Spring is around the corner, and it won’t be long before it’s prom and graduation seasons for many high schoolers. Rites of passage for many, these are times for teens to celebrate, but can also be times of poor decision-making, especially when vehicles are involved. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that 2,524 teen drivers and passengers were killed and 177,000 were injured in 2013. Twenty-seven percent of these fatalities occurred between April and June, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).
“The statistics are staggering, especially when you consider that most of these accidents and fatalities are preventable,” said Randy Petro, Mercury Insurance’s chief claims officer. “We don’t want any families to suffer through the loss of a child, so Mercury is taking action with the launch of the ‘Mercury Insurance Drive Safe Challenge.’”
The Mercury Insurance Drive Safe Challenge kicked off with a free defensive driving program, which included hands-on driving skills training and classroom material. An interactive website provides teens with detailed instruction, as well as gives parents the tools to shape responsible driving behavior.
To view the multimedia release go to:
http://www.multivu.com/players/English/7772251-mercury-teen-drive-safe-challenge/
Think “muscle car” performance, and images of speed and power are more likely to come to mind than crash tests and safety ratings. Because no one buys a sports car to drive in the slow lane, the best all-¬ around occupant crash protection is crucial. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) recently put a trio of iconic sports coupes through their paces, and unlike more sedate sedans, none earns the scores needed to clinch a TOP SAFETY PICK award.
IIHS evaluated 2016 models of the Chevrolet Camaro, Dodge Challenger and Ford Mustang in the full battery of crashworthiness evaluations. The Mustang comes closest to earning TOP SAFETY PICK, while the Camaro falls shortin one category and lacks an available front crash prevention system. The Challenger is most in need of improvement.
To qualify for TOP SAFETY PICK, vehicles must earn good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint evaluations and have a basic-¬rated front crash prevention system. To qualify for the Institute’s highest award, TOP SAFETY PICK+, vehicles must earn good ratings in the five crashworthiness tests and an advanced or superior rating for front crash prevention.
Obwohl Toyota bei seinem RAV4 des Modelljahrgangs 2013 zumindest in der USA-Version - in den Bereichen Lenksäule und Fußraum das neue Modell nachgebessert hat, ist es beim von dem anerkannten amerikanischen Insurace Insitute für Highway Safety (IIHS) durchgeführten Frontalcrasch mit kleiner Überlappung durchgefallen. Mit dem Crash, bei dem mit einer Geschwindigkeit von 40 Meilen (64,37 km/h) 25 Prozent der Front auf eine Barriere treffen, werden die Auswirkungen eines Unfalls simuliert, bei dem zwei Fahrzeuge mit ihren Frontecken zusammenstoßen beziehungsweise das Auto auf einen Baum prallt. Ein sehr realistischer Test, den das Institut erst seit vergangenem Jahr zu seinen vier anderen Crashformen – moderate Überlappung der Front, Seite, Überschlag und Heck – hinzugefügt hat und inzwischen mit der „moderaten Überlappung“ zusammen als wichtigsten Test ansieht. Der – wegen der Nachbesserungen des Herstellers – extra verschoben, verlief nun alles andere als erfolgreich. Laut IIHS wurde die Karosserie-Struktur schwer beschädigt und drang teilweise in den Fußraum, so dass auch der linke Fuß des Fahrers – wenn es kein Dummy gewesen wäre – verletzt worden wäre. Darüber hinaus zeigte sich der Frontal-Airbag als „nutzlos“, da die Lenksäule durch den Aufprall nach rechts gebogen wurde und der Kopf des Dummys kaum geschützt wurde. Und obendrein arbeitete der Sicherheitsgurt nicht korrekt, so das Kopf und Oberkörper auf das Armaturenbrett prallten. Auch wenn der RAV4bei den anderen vier Crashtest überall mit der Note „Gut“ abgeschnitten hatte, gab es nur ein Urteil: Schlecht.
Twenty-two vehicles earn the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's highest safety award for 2014, TOP SAFETY PICK+, thanks to a high level of protection in crashes and the availability of front crash prevention technology to avoid many collisions in the first place. An additional 17 earn TOP SAFETY PICK by meeting the crashworthiness criteria alone.
IIHS is using new criteria for the awards this year. TOP SAFETY PICK requires good performance in the Institute's moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint tests and, for the first time, good or acceptable performance in the small overlap front test introduced in 2012. The same level of performance in those tests, along with at least a basic rating for front crash prevention, is required for the higher accolade, TOP SAFETY PICK+.
Just over half of 2018 model vehicles evaluated by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety are available with headlights that do an adequate job of lighting the road at night and limiting glare for oncoming drivers, but most good-rated headlights are optional or bundled with other features that can raise the price of the vehicle.
Since IIHS released its first headlight ratings for passenger vehicles in 2016, most manufacturers have focused on improving this key safety component. That year, only 2 of 95 headlight systems on 2016-model vehicles evaluated earned a good rating.
For the 2018 model year, the best-available headlights on 32 of 165 models evaluated earn the highest rating of good, and the best-available headlights on 58 models earn the second-highest rating of acceptable. Thirty-two models have only marginal-rated headlights, while poor-rated headlights are the only ones available for 43 models.
