The worst part isn't the fact that the Venture did so poorly... it's that GM sold it for 9 years without making a single change to improve it's safety.
GM and Ford sued the federal government when they started requiring seatbelts and airbags too. They don't give 2 shits about you. Just sell units and make money 💰
oh my god nostalgia flashbacks... When I was a kid my mom recorded this on our vhs player for me to watch again and again. I was fascinated by car crashes, demolition, other male kid stuff. It's funny we used to watch it so much this guy was like a movie star to me I was a huge fan of Brian O'Neill. I used to lie down in with a pillow on top of my head and have my parents determine that "there's just no room down here. I believe the foot is completely separated from the leg." and "It's not even budging!" Looking back I guess I was a strange kid but my parents thought it was funny.
The advent of passenger airbags becoming commonplace in new cars during the mid-1990s, made segments like this conflicting as a masochistic interest for me as a young child. I grew past that fear and grew up to crash test them as an engineer professionally, some 20 years later. Those early days of kids being decapitated, some smaller or even bigger than me, was mentally scarring as a kid car enthusiast in the 1990s to early 2000s. The grainy, sepia or often B&W slow motion 90s reenactments, of these violently exploding billowy pillows into the heads of microsized dummies put the fear of God into me. Hearing the child airbag death reports mounting in 1996-97, on nightly news. Back then, I couldn't comfortably enjoy sitting in some cars, with the fear inadvertent deployments or potential that an accident could kill me, below the height 5'3 and under 120 lbs.
I love how back then, auto makers were like "yeah, your test is crap because the government doesn't do it. You go too fast and do an unconventional test. BUY OUR CARS because fuck you!" Whereas today, the IIHS is embraced by both the government and auto makers. Well done lads!
Look at the 1956 Ford "Tedy" ads, supposedly people thought it was stupid to have a safe car back then so they avoided the Fords. What, did they think "Oh no, mustn't think about crashing or I'll crash"? img1.etsystatic.com/063/1/11038289/il_570xN.773028101_okc6.jpg
actually Ford outsold Chevy in 1957. But the irony is that the 57 Chevys (mainly the Bel Air) are considered classics and the 57 Fords are just considered old jalopies.
This guy who represents the manufacturing of cars is full of shit. He is clearly covering for the POOR, subpar car saftey designs. Thank you IIHS for these videos.
I'm starting to have a bigger appreciation for the 1977-1989 Chevy Caprice; Father hit a telephone pole in an 84 model in a 45 MPH zone (someone decided to pass cars on a 2 lane road and not yield to him or so it seems, I wasn't there.) He went home from the hospital on the same day and although his knees went through the plastic dashboard and he had seat belt rash and still has issues with his arm, he's alive and can still _walk._ There wasn't any movement of the steering wheel, the pole went in the middle just where the radiator and engine block were.
kylerawks10 These tests were released on November 19, 1996. I am actually watching this to commemorate the 17th anniversary of their release. November 18, 2013 9:07 pm
Back when I was younger my mom owned a 1996 Windstar, and it was fully loaded and good lord was it nice, she drove that thing until it hit 363,000 miles! That shows that the first generation Windstar was reliable and safe! I bought it from her a few years ago and although I only use it to get groceries and drive to my mom’s house, it still runs like it’s new, I fixed the rust on the surface and repainted it to make it look new. I love that Windstar.
All minivan in america crash test. (40 mph) 2:38 Ford Winstar 3:27 Dodge Grand caravan 4:27 Chevrolet Astro/Gmc Safari 5:29 Ford Aerostar 6:35 Toyota Previa 7:47 Pontiac Transport (Brand new design from general motor)
Here's a millisecond-by-millisecond comparison between the 2005 Honda Odyssey and the Trans Sport (which, keep in mind, was still sold under the same design as late as 2005 as the Chevy Venture). Two vans, sold new, in the same model year. The '05 Chevy Venture's airbags are a little different in design, but in this crash mode wouldn't make a lick of difference. Besides, the test report I have is of this Trans Sport. 0 ms: The vans hit the offset barriers. 27 ms: The Trans Sport's airbag doors rip open, and the front airbags begin to inflate. 32 ms: The Odyssey's driver seat belt pretensioner activates, tightening the seat belt across the driver's chest. 36 ms: The Trans Sport's driver airbag slams into the driver's face, probably breaking the nose if it were a real person. This would be the least of his problems. 48 ms: The Odyssey's steering wheel hub rips open, and the driver airbag begins to inflate. The passenger airbag will not inflate because not enough weight is on the seat. 52 ms: The Trans Sport's interior begins to structurally collapse. The driver's seat begins to move. 62 ms: The Odyssey's driver airbag reaches its maximum rearward extent. It never touches the driver, who is at no risk of airbag injury. At the same time, the Trans Sport driver starts moving into the driver airbag. 70 ms: The Trans Sport driver's legs are being smashed as the footwell intrudes. The left foot is being rapidly rotated upward. The steering wheel is rapidly moving upward. 76 ms: The Odyssey's driver airbag assumes its fully inflated shape and begins to deflate. 80 ms: The Trans Sport driver's foot snaps off from the tibia. 84 ms: The Odyssey driver's head finally meets the inflated driver airbag. 97 ms: The Trans Sport's steering wheel has been driven through the airbag, and the head gets shoryukened back, straining the neck. 100 ms: The Odyssey's steering wheel moves back only slightly - less than two inches. This has no effect on the driver's injury measures. 105 ms: The Trans Sport's headrest hits the driver's head and begins to push down, further straining the neck. 114 ms: The Odyssey's driver loses his grip on the steering wheel. 120 ms: The Trans Sport driver's neck gets seriously injured. 130 ms: The Odyssey's driver reaches the forward-most point of his movement and begins moving back toward the seat. The body and steering wheel never got to meet. At the same time, the Trans Sport driver has assumed his final position. 230 ms: As the Odyssey driver moves rearward and to the left, the side airbags deploy, preventing the head and chest from hitting anything hard. Fortunately, it was only a dummy in the Trans Sport's driver's seat. In real life, if these two vehicles hit head on, the Trans Sport's driver would probably end up unconscious or in severe pain, with life threatening injuries. The Odyssey's driver would come to in a largely intact interior, with the deflated pink airbag hanging out of the ripped open steering wheel hub being the first thing he saw, and the strong smell of burning rubber from the airbag propellant. His injuries would probably consist of a few cuts and bruises. It would be whoever was in the Odyssey who would call for help and/or try to assist the driver of the Trans Sport. All I can say is, whoever gets hit head on in one of these death-trap minivans, I hope you survive. March 17, 2020 6:26 am
There would be a similar result in the Astro, Aerostar, and Previa, where the Odyssey driver would have to try to assist the driver in any of those three vehicles.
