Topic: Honda Civic only nets two stars on revamped NHTSA side impact test

[Shnak]

I have no clue, but it really doesn't matter as my Sonata isn't being sold anymore whereas the Civic still is.

Also, how come the Cruze hasn't been rated yet? A lot of the new offerings for 2011 have been rated (new Sonata, Fiesta, Mazda2, etc.). Why not the Cruze? I'd expect it to do very well with its 10 standard airbags.

It's fine by me, but I think you made a strong statement saying "I'd be ticked if I bought a car thinking it was one of the safest ones out there, but turns out it isn't when more complete tests are done" related to Civic (which is soon to be replaced anyway), without realizing your new car is in a very same situation so you must be "ticked off" based on your own comment.
I’m pretty sure you’ve stated in several occasion how important the safety is for you so sure thing you though the 2010 Sonata is a one of the safest cars based on the previous ratings, which perhaps was one of the reasons you bought it.

This is what few posters picked up on.

How is my Sonata in the exact same situation as the Civic when my Sonata isn't sold anymore and thus wasn't tested against the new standards? Who knows, it might do better than the Civic does? It might do even worse? I don't know. Why would I be ticked off that my Sonata is possibly not as safe as the new one? And besides, that's pretty much always a given... new is better than old. That doesn't mean the old isn't good, just that it isn't as good as the new. Whatever. Again, Hyundai gets dragged into a thread by a bunch of other people for no apparent reason other than they can't have a reasonable discussion without resorting to insulting my personal choice of vehicles. Why is that?

[Shnak]

Also, how come the Cruze hasn't been rated yet? A lot of the new offerings for 2011 have been rated (new Sonata, Fiesta, Mazda2, etc.). Why not the Cruze? I'd expect it to do very well with its 10 standard airbags.

It appears that only about two dozen cars have been rated so far; there are maybe a hundred cars to rate.  They can't test everything on one day.

Sure, but I would expect one of the most anticipated vehicles to hit the market in a little while to get tested as soon as possible. I mean, Chevrolet has had 17 vehicles tested under the new standards, but couldn't send a Cruze or two their way to be tested? Are they hiding something? Maybe those 10 airbags aren't helping as much as they were hoping? I realize those questions are stuff of conspiracy theorists, but at the same time, they wouldn't come up if the Cruze had been tested already.

[Mitlov]

Also, how come the Cruze hasn't been rated yet? A lot of the new offerings for 2011 have been rated (new Sonata, Fiesta, Mazda2, etc.). Why not the Cruze? I'd expect it to do very well with its 10 standard airbags.

It appears that only about two dozen cars have been rated so far; there are maybe a hundred cars to rate.  They can't test everything on one day.

Sure, but I would expect one of the most anticipated vehicles to hit the market in a little while to get tested as soon as possible. I mean, Chevrolet has had 17 vehicles tested under the new standards, but couldn't send a Cruze or two their way to be tested? Are they hiding something? Maybe those 10 airbags aren't helping as much as they were hoping? I realize those questions are stuff of conspiracy theorists, but at the same time, they wouldn't come up if the Cruze had been tested already.

Really just five vehicles; just 17 trim levels.  Equinox, Malibu, Tahoe, Traverse, Silverado.  All but one--the Malibu--are SUVs and trucks, which is I think where the NHTSA started doing its testing under the new method.

[Mitlov]

How is my Sonata in the exact same situation as the Civic when my Sonata isn't sold anymore and thus wasn't tested against the new standards? Who knows, it might do better than the Civic does? It might do even worse? I don't know. Why would I be ticked off that my Sonata is possibly not as safe as the new one? And besides, that's pretty much always a given... new is better than old. That doesn't mean the old isn't good, just that it isn't as good as the new. Whatever. Again, Hyundai gets dragged into a thread by a bunch of other people for no apparent reason other than they can't have a reasonable discussion without resorting to insulting my personal choice of vehicles. Why is that?

If you're genuinely concerned about the SAFETY aspect, instead of the MARKETING aspect of Honda selling a "two-star-side-impact-rated" Civic for a nine-month period until the new Civic is here, then you'd be concerned about the Sonata YOU own, regardless of whether it was replaced for the 2011 or 2012 model year.  You're not. 

I would also point out that the biggest dig you took at Honda ("I'd be ticked if I bought a car thinking it was one of the safest ones out there, but turns out it isn't when more complete tests are done") is not dependent on whether the car is still sold, or whether it has just been replaced on dealer lots.  However, you're not applying that same reasoning to other carmakers or to the car you yourself drive your family around in.

