 4 out of 5 stars on the frontal collision. Should I be concerned? It also has not taken the small overlap test.

The MDX has 5 stars on everything (besides rollover, which I guess no SUV gets 5 stars) and a good small overlap rating. Does this make it much safer than the other two? Its my least favorite!

Thank you!

What years are you looking at? I'm going to respond as if you were looking at 2014 models.

Between the three, I'd rank them as the MDX, XC70, and QX60 from a safety perspective. The XC70 is based on the S80, so you can roughly consider them to be the same vehicle from a safety standpoint. Between the MDX and the XC70, the MDX wins for me because it weighs more and offers a ride height not present in the XC70. I put the QX60 last because although it weighs the most of the three vehicles, it doesn't have a roof score or a small overlap score, and prior generations had a marginal roof score. But yes, the MDX is one of the safest vehicles you can buy today, and the XC70 is no slouch either.

cantabdad · Apr 28, 2014

I didn't mention this in my earlier post, but another safety consideration is emergency handling and braking -- i.e. avoiding a crash in the first place.

Based on Consumer Reports testing, the Acura had the best emergency handling of the three models, being able to negotiate their defined course at a max speed of 52 mph. The Volvo was next at 50.5 mph and the Infiniti was worst at 47 mph.

For braking, the Volvo had the shortest (best) 60-to-0 braking distance at 135 feet dry and 140 wet. The Acura was 136 ft dry/145 wet and the Infiniti was 137/143.

Hazelandlucy · Apr 28, 2014

I spent a lot of time on the IIHS website today and have ruled out the Infiniti. The auto brake feature basically doesn't work, it has no small overlap or roof score and gets 4 out of 5 stars on the government front collision test. Not good enough to make it worth it.

The Volvo XC70, if going off the s80, does great. But like another poster mentioned, it's not as heavy or high up as a real SUV. However, it's not that low with 8.3 inches of ground clearance and the turbo model weighs 4,000 lbs. So is it considered pretty safe if hit by a large SUV?

New to my list is the Mercedes ML350 (fits 3 carseats so should have plenty of room for a passenger in the back) and Cadillac SRX. Both do very well with the auto brake test, although the Cadillac hasn't take the small overlap - any idea how it would do? Any opinions on those two cars as far as backseat room (need a passenger to fit either between or outboard of two rear facing carseats)?

Are there any third row SUVs besides the Acura that do very well in the auto brake and small overlap test? I didn't see any as "Top Safety Picks +"

CarSafetyGuy · Apr 28, 2014

Maplesmom said:
The Volvo XC70, if going off the s80, does great. But like another poster mentioned, it's not as heavy or high up as a real SUV. However, it's not that low with 8.3 inches of ground clearance and the turbo model weighs 4,000 lbs. So is it considered pretty safe if hit by a large SUV?

It's pretty safe, yes. I haven't come across any XC70 fatalities lately in the collision cases I look into, and I've looked into a lot. It won't be as safe as the MDX in a side impact not because of its weight but because of its ride height; the higher you sit, the fewer of your vital organs are directly in the line of fire. In a frontal crash, it also wouldn't do quite as well as, say, the MDX, simply because it doesn't weigh as much. However, the difference between a 4000 lb vehicle and a 4250 lb vehicle like the MDX is 6%, which basically means that in a head on collision at the same speed between the two vehicles, passengers in a turbo XC70 would experience 6% greater forces than they would in a crash into another turbo XC70, which isn't that much of a difference.

New to my list is the Mercedes ML350 (fits 3 carseats so should have plenty of room for a passenger in the back) and Cadillac SRX. Both do very well with the auto brake test, although the Cadillac hasn't take the small overlap - any idea how it would do? Any opinions on those two cars as far as backseat room (need a passenger to fit either between or outboard of two rear facing carseats)?