Looking at these crash tests has made me appreciate newer cars a bit more, especially me involved in a crash with crumple zones, seatbelt and airbags. I just wish the older vehicles from the 80's and 90's had the same safety measures
my favorite part is when they’re talking about the astro and the reporter says “what if this had been a woman, shorter, and lighter?” then immediately cuts to a frame that shows that she is taller than o’neil
Me too. A blue '99 Montana. One of the biggest pieces of you know what we ever had. Leaked oil and coolant and the interior started falling apart at 50,000 miles. Glad we got rid of it.
Same for me with the Caravan! Seeing them now the pillars are so thin for such a vehicle! Add to that ours didn’t have seatbelts 🤭🤭 It’s so strange to think that before the internet was widespread, people were driving very dangerous and deadly vehicles and they thought because it has seatbelts it is safe!
I'm so glad my parents had volvos when we were growing up, and didn't buy into the minivan craze in the 90s and 00s. The Volvo isn't as easy to get in and out of with kids or as big as a minivan, but volvo, Saab, and Mercedes were the only ones that really cared about safety back then. these companies spared no expense when building safe cars, while everyone else was trying to cut costs even at the expense of safety, but trying to meet the bare minimum standards.
20 years later... GM and Ford are out of the minivan business (good riddance since their minivans were kinda crap... except for the Freestar and Monterey, maybe) Kia's entered the fray Hyundai had a Minivan, but was discontinued due to slow sales Chrysler has their new minivan out right now Toyota has the Sienna Honda has the amazing Odyssey Nissan's Quest is one of the worst performers
I have a 90 Astro, never let me and my family down and reliable and outlasted my aunts 2013 honda odyssey. The 1st gen astros were built like tanks. But I still see them on the roads today, thats to show you how reliable they are.
Well chrysler did invent the minivan essentially, with the caravan back in the 80s. I don't think they'll ever stop making them until popularity of that class dies completely
It's insane to think of how unsafe that GM minivan design is, how behind the times it is. Keep in mind that this was a brand new design, sold all the way until 2005! If it was this bad - far worse than even the second-worst performer - at launch, just imagine how bad it was by 2005! The Toyota Previa - a van with a very short front end and an old design at this time - did much better than the GM minivan. So did the Mazda MPV, which had a structural design dating back to 1989! IIHS rates on a "demerit" system. 0-3 is good, 4-9 acceptable, 10-15 marginal, 16 or more poor. The Windstar came away perfectly, no demerits. The Chrysler minivans got 11 demerits. Every other van, 11-16 demerits. The Aerostar, 18 demerits. The Previa, 26 demerits (it was second worst). The GM minivans got a whopping *40* demerits! Most poor-performing vehicles were getting less than 25! This death trap, a brand new design, got 40 demerits while most vans with designs 5-10 years older were getting less than half that! And you have to keep in mind that this van was THE LAST of these designs in production! All the others were replaced with safer versions years before the GM minivans were! By 2005, this van was a pathetic joke. Who in their right mind bought a brand new 2005 Chevy Venture? None of the other '05 minivans got even 10 demerits. Most were getting good ratings, in fact the Toyota Sienna and Honda Odyssey got no demerits at all. The Odyssey's performance was so good that that same body style of van got a Top Safety Pick in 2008 and 2009! I would love to see a van-to-van, 40 mph offset of an '05 Odyssey vs. an '05 Chevy Venture. March 17, 2020 5:39 am
The 2001 Dodge Grand Caravan/Chrysler Town & Country failed because the gas tank leaked. The 2002-07 models went to an acceptable because of a design change.
Even though the Ford Areostar did poorly, It's design dated back to 1986, With the only design change being front airbags in 1992.Yet This brand-new Transport 11 years later did 10 times worse
@@FrozenDount13 Exactly. The structural design of the Aerostar was better than a van 11 years newer, and car safety in general progressed a lot between the 1986 and 1997 model years. So basically, GM sold a minivan that had a structural design that was deficient by 1986 standards… in 2005, when people born in 1986 could drive! It never ceases to amaze me how bad that design was. By the time the Venture went out of production in June 2005, I was 12 and my family had a 2001 Toyota Highlander as our family hauler, which we bought used for less than the price of a new Venture. It would have shredded a Venture in a crash. April 3, 2023 11:03 am
The Previa did very poorly, with the steering column going into the ceiling, slack in the seat belt, and broken legs. Not to mention a significant head injury from the steering wheel smacking the face of the driver.
No there is. For instance crash at 60 mph into a 100% overlap barrier is fatal disregarding the vehicle crumple zone performance. Human internals experience deadly force decelerating 60-0 in 0.1 seconds.
12:35 Result Of Car Good Rating: Ford Windstar Marginal Rating: Mazda Mpv Dodge Grand Caravan Honda Odyssey Nissan quest Poor Rating: Chevrolet Astro Ford Aerostar Toyota Previa Pontiac Trans Sport Oldsmobile Silhouette Chevrolet Venture
Great minivans provide balance of comfort, convenience, versatility, and road manners. However, they also need to be safe and reliable. Dateline did a good job with this helpful news piece. Not Legal Advice. For information only. Please consult with an attorney for legal advice.
Windstar may have been the safest, but too bad it was unreliable as shit. I see tons more Caravans, Astros, and even Previas still on the road today from this era than I do Windstars.
LNER Mallard I don't know, I have a 98 Windstar and it has always been pretty reliable. It has had its far share of problems, but not anymore then the other cars we've owned. There are quite a few Windstars still on the road around me as well, only other old van I see that much is 1st generation Sienas. IDK, it might just be because I have a Windstar, I've got a SAAB convertible now too and suddenly those are everywhere too!
Ford Windstar: Good Dodge Grand Caravan: Marginal Chevrolet Astro/GMC Safari: Poor Ford Aerostar: Poor Honda Odyssey/Isuzu Oasis: Marginal Pontiac Transport/Montana/Opel/Vauxhall Sintra/ Chevrolet Venture/Oldsmobile Silhouette: Poor Toyota Previa: Poor Mazda MPV: Marginal
Minivans crash test at 40 mph (64 km/h) 3:27 Dodge Grand Caravan 4:26 Chevrolet Astro/GMC Safari 5:28 Ford Aerostar 6:34 Toyota Previa 7:47 Pontiac Transport
Umm excuse me 40 MPH to high speed of a crash test?!?!?!? That's how fast the cars in city's are usually FORCED to drive at BY LAW!!! What do they test them at 10 MPH?!?!?!
