Oh Snap.. BMW sedan performs worst in crash test

[Jscotty]

Kind of on a tangent here but if that crash thing was an acutal type of vehicle on the road, how likely would it be that you would get hit by it? I mean that thing would draw so much attention that you would see it 3 blocks before you got to the intersection.

Secondly that thing is so heavy and non-areodynamic that there is no way that it could really pick up any kind of speed not to mention that a vehicle like that probably wouldn't be street legal.

BTW, what kind wheels are those? I want a set like that.

[JGood]

Sorry, but I wasn't just addressing one post. I was responding to some of what everyone was saying, including your 'joke' about wanting to die in a bmw rather than a kia. Apparently, the general populous seems to think the same way, and that's why bmw being bad at something is newsworthy.

My point is that everyone gets riled up whenever there's factual evidence stating that bmw isn't the best at everything, and try to denounce the sources. However, they're quick to praise those sources if they say something good.

I kind of see your point about the media trying to get our attention, but that's the way the world has always been. Last time I checked, BMW isn't the subject of all of the safety test headlines, yet people still read the articles. If the headline read "bmw performs best in side impact," would you still be preaching about how pointless the article is, or would you be telling yourself "fuck yeah, bmw owns"? I think the only reason why it's so 'biased' is because you don't like the outcome.

I agree, same people believe BMW is on top of the world. There is people like that for every manufacturer.

And yes, I would preach about how pointless it is if BMW was on top. The test (like all of their tests) don't show a variety of impacts on whatever side of the vehicle they are testing, just one. It means nothing overall.

I usually laugh at the articles/shows I see testing new BMW's. Things like little arms that push the seatbelt forward so you don't have to reach back and grab it? Give me a break. New BMW's have more stupid shit for lazy people then probably any other car, and that's why they cost so damn much.

Yes, if someone posts something that tears down BMW for no real reason, on a BMW message board, people aren't going to say "damn, this manufacturer is a rip-off", they are going to say why the test is useless. This isn't a Kia message board.

[ivo316]

I wonder how the cars did in an impact with a car OTHER then an SUV?

Listen to the final sentence of the video...

My point is that the "thing" that crashes is not an SUV. That contraption does not behave the same way as a normal vehicle, and I think that BMW makes the cars to crash against real vehicles, and real vehicles (even SUV's) do crumple on impact.

[brandondan1]

Sorry, but I wasn't just addressing one post. I was responding to some of what everyone was saying, including your 'joke' about wanting to die in a bmw rather than a kia. Apparently, the general populous seems to think the same way, and that's why bmw being bad at something is newsworthy.

My point is that everyone gets riled up whenever there's factual evidence stating that bmw isn't the best at everything, and try to denounce the sources. However, they're quick to praise those sources if they say something good.

I kind of see your point about the media trying to get our attention, but that's the way the world has always been. Last time I checked, BMW isn't the subject of all of the safety test headlines, yet people still read the articles. If the headline read "bmw performs best in side impact," would you still be preaching about how pointless the article is, or would you be telling yourself "fuck yeah, bmw owns"? I think the only reason why it's so 'biased' is because you don't like the outcome.

[JGood]

Why would you even mention how well the BMW did in the front impact tests? I thought the tests were completely irrelevant? The results are acceptable when BMW is on top, but when they're not, it becomes a problem?

Apparently you've missed the point of my post. Completely.

The news reports come flying when BMW is on bottom, but are nowhere to be found when BMW is on top (most of the time, according to the IIHS website). Biased, attention grabbing, useless info, designed to get the masses to buy shit. Apparently, it works.

[1991 318is]

"The issue is that depending on the location of seat, the location of dummy, the location of the sled, the results could change," he said. "This was one test on one day on one car."
I'm going to start sitting in the middle like a rural mail carrier. A 5 series is a $50k car but $3k of it is the headlights, $6k is seats. A more relevant question is what is the difference in cost of the structural part of the car? High end leather doesn't absorb any more energy than cheap vinyl. The Volvo is probably the strongest unibody structure although they resemble tin cans more and more. The 240 Volvo was a tank!

[brandondan1]

to me the point to this is that... if I'm paying 50k for a car... shouldnt it be alot safer than a kia for 1/3 fo the price? I know I got more airbags... another way to show that airbag is the most unsafe safety device ever made.

I mean BMW should be hell of alot more on every level than the kia, not just the electronics, not just style, not just power, but safety as well. EVen if tested and they came out even... its still is pretty lame. It should be alot better, not same and definitely not worse, from any impact position from any kind of impact.

I HATE AIRBAGS.

And that's what they want you to think. That it's a superior product in every single way just because of the price (and the badge). Superior electronics? Talk to a 7 series owner and then talk to an Sonata owner. See which one has had more problems. Although that depends if you measure superiority by complexity or reliability.

Just because they offer more affordable products doesn't mean they don't do their fair share of R&D.

I bought jeans from banana republic and they tore after I washed them 3 times. I bought levi's (for a lot less) and they have never showed any signs of wear. But wait, that can't be true.. levi's are cheap pieces of crap.

The bullet example was completely out there. Apples to oranges. Side impacts from car-sized, metal objects, however, have a much greater occurrence regardless of what 'hood' you're in.

