2011-2018 Volvo S60 NHTSA Oblique Overlap Crash Test (Right Side)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 кві 2019
- A crash test performed 9/24/2015 to analyze the performance of a vehicle in an Oblique Overlap on the passenger side. Primarily observing the performance of seat belts and airbags. This is a 15 Degree, 35% overlap frontal crash test at 56 Mph. (90 Km/h)
Dummy Information:
Driver-Passenger
HIC 173-241
Femur (N) L/R 716/436-317/240
There is a high possibility for neck injuries for the driver. - Авто та транспорт
![ОРБАН приехал к ПУТИНУ и "отчитался" о поездке в Киев 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_0ukDovOWq8/mqdefault.jpg)
HIC for the driver is 173, I made a mistake while typing the description and have made changes.
CarPro1993 oh that’s a huge difference
I thought so. Lol. Thank you for the correction.
Looks like it did quite well, especially in the footwell area.
I want to thank Volvo for making the s60 so safe. I was involved in a accident in my Volvo s60 n it felt like it lock me in to keep me safe inside the car. So thank you so very much Volvo. Keep making great cars.
High risk of neck injury.
@@matthewking5612 90kmh is a lot for any car
Yes Volvo’s are very safe, but the Subaru Outback and Forester are safer according to the IIHS.
Most Volvo’s have 4 & 5 star crash worthiness. The Outback and Forester have the 5 star, and the highest safety rates with the IIHS Safety Plus rating.
Volvo does not achieve the “Plus” rating.
@@Doc1855volvo inner tests are more complex than iihs
@@nickz4231 Then why doesn’t those tests show up when it comes to insurance premiums?
impressive result for a 2011 model
@@point4894 If you're too stupid to understand what you're looking at, then don't get into discussions. The Volvo video was done with only 20% overlap and only 7 degree angle, while the Buick video was done with a 35% overlap and 15 degree angle, meaning the forces on the car on the Buick video were MUCH lower than on the Volvo. Buick would do much worse in the same test than the Volvo did.
Just look old xc90 small overlap vs mercedes bmw audi 2017...
@@point4894 Dude... ua-cam.com/video/L4hsS7lTo-4/v-deo.html... The two tests you posted were different, more severe on the Volvo... Now compare them.
This Volvo is based on Fords EUCD platform. (Mondeo). This platform had a great emphasis on safety. Volvo further enhanced it. That’s why you see very good results with these Volvo model years S60 v60. I would say it even rivals the new SPA Volvo platform.
The S60 is quite arguably the best car among the pre 2011 vehicles in this oblique crash test. If you look at the report you can see that all injury measures are well below threshold values, and while the A-pillar does buckle a little, intrusion in the cabin remains low.
The passenger cell strength of the Buick is Indeed impressive, however despite having the advantage to the Volvo in regards of size and weight it still has buckling of the A-pillar, and actually has higher intrusions of the toepan and dashboard. Worse than that, due to the lack of seatbelt pretensioners and load limiters in the backseats, the head of the passenger dummy whips harshly, causing forces exceeding thresholds, indicating the possibility of severe brain injuries.
What comes to Volvo safety, they are probably the only manufacturer that has never scored a poor or marginal result in any crash test since airbags became standard equipment. Their models have also always been in the top pack in real insurance crash statistics in regards to injuries and fatalities. That is hardly ordinary.
The IIHS test that you linked does indeed look bad in terms of structural performance, however all of the injury measurements still remained well below thresholds, in fact so low that it would have scored a good rating in all subcategories, making it far from disastrous. Of all of the cars that IIHS tested in this much harsher configuration, the Volvo was easily the best.
The test is far from being a secret too. It was never hidden, as it was a part of the around 40 tests that IIHS did to research the small overlap crash mode. They were just never used for official ratings, as the tests weren't obviously standardized yet. But it has been available since 2011 from the IIHS Tech Data website. Hardly unique, secret or hidden.
Volvo’s have passenger small overlap protection all the way back in 2011 models. They are truly committed to safety. Some new cars don’t even do well in that tesff
Even older, back to 2003. The 2003 Volvo XC90 got a Good Rating on the small over lap crash test, whereas some new cars from other luxury brands at the time of the test launching got really poor ratings.
A small overlap crash is a crash with 15% of the car crashed. This is 35%
@@gregorhorvat80 this is oblique. Not intended to be same test as front overlap tests.
It's much faster than the standard iIHS or euro ncap also. They test around 60kph.
ive heard from a crash engineer it was even earlier, 1998 to be exact
@@jrmt6 jeep wrangler still has marginal lol
Safest cars in the world
Impresionante! 90km/h Volvo el mejor auto
Damn, that steel cable at 2:20 is so dangerous it made holes in cement.
That's some serious force
im reading a lot of people talking about the safety... I don't see it here, the head of the driver literally made a 180°
Bravo Volvo👍👍👍
Volvo el.mejor
That’s the thing about cars. In 5-10 years you will be able to survive a 70mph crash because you head legs and chest will be fine. The problem is that the neck and arms cannot really be secured.
