Side-impact air bags

[1X83Z]

Today I read an article in the local newspaper here in Tennessee that the Toyota RAV4 equipped with side airbags had recently been rated "good" or "best pick" or whatever the highest rating is for side impacts by the Insurance Institue of Highway Safety. The RAV4 without side air bags was given a 'poor' rating - the worst available rating.

When I was traveling this weekend I bought a copy of Automobile and was shaken by an editorial with a similar theme. The column was written by Jean Jennings, detailing how her husband, who drives 50-100,000 miles per year and has had one ticket in his entire life rolled his Chevrolet Suburban three times on the freeway when someone pulled out in front of him. He lived, but the pictures are scary and whenever I see something like that I always remember it as a reminder to slow down.

These two things got me thinking.

It goes like this - ever since Volvo introduced side airbags on the 1995 850, they've become a huge trend in the auto industry. Every year, side impact crashes kill 9800 people. This doesn't include rollovers. The driver-side front side head-protecting airbag reduces the risk of death by 45% for the driver. According to the NHTSA, if every vehicle had curtain side airbags, nearly 1000 lives could be saved every year.

So with those statistics in mind, why not make curtain side airbags standard? There's simply no way to be protected from a high-speed side impact unless there's an airbag. And they also help SUV occupants in a rollover by not allowing non-secured occupants to be thrown from a vehicle.

My contention now is that the United States government should mandate side curtain airbags be placed in all vehicles. Right now the only things the US government mandates are dual front airbags and an emergency inside trunk release for sedans, but I believe mandatory curtain side airbags would be a huge step in the right direction.

Legislation has been introduced with this very goal in mind, but there will probably be a huge lobby against it by car makers, particularly Hyundai, who use the prospect of side airbags to sell "high-value" cars. Anyway, that's my opinion - any thoughts?

 

[Chevelle SS]

I agree with you completely, and I don't see why it hasn't happened yet. The side of a car is the weakest part, and it shows in a collision, like you said, there's no real protection from a high-speed side impact unless there's an airbag. While I'm not sure about keeping unsecured occupants from being ejected during a rollover, side airbags are almost, if not more, important than front airbags (at least there's more protection in the front in a collision). Public indifference could also be a problem in that people who have not recently been in a side collision or known someone who has will have that dreaded "it won't happen to me" attitude and ignore the issue.

 

[1X83Z]

While I'm not sure about keeping unsecured occupants from being ejected during a rollover

I wouldn't have even thought of that, but the NHTSA says that's what's up, and I guess it makes sense when you think about it: a fully-deployed cushion over the window would make it rather difficult to escape through a window, probably.

 

[TsLeng]

Or everyone can drive tanks....hehe

 

[Ethix101]

With all the airbags their adding to cars, it makes me wonder "Why not just make the frame, seats, and seatbelts better?" Add a roll cage, more supportive seats, and 4-point seat belts to every car. I don't know much about car safety, but you'd think they'd try harder to incoporate race-car safety technology into their road cars. :shrugs:

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they've got the right idea. Whatever.



-Mark

 

[TheCracker]

With all the airbags their adding to cars, it makes me wonder "Why not just make the frame, seats, and seatbelts better?" Add a roll cage, more supportive seats, and 4-point seat belts to every car. I don't know much about car safety, but you'd think they'd try harder to incoporate race-car safety technology into their road cars. :shrugs:

A roll-cage really intrudes into the interior of a car and restricts vision. Four-point harness also intrude into the interior by making it hard to sit anyone behind the front seats - they also have no 'inersia reel' which would limit movement by the wearer.

 

[rollazn]

I agree with M5Power, it would be an good standard feature. If it saves thousands of life each year, why not do it? It could only bring good. Beside the fact that it would be hard trying to escape from window in a case like a roll-over.

 

[Fenrir51]

Id rather then keep it as an option, now when you get in a light accident to the side you get to replace your interrior too.

