Off Topic ForumThis is the place for mature discussions not necessarily related to cars. This is however also moderated and only registered members are allowed to post. No religion and no vicious attacks.
It's unfair for board members on here to say that the Kia is safer than the 5 series mainly because the safety ratings are used as a comparison with vehicles within the same class/group.
The 5 series crash test ratings is disappointing for the side, but I'm not sure if it would take me off the market for an E60. Other vehicles in this category (aside from A6 and the S80) don't seem to have stellar ratings as well.
I am still waiting to get a few suggestions for a possible replacement for the E60. I want a four door monster with the drivability that I desire and I am afraid the M5 might be one of the few that meets the demand.
Any comments on the RS4????
If you are serious about leaving BMW behind, I would deffinatly wait for the RS6. That or get a S6 right now, but I don't think you would be satisfied with anything other than the M5. Mercedes is also another option, pick up a used s65 (unless you can afford new).
I'd give some suggestions but I don't believe you have given us your requirements. What are you specifically looking for? Does the car have to be 4 doors etc,.
Personally crash tests (while imperfect) shouldn't be taken lightly. I know that after being in an accident it definitely is something that is even more critical. After my wife and son were in a car accident (highway, around 65 mph, 25k in damages) I really liked the FX45. It protected them well and if I needed something like that again, I would seriously consider it.
BTW there are so MANY crappy drivers out there it isn't just about your driving skill.
As to BMW not building a car that would potentially hurt it's occupants ... thats obvious. What might have happened though is that in 1 permutation of a side impact (5 degrees off etc) a part has failed in a way that they weren't aware of. As such, it is now to be considered unsafe, in that instance. This is not about brand loyalty ... if mercedes had the same issue I would honestly have to consider it very carefully.
The power of any study is the size/number of population sampled and it's reproducibility. From my understanding of this crash test, they studied/crashed ONE car. How powerful or convincing is this experiment? If I were to present a case study of one to try to convince an audience of a point, I'd be laughed of the podium.
The IIHS crash test does not amount more than anecdotal information. It's as valid as someone saying that they had a second cousin's nephew who did this or that...
If anything, there is more cumulative data and experience from existing board members' and their accidents and results. I'd place more credence on the comments of people like Harold who survived a horrific accident than the IIHS study.
You can't use one owner's crash as a benchmark. NO crash is going to be 100% alike. Hopefully that means that this specific test will never be replicated but I'd rather trust that actually crash data.
Did you even read the first half of my post?
My point, the crash test would have more meaning if, say, they sampled 10 identical vehicles and came to the same conclusion a majority of the time. The more vehicles tested, the more accurate the result. I did not say the study was useless (almost useless). If anything, one owner's crash result is probably just as informative as the IIHS study; one car crash. You take the information for what it's worth.
Anything on the planet can be googled these day of importance regarding safety etc. If it were a real issue since the 5er's been around for a few years, we would have heard about by now, not to mention we could find issues regarding accident safety from consumers that have safety facts findably on the net. Its news spin and sensationalism, why do you think they put the KIA in the same study as a BMW. When I did a search on BMW 5 series side impact accidents, I couldnt find anything other than what came up for IIHS and all the news agencies. It was headlines at abcnews.com. "25k kia may be safer than a 45k bmw" News, studies, wars, safety, all that is spooned fed to us in such a way to sway opinion. Case history and fact, speak louder than an IIHS 5 second test.
Dont believe everything you read, go to an Aljazeera web site in english, and you'll get an entirely different version of the Iraq war. People just want to believe what they read and hear, and are told by others.
It would appear that most here are of like mind, that is, to assign appropriate weight to these crash tests.
As it relates to the OP, however, it's my belief that MJ is upset by the fact that many did not take his post seriously. I'll be the first to step up here and admit that that was my initial reaction.
My take (as with others, it seems) was that MJ's sheer number of BMW purchases seemed to bely any credence to his original post, but in all fairness, I believe that he should move on and away from BMW.
Many of us value active safety nearly as much as passive safety, however, when transporting one's family, I'm sure we can agree that most of us desire the best of both worlds.
That said, something has to give. The car buying public and manufacturing industry has to balance their purchase and manufacturing decisions with regard to their priorities.
To gain in passive safety, one will forego active safety -- read: performance.
Many here, including myself, did not take MJ's post seriously. For my part, this relates especially given my tendency to over, not underestimate people in general. This trait leads me to "call it as I see it". Please note that this is not in any manner a knock to anyone here.
Perhaps his past purchases were based on style, not performance (but he did not elaborate). The fact that he didn't research crash testing and made assumptions as to 100% (give or take) safety is at this point, is not an issue. (I'm not criticizing nor am I joking here).
In any event, at this point it's quite apparent that MJ is offended by the responses to his discovery and to the responses here. That said, the fact that he has chosen to ignore many of the responses to his post is certainly fine with everyone, I'm sure (fine by me, at least -- the "saving face" aspects of life are important, and we should respect this).
Given this, my contribution to his genuinely posted question would be a very heavy car -- something that would better protect its occupants in the event of a collision.
Perhaps that's the avenue we, as members here, should be pursuing in answer to his request for reccommendations.
From the IIHS:
"Side impacts are the second most common fatal crash type after frontal crashes. About 9,200 people in passenger vehicles were killed in side impacts in 2005. In crashes with other passenger vehicles during 2004-05, 49 percent of driver deaths in 1-3-year-old cars and minivans occurred in side impacts, up from 31 percent in 1980-81. During the same time, the proportion of driver deaths in frontal crashes declined from 61 to 46 percent."
I am not insulted by some of the responses, just a little surprised. I just can't believe that some people are blowing off a crash test that BMW should have passed with flying colors. It's a far cry from from what the IIHS said in 1997 about the frontal test. Here's a quote my post in 2004:
"When the 1997 E39 5 Series was offset crash tested, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety President Brian O'Neill said that if all cars crashed like the BMW 5 series, they could shut down their testing. Remember, the IIHS is privately funded by insurance companies. The US Government testing done by NHTSA utilizes the full frontal crashes which are not as "real world" as the IIHS offset tests."
Here is the 2004 thread which raises questions about the EURO test also:
The IIHS tests are the BEST thing to happen to auto safety. The institute which is funded by the insurance industry to reduce costs has effectively EMBARRASSED cars companies to make safer cars. The insurance companies pay out less in claims and fewer people die or are maimed. We all win.
I would like to see the IIHS crash a 2004-2007 model to see if the test is the same, since we have no base-line test for the 5 series in a side impact crash. This would show if the design was never good or the 2008 interior door panel redesign is solely the culprit.
Some of the above responses to my original post still don't change my belief that BMW should have ranked in the top tier in this test. THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL INTENT I WAS TRYING TO CONVEY. I was emotionally torqued that something that I thought was a "given" proved not to be. Mattel, the largest toy company in the world, just let parents and kids down with magnets that fall out of Polly Pocket toys and lead paint on some Sesame Street Toys. BMW has also let us down because our expectations are high and we thought a high mark on this test was fundamental for a BMW.
My 2008 M5 order was placed thinking I had the best possible cocoon surrounding me and my family in an unparalleled performance sedan. BMW let me down with last week's results. I still don't take that lightly and you shouldn't either.