Willie Peck you have to be asleep to crash at 70mph on the highways, or suicidal. Generally 70mph-40mph takes a second or two if you are paying attention. Most cars will stop from 70 to 0 in 4 seconds. In the city you are doing 45-55 mph, and if you crash it's generally at 10-20mph unless you are suicidal or asleep.
it meets or exceeds government safety standards so it can be on the road the iihs isn't ran by the government and plus the nissan quest and chrysler town and country were not built to pass the test and at the time, and plus the small overlap crash test was new so every car brand had one bad performer just because it fails a crash test that is not required by the government does not mean its dangerous if a car fails the nhtsa crash test then the car can't be on the road so please understand all the cars on the road are safe if they weren't then they can't sell it and they would sue the pants off of the car brand
I saw another crash test video a few years ago that also had a black Pontiac Transport but it was stationary. A midsize sedan traveling at 35 mph crashed into it off center and the Pontiacs door completely collapsed just like in both IIHS tests
It's of course obvious that all of these are horrendous deathtraps by modern standards. But coming from an era when automakers other than Volvo and Mercedes had only just started to care about serious safety equipment that worked for purposes other than producing appealing ad copy, I'm fairly impressed. As recently as surviving a crash had stopped being a luxury item at that point, it's impressive how far they'd come. Rewind 10 year further back and every vehicle in this segment crumples like a tin can the way Indian cars do today and severely injures everyone inside at highway speeds. Rewind 20 years back and designing cars for crash safety wasn't even really on the radar. Ditto compact cars and economy sedans, I wouldn't want to be within 20 feet of an 80s Chevy Cavalier whether it's running or not, and 70s cab forward vans frequently left moderate speed crashes without much of a passenger compartment in front of the driver's seat at all. Believe it or not, all of the cars in this test, as bad as they look, vastly exceed whatever owners at the time were upgrading from in that the only occupant likely to be killed is the driver.
After watching over 100 Crash Tests and reading many reviews from different sources I came to a conclusion. The tiny "Smart Car" has a basic Roll Cage or hard shell to protect the occupants because they have no room for any significant 'crumple zones' to absorb G-forces. The safest cars/trucks/vans all have side curtain airbags. If you built a full sized car/truck/van with the Roll Cage like the Smart Cars AND made side curtain Airbags and Seatbelt Pretensioners mandatory it would save thousands of Lives per year. Of course the price of new vehicles would have to increase to pay for this level of Safety. It might be worth doing, only if the price is not too high. We know HOW to do it, but do we have the will to do it?
11:15 listen to whats said, too fast? See in this day and age we have dash cams and if you look at the majority of them, someone is Hot Headed and is SPEEDING right into someone else! I hope this is type of test is mandatory today.
DNIHelixUSN Yes you are right about how fast people are going. Where I live drivers go at least 10 mph over the posted speed and just up the street from my apartment drivers are racing each other easily going 20 mph over the posted speed. Also just look at the crosses on the side of the road and intersections.
11:25 "I would have to say that these tests are at or done it ultra high speeds". Lol since when is 40 miles an hour a ultra high speed? A great question he should have been asked is would he feel safe letting his kids or wife or family have one of these as a daily driver for doing everything the family does? Btw he's paid from the car manufacturer's themselves so basically if he said they we're anything but safe, then he'd essentially be trashing his employer and loosing his livelihood, (back in the 90s of course). So yeah hes bias.
Back when TV was still using analog, even though I was really little and dont really remember analog, something about seeing the analog just makes me feel nostalgic or deja vu, simpler times, back when the video wasnt crystal clear and women all sounded the same and men all sounded the same
My Dodge Grand Caravan SE saved my life. Every time I'd drive it downtown Chicago, whenever a carjacker approached to steal it, just before grabbing the doorhandle to presumably pull me out and drive away, they'd get this look on their face. A look like they had just drank vinegar, instead of icewater. Then they'd run away. Man, that was a great van!
After the Trans Sport test, IIHS said that the Pontiac Trans Sport was the worst performer we have ever tested, with potentially fatal injuries for the driver. Brian O'Neill noted that this crash could have proven fatal for a human occupant. I would never drive that vehicle, EVER because of this!
I recall my wife wanting a mini van back in the mid 90s. I told her you have to see this video and prove to her that they were unsafe. We bought a an SUV instead.
An old couple in a 1994 Caravan ran a red light and t-boned a 2012 Toyota Sienna flipping the Sienna over twice, the old couple immediately got out and walked over to see if the people in the Sienna were alright, unfortunately the couple and their three kids were seriously injured and had to be cut out of the van and airlifted, I never found out if anyone in the van survived. The body on frame Caravan was still driveable surprisingly.
What about the dustbuster pontiac trans sport / lumina apv / silhouette?? They were still out around that time .. what was the crash test rating for those ?
For the Previa - Thats what happens when you put the engine in the middle of the car and put barely anything in the front, just look at cabovers, even when the driver is higher, its still dangerous
That's not how it works. If two similarly weighted cars crash into each other head on at 40 mph, they both go from 40 mph to 0 mph at the same time. The crash forces are distributed between both cars. This crash test is equivalent to two cars having a head on crash at 40 mph. Not 20 mph.
I know this was a year ago, but there is a reason that you don't see any crash testing done above 40mph, because your chances of survival drop dramatically once you hit 50mph. in a 60mph collision, there is a 75% chance of death due simply to the forces. Go look up some independant crash tests of cars going 60mph or more, the results are very grim. this is a 90kph(56mph) crash into a telephone pole, but it gives you the gist: ua-cam.com/video/OoJqCsHAak8/v-deo.html No one would survive that at 90kph, which is the very reason the IIHS test at 40mph and no faster, because every car would get terrible ratings, and they would quit getting paid.
Omg my family had a Toyota previa for years and my dad fell asleep while driving it once when we were in driving in France on a mountain road and we were bouncing of the barrier 😳
here is the problem with the iihs and the gov crash testing. they are running cars into a concrete barrier to simulate another car. in the real world when two actual cars hit each other both cars absorb the impact. in the iihs and gov test on the other hand, they crash a car into concrete barrier and the car has to absorb all of the impact. that's not an accurate assessment of real world crashes, because the vast majority of the time when a car crashes, it's the result of crashing into another car and both cars are absorbing the impact and not crashing into something that doesn't absorb an impact. 2:20 is a prime example of what would happen in a real world crash. both gm cars that crashed into each other had their occupant compartment fairly intact, because both cars absorbed each others impact, but if you ran both of those gm cars into a concrete wall, more then likelky the occupant compartment would have been crushed due to the fact that the car itself would have to absorb all the impact. So just because a car fairs poor running into a concrete wall doesn't mean it would fair poor if it hit another car in which most real world crashes occur that way anyhow.
8:12 Look at that. "The slow motion film" -- which is actual, physical film. Of course, for the time, physical film (probably something like 16mm) was best for super slow motion applications. Today, you can shoot slow motion (though maybe not as slow as that) with a smartphone.
I hate how it's always about "meeting" the federal standard. A standard that is no doubt effected by tons of bureaucratic BS all in the name of lowering costs. What a shitty cop out.
"Too fast" lol... the Venture was sold as Opel Sintra in Europe, and it failed miserably at way older, easier crash tests. It was questionable even for late 80s standards. At that time GM and Ford were already selling cars in Europe that did okay in the EuroNCAP moderate overlap test, the equivalent of this. The Omega B1, a 1993 design, got 3 stars, so did the Fiesta IV from 1995. Other manufacturers were able to build really safe minivans, like the Renault Espace III from 1996 (4 Stars). They knew their competition, they knew what was coming, they tested their vehicles for this, but they just chose to say "fuck it" here. I would have loved to hear the response of these spin doctors had somebody called them out on that.
