http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/4311.html

 

Thanks, any discounts in insurance?

 

i'm pretty sure there will be some sort of lower rate.

2006 xB NHTSA:
http://www.safercar.gov/NCAP/Cars/3725.html

2008 xB NHTSA:http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/4311.html

2006-2008 xB IIHS: http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=590 w/side crash on 06

a tale of two different safety test. what i'd like to know is a 4 star from the nhtsa equivalent to an acceptable through iihs or is a 3 star the accepatble?

 

whats up w/ the pics for the 08 crash test?

 

There's really no translation whatsoever. IIHS uses a 50% taller striking barrier, which is rounded to only strike the B pillar. It's also a few hundred pounds heavier. IIHS also uses 5'0" dummies, far shorter than the NHSTA's dummies.

Basically, unless a vehicle has side airbags, it's going to fail the IIHS' test. I don't believe there's been a single exception to that rule. (Though the Gen 1 xB is among the few and proud vehicles in which one or both passengers struck their head on plastic molding inside the vehicle, instead of the striking barrier.)

The NHSTA's test is designed to show "average" test scenarios: a vehicle with average-height male occupants being struck in the side by a passenger car. There's two problems with this:

a) it doesn't account at all for shorter passengers (like...um...kids) who are more vulnerable to head injuries in side impacts, and
b) it doesn't account for the increased popularity of stupidly-gigantic SUVs and pickup trucks, which tend to come right on into the passenger cabin and crack you in the head.

The IIHS test is basically a doomsday scenario: a five-foot-nothing woman driver pulling in front of by Billy McTinyPenis's Dodge Ram.

I go back and forth on these tests...on the one hand, I'm all for safer cars, and it's nice to see someone putting pressure on the big auto companies to do something they should be doing anyway. (IIHS also pressures automakers with bad-looking footage of low-speed bumper impacts) On the other hand, it's throwing a lot of information out to a news media and a public that are too stupid to draw the right conclusions from it. (Consider the 1st Gen xB "unsafe," when it's actually a better performer than most cars on the road)

I suppose it's all for the greater good, however, so I'll take it. Maybe I should be the first to start work on a Gen 1 side airbag mod. =p

 

 

x2

 

shocking to see another 4-star frontal crash test rating for a new Toyota/Scion product
may not sound as much, but i'm sure toyota is looking into it as to why...
its obvious that when developing the xB2, they placed extra attention to safety -- increasing front/rear and side crumple zones and adding standard side SRS, to go along with the traction and stability control
remember, the Tundra also received a 4-star frontal crash test rating and the domestic automakers pounced on it for failing to reach the 5-star rating like their products

 

Here is more information from the FAQ page about the NHTSA vehicle tests at http://www.safercar.gov/info.htm#iq8
As a side note, I see that 2006 xB also received 4 stars from NHTSA for the frontal crash (as did 2008 xB). The 2006 xB page also has pictures showing how they tested the car [Edit: and also the videos currently missing from the 2008 xB page]:

2006 xB: http://www.safercar.gov/Cars/3725.html
vs.
2008 xB: http://www.safercar.gov/Cars/4311.html

 

this article answered my question in terms of what those stars really mean.

click on the pic and scroll 1/3 down.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/07/11/w...s-really-mean/

 

thanks for the info. its the same explanation that i saw today....