The Lincoln Continental, the Mercedes-Benz E-Class and the Toyota Avalon come out at the top of a group of six large cars recently evaluated by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
The three cars qualify for TOP SAFETY PICK+, the Institute’s highest award. The Tesla Model S, the Chevrolet Impala and the Ford Taurus fall short of any award because they each earn only an acceptable rating in the small overlap front test.
Vehicles qualify for either the TOP SAFETY PICK or TOP SAFETY PICK+ award if they have good ratings from IIHS in five crashworthiness tests — small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraints — and an available front crash prevention system that earns a superior or advanced rating. To qualify for TOP SAFETY PICK+, a vehicle also must come with good or acceptable headlights
The ranks of top-rated booster seats continue to grow as manufacturers design models to earn high marks in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s annual booster seat evaluations, plus offer the style and convenience parents look for when it’s time to pick a safe seat for their booster-age children.
Among the 41 models new for 2014, there are 27 BEST BET seats — more than in any prior year — and three GOOD BETs. Eight boosters are in a category the Institute calls “Check Fit,” and there are three new models that the Institute doesn’t recommend using as boosters. Prices for BEST BET boosters start around $25 and go up to about $370, depending on features, and several models are LATCH compatible.
The latest booster seat ratings from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety show that child seat manufacturers have mastered something that once eluded them: building a seat that provides good safety belt fit for the typical 4-¬ to 8-¬year-¬old passenger.
Out of 53 new models evaluated, 48 earn the top rating of BEST BET, meaning they are likely to provide good belt fit for a 4 to 8 year-¬old in almost any car, minivan or SUV. When the Institute first began rating boosters in 2008, only a quarter of the seats evaluated earned the BEST BET designation.
Thirteen out of 16 new booster seats for 2017 earn the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's highest rating of BEST BET, bringing the total number of boosters on the market with that designation to 118.
The BEST BET rating means a booster provides good safety belt fit for typical 4 to 8 year-olds in almost any car, minivan or SUV. Boosters that are rated GOOD BETs provide acceptable belt fit in almost any vehicle, while those rated Check Fit could work for some children in some vehicles. Seats designated "Not Recommended" don’t provide good belt fit and should be avoided.
Buckling precious cargo into a late-model vehicle has gotten a bit easier in the past year, the Institute’s LATCH ease-of-use ratings show.
IIHS launched its ratings of child seat installation hardware in vehicles in June 2015. Out of 102 vehicles rated at that time, the majority were poor or marginal. Today, a total of 170 current models have been evaluated, and most are good or acceptable. Three models — the Audi Q7, Lexus RX and Toyota Prius — earn the top rating of good+, a distinction that no vehicle achieved last year.
A properly installed, age-appropriate child restraint can protect a child much better in a crash than a safety belt alone. LATCH, which stands for Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children, is intended to make it easier for caregivers to install child restraints properly. Child restraints installed with LATCH are more likely to be put in correctly than restraints installed using the vehicle safety belt, IIHS research has shown.
Even with LATCH, installation errors are common. The Institute’s ratings are based on key ease-of-use criteria that have been shown to minimize mistakes.
A new crash test program from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety aims to ensure that manufacturers pay attention to the safety of front passengers as well as drivers.
The test was developed after it became clear that some manufacturers were giving short shrift to the right side of the vehicle when it comes to small overlap front crash protection. A good or acceptable passenger-side rating will be required to qualify for the Institute’s 2018 TOP SAFETY PICK+ award.
The first test group in the passenger-side small overlap front test program did better overall than vehicles IIHS previously evaluated for research. Ten out of 13 midsize cars tested earn a good rating, while one is acceptable and two earn a marginal rating.
In contrast with a group of 2014-16 model small SUVs tested for research, none of the 2017-18 midsize cars had a poor or marginal structural rating. Instead, the biggest problem in the new group was inconsistent airbag protection in five cars, which would put passengers’ heads at risk.
Three out of seven large pickup trucks evaluated by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in a new round of crash tests earn an acceptable or higher rating for occupant protection in a small overlap front crash.
IIHS evaluated two body styles of each 2016 model-year pickup — crew cab and extended cab. Crew cabs have four full doors and two full rows of seating. Extended cabs have two full front doors, two smaller rear doors and compact second-row seats.
IIHS last year decided it would test the two most popular variants of large pickups instead of just one after discovering that the Ford F-150 extended cab lacked structural countermeasures that helped the crew cab earn the top rating of good in the small overlap test. The test replicates what happens when a vehicle runs off the road and hits a tree or pole or clips another vehicle that has crossed the center line.
Ford improved the 2016 model F-150 SuperCab to clinch a good rating in the small overlap crash test, up from the 2015 model’s marginal rating. The F-150 is the only large pickup in the latest test group to earn the Institute’s top rating in the test. It joins the F-150 SuperCrew in earning a 2016 TOP SAFETY PICK award when equipped with Ford’s optional basic-rated forward collision warning system.
Vehicles that earn a basic rating for front crash prevention plus good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint evaluations qualify for TOP SAFETY PICK. To qualify for 2016 TOP SAFETY PICK+, a vehicle must earn good ratings in the five crashworthiness tests and an advanced or superior rating for front crash prevention.