What test did gm do a test of 2 mph bumper crash? Is that where the Iihs get the bumper test and what happened with the Sewell not separating is it because the put strength.
I cannot believe they think a 40 mile an hour crash is a fast speed. 99% of my commute to work is 55 miles an hour, so what they are telling me is no matter what my car will not protect me. G and look for any excuse to deny issues with their vehicles.
I think they are just going by average crash speeds,. The highest speed limits around the time this was recorded were 55-65mph, since then they’ve been raised up to 85mph in some places in the states. And even the safest modern cars would still be demolished at those speeds.
It's funny to see how much car companies bashed iihs in the 90's and now today rely on their reviews for better sales
...come to think of it, the number one killer in the 90s was *[GASP]* car accidents.
THE PLOT THICKENS
sam_cesario7 its funny to say they havent done much to change any of this there are only a few that arnt that bad now
I wonder if car companies pulled the same shenanigans for the Small Overlap Test
nope. they are redesigning to meet the test
What "tests" did GM carry out for their vehicles, a 5MPH crash into a pile of feathers?
Sounds pretty accurate 😂🤣
Knowing GM, yes.
LOL
Running over a Dustbuster
😂😂XDXD LOAD IT AND TAKE A SHIT XDXD😂😂
6:45 "This is the worst we've seen, I think."
Pontiac Trans Sport: "Hold my beer."
Lol this is funny
Nissan Tsuru: hold my tequila
The worst part isn't the fact that the Venture did so poorly... it's that GM sold it for 9 years without making a single change to improve it's safety.
Yikes
They did some year to year changes such as the steering wheel design
@@aidenthecomputernerd I'm sure that would stop the structure from collapsing around you like that...
GM and Ford sued the federal government when they started requiring seatbelts and airbags too. They don't give 2 shits about you. Just sell units and make money 💰
GM is a shitty company that doesn't give a damn about the people that are keeping afloat
oh my god nostalgia flashbacks... When I was a kid my mom recorded this on our vhs player for me to watch again and again. I was fascinated by car crashes, demolition, other male kid stuff. It's funny we used to watch it so much this guy was like a movie star to me I was a huge fan of Brian O'Neill. I used to lie down in with a pillow on top of my head and have my parents determine that "there's just no room down here. I believe the foot is completely separated from the leg." and "It's not even budging!" Looking back I guess I was a strange kid but my parents thought it was funny.
Great 2019
I'm also interested in car crash tests, this is why i have BeamNG.drive.
@@titan9259 im playin beam right now.
@@titan9259 hi
The advent of passenger airbags becoming commonplace in new cars during the mid-1990s, made segments like this conflicting as a masochistic interest for me as a young child.
I grew past that fear and grew up to crash test them as an engineer professionally, some 20 years later.
Those early days of kids being decapitated, some smaller or even bigger than me, was mentally scarring as a kid car enthusiast in the 1990s to early 2000s.
The grainy, sepia or often B&W slow motion 90s reenactments, of these violently exploding billowy pillows into the heads of microsized dummies put the fear of God into me.
Hearing the child airbag death reports mounting in 1996-97, on nightly news.
Back then, I couldn't comfortably enjoy sitting in some cars, with the fear inadvertent deployments or potential that an accident could kill me, below the height 5'3 and under 120 lbs.
I wonder.... if you crash a Pontiac into an astro, could you taste each others steering wheel??
We simply don't talk about tasting each others steering wheels.
Mark K funny funny 😂
Mark K I
DUMB
But the Pontiac Transport look that bad
I love how back then, auto makers were like "yeah, your test is crap because the government doesn't do it. You go too fast and do an unconventional test. BUY OUR CARS because fuck you!"
Whereas today, the IIHS is embraced by both the government and auto makers. Well done lads!
Look at the 1956 Ford "Tedy" ads, supposedly people thought it was stupid to have a safe car back then so they avoided the Fords. What, did they think "Oh no, mustn't think about crashing or I'll crash"?
img1.etsystatic.com/063/1/11038289/il_570xN.773028101_okc6.jpg
actually Ford outsold Chevy in 1957.
But the irony is that the 57 Chevys (mainly the Bel Air) are considered classics and the 57 Fords are just considered old jalopies.
Wow you're a tool.
Listen to this tool "embraced by government" ... I can see someone that's never paid taxes.
And all this damage is at 40 MPH. Just think if it was at 60, 70, or even 80 MPH.
Lexzar Boom and the car makers say 40 mph is too high for testing!
Lexzar Boom I think moderate overlap and small overlap tests should be done at 55 mph, because that's the maximum speed of undivided highways.
sai173 did you see fifth gear crash test on the Ford focus going 120 miles an hour into a wall
sai173 There’s cars on the road crashing at 185,200,110 and they walked away with none to minor injuries
Logan Knupp I was going to say, **the exact same thing** ! 😂😂
This guy who represents the manufacturing of cars is full of shit. He is clearly covering for the POOR, subpar car saftey designs. Thank you IIHS for these videos.
How unprofessional and crude can you get kid? As far as I am concerned the man in that video knows no shame if you even know what that means.
i know this is 3 years old but im gonna have to side with uno here
Love the way GM claims the Transport performed very well but they aren't gonna back up the claim with any kind of picture or some kind of footage.
Someone said that they theorize that GM crash tested into a pile of feathers and I gotta agree
I'm starting to have a bigger appreciation for the 1977-1989 Chevy Caprice; Father hit a telephone pole in an 84 model in a 45 MPH zone (someone decided to pass cars on a 2 lane road and not yield to him or so it seems, I wasn't there.) He went home from the hospital on the same day and although his knees went through the plastic dashboard and he had seat belt rash and still has issues with his arm, he's alive and can still _walk._ There wasn't any movement of the steering wheel, the pole went in the middle just where the radiator and engine block were.
These were my favorite things to watch on mbnbc during the weekends before I had the internet.
Me too! So funny.
kylerawks10 These tests were released on November 19, 1996. I am actually watching this to commemorate the 17th anniversary of their release.
November 18, 2013 9:07 pm
I read this almost 10 years later. January 7th 2022 at 16.46
holy crap, my family had a Toyota pevia for 22 years!
we never crashed it but it lasted up to 400,000 miles
Magic Mike But you can buy a toyota sienna! Ihss said it is the best minivan for saftey
steven play roblox i find the mercedes r class the best minivan
Umm Minivan yea umm mercedes dont make minivans but they make vans
So what is a mercedes b class then?
Btw look up mercedes R class its a sport minivan its for up to 7 people
I’m Surprised that the Pontiac Trans Port doesn't have a legendary meme status for how unsafe it is, because it totally deserves it.
It has. I’m in a discord server where everybody finds that funny
there are cars from the 70s that would literally explode from being rear ended
My friend group calls them deathtrap mobiles lol
@@davidpark761 Uh one wasn't it? The Ford Pinto.
