wife pointed this one out to me - was surprised.
are you guys concerned with this? not sure what to make of it yet.

Subcompact cars fare poorly in new crash tests | UTSanDiego.com

 

It's certainly a poor rating in one type of test. The specific test is a new "small offset" where only a small portion of the front of the car contacts whatever it's hitting. Prior to this, "moderate offset" tests were used where the Fit got a "good" rating.

The take away point, I think, is small cars are less safe than large cars. Well that and if you're going to hit something, better to hit it full-on than offset. In an ironic twist, with ABS you're more likely to steer away from a full-on front hit.

Here's the source release from IIHS with more information including a pretty damning chart.

Here's the visual. it's just a tiny area that hits. The headlight out. still...


And the institute's comments (with more ugly video)


I think our Fits just depreciated 10%...

 

I get a big laugh out of this stuff. First off, USAA told me not to buy a Yaris unless I wanted my insurance to be much higher, and as you can see, the Yaris was substantially better than the Fit in this one offset test. The Fit was one of USAA insurance's highly recommended cars for a new driver. While it is true that large cars "are safer" than small ones, the word safer applies to those who believe that they are driving to survive. Those that think that they require a tank to keep them safe should not be driving at all, and seem to drive the biggest, stupidest vehicles on the road to compensate for their lack of driving skill. Yes, while they may well survive, I will always continue to drive small cars like the Fit because I have steered out of so many accidents over the decades. Smaller width tires do better in snow and ice as well. I would like to see figures from IIHS not on insurance costs, fatalities, property damage, etc, but simply rather a figure on overall how many mid sized cars/trucks/SUV's are involved in accidents (no matter how minor) versus cars smaller than a mid sized. Take that total and divide it by the number of small cars versus large cars to get a proper proportion. Alas, I am on my way out on to the icy streets in my small compact car. I'm sure I will encounter many "safe" vehicles which have plunged into a ditch as the clueless drivers get out wondering why their big bertha did not save them from peril.

 

I agree, the driver is the biggest safety feature.

But accounting for other drivers (there are real idiots out there, present company excluded), it's hard to dismiss. I tend to discount the small offset test at first blush: it's such a tiny impact area, check out the vids.

Still, while it doesn't make me want to buy a Chevy Spark, it does make the next larger class more appealing (Civic).

And my thoughts about replacing the Fit with a Prius C have been shelved.

Need more time to rationalize...

 

Well said, and I completely agree. Seems like IIHS sensationalizes test reports to the media are self-serving. This latest test result for the Fit does not detract at all my love of this car.

 

The new fit should do much better. The one tested here is a 6-year-old design, built long before this test existed. It's the oldest car in the lineup.

 

meh, the dummy just didnt know how to drive, that's all.

 

BINGO! That's exactly what I say just about every day.


All I can think of when I watch the video is: what a waste of a perfectly good Fit. Can I at least get the floor mats before they take it to the dump??; assuming the dummy didn't bleed all over them.

 

I stopped reading at "offset crash test"

Very few cars do well at that test, especially compact cars. Cars with a short front end are especially bad at it, which makes sense right? Less crumple zone available.

I am more concerned with side and rear crash ratings.

 

Haha, best comment! Though looks like a Base model in the vid...

 

This news isn't going over well between my fiance and I.

We bought a new car last year and I pushed her towards subcompacts. I won her over on the FIT specifically because it seemed to have the best safety ratings out of the subcompacts.

So this news comes as a bit of a shocker, but it seems to be the case (I hope?) that the FIT does very well on all the other tests. Just not this partial front impact one.

I feel like an idiot however for my previous "research" made me feel like the fit was pretty dang safe all things considered and I was preaching this safety to her. Fuck.

 

I believe this is still true. Of course you will be "safer" in a compact (which is pretty much a mid-size at this point), or mid-size car because of the extra weight and longer hood.

It's not a Pinto and you don't hear about how unsafe Fits are, i've seen some pretty gnarly crashes posted on here and the car held up like a champ. This is mostly sensationalism IMO, and you shouldn't worry about it much.

 

Yes. Let's not all forget the advancements in safety in the past 15 years. Just imagine how poorly cars prior to the 90s would fare in any of these tests.

 

I've been in accidents in larger SUV/Trucks (a 04 Suburban and more recently an 09 Silverado 2500 4x4) and walked away fine and so did the vehicle for the most part.

I was in pretty severe accident in a friends EP3 and walked away the same.

I see the point they are getting at in the testing. But they're comparing apples to oranges. People are going to buy the car regardless if it fits the budget and personal choices. Every new car sold and used, has information online available through reading and video. I bought a Fit before I saw the videos and haven't regretted my decision.

Speaking of USAA, I owned an 04 Mountaineer and now my Fit and paid 75 for the SUV and currently pay 70 for the Fit. Both on full coverage, with WELL above minimums. My truck on the other hand was significantly cheaper at 45-50 a month. My bike is about 25 a month. Insurance companies will charge whatever they feel off some formula they've made up for the situations.

And on the video, I smell a part out!!! LOL

 

Also, the dummy's head goes off the airbag on most of the compact videos, not just the Fit. The Mazda 2 seems to be built well for the test because the test really just impacts the fender and pulls it back but it doesn't hit the unibody frame really so it's not as dramatic. I wonder if this was done on purpose.

Working with engineering, I know companies purposefully build things so they look good on standardized tests. In the real world however, this means little to nothing.

 

Definitely sensationalized. Otherwise, there would be a car that actually got the top ranking of "good" in this test. But instead, all but one car got either "poor" or "marginal" rating. This leads me to believe this is an issue with almost all cars of this size segment and not something to fret about. Bigger cars will almost always be safer given the same safety equipment. That being said, safety equipment nowadays make a subcompact a good choice.

 

They run this test now because apparently it's a pretty common type of collision. And, now that they're running this test, cars may start to be build to do better on it.


So for all you folks who complain about insurance, here's something done with your money to help save your life (and save money, too).

 

I was looking at the inside of the engine compartment, and it didn't look like the engine had moved. Didn't see anything flying out like a battery, etc. Did see the rear view mirror flying off the windshield - that could be a missle to someone in the car. Thought is was interesting how the dummy's head glanced off the air bag and then into the dash. arghh Ain't givin' up my FIT!

 

Yea, they say bigger cars are safer, but why are they safer?

Because you can get more structural integrity into a F350 than a Fit. The test is basically showing people what happens to your car after the pole and front kiss or another car half in the intersection. Anything can be built to test well and perform poorly IRL. I see why they do it, but they are making it sound worse than it is.


There's a real world Fit accident and guess what the guy is fine. Proving any can be safe and the testing can point out a fault.

 

^Crazy video!

Big +1 to this and similar responses, I am not worried at all about this unrealistic crash scenario