The LW Focus safety con

4.0i OHC · 25-08-2011, 07:35 PM

Out of interest, I took a look on ANCAP's website for the safety data of the new Focus. I anticipated that the results would be outstanding, due to the safety levels of the outgoing (awesome) Focus. I was quickly dismayed.

Old Focus:
15.66 out of 16 for the offset crash test
15.80 out of 16 for the side impact crash test

New Focus:
15.04 out of 16 for the offset crash test
15.13 out of 16 for the side impact crash test

Looking at the injury measurements, one can deduce that the new Focus is a slight improvement in chest compression, but considerably worse in all other aspects (especially head injury!)

It is simply sickening that a car manufacturer can, in this day and age, release a car LESS SAFE than the outgoing model.
Don't get me wrong, I love Ford. As well as this, I really loved the old Focus. However, this is a serious issue and cannot be ignored. I feel that if so many here ***** about the Falcon's lack of frivolities such as a touch screen, then I have the right to criticise the safety of the new Focus.

In Focus · 25-08-2011, 08:21 PM

Was it compared to the same standard as the previous model? In other words, do the scores become harder over time, so that what used to be 16 only rates, say, a 10 nowadays?

4.0i OHC · 25-08-2011, 08:30 PM

Exactly the same standard. Comparing the injury measurements, units such as metres and newtons don't change over time.

What ANCAP does change, though, is what is required to achieve 5 stars (such as the introduction of seat belt reminders). However, in this case, it is the same.

Yellow_Festiva · 26-08-2011, 09:45 AM

Interesting findings....

4.0i OHC · 31-08-2011, 06:49 PM

I'm surprised that this finding hasn't attracted more attention. Do people consider it okay if a car manufacturer makes a new model less safe than the outgoing model?

XR Martin · 31-08-2011, 10:54 PM

Looks to me its not any less safe than before....
Those difference in numbers are within typical crash varience levels.

If you look closer at the figures, its the driver's lower leg that skewed the offset number, and the driver's pelvis skewed the side impact test.
Otherwise the LW figures are better overall.

LW scored 34.17 and the LV 34.46. That less than 1% difference.... For a car that is 7.5% heavier.

4.0i OHC · 01-09-2011, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Looks to me its not any less safe than before....
Those difference in numbers are within typical crash varience levels.

If you look closer at the figures, its the driver's lower leg that skewed the offset number, and the driver's pelvis skewed the side impact test.
Otherwise the LW figures are better overall.

LW scored 34.17 and the LV 34.46. That less than 1% difference.... For a car that is 7.5% heavier.

I don't know about you, but I tend to drive around with a lower leg and a pelvis. These areas did not 'skew' the results, they formed a part of the results. Something 'skewing' the results would be if the LW was tested at a slightly higher speed than the LV.

By the way, what are typical crash variance levels? If the levels vary this much, then why weren't repeats taken?

Edit: Are you one of the people that cries foul because the Falcon doesn't have a touch screen?

Velociraptor82 · 01-09-2011, 02:17 PM

I not really one who buys a car for its safety rating however from a marketing perspective, it seems that they are focused on the star rating not the overall scores. And therefore unless the buyers look deeper into the scores like yourself they will never know the difference.

My person opionon is that the crash testing is just that "testing" and that there are many other variables in the real world that would alter the outcome. The small difference you noted I don't believe is as big as it seems especially when you add the wind, temperature, ground level, etc variables.

Do you recall when Holden dropped the 4star(?) ancap opal built barina for the 2star korean built one? There may be a small drop between the focus models but nothing like that..

PS....I love Falcons, but I choose to drive a Focus due to its handling and running costs over the falcon. Not becasue of the touch screen which my Focus also doesn't have. besides a touch screen is just a distraction from the real task at hand.... DRIVING!!

jayjays · 01-09-2011, 04:07 PM

I think most crash test are only done at 50km/h, correct me if I'm wrong. The fact is if you have a head on collision on a highway or wrap your car around a tree at highway speed it won't matter what type of car you are in really.

XR Martin · 01-09-2011, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fairlaneman

By the way, what are typical crash variance levels? If the levels vary this much, then why weren't repeats taken?

Edit: Are you one of the people that cries foul because the Falcon doesn't have a touch screen?

As I said, the difference between the two is less than 1%...
At the end of the day cars are about as safe as they can get at this point in time. There wont be big leaps between models like there have been previously.
Im sure that 9 out of 10 times the LW would score better everwhere in an NCAP test, looks to me this was the odd one out. It did basically score better everywhere else compared to the LV.

And what has touch screens in new Falcons got to do with anything? Why would I care anyway, Im happy driving 10yo+ models.

dannyhilton · 02-09-2011, 11:17 AM

Considering the percentage score of my WS Fiesta, the LW Focus is a much safer vehicle so it's a step up for me.

What you may find the is that the Focus has become a victom of one of its greatest assets, it's a global vehicle, designed for a global audience. When designing a vehicle to comply with two complety different sets of safety regulations, one for the US market, and one for the Euro market, there was bound to be some compromise.

Ford had to design a vehicle that Americans could drive comfortably, but at the same time Europeans could feel embraced by in the drivers seat. They also had to design a vehicle to comply with both US safety regulations and Euro guidelines, of which the former is rather strange.

Now you may say 'Well BMW can make a safer car each time.' Yes, they can and they do. But the new Focus is actually narrower than the LV model. It also has a much smaller boot. This car really was caught between a rock and a hard place in design terms.

The fact the car hasn't progressed with a higher overall safety score in some areas is disapointing, but as stated, it's less than a 1% difference. And coming from a Fiesta, the new Focus is still a big jump forward overall for me.

So no, I'm not concurned.