@@SCREAMILLUSION yes
Back when I was younger my mom owned a 1996 Windstar, and it was fully loaded and good lord was it nice, she drove that thing until it hit 363,000 miles! That shows that the first generation Windstar was reliable and safe! I bought it from her a few years ago and although I only use it to get groceries and drive to my mom’s house, it still runs like it’s new, I fixed the rust on the surface and repainted it to make it look new. I love that Windstar.
All minivan in america crash test. (40 mph)
2:38 Ford Winstar
3:27 Dodge Grand caravan
4:27 Chevrolet Astro/Gmc Safari
5:29 Ford Aerostar
6:35 Toyota Previa
7:47 Pontiac Transport (Brand new design from general motor)
Here's a millisecond-by-millisecond comparison between the 2005 Honda Odyssey and the Trans Sport (which, keep in mind, was still sold under the same design as late as 2005 as the Chevy Venture). Two vans, sold new, in the same model year. The '05 Chevy Venture's airbags are a little different in design, but in this crash mode wouldn't make a lick of difference. Besides, the test report I have is of this Trans Sport.
0 ms: The vans hit the offset barriers.
27 ms: The Trans Sport's airbag doors rip open, and the front airbags begin to inflate.
32 ms: The Odyssey's driver seat belt pretensioner activates, tightening the seat belt across the driver's chest.
36 ms: The Trans Sport's driver airbag slams into the driver's face, probably breaking the nose if it were a real person. This would be the least of his problems.
48 ms: The Odyssey's steering wheel hub rips open, and the driver airbag begins to inflate. The passenger airbag will not inflate because not enough weight is on the seat.
52 ms: The Trans Sport's interior begins to structurally collapse. The driver's seat begins to move.
62 ms: The Odyssey's driver airbag reaches its maximum rearward extent. It never touches the driver, who is at no risk of airbag injury. At the same time, the Trans Sport driver starts moving into the driver airbag.
70 ms: The Trans Sport driver's legs are being smashed as the footwell intrudes. The left foot is being rapidly rotated upward. The steering wheel is rapidly moving upward.
76 ms: The Odyssey's driver airbag assumes its fully inflated shape and begins to deflate.
80 ms: The Trans Sport driver's foot snaps off from the tibia.
84 ms: The Odyssey driver's head finally meets the inflated driver airbag.
97 ms: The Trans Sport's steering wheel has been driven through the airbag, and the head gets shoryukened back, straining the neck.
100 ms: The Odyssey's steering wheel moves back only slightly - less than two inches. This has no effect on the driver's injury measures.
105 ms: The Trans Sport's headrest hits the driver's head and begins to push down, further straining the neck.
114 ms: The Odyssey's driver loses his grip on the steering wheel.
120 ms: The Trans Sport driver's neck gets seriously injured.
130 ms: The Odyssey's driver reaches the forward-most point of his movement and begins moving back toward the seat. The body and steering wheel never got to meet. At the same time, the Trans Sport driver has assumed his final position.
230 ms: As the Odyssey driver moves rearward and to the left, the side airbags deploy, preventing the head and chest from hitting anything hard.
Fortunately, it was only a dummy in the Trans Sport's driver's seat. In real life, if these two vehicles hit head on, the Trans Sport's driver would probably end up unconscious or in severe pain, with life threatening injuries. The Odyssey's driver would come to in a largely intact interior, with the deflated pink airbag hanging out of the ripped open steering wheel hub being the first thing he saw, and the strong smell of burning rubber from the airbag propellant. His injuries would probably consist of a few cuts and bruises. It would be whoever was in the Odyssey who would call for help and/or try to assist the driver of the Trans Sport. All I can say is, whoever gets hit head on in one of these death-trap minivans, I hope you survive.
March 17, 2020 6:26 am
There would be a similar result in the Astro, Aerostar, and Previa, where the Odyssey driver would have to try to assist the driver in any of those three vehicles.
Well duh, the trans port is the worst performer the institute has ever seen
We don't talk about gm vans
LOL! I'm dead,
I don't talk about GM at all.
Johnny Paulson I owned 2 Astros and 1 safari. Thank God no accidents. I was kinda shocked of the results.
Indeed. Unreliable, underpowered, terrible fuel economy, and unsafe.
I’ll keep my Hyundai over those piles of rubbish
Looking at these crash tests has made me appreciate newer cars a bit more, especially me involved in a crash with crumple zones, seatbelt and airbags. I just wish the older vehicles from the 80's and 90's had the same safety measures
my favorite part is when they’re talking about the astro and the reporter says “what if this had been a woman, shorter, and lighter?” then immediately cuts to a frame that shows that she is taller than o’neil
Lmao!! You're right!! That's so funny! (5:09)
to think that i actually rode in a pontiac trans sport everyday at on point in my childhood... scary shit
Me too. A blue '99 Montana. One of the biggest pieces of you know what we ever had. Leaked oil and coolant and the interior started falling apart at 50,000 miles. Glad we got rid of it.
We had a 1st gen Pontiac Trans Sport. I loved how the interior was shaped from looking back to the front.
Same my mom drove a '97 Chevy Venture for 15 years with 130k miles. A lot of issues with that van and we sold it in 2011. So glad we got rid of it!
Same for me with the Caravan! Seeing them now the pillars are so thin for such a vehicle! Add to that ours didn’t have seatbelts 🤭🤭 It’s so strange to think that before the internet was widespread, people were driving very dangerous and deadly vehicles and they thought because it has seatbelts it is safe!
General Motors: our minivans are super safe!
The IIHS and the mass ignition switch recall: Sure Jan.
typical GM. denying there is a problem with their vehicles
Ray Kuipers my mom is a ford fan so ya
I'm so glad my parents had volvos when we were growing up, and didn't buy into the minivan craze in the 90s and 00s. The Volvo isn't as easy to get in and out of with kids or as big as a minivan, but volvo, Saab, and Mercedes were the only ones that really cared about safety back then. these companies spared no expense when building safe cars, while everyone else was trying to cut costs even at the expense of safety, but trying to meet the bare minimum standards.
How nice to have come from money
20 years later...
GM and Ford are out of the minivan business (good riddance since their minivans were kinda crap... except for the Freestar and Monterey, maybe)
Kia's entered the fray
Hyundai had a Minivan, but was discontinued due to slow sales
Chrysler has their new minivan out right now
Toyota has the Sienna
Honda has the amazing Odyssey
Nissan's Quest is one of the worst performers
I have a 90 Astro, never let me and my family down and reliable and outlasted my aunts 2013 honda odyssey. The 1st gen astros were built like tanks. But I still see them on the roads today, thats to show you how reliable they are.
+Sloth Demon
but they're unreliable and get terrible mileage.
Well chrysler did invent the minivan essentially, with the caravan back in the 80s.
I don't think they'll ever stop making them until popularity of that class dies completely
Except the Freestar couldn't keep transmissions in them. There was a massive recall regarding it.