I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about the crash avoidance test right now; at the speeds in which they're effective, fatalities are rather low to begin with. However, the small overlap test is far more likely to affect your survivability outcomes, so that one's more important. The SRX is basically a fancy version of the Equinox / Terrain, and as both did well in their most recent revision (2014) on the small overlap test, I'd expect the newest SRX to do well too. However, that also means I wouldn't expect the older SRXes to do well.

Are there any third row SUVs besides the Acura that do very well in the auto brake and small overlap test? I didn't see any as "Top Safety Picks +"

Yes--the 2014 Highlander and the XC90. Again, though, I wouldn't focus so much on the crash prevention test; the small overlap test and the other tests (roof, front, side), as well as ESC and side airbags, are much more relevant for preventing fatalities.

Hazelandlucy · Apr 29, 2014

CarSafetyGuy said:
It's pretty safe, yes. I haven't come across any XC70 fatalities lately in the collision cases I look into, and I've looked into a lot. It won't be as safe as the MDX in a side impact not because of its weight but because of its ride height; the higher you sit, the fewer of your vital organs are directly in the line of fire. In a frontal crash, it also wouldn't do quite as well as, say, the MDX, simply because it doesn't weigh as much. However, the difference between a 4000 lb vehicle and a 4250 lb vehicle like the MDX is 6%, which basically means that in a head on collision at the same speed between the two vehicles, passengers in a turbo XC70 would experience 6% greater forces than they would in a crash into another turbo XC70, which isn't that much of a difference.

I wouldn't spend too much time worrying about the crash avoidance test right now; at the speeds in which they're effective, fatalities are rather low to begin with. However, the small overlap test is far more likely to affect your survivability outcomes, so that one's more important. The SRX is basically a fancy version of the Equinox / Terrain, and as both did well in their most recent revision (2014) on the small overlap test, I'd expect the newest SRX to do well too. However, that also means I wouldn't expect the older SRXes to do well.

Yes--the 2014 Highlander and the XC90. Again, though, I wouldn't focus so much on the crash prevention test; the small overlap test and the other tests (roof, front, side), as well as ESC and side airbags, are much more relevant for preventing fatalities.

Thank you so much!! I like the crash prevention just because I am trading in such a new car (bough just before my first child and before I had any understanding of carseats and backseat room!) and want the latest and greatest technology so I don't feel so silly. Plus it would be nice to avoid rear ending something at any speed!

Should I bother comparing the weight of the MDX, SRX, and ML350 or is are they all similar enough?

I am really not as neurotic as I coming off! Home with a 2 month old and find this very interesting and fun to research, lol.

By newest version of the SRX, do you mean the 2014 or the new redesigned 2015?

Thanks again!

CarSafetyGuy · Apr 29, 2014

Maplesmom said:
Thank you so much!! I like the crash prevention just because I am trading in such a new car (bough just before my first child and before I had any understanding of carseats and backseat room!) and want the latest and greatest technology so I don't feel so silly. Plus it would be nice to avoid rear ending something at any speed!

Should I bother comparing the weight of the MDX, SRX, and ML350 or is are they all similar enough?

I am really not as neurotic as I coming off! Home with a 2 month old and find this very interesting and fun to research, lol.

By newest version of the SRX, do you mean the 2014 or the new redesigned 2015?

Thanks again!

Ha, I totally understand. And yes, it's definitely better to avoid a crash if you can at all help it. : D

The MDX, SRX, and ML350 all weigh within a hundred pounds of each other, so they're practically identical (~4500 lbs).

And don't worry, you don't seem neurotic. This is my hobby too! By newest version of the SRX, I mean the 2015. I don't think the IIHS will test the 2014 at this point with the imminent redesign. Keep in mind, though, that it's possible that the SRX might not get the test for a while; it's been 2 years and the Ford Edge still hasn't been tested, for example, and a bevy of midsize SUVs just had their results released this month.

tl01 · Apr 29, 2014

Maplesmom said:
Thank you so much!! I like the crash prevention just because I am trading in such a new car (bough just before my first child and before I had any understanding of carseats and backseat room!) and want the latest and greatest technology so I don't feel so silly. Plus it would be nice to avoid rear ending something at any speed!