Tested: September 24th 2015
Volvo good 🚗 car👍
I thought it had airbags under the steering wheel for the legs
в отчёте указано HIC для водителя 173,18, вы ошиблись (the report states HIC for the driver 173.18, you were mistaken)
@@point4894 отчёт об испытании NHTSA #9483, там файл пдф со всеми значениями, данные о нагрузках и их продолжительности как раз в нём и содержаться, страница 2-4
@@point4894 на сайте nhtsa, www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/database/veh/veh.htm
Look at that crumple zone at 2:36 nice!
I have a question…
If 2 cars are traveling at 70mph and hit head on, is that the equivalent of a car traveling at 140mph hitting a cement wall head on?
To me this makes sense, but physics was not my major in college or my career.
No
@@lilpeppa117G How come?
My degree is in psychology.
I don’t understand physics.
@@Doc1855it’s the equivalent of a car traveling 70mph hitting a car traveling 70mph. the mph doesn’t increase.
@@renmen7132 Why not?
I’m no physics major. My PhD is in psychology, so I don’t understand.
Break it down for me so that I can understand.
90 km/h and minimal A-pillar deformation. Volvo, everyone.
OUCH. Thank goodness that driver wasn't a real person. I'm not sure what a HIC of 1173 is fatal or just very severe, but I do know it's a larger number than normal.
That was just a Typo, the correct HIC for the driver is 173. Btw: the HIC-Scale ends a 1000
Is there a BrIC value?
1.72 for the driver and 0.99 for the passenger.
ouch that's much higher than 0.87 threshold@@CarPro1993
So there was an xc60 crash a few months back and the driver, a female died from her neck being snapped. A hyundai coupe hit her. Why is the HIC so high for the driver? I own a 2016 S60....
56 mph is high speed for a crash. Most published tests are around 30mph.
There might have been an underling cause for her neck snapping. Like no seatbelt. Shoulder belt under her arm or her steering wheel may not have been in the proper position. If it is all the way up and not pointed at your chest it can cause neck injuries. I'm constantly correcting my sister from this mistake when she drives my xc60, having the steering wheel with the airbag pointed at your face is not okay and can do as you said happend to this woman and snap your neck. Especially if her seat was not at the proper hight, that would make it even worse. I am confident in the safety of Volvo's with correct positioning of the steering wheel and seat placement. I'm sure Volvo did some tweaking to their systems after this test was published. That's what Volvo does. Constant improvements.
If you look at the driver movement at 4:05 you can see why, if it were human the neck would have been broken
alexandru20i that is severe neck rotation. That’s a broken neck for sure on a human
@@hectorvazquez7929 that is what I said
Neck injuries ... In Volvo... When the crash has been on the passenger side...
90kmh is a lot. The problem is that driver's head nearly misses his airbag
volvos60
the driver would have die for broken neck
Why cant they make the cars stronger like that red machine that was used in the crash test
Too heavy (poor fuel economy) too much material required (expensive to manufacture.)
They have to balance several things and Volvo tend to sway far towards heavy and strong but still hi tech enough to get decent fuel economy.
My wife's 6000+ pound Volvo XC90 v8 with AWD gets around 25mpg highway at 75 with AC on. Pretty impressive for a 2005 model. It's one of the safest cars ever made.
The cars that are very small and light get VERY good fuel economy but are generally much less safe in real world crashes.
Look up the 10 US cars with most fatalities, most are small cars.
Also all the energy that would be used to crumple metal would instead go through your body, not good
@@datsunz152 good point! Gotta love that sweet sweet crumpling action 👌
Volvos are very safe due to high grade heavy steel construction, downside is a poor fuel economy and slow acceleration
Off course I respect Volvo for safety. But in 4:15min mannequins looks like he could unscrew the neck
You're talking about a 90kph impact here, not a light parking-speed crash. Not so long ago, any crash at that speed would almost certainly be fatal
I think euroncap crashing just at 64km/h and second here one car stay, and other model crash to him. In real life both cars run and crash at 90-110km/h and impact maybe be double, not like on euroncap one car stay, other hit just 64km/h.
Edit: yeah here go 90km/h my mistake, but other side still car staying in one place and just other go 90km/h to him. In real collapse both cars at 90-110km/h
Also the dummy isn't a perfect anatomically correct model of a human neck, and a human would not do the same thing there.
Real stupid test as it get hit by a simulated car but the steal box doesn't deform at all .
Subaru Outback and Forester have the IIHS Safety Plus awards, where as Volvo does Not have the “Plus” rating.
Furthermore it’s cheaper to insure a Subaru over a Volvo.
2019 and newer Subaru’s are more reliable than the Volvo according to Consumer Reports.
Pretty good, but a Saab is better 👌😀
Hilarious