Giordan Diodato the Aerostar is extremely deformable and slow and crumbles like my cookies
The Windstar I was hauled around as a kid may have had a shitty unreliable power train but at least it was safe.
When Dateline was so much more than true crime stories.
This generation of GM minivans is so unsafe that it's become legendary.
August 17, 2020 2:57 am
Its good to hear that parents are safe and good drivers
It's insane to think of how unsafe that GM minivan design is, how behind the times it is. Keep in mind that this was a brand new design, sold all the way until 2005! If it was this bad - far worse than even the second-worst performer - at launch, just imagine how bad it was by 2005!
The Toyota Previa - a van with a very short front end and an old design at this time - did much better than the GM minivan. So did the Mazda MPV, which had a structural design dating back to 1989! IIHS rates on a "demerit" system. 0-3 is good, 4-9 acceptable, 10-15 marginal, 16 or more poor. The Windstar came away perfectly, no demerits. The Chrysler minivans got 11 demerits. Every other van, 11-16 demerits. The Aerostar, 18 demerits. The Previa, 26 demerits (it was second worst). The GM minivans got a whopping *40* demerits! Most poor-performing vehicles were getting less than 25! This death trap, a brand new design, got 40 demerits while most vans with designs 5-10 years older were getting less than half that!
And you have to keep in mind that this van was THE LAST of these designs in production! All the others were replaced with safer versions years before the GM minivans were!
By 2005, this van was a pathetic joke. Who in their right mind bought a brand new 2005 Chevy Venture? None of the other '05 minivans got even 10 demerits. Most were getting good ratings, in fact the Toyota Sienna and Honda Odyssey got no demerits at all. The Odyssey's performance was so good that that same body style of van got a Top Safety Pick in 2008 and 2009! I would love to see a van-to-van, 40 mph offset of an '05 Odyssey vs. an '05 Chevy Venture.
March 17, 2020 5:39 am
The 2001 Dodge Grand Caravan/Chrysler Town & Country failed because the gas tank leaked. The 2002-07 models went to an acceptable because of a design change.
Even though the Ford Areostar did poorly, It's design dated back to 1986, With the only design change being front airbags in 1992.Yet This brand-new Transport 11 years later did 10 times worse
@@FrozenDount13 Exactly. The structural design of the Aerostar was better than a van 11 years newer, and car safety in general progressed a lot between the 1986 and 1997 model years. So basically, GM sold a minivan that had a structural design that was deficient by 1986 standards… in 2005, when people born in 1986 could drive!
It never ceases to amaze me how bad that design was. By the time the Venture went out of production in June 2005, I was 12 and my family had a 2001 Toyota Highlander as our family hauler, which we bought used for less than the price of a new Venture. It would have shredded a Venture in a crash.
April 3, 2023 11:03 am
The Previa did very poorly, with the steering column going into the ceiling, slack in the seat belt, and broken legs. Not to mention a significant head injury from the steering wheel smacking the face of the driver.
@@whattheheck1000Not so fast. In both the Chevy Astro and Ford Aerostar, the floor wad rammed back 15 inches, trapping the feet of the driver.
Wonder if he traded the previa in for a windstar.
I’m sure he did
2:15 BeamNG in real life.
streetracer111 yes,you are right because there is no airbag
Real life in BeamNG
2 legrans
11:25, there's *never* a "Too fast" for a car crash
No there is. For instance crash at 60 mph into a 100% overlap barrier is fatal disregarding the vehicle crumple zone performance. Human internals experience deadly force decelerating 60-0 in 0.1 seconds.
12:35 Result Of Car
Good Rating:
Ford Windstar
Marginal Rating:
Mazda Mpv
Dodge Grand Caravan
Honda Odyssey
Nissan quest
Poor Rating:
Chevrolet Astro
Ford Aerostar
Toyota Previa
Pontiac Trans Sport
Oldsmobile Silhouette
Chevrolet Venture
At least it isn't the Brilliance BS6..... XD
AcE_HwMustang28 Ikr
Great minivans provide balance of comfort, convenience, versatility, and road manners. However, they also need to be safe and reliable. Dateline did a good job with this helpful news piece.
Not Legal Advice. For information only. Please consult with an attorney for legal advice.
And now in days the safest minivans are the Honda Odyssey & Kia's Sedona. Toyota hasn't gotten that title in awhile & they claim to be the "best".
Jose Santana nope, Toyota has made it like a million times
Not now it hasn't
Jose Santana ya it has, 2015 Toyota sienna has made it into safest minivans.
Kia's Sedona also did pretty well in it.
Toyota only has 2 top safety pick plus vehicles in 2019, Hyundai has 12
Windstar may have been the safest, but too bad it was unreliable as shit. I see tons more Caravans, Astros, and even Previas still on the road today from this era than I do Windstars.
Yah man, the good old astro never dies. Mines at 430.000 and still running good.
spiffcats Yep, toughest damn vans on the road.
LNER Mallard I don't know, I have a 98 Windstar and it has always been pretty reliable. It has had its far share of problems, but not anymore then the other cars we've owned. There are quite a few Windstars still on the road around me as well, only other old van I see that much is 1st generation Sienas. IDK, it might just be because I have a Windstar, I've got a SAAB convertible now too and suddenly those are everywhere too!
scottthewaterwarrior
If you drive something you think about it, so you notice it. For example when i get a dodge shadow i started noticing them.
+LNER Mallard Or off the road 👹
Ford Windstar: Good
Dodge Grand Caravan: Marginal
Chevrolet Astro/GMC Safari: Poor
Ford Aerostar: Poor
Honda Odyssey/Isuzu Oasis: Marginal
Pontiac Transport/Montana/Opel/Vauxhall Sintra/ Chevrolet Venture/Oldsmobile Silhouette: Poor
Toyota Previa: Poor
Mazda MPV: Marginal
Wtf did GM do when they tested the transport. Crash them to a stack of pillows in 1 mph!?!
Minivans crash test at 40 mph (64 km/h)
3:27 Dodge Grand Caravan
4:26 Chevrolet Astro/GMC Safari
5:28 Ford Aerostar
6:34 Toyota Previa
7:47 Pontiac Transport
Umm excuse me 40 MPH to high speed of a crash test?!?!?!? That's how fast the cars in city's are usually FORCED to drive at BY LAW!!! What do they test them at 10 MPH?!?!?!
10 MPH is for bumper test
Willie Peck
you have to be asleep to crash at 70mph on the highways, or suicidal. Generally 70mph-40mph takes a second or two if you are paying attention. Most cars will stop from 70 to 0 in 4 seconds. In the city you are doing 45-55 mph, and if you crash it's generally at 10-20mph unless you are suicidal or asleep.
Y10Q now it all makes sense but you forgot to add people tweeting on iPhones lol. I cringe every time I see that.
Yay Ford Windstar rules! It was the travel/commuter/everyday car for my family for many years.