Should I bother comparing the weight of the MDX, SRX, and ML350 or is are they all similar enough?

I am really not as neurotic as I coming off! Home with a 2 month old and find this very interesting and fun to research, lol.

By newest version of the SRX, do you mean the 2014 or the new redesigned 2015?

Thanks again!

We are thinking of a ML350 for dh's next car. I like the design and it did well in the crash tests.

Hazelandlucy · Apr 30, 2014

How much do neck shear force numbers matter? Like if one car had a 30 and the other a 0. Would that make a difference when DD1 goes FF at around 4 yr old? The Volvo has a 30 and the ML350 a 0. The Volvo also has a 19 "extension bending moment" compared to a 6 for the Mercedes and 4 for the Acura for the small overlap. I have no ideas what these numbers mean!

Also, how much does this statement matter as part of the Volvo small overlap test "The side curtain airbag deployed but does not have sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with forward side structure and outside objects?"

There was more vehicle intrusion and less "survival space" in the ML350 (still rated good) and a possible leg/foot injury. Still a safer car though with no neck shear and a side curtain airbag that is big enough?

cantabdad · Apr 30, 2014

When you think about the sheer variety of vehicles that are out on the road, including a lot of older cars that lack even some basic safety features, *any* of the vehicles that you've mentioned are going to be incredibly safe by comparison. I would not dwell too much on small differences in scores, much less in the underlying technical measurements.

That being said, one thing that impressed me is that the XC90 aced the small overlap test even though the design has been the same since 2003. Toyota did a redesign of the Camry specifically to do better on this test and still only managed an Acceptable. To me, this suggests that safety is engrained in the Volvo culture and that they're not just "teaching to the test," if that makes sense.

Also, even though there's not as much cool data, don't underestimate crash avoidance. The single biggest fatal crash scenario (last I checked) is a single-vehicle, run-off-the-road crash. These are often related to impairment or fatigue, but it points out that good handling and braking are just as important as crashworthiness.

CarSafetyGuy · May 1, 2014

Maplesmom said:
How much do neck shear force numbers matter? Like if one car had a 30 and the other a 0. Would that make a difference when DD1 goes FF at around 4 yr old? The Volvo has a 30 and the ML350 a 0. The Volvo also has a 19 "extension bending moment" compared to a 6 for the Mercedes and 4 for the Acura for the small overlap. I have no ideas what these numbers mean!

Also, how much does this statement matter as part of the Volvo small overlap test "The side curtain airbag deployed but does not have sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with forward side structure and outside objects?"

There was more vehicle intrusion and less "survival space" in the ML350 (still rated good) and a possible leg/foot injury. Still a safer car though with no neck shear and a side curtain airbag that is big enough?

Yup, good advice from cantabad above. These are already very safe vehicles. That said...

Neck shear forces refer to the movement of the neck in a diagonal motion. It's essentially a measure of torque. There are certain ranges the average adult neck can tolerate without injury. None of these are really applicable to your child, as your child would have a weaker neck but would have more protection due to being in a harnessed FF seat. Lower numbers are better, but none of the numbers you listed are dangerous.

I'll come back to talk about your other two questions this evening. I've got a meeting in a few minutes!

CarSafetyGuy · May 1, 2014

Maplesmom said:
Also, how much does this statement matter as part of the Volvo small overlap test "The side curtain airbag deployed but does not have sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with forward side structure and outside objects?"

This means that the side head airbag did deploy but didn't extend forward enough to the point where the front end was parallel to the steering wheel. Essentially, they're saying that the side bag should have covered more ground. It's not ideal, but it's still good.

There was more vehicle intrusion and less "survival space" in the ML350 (still rated good) and a possible leg/foot injury. Still a safer car though with no neck shear and a side curtain airbag that is big enough?