[Shnak]

Also, how come the Cruze hasn't been rated yet? A lot of the new offerings for 2011 have been rated (new Sonata, Fiesta, Mazda2, etc.). Why not the Cruze? I'd expect it to do very well with its 10 standard airbags.

It appears that only about two dozen cars have been rated so far; there are maybe a hundred cars to rate.  They can't test everything on one day.

Sure, but I would expect one of the most anticipated vehicles to hit the market in a little while to get tested as soon as possible. I mean, Chevrolet has had 17 vehicles tested under the new standards, but couldn't send a Cruze or two their way to be tested? Are they hiding something? Maybe those 10 airbags aren't helping as much as they were hoping? I realize those questions are stuff of conspiracy theorists, but at the same time, they wouldn't come up if the Cruze had been tested already.

Really just five vehicles; just 17 trim levels.  Equinox, Malibu, Tahoe, Traverse, Silverado.  All but one--the Malibu--are SUVs and trucks, which is I think where the NHTSA started doing its testing under the new method.

Still, they ran the tests 17 times. They could've ditched one of those trims and tested the Cruze instead, no?

[Shnak]

How is my Sonata in the exact same situation as the Civic when my Sonata isn't sold anymore and thus wasn't tested against the new standards? Who knows, it might do better than the Civic does? It might do even worse? I don't know. Why would I be ticked off that my Sonata is possibly not as safe as the new one? And besides, that's pretty much always a given... new is better than old. That doesn't mean the old isn't good, just that it isn't as good as the new. Whatever. Again, Hyundai gets dragged into a thread by a bunch of other people for no apparent reason other than they can't have a reasonable discussion without resorting to insulting my personal choice of vehicles. Why is that?

If you're genuinely concerned about the SAFETY aspect, instead of the MARKETING aspect of Honda selling a "two-star-side-impact-rated" Civic for a nine-month period until the new Civic is here, then you'd be concerned about the Sonata YOU own, regardless of whether it was replaced for the 2011 or 2012 model year.  You're not. 

I would also point out that the biggest dig you took at Honda ("I'd be ticked if I bought a car thinking it was one of the safest ones out there, but turns out it isn't when more complete tests are done") is not dependent on whether the car is still sold, or whether it has just been replaced on dealer lots.  However, you're not applying that same reasoning to other carmakers or to the car you yourself drive your family around in.

It's simple. If I buy a car that is rated to be amongst the safest in the segment, I expect that to be true even when tests change. As you said yourself, the Golf and Imprezza are likely to do better than the Civic in these new tests. If that is true, I was misled when I bought the car. Unintentionally misled, but misled still, especially considering Honda's marketing regarding safety, etc.

As for the Sonata, what do you want me to do? Go to IIHS and give them my car so that they can run the new tests on it? Of course not. And do you know for a fact that it'd fare worst than the Accord, Camry, etc. under the new tests? No? Well what's the point in arguing about something for which we'll never have the answer?

[Mitlov]

Still, they ran the tests 17 times. They could've ditched one of those trims and tested the Cruze instead, no?

   What's the point you're trying to make?  What's the significance in your eyes that they tested vehicle X before vehicle Y?  Is there a conspiracy here?  Do you think something's being hidden?  They can't do 'em all at once, so they had to start somewhere.  It turns out that they didn't start with the Cruze.  What angle are you trying to work with this fact?

[Shnak]

Still, they ran the tests 17 times. They could've ditched one of those trims and tested the Cruze instead, no?

   What's the point you're trying to make?  What's the significance in your eyes that they tested vehicle X before vehicle Y?  Is there a conspiracy here?  Do you think something's being hidden?  They can't do 'em all at once, so they had to start somewhere.  It turns out that they didn't start with the Cruze.  What angle are you trying to work with this fact?

All I'm asking is why test a bunch of old/unchanged vehicles before their brand new long-awaited vehicle?

[Mitlov]

It's simple. If I buy a car that is rated to be amongst the safest in the segment, I expect that to be true even when tests change. As you said yourself, the Golf and Imprezza are likely to do better than the Civic in these new tests. If that is true, I was misled when I bought the car. Unintentionally misled, but misled still, especially considering Honda's marketing regarding safety, etc.

YOU were misled by Honda?  When?  How?  The only person with a 2011 Civic here is me, and I don't think I was misled.