Dateline said it got a good rating but it good ah acceptable
4:37 I always wanted to know what a steering wheel tastes like.....
8:33 Like a steering wheel necklace
Remember: the Toyota Previa is mid engine, RWD.
True. And the Chevy Astro/GMC Safari was introduced for the 1985 model year, in an era before widely known American offset crash tests.
@@hakeemsd70m they started in 1993s so you are correct
@@asfitube I didn't know that, thank you for sharing that with me. Was always curious as to when they started the offset test.
@@asfitube Nope, late 1994/early 1995.
@@hakeemsd70m Ignore that, it was MY 1995, not 1993.
My dad had an astro, glad he sold the piece of shit before I was born.
Maximiliano Luera lmao what does he drive now?
DogLover0124 2013 explorer
My friends dad has a Astro and his grandparents has a Safari.
Technology Spotlight My friend's family owns 3 Astros
Kind of glad my friends dad sold it and bought a Ford Fusion.
It’s 2020 and the Nissan Quest is still a death trap. While others have surpassed it in safety.
it meets or exceeds government safety standards so it can be on the road the iihs isn't ran by the government and plus the nissan quest and chrysler town and country were not built to pass the test and at the time, and plus the small overlap crash test was new so every car brand had one bad performer just because it fails a crash test that is not required by the government does not mean its dangerous if a car fails the nhtsa crash test then the car can't be on the road so please understand all the cars on the road are safe if they weren't then they can't sell it and they would sue the pants off of the car brand
I saw another crash test video a few years ago that also had a black Pontiac Transport but it was stationary. A midsize sedan traveling at 35 mph crashed into it off center and the Pontiacs door completely collapsed just like in both IIHS tests
Never buy a car until you see one of these videos.
1/4 star safety rating, no airbags, we still zoomin👌
They should buy a used Trans Sport and test it today, that would be really cool.
It's of course obvious that all of these are horrendous deathtraps by modern standards. But coming from an era when automakers other than Volvo and Mercedes had only just started to care about serious safety equipment that worked for purposes other than producing appealing ad copy, I'm fairly impressed. As recently as surviving a crash had stopped being a luxury item at that point, it's impressive how far they'd come. Rewind 10 year further back and every vehicle in this segment crumples like a tin can the way Indian cars do today and severely injures everyone inside at highway speeds. Rewind 20 years back and designing cars for crash safety wasn't even really on the radar. Ditto compact cars and economy sedans, I wouldn't want to be within 20 feet of an 80s Chevy Cavalier whether it's running or not, and 70s cab forward vans frequently left moderate speed crashes without much of a passenger compartment in front of the driver's seat at all. Believe it or not, all of the cars in this test, as bad as they look, vastly exceed whatever owners at the time were upgrading from in that the only occupant likely to be killed is the driver.
what the car companies are saying is, we dont care what happens to you, if it costs us more to make them safer, than thats not in our budget
Glad we have a good relationship with the car companies, aren't we?
11:29 an ultra-hugh test at 40 miles per hour . This is tragically hilarious.
The 1984 Toyota Van would've done even worse than the Previa. I will still buy a Previa as long as I pay very precise attention on the road.
After watching over 100 Crash Tests and reading many reviews from different sources I came to a conclusion. The tiny "Smart Car" has a basic Roll Cage or hard shell to protect the occupants because they have no room for any significant 'crumple zones' to absorb G-forces. The safest cars/trucks/vans all have side curtain airbags. If you built a full sized car/truck/van with the Roll Cage like the Smart Cars AND made side curtain Airbags and Seatbelt Pretensioners mandatory it would save thousands of Lives per year. Of course the price of new vehicles would have to increase to pay for this level of Safety. It might be worth doing, only if the price is not too high. We know HOW to do it, but do we have the will to do it?
randy109 I agree, and have been thinking about a roll cage installation myself. Would feel 1000x better driving than I do now
It just costs too much right now, like tons more it's to bad your so right.
ah the 90's the last decade when crash tests were spectacular
The driver of that Chevy Astro is eating that air bag right now
11:15 listen to whats said, too fast? See in this day and age we have dash cams and if you look at the majority of them, someone is Hot Headed and is SPEEDING right into someone else! I hope this is type of test is mandatory today.
It still is conducted today with new cars. They have a new, harder test called the small-overlap.
DNIHelixUSN
Yes you are right about how fast people are going. Where I live drivers go at least 10 mph over the posted speed and just up the street from my apartment drivers are racing each other easily going 20 mph over the posted speed. Also just look at the crosses on the side of the road and intersections.
11:25 "I would have to say that these tests are at or done it ultra high speeds". Lol since when is 40 miles an hour a ultra high speed? A great question he should have been asked is would he feel safe letting his kids or wife or family have one of these as a daily driver for doing everything the family does?
Btw he's paid from the car manufacturer's themselves so basically if he said they we're anything but safe, then he'd essentially be trashing his employer and loosing his livelihood, (back in the 90s of course).
So yeah hes bias.
The things we do for money 🪙
3:33 Just 5 years later, the Grand Caravan would get a Poor rating due to the fuel tank leaking.
But then it was retested and got an acceptable
Back when TV was still using analog, even though I was really little and dont really remember analog, something about seeing the analog just makes me feel nostalgic or deja vu, simpler times, back when the video wasnt crystal clear and women all sounded the same and men all sounded the same
The ford windstar saved my life
Jonathan Cheshire same my mom owned a windstar it's a 2002
My Dodge Grand Caravan SE saved my life. Every time I'd drive it downtown Chicago, whenever a carjacker approached to steal it, just before grabbing the doorhandle to presumably pull me out and drive away, they'd get this look on their face. A look like they had just drank vinegar, instead of icewater. Then they'd run away. Man, that was a great van!
After the Trans Sport test, IIHS said that the Pontiac Trans Sport was the worst performer we have ever tested, with potentially fatal injuries for the driver. Brian O'Neill noted that this crash could have proven fatal for a human occupant. I would never drive that vehicle, EVER because of this!
Wow the Astro totally buckled. The Aerostar steering wheel snapping off is so dangerous and let’s not even mention the Transport. It speaks for itself
I thought my screen had a bug on it lol
I recall my wife wanting a mini van back in the mid 90s. I told her you have to see this video and prove to her that they were unsafe. We bought a an SUV instead.
@@based_kujoproductions Exactly, but not surprised he was that ignorant
An old couple in a 1994 Caravan ran a red light and t-boned a 2012 Toyota Sienna flipping the Sienna over twice, the old couple immediately got out and walked over to see if the people in the Sienna were alright, unfortunately the couple and their three kids were seriously injured and had to be cut out of the van and airlifted, I never found out if anyone in the van survived. The body on frame Caravan was still driveable surprisingly.
I find it hard to I believe this story...
What about the dustbuster pontiac trans sport / lumina apv / silhouette?? They were still out around that time .. what was the crash test rating for those ?
