This never stops Insurance companies from raising rates anyway. If one reason doesn't hold they always cherry pick other reasons to raise your rates. It's no win situation with them.
True. But at least the state doesn't pay that much or not at all for medical care after a certain crash, because cars are just safe and injuries are low or inexistent, at least in crashes like these above. So in a way it is a win-win situation. You walk away from a crash, and nobody has to pay for what could've been a truly expensive medical care. Whoever decided to create IIHS was not stupid, that's for sure.
@@legioner9 That, and it's also a question of how to distribute the cost. Of course everyone could pay the same rates, but to me it seems more fair that in a free market, those choosing a product posing a higher risk pay more. And who really understands insurance quotes in detail? This testing program provides a somewhat scientific and comprehensible assessment basis for at least part of how they come up with their numbers. And useful consumer information on top. What's not to like about that?
Rates are more predicated now on the cost to fix cars due to making them safer rather and more expensive to build, rather than medical costs due to injuries. With the average cost of new cars rising, insurance costs will inevitably rise along with it.
I love coming back to reminisce. This is probably weird but its kinda like "the good ole days," just thinking back to my time as a knee high grasshopper. My dream job is job with Volvo in crash safety. Lol. God im a nerd. RIP Saab😢
Fun fact: Toyota was the FIRST automaker in the mid 90s to praise the IIHS and begin designing their cars based on their tests. Just as Ford and GM bashed their tests and called them "ultra high speed", Toyota embraced them. Knowing that, it's no surprise the Camry fared so well here.
"No manufacturer wants their vehicle shown on Dateline collapsing, and having Brian O'Neill and Lea Thompson saying bad things about them." Okay... but were they actually _trying,_ though? Even as late as 2007, not all newly-tested models got good ratings in the front crash test. The Chevrolet Aveo is a particularly below-average example by that point. (But to be fair, General Motors never had the best track-record at IIHS anyway, so... X3)
Initially, yes. However, after the Altima was first tested but before this episode aired, the IIHS began increasing the rating for cars that offered optional side airbags with head protection, similar to how they do that now for headlight ratings with cars that offer automatic high beams. If you notice at the end when they’re listing all the other cars’ ratings, they say the Mazda 626 rated good but it was actually rated acceptable. An actual Dateline mistake was when they get to the Camry, and show the video of the Lexus IS (before the slo-mo video).
@@titan9259 Correct, but when this episode aired, the IIHS was in the process of upgrading ratings for vehicles able to be equipped with side airbags. What Dateline should have said was "only rated Acceptable when equipped with side airbags", as models without them were still rated Marginal.
There’s just something I don’t understand when I hear the word, Best Pick, I think of the best performer in this test but not only are multiple cars getting this award, but also cars that didn’t do that great are getting it, I think a best pick would be the best performer in this test with no minor or major injuries recorded to the dummy?!
Per the IIHS website from 2002: "The overall evaluation of (2000-2001) Altimas with side airbags is acceptable, while other models would be rated marginal."
This never stops Insurance companies from raising rates anyway. If one reason doesn't hold they always cherry pick other reasons to raise your rates. It's no win situation with them.
True. But at least the state doesn't pay that much or not at all for medical care after a certain crash, because cars are just safe and injuries are low or inexistent, at least in crashes like these above. So in a way it is a win-win situation. You walk away from a crash, and nobody has to pay for what could've been a truly expensive medical care. Whoever decided to create IIHS was not stupid, that's for sure.
@@legioner9 That, and it's also a question of how to distribute the cost. Of course everyone could pay the same rates, but to me it seems more fair that in a free market, those choosing a product posing a higher risk pay more. And who really understands insurance quotes in detail? This testing program provides a somewhat scientific and comprehensible assessment basis for at least part of how they come up with their numbers. And useful consumer information on top. What's not to like about that?
Rates are more predicated now on the cost to fix cars due to making them safer rather and more expensive to build, rather than medical costs due to injuries. With the average cost of new cars rising, insurance costs will inevitably rise along with it.
I HAVENT SEEN THIS ONE SINCE 2012!!!!
I love coming back to reminisce. This is probably weird but its kinda like "the good ole days," just thinking back to my time as a knee high grasshopper. My dream job is job with Volvo in crash safety. Lol. God im a nerd. RIP Saab😢
I can't believe the Camry did so well in a test like this!
Fun fact: Toyota was the FIRST automaker in the mid 90s to praise the IIHS and begin designing their cars based on their tests. Just as Ford and GM bashed their tests and called them "ultra high speed", Toyota embraced them. Knowing that, it's no surprise the Camry fared so well here.
Thanks for all this!
You're welcome. Glad you enjoy them.
My 2002 Volkswagen Passat is safe as shit I’m glad it safe😁
They mixed up some IS300 footage for the Camry review.
Yeah, I caught that too.
"No manufacturer wants their vehicle shown on Dateline collapsing, and having Brian O'Neill and Lea Thompson saying bad things about them."
Okay... but were they actually _trying,_ though? Even as late as 2007, not all newly-tested models got good ratings in the front crash test. The Chevrolet Aveo is a particularly below-average example by that point. (But to be fair, General Motors never had the best track-record at IIHS anyway, so... X3)
I'm surprised how the chevy lumina managed to sneak by
5:09 ANOTHER dateline mistake, Lea says the 2000 Altima was rated acceptable yet it was actually rated marginal.
Initially, yes. However, after the Altima was first tested but before this episode aired, the IIHS began increasing the rating for cars that offered optional side airbags with head protection, similar to how they do that now for headlight ratings with cars that offer automatic high beams. If you notice at the end when they’re listing all the other cars’ ratings, they say the Mazda 626 rated good but it was actually rated acceptable.
An actual Dateline mistake was when they get to the Camry, and show the video of the Lexus IS (before the slo-mo video).
@ToyotaCamryFan2016 yep, that was another car that rating increase applied to.
@@carsandcrashtests Problem is that the dateline episode where the 2000 Altima was first shown they said it was rated marginal
@@titan9259 Correct, but when this episode aired, the IIHS was in the process of upgrading ratings for vehicles able to be equipped with side airbags. What Dateline should have said was "only rated Acceptable when equipped with side airbags", as models without them were still rated Marginal.
There’s just something I don’t understand when I hear the word, Best Pick, I think of the best performer in this test but not only are multiple cars getting this award, but also cars that didn’t do that great are getting it, I think a best pick would be the best performer in this test with no minor or major injuries recorded to the dummy?!
RIP 2JZ Lexuses
wasnt the 626 acceptable?
What was the date of the broadcast?
I don't have that, sorry.
The 2000 Nissan Altima was rated marginal
Per the IIHS website from 2002: "The overall evaluation of (2000-2001) Altimas with side airbags is acceptable, while other models would be rated marginal."
Someone got ran over by a Daewoo Lanos with the hard pass on the stunning Leganza
5:12 Why did the institute test a car with an optional side airbag instead of none, moreover it's the standard version of the car.
Volkswagen wasn’t playing when it came to safety thus all its vehicles (including the Passat) is safe as shit‼️
4:40, is that not a Lexus?
4:38
If You saw A Jeep Liberty Sub The Video And like The Video
Jaguar Cheap Type
It was basically a Ford Mondeo with a Jaguar hood ornament.
The Jaguar X-Type turned out to be one of the least reliable 🔩 🔧 vehicles ever produced.