And yes, I always knew the Civic was not quite the tank that the Golf and Impreza are.  I wouldn't have said otherwise even when I bought it.  But compared to the rest on the market, it always did quite well, especially in rear-seat crash test safety (which I care more about than front-seat).  Not misled here at all.

As for the Sonata, what do you want me to do? Go to IIHS and give them my car so that they can run the new tests on it? Of course not. And do you know for a fact that it'd fare worst than the Accord, Camry, etc. under the new tests? No? Well what's the point in arguing about something for which we'll never have the answer?

I want you to quit squaking about the safety of one particular car that's just as safe as pretty much anything else from its era...a car that is going to be replaced in less than a year by a car which will probably be just as safe as pretty much anything else from its era.

The fact that you own a car that's as safe as pretty much anything else from its era, but likely not as good as the new-generation cars, just drive home the silliness of the indignation that you're directing at the Civic.

[Mitlov]

All I'm asking is why test a bunch of old/unchanged vehicles before their brand new long-awaited vehicle?

Why not?  They were already on dealer lots before the Cruze was.

You're acting like that kid in elementary school who was always like "why do we have to line up in alphabetical order instead of reverse alphabetical order?"  It doesn't matter, but either way, not everybody is going to be first.

[footlong58]

Who cares about the old Elantra or the new Sonata? I'm talking about the Civic here. And I would expect the Civic to be much better than whatever the test standards were before the new ones because Honda's always played up their safety R&D. And in your own words, I do find it surprising and frankly puzzling that a Honda isn't expected to beat safety standards like the Imprezza and Golf presumably do. I honestly put Honda at a higher level than what they're showing with these tests, so yes, I was surprised and disappointed about the results for the Civic, especially considering it likely won't be replaced for at least another year, if not longer.

That's the problem.  You (and the original article) restrict the conversation to the Civic specifically, when most cars of the Civic's generation (designed in mid-2000s) fare similarly (Mazda3 and Versa get two stars; Sentra and Camry get three).  This is a generational issue, not a Civic-specific issue.

And in case you're not aware, a new Civic is coming for model year 2012.  It was originally planned to be here for model year 2011, though they ended up holding off for another year (the rumor is they decided to downsize it or keep the size constant instead of the original plan to make it larger than the 2006-2010 Civic).  The Civic isn't any newer of a design than your Sonata is, and this generation Civic will continue be on sale for less than a year.

I don't know what sort of ads Honda runs in Canada, but in the States, they're best known for fuel economy and reliability.  They're pretty good on safety, but I've never thought of them as heads and shoulders above everybody else.  I've never thought of them as current crash-test leaders like VW and Subaru, or historical safety leaders like Volvo and MB.  Maybe they play up the "safety" card more in Canada, claiming to be the best of the best of the best, but I doubt most Americans think of them in that way.

EDIT:  And even though the previous-generation Sonata isn't being sold anymore, YOU own one.  You bought it not soon before I bought my 2011 Civic.  So are you worried about how previous-generation cars perform on the new test or not?  Because if you're not worried for your own sake, I'm not sure why you're worried for mine.

Never said you should be worried... all I said was that I expected more out of Honda... Is it really wrong to expect more out of a car maker?

Oh, and Honda prides itself on safety.
http://corporate.honda.com/safety/details.aspx?id=history

Smartly designed passenger cars can provide high levels of protection. We believe safety can and must apply to all vehicles. With vehicle bodies designed to manage crash energy in a controlled manner and direct it away from the passenger cabin, combined with advanced safety technologies, Honda and Acura models achieve industry-leading occupant protection.

It would appear that isn't quite the truth, is it?


The Bottom Line
Whether it’s passenger cars or light truck models, Honda and Acura provide exceptional levels of protection.


Uh uh.

Why do you care so much?  Has Honda wronged you in the past?  Sounds like you are on a mission...

[Shnak]

It's simple. If I buy a car that is rated to be amongst the safest in the segment, I expect that to be true even when tests change. As you said yourself, the Golf and Imprezza are likely to do better than the Civic in these new tests. If that is true, I was misled when I bought the car. Unintentionally misled, but misled still, especially considering Honda's marketing regarding safety, etc.

YOU were misled by Honda?  When?  How?  The only person with a 2011 Civic here is me, and I don't think I was misled.

You do know that when someone uses the word 'If' a few places in a paragraph, they're talking hypothetically, right?