Why would you even mention how well the BMW did in the front impact tests? I thought the tests were completely irrelevant? The results are acceptable when BMW is on top, but when they're not, it becomes a problem?

[JGood]

Yeah.. I mean I could take a gun, shoot it through the rear quarter panel of a BMW and it will richochet all over the inside of the car and hit the dummy the back of his head which would have killed a real person but do the same "test" with the kia and bullet goes right through the car and hits the ground. Does that make the KIA a safer car? Sure.. if you plan on driving through gang territories where they selectively shoot at rear quarter panels.

I got the point, but that was the most obscure thing I've ever read in my life. It almost seems as though you type approximately 10 seconds ahead of what your brain thinks. I like it!

[Jscotty]

QFT.. Remember when Dateline caught hell for blowing up a Chevy pickup to try and prove it was unsafe?

Oh, no- I was not aware of that. I thought the story was true.

Haha, I visited the IIHS site. EVERY Kia besides the Armanti received a "Poor" (lowest) rating, while all other BMW's performed better in all tests. I wonder why those were never broadcast to the public like this 5 series test is? Google "BMW side impact" and see how many cleverly-titled results you get from various sources about this test. Now do a search for "BMW front impact" and see what kind of results you get. What about the tests where it faired much better then the Kia?

Yeah.. I mean I could take a gun, shoot it through the rear quarter panel of a BMW and it will richochet all over the inside of the car and hit the dummy the back of his head which would have killed a real person but do the same "test" with the kia and bullet goes right through the car and hits the ground. Does that make the KIA a safer car? Sure.. if you plan on driving through gang territories where they selectively shoot at rear quarter panels.

[JGood]

I guess I missed the joke. I wasn't really trying to be rude, I guess I should apologize. I'm sorry. Truce?

"I agree. But only for the fact that I could die with dignity in a BMW, rather then die with shame in a fucking Kia."

= joke. Maybe a poor one. I was serious about the news though. I'm not weird, I just don't find interest in hearing the "attention grabbing" side of every single topic.

It's all good, I wasn't going to lose sleep over it!

[kellie]

What the fuck crawled up your ass? It was a joke.

And as for the news, what are you talking about exactly? Fantasy world? I just don't watch/read news because it's generally biased and designed to sell. Hardly a "fantasy world"

I guess I pissed you off at some point...

I guess I missed the joke. I wasn't really trying to be rude, I guess I should apologize. I'm sorry. Truce?

[JGood]

Haha, I visited the IIHS site. EVERY Kia besides the Armanti received a "Poor" (lowest) rating, while all other BMW's performed better in all tests. I wonder why those were never broadcast to the public like this 5 series test is? Google "BMW side impact" and see how many cleverly-titled results you get from various sources about this test. Now do a search for "BMW front impact" and see what kind of results you get. What about the tests where it faired much better then the Kia?

[thereisnoyun]

umm...

to me the point to this is that... if I'm paying 50k for a car... shouldnt it be alot safer than a kia for 1/3 fo the price? I know I got more airbags... another way to show that airbag is the most unsafe safety device ever made.

I mean BMW should be hell of alot more on every level than the kia, not just the electronics, not just style, not just power, but safety as well. EVen if tested and they came out even... its still is pretty lame. It should be alot better, not same and definitely not worse, from any impact position from any kind of impact.

I HATE AIRBAGS.

[brandondan1]

Probably.

Maybe it's more form over functions with German cars nowadays. I remember seeing simulations where a car would involved in a low impact crash and see how much damage would be done. The German cars suffered a noticeable amount of damage compared to rivals.

What was the company's response? "We believe people care more about styling than having to pay hundreds of dollars to repair their vehicles if they are involved in such a crash."

Sure, putting BMW in the headlines will attract more readers, but it's not like they fabricated any of the results. If you think Asian cars aren't safe just because German cars in general cost more (by nickel and diming every little feature, and adding useless annoyances such as idrive) Sure a single test isn't going to tell you everything, but it will reveal a lot. Who's to say that this exact scenario could never happen?

[JGood]

Because the car you drive defines the kind of person you are and determines how you should feel about yourself. Right. I had a Kia rental for a week when my car was being repaired from an accident, and I actually enjoyed it. The following week, I had a Chevy Malibu, and I missed the Kia like hell.

It's hard to live in your little fantasy world where everything goes exactly how you want it to when the news is trying to tell you otherwise, eh?

What the fuck crawled up your ass? It was a joke.

And as for the news, what are you talking about exactly? Fantasy world? I just don't watch/read news because it's generally biased and designed to sell. Hardly a "fantasy world"

I guess I pissed you off at some point...


Anyway, yeah, I've driven pretty much every type of car ever made (minus McLaren, Bugatti, etc...) Everything from Geo Metro's to Dodge Vipers. I'm not biased towards BMW's, I just find it hard to believe they would allow a car to roll out that is sub-par in safety. It's not logical. The report, which appeared on 99% of news reports, basically claimed BMW is making an unsafe car, blah blah blah. But maybe I should just listen to them and go buy a Kia, then I will be much safer, right?