I dont think you watched the whole video
@@francoisd6942 wym ? They’re the gen before this transport , even tho they were still making dustbusters in 97
I would test at 65 mph.
Munchkine26 then there is going alot more damage
the dummies would be destroyed
Ethan Hibbert what about 50 miles an hour Because I’ve been in a 50 mile an hour crash
why were there 2 nissan quests? one was red the other was green! was there a malfunction with the grren one or the dummy?
It’s really cool how you know all cars relatives
For the Previa - Thats what happens when you put the engine in the middle of the car and put barely anything in the front, just look at cabovers, even when the driver is higher, its still dangerous
Honestly makes me feel safe that my parents drove me in a 2001 ford Windstar.
JoeyLovesTrains my mom had a 2002 ford windstar
@@cjiekel668my sister had a 2002 Windstar
they think 40 is fast? Wtf a head on with two cars going 20
Well, especially with older cars you're not likely to survive over that speed unless you get lucky.
wrong, 20mph each.
That's not how it works. If two similarly weighted cars crash into each other head on at 40 mph, they both go from 40 mph to 0 mph at the same time. The crash forces are distributed between both cars. This crash test is equivalent to two cars having a head on crash at 40 mph. Not 20 mph.
I know this was a year ago, but there is a reason that you don't see any crash testing done above 40mph, because your chances of survival drop dramatically once you hit 50mph. in a 60mph collision, there is a 75% chance of death due simply to the forces. Go look up some independant crash tests of cars going 60mph or more, the results are very grim. this is a 90kph(56mph) crash into a telephone pole, but it gives you the gist: ua-cam.com/video/OoJqCsHAak8/v-deo.html No one would survive that at 90kph, which is the very reason the IIHS test at 40mph and no faster, because every car would get terrible ratings, and they would quit getting paid.
Omg my family had a Toyota previa for years and my dad fell asleep while driving it once when we were in driving in France on a mountain road and we were bouncing of the barrier 😳
here is the problem with the iihs and the gov crash testing. they are running cars into a concrete barrier to simulate another car. in the real world when two actual cars hit each other both cars absorb the impact. in the iihs and gov test on the other hand, they crash a car into concrete barrier and the car has to absorb all of the impact. that's not an accurate assessment of real world crashes, because the vast majority of the time when a car crashes, it's the result of crashing into another car and both cars are absorbing the impact and not crashing into something that doesn't absorb an impact. 2:20 is a prime example of what would happen in a real world crash. both gm cars that crashed into each other had their occupant compartment fairly intact, because both cars absorbed each others impact, but if you ran both of those gm cars into a concrete wall, more then likelky the occupant compartment would have been crushed due to the fact that the car itself would have to absorb all the impact. So just because a car fairs poor running into a concrete wall doesn't mean it would fair poor if it hit another car in which most real world crashes occur that way anyhow.
Imagine Nissan quest vs Pontiac trans sport 😂
The trans sport will completely crumple lol
Everyone: Fords are Auful CHEAPLY MADE!! BREAKS EASLY!!!
Ford: would you rather die in a Pontiac?
I wonder if like if they say chevy astro aka gmc safari does that mean it has the same damage
Ronnie Vedin vlogs aka ron vedin it just means it a slightly different design and under a different name but the same structure
I was Very surprised the WinStar came out on top!
6:43 Bro hit us 💀
You see, they make the passengers as the crumple zones.
The Pontiac Trans Port is the worst crash test that IIHS has ever preformed. The 2001 Ford f150 is a close second but the Trans Port is worse.
These test were done with onl the driver. usually these vans transpoort as much as 6 or 7 people adding over 12000 pounds to the inertial energy
@@francoisd6942 Which makes the crash that much worse. That's real chilling.
It was a little funny to see the steering wheel fall out when they opened the door.
8:12 Look at that. "The slow motion film" -- which is actual, physical film. Of course, for the time, physical film (probably something like 16mm) was best for super slow motion applications.
Today, you can shoot slow motion (though maybe not as slow as that) with a smartphone.
VectraQS yeah. They used physical film at 5k frames per minute.
At 6:54 you can hear the door chime
Good that GM redesigned the Pontiac trans port in 2005 and that version got a good rating
It’s the Montana SV6.
The balls on the guy that wrote a letter claiming that "less than 1% of offset crashes happen at 40mph".....
My grandpa got in a crash in the Chevrolet astro he got rear ended by some car going fast amazingly he survived he only had a broken back
Ford is always be unstoppable
Wow. What a shame Ford discontinued the Windstar. That was a great minivan
Don't forget the freestar and Aerostar decontinued
An uncle had a 2005 Venture and they crashed from behind, the trunk was destroyed.
I hate how it's always about "meeting" the federal standard. A standard that is no doubt effected by tons of bureaucratic BS all in the name of lowering costs. What a shitty cop out.
Every gosh darn letter the compinaes always say "it meets federal regulations" . Yep! If it didn't it wouldn't be on the road!!!
Federal safety standards are not rigorous enough! The government should do more to make cars much more safer!
"Too fast" lol... the Venture was sold as Opel Sintra in Europe, and it failed miserably at way older, easier crash tests. It was questionable even for late 80s standards. At that time GM and Ford were already selling cars in Europe that did okay in the EuroNCAP moderate overlap test, the equivalent of this. The Omega B1, a 1993 design, got 3 stars, so did the Fiesta IV from 1995. Other manufacturers were able to build really safe minivans, like the Renault Espace III from 1996 (4 Stars). They knew their competition, they knew what was coming, they tested their vehicles for this, but they just chose to say "fuck it" here. I would have loved to hear the response of these spin doctors had somebody called them out on that.
Luckily, the Astro and Savannah were mostly sold as cargo vans and occasionally sold as passenger vans, not minivans
The funny thing is, you can still see a whole bunch of Toyota Previa on the road today but almost none of the others....
35 years old rust buckets that will collapse even worse
What test did gm do a test of 2 mph bumper crash? Is that where the Iihs get the bumper test and what happened with the Sewell not separating is it because the put strength.
You literally just copying the top comment LMFAO
@@TheMW2informerfrr😊
@@TheMW2informerfr😊
@ 7:30 "and now he is selling it" "I don't want my family in one of these things"
yea, so let some other family get crushed and possibly killed...
PhillyJosh, at their free will.
What would you have done?
All 1998-2003 Toyota Sienna cars: Ye boy we gonna get popular!
I cannot believe they think a 40 mile an hour crash is a fast speed. 99% of my commute to work is 55 miles an hour, so what they are telling me is no matter what my car will not protect me. G and look for any excuse to deny issues with their vehicles.
I think they are just going by average crash speeds,. The highest speed limits around the time this was recorded were 55-65mph, since then they’ve been raised up to 85mph in some places in the states. And even the safest modern cars would still be demolished at those speeds.
@@xGLITCHGAMINGx Fair!!
And this Pontiac Trans Sport.......was a redesign!
This was the Trans Sport that was an improvement
Imagine what the 1990 model was like?☠