[Mitlov]

Why do you cae so much?  Has Honda wronged you in the past?  Sounds like you are on a mission...

No joke.

Why isn't Shnak fuming about the Mazda3, which is newer than the Civic, doesn't do any better in the new NHTSA crash tests (two star side impact), isn't about to be replaced like the Civic is, and is marketed based in part upon its "solid construction," "rigid body construction," and "ultra-high-tensile steel construction for increased cabin strength"?  (source).

Like I said, this isn't a Civic-specific issue at all, even though some people are trying to make it a Civic-specific issue.

[footlong58]

Why do you cae so much?  Has Honda wronged you in the past?  Sounds like you are on a mission...

No joke.

Why isn't Shnak fuming about the Mazda3, which is newer than the Civic, doesn't do any better in the new NHTSA crash tests (two star side impact), isn't about to be replaced like the Civic is, and is marketed based in part upon its "solid construction," "rigid body construction," and "ultra-high-tensile steel construction for increased cabin strength"?  (source).

Like I said, this isn't a Civic-specific issue at all, even though some people are trying to make it a Civic-specific issue.

I suspect he was just waiting to drop the Hyundai does "blank", and Honda doesn't "blank" tidbit...

[5 Wheel Drive]

Here's my take, this whole thisng is pointless!

The current Civic arrived in showrooms in September '05 as a new '06.  How long does it take to design a car from the ground up?  3-4 years, I'm guessing?  Which means the current Civic was having its major design work done sometime during 2002.  All this arguing over a car that was being designed almost 10 years ago.  And people are upset because it didn't quite measure up to a current standard that was just changed.  Who cares?  The new one will probably be in showrooms by September or so.  The current Civic is just as safe as it was before that article came out.  I would make the same argument whether the car was a Honda, Mercedes, or a Kia.

[vdk]

Here's my take, this whole thisng is pointless!

The current Civic arrived in showrooms in September '05 as a new '06.  How long does it take to design a car from the ground up?  3-4 years, I'm guessing?  Which means the current Civic was having its major design work done sometime during 2002.  All this arguing over a car that was being designed almost 10 years ago.  And people are upset because it didn't quite measure up to a current standard that was just changed.  Who cares?  The new one will probably be in showrooms by September or so.  The current Civic is just as safe as it was before that article came out.  I would make the same argument whether the car was a Honda, Mercedes, or a Kia.

QFT

[Mitlov]

Seconded.

In other news, you know what I think is odd about the new NHTSA crash tests?  That, without exception, for frontal impact tests, the "male" is in the driver's seat and the "female" in the passengers, and for side impact, without exception, the "male" is in the front seat and the "female" is in the back.  What is this, 1955?

[rrocket]

Seconded.

In other news, you know what I think is odd about the new NHTSA crash tests?  That, without exception, for frontal impact tests, the "male" is in the driver's seat and the "female" in the passengers, and for side impact, without exception, the "male" is in the front seat and the "female" is in the back.  What is this, 1955?

Who cares.  It's a %$$#%^ dummy....

[Mitlov]

Seconded.

In other news, you know what I think is odd about the new NHTSA crash tests?  That, without exception, for frontal impact tests, the "male" is in the driver's seat and the "female" in the passengers, and for side impact, without exception, the "male" is in the front seat and the "female" is in the back.  What is this, 1955?

Who cares.  It's a %$$#%^ dummy....

I'm not losing sleep over it, but it did make me raise an eyebrow.  The IIHS and the previous-generation NHTSA tests use gender-neutral dummies.  I'm just curious why the NHTSA felt it was necessary to add gendered dummies and also to assign them to (1950s-esque) seating positions.

[rrocket]

Seconded.

In other news, you know what I think is odd about the new NHTSA crash tests?  That, without exception, for frontal impact tests, the "male" is in the driver's seat and the "female" in the passengers, and for side impact, without exception, the "male" is in the front seat and the "female" is in the back.  What is this, 1955?

Who cares.  It's a %$$#%^ dummy....

I'm not losing sleep over it, but it did make me raise an eyebrow.  The IIHS and the previous-generation NHTSA tests use gender-neutral dummies.  I'm just curious why the NHTSA felt it was necessary to add gendered dummies and also to assign them to (1950s-esque) seating positions.

I dunno.  Most of the couple I know when they go out together, the guy drives.  It's like that for us.  Is it not like that for you, or does your wife do the driving when your family goes out?