I'd rank the ML350 as safer than the S80 not because of the neck shear scores or airbag coverage, but because the small overlap test, like the moderate overlap test, is weight-loaded. In other words, the ML350 scores are based on a small overlap crash into a 4800 lb vehicle, while the S80's results are based on a crash into a 3800 lb vehicle.

henrietta · May 4, 2014

I can't reply to those numbers at all, but I do have one of those vehicles..I looked at those same vehicles 2 years ago (older models though). I ended up with an XC70 b/c I got a great deal on one & b/c it was so comfy for me to sit in & drive (matters a lot to me b/c I have an autoimmune condition). I agree with Cantabdad that safety seems to be more ingrained in Volvo culture. I felt the same way about our '98 Passat (which actually had Side Airbags in the front & rear). I love my Volvo. I got on here to read threads about 3 across b/c we've had a third baby (didn't plan that when I bought it!) and the 3 across is tough for me. I really don't want to sell it, but I'm exploring my options. As to getting hit head on by a bigger vehicle, it doesn't worry me that much. My husband got hit by a semi in August (the death of the Passat) & even being older, it crumpled up well, airbags did their thing, & he was okay. That said, the truck had already braked hard & tried to avoid the crash, so it was not straight head on, but the truck hit the Passat still at about 20 mph or more (Passat was stopped). I guess I'm firmly in the camp of any of those vehicles, being newer, with the added safety features, are going to be pretty safe in a crash. I would buy another Volvo in a heartbeat. Good luck!

Hazelandlucy · May 5, 2014

henrietta said:
I can't reply to those numbers at all, but I do have one of those vehicles..I looked at those same vehicles 2 years ago (older models though). I ended up with an XC70 b/c I got a great deal on one & b/c it was so comfy for me to sit in & drive (matters a lot to me b/c I have an autoimmune condition). I agree with Cantabdad that safety seems to be more ingrained in Volvo culture. I felt the same way about our '98 Passat (which actually had Side Airbags in the front & rear). I love my Volvo. I got on here to read threads about 3 across b/c we've had a third baby (didn't plan that when I bought it!) and the 3 across is tough for me. I really don't want to sell it, but I'm exploring my options. As to getting hit head on by a bigger vehicle, it doesn't worry me that much. My husband got hit by a semi in August (the death of the Passat) & even being older, it crumpled up well, airbags did their thing, & he was okay. That said, the truck had already braked hard & tried to avoid the crash, so it was not straight head on, but the truck hit the Passat still at about 20 mph or more (Passat was stopped). I guess I'm firmly in the camp of any of those vehicles, being newer, with the added safety features, are going to be pretty safe in a crash. I would buy another Volvo in a heartbeat. Good luck!

I don't actually need a third carseat, just a passenger...does anyone fit back there with the kids? Can you get a seat in the center and outboard so I could leave an outboard seat free? I think maybe the new ones are slightly bigger, but not sure

henrietta · May 5, 2014

Maplesmom said:
I don't actually need a third carseat, just a passenger...does anyone fit back there with the kids? Can you get a seat in the center and outboard so I could leave an outboard seat free? I think maybe the new ones are slightly bigger, but not sure

Tried to answer that on your other post yesterday & phone wouldn't post anymore. Lol

Yes, you could fit a thin to average sizes adult outboard next to two car seats. I bet you can fit the rear facing found next to the rear facing cocorro. They should puzzle well.

But it isn't huge...no extra room.

Hths

Safety questions

Hazelandlucy

Active member

cantabdad

New member

CarSafetyGuy

New member

cantabdad

New member

Hazelandlucy

Active member

CarSafetyGuy

New member

Hazelandlucy

Active member

CarSafetyGuy

New member

tl01

New member

Hazelandlucy

Active member

cantabdad

New member

CarSafetyGuy

New member

CarSafetyGuy

New member

henrietta

Well-known member

Hazelandlucy

Active member

henrietta

Well-known member

Car-Seat.Org Facebook Group

Sponsors

Forum statistics