 

[1X83Z]

Id rather then keep it as an option, now when you get in a light accident to the side you get to replace your interrior too.

Not necessarily, and I'd rather pay cash for a low-speed accident than pay with my life for a high-speed one.

 

[///M-Spec]

I like side airbags. Curtain airbags are even better. These days I won't buy a car without BOTH.

But if you've read my rantings in the opinions forum, I'm not a fan of government regulation. I don't believe its the government's job to protect us from our own choices.

Besides which the government already mandates that we all wear seat belts. And there are thousands of people dying every year who valued their own lives so little they couldn't even be bothered to do a simple thing like that.

:shrug: When in doubt, I say let the marketplace figure it out. Like ABS and shatter resistant safety glass, its already well on its way to being 'standard equipment' anyway. If people really want to save lives, we need to look at changing the behavior of the average motorist, not legislate ourselves into a rubber padded world.


M

 

[1X83Z]

But if you've read my rantings in the opinions forum, I'm not a fan of government regulation. I don't believe its the government's job to protect us from our own choices.

I hate this attitude in this situation. A lot of people pay the premium price for side curtain airbags or front side airbags just because they know it could save their lives, even if they use it just once. I don't buy cars without side airbags - why should I pay with my life when riding in someone else's car because they chose alloy wheels instead?

 

[Mike Rotch]

I think it is common sense to make it a standard option.

In a side impact, there is what, like 4 maybe 5 inches of non-solid door between your soft human body and the grill of a car running the red light? At least in a head-on you have enough car in front of you to have crumple zones. The door only crumples into you.

As for government regulation, if they didnt regulate seat belts, would everybody (barring idiots) be wearing them? The same goes for side airbags. Manufacturers wont implement them on all models as they will point to the cost factor. Government stipulating that side airbags must be a standard feature would force manufacturers to put their hand in their pocket.

 

[///M-Spec]

I hate this attitude in this situation. A lot of people pay the premium price for side curtain airbags or front side airbags just because they know it could save their lives, even if they use it just once. I don't buy cars without side airbags - why should I pay with my life when riding in someone else's car because they chose alloy wheels instead?

If the DOT mandated side/curtain airbags, it would not make them free. Automakers are not in business of giving stuff away. It would simply be added to the price of the car. Instead of the base sticker reading $25,000, it would read $25,450.

You make the decision to ride with that other person. That person made the decision to purchase a car without side airbags. What problem of it is the government's if neither of you made good decisions? You could have just as easily refused the ride and take your own car.

You walk a very slippery slope when you start passing laws to protect people from themselves. Airbags save lives; let's make them mandatory. Maybe we should make traction and stability control mandatory too? And why stop there? Too much horsepower is obviously dangerous. Let's put a limit. SUVs and other trucks kill a lot of people, let's ban those.

Why stop with cars? Home security systems prevent theft and violent crimes; let's require every new home have one and subsidize the fees. Smoking causes cancer and kills thousands every year; let's make it illegal. Alchohol causes car crashes, domestic violence, loss of productivity, disintegration of family values, billions a year in related healthcare costs; let's make that illegal too. Video games and TV cause children to grow up with ADD and turn into gun toting sociopaths; let's ban all that. So where does it end?

The government is not your mother. There are and should be limits to what it can protect you from. That's my take.


M

 

[Fenrir51]

I agree with M-spec couldnt have said it better myself

 

[1X83Z]

If the DOT mandated side/curtain airbags, it would not make them free. Automakers are not in business of giving stuff away. It would simply be added to the price of the car. Instead of the base sticker reading $25,000, it would read $25,450.

Maybe even more. But then it would be in the vehicles, for sure, eliminating road deaths, as opposed to optional where someone might opt for something else instead. Duh?

You make the decision to ride with that other person. That person made the decision to purchase a car without side airbags. What problem of it is the government's if neither of you made good decisions? You could have just as easily refused the ride and take your own car.

I understand your argument fully here, ///M-Spec, but I think these are the two single worst supporting reasons I've ever heard you give.

 

[wdb]

And they also help SUV occupants in a rollover by not allowing non-secured occupants to be thrown from a vehicle.

Well, reform of road laws should mean all except the species' weakest would be strapped in! (Crying out loud! )

And while i agree that side air bags should just become a standard feature, they are more of an issue than they might be because of SUVs.

-SUVs enter the car structure at the shoulder/neck height (in a side impact)
-SUVs themselves are more likely to roll over
-SUVs are more often equipped with bull-bars

Side impact bags will not fix the problem while the road is shared by cars and land-barges. And I know which one ought to go.

 

[///M-Spec]

Maybe even more. But then it would be in the vehicles, for sure, eliminating road deaths, as opposed to optional where someone might opt for something else instead. Duh?

Well duh, there are a lot of things the government can make us do to make the world a safer place. Doesn't mean its right or even a good idea.

I understand your argument fully here, ///M-Spec, but I think these are the two single worst supporting reasons I've ever heard you give.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Really, I am. But what's so bad about my reasons? I believe people should be responsible for the decisions they make. If they make a decision like riding in a car without side bags that ends up killing them, it was THEIR decision. The government cannot just mitigate away all the dangerous things people decide to do like jump out of airplanes, smoke cigarettes or buy Kias.


M

 

[1X83Z]

Side impact bags will not fix the problem while the road is shared by cars and land-barges. And I know which one ought to go.

Um, actually, it's probably because of the 'land barges' that we need side impact airbags. Wouldn't you say? A midsize sedan hitting my car side-on would certainly be less dangerous than a midsize SUV hitting my car side-on. I'd much rather have the side airbags to protect against the larger vehicle.

If they make a decision like riding in a car without side bags that ends up killing them, it was THEIR decision.

Still.

The government cannot just mitigate away all the dangerous things people decide to do like jump out of airplanes, smoke cigarettes or buy Kias.

Let's compare Kia to Toyota, because I'm really bored.

Unfortunately for me, you, and much of North America, Kia sells six products in these United States. Actually, it's not unfortunate, I'm really coming around on Kias and Hyundais - the Kia Optima is very quickly becoming one of my favourite midsize sedans. Now, five of Kia's six vehicles' names' begin with letters after "N". So:

Kia Amanti ($25000):
- Standard front side airbags
- Standard rear side airbags
- Standard side curtain airbags
Kia Optima ($15500):
- Standard front side airbags
Kia Rio ($9700)
Kia Sedona ($20000)
Kia Sorento ($19000):
- Standard side curtain airbags
Kia Spectra ($12600):
- Standard front side airbags
- Standard side curtain airbags

Okay, so Kia has seven seperate standard side airbag systems on six vehicles.
SSSSSSSSSSSS. Toyota:

Toyota 4Runner ($27300)
Toyota Avalon ($27000):
- Standard front side airbags
Toyota Camry ($19000)
Toyota Celica ($17600)
Toyota Corolla ($13600)
Toyota Echo ($10400)
Toyota Highlander ($24100)
Toyota Land Cruiser ($54700)
Toyota Matrix ($14700)
Toyota MR2 Spyder ($24900)
Toyota Prius ($20300)
Toyota RAV4 ($18500)
Toyota Sequoia ($31600)
Toyota Sienna ($23000)
Toyota Solara ($19200)
- Standard front side airbags
Toyota Tacoma ($12500)
Toyota Tundra ($16000)

The industry has set its own voluntary guideline for equipping all vehicles with standard side curtain airbags at 2009. Toyota is 0-for-17 here, with two side airbag systems on those 17 vehicles. Not one of its family vehicles has standard side airbags, minivan and five SUVs included.

So, yeah, Kia might employ cheap engines, but they're not skimping on safety. Unlike Toyota, who'd rather make a buck off your well-being (that line was pretty good, huh? I'd use it again).