smart has to be careful how they tout these results, less someone looks at all of them rather than just the 4-5 stars. Being the only car ever tested to get less than 4 stars in the rollover test is a dubious distinction!
I'm just gonna quote myself from another thread since I think this rating is misleading..
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmartAzz
"For rollover resistance, the ForTwo earned three stars. No other passenger car - a group that excludes trucks, vans and SUVs - has a rollover rating below four stars, according to NHTSA."
I think the star rating is very confusing, because just looking at that, as most people will, it infers that the car does not do well *in* a rollover accident - it is not clear that they are grading the resistance. There is a big difference in that discrepancy, most SUVs do not only rollover easier then lower cars but the roof strength is not up to bearing the weight and impact and I doubt this is the same for the Smart. It really seems almost deliberately obtuse when you just see "Rollover 3 stars". Of course a small high light car will rollover easier then a heavy low car - the info they should be putting out there is how will you fair if it does?
first off great point about the roll over rating smartazz. Most cars when rolled are unsafe because the govt only requires one side of the roof to be able to support 1.5 times the weight of the car. Someone can correct me if thats wrong, but I'm pretty sure thats the current standard. Basically with your average car rolling over will quickly crush the roof. In the smart we have the Tridion Cell which is basically a "roll cage" meaning we can roll all over the place and the roof isn't going to cave in on us. Next, I spent a lot of time looking at the actual crash test data. Its a little rough to understand because I couldn't find the thresholds that actually mark the boarders of a 3, 4, or 5 star rating, but here is my educated guess as to what happened with the 3 star frontal crash. I belive it was the Chest Decelleration number which caused the 3 star rating, the Femur Load, and Head injury values appear to be within the 4 star range to me. If you notice the passenger chest decel value is 59, as compared to 55 for the driver. So I think it just barely missed the cut, by that same theory the driver side just barely made it, but all in all its a pretty safe car. If anyone is able to interpret the stats better than me, please verify this statement or correct me.
I'm no expert on rollover, but it appears the rollover rating for vehicles combines two factors; a dynamic test to see if the vehicle has "tip" or "no-tip." The smart had "no-tip." That's probably a result of the ESP doing its job, and is also why the car was the slowest ever in Road & Track's slalom test.
The second factor is mathematical. It surely looks at car height and center of gravity to determine the number. Obviously this car is tall. I can't speak to its center of gravity, but with the passengers sitting fairly high, I'd say the CG is also fairly high. This mathematical calculation is important, as this entire rating is relative to a single vehicle accident. If any of us are in a single vehicle accident, it may well involve going off the hard surface of a road. The ESP will have little use as this or any other vehicle goes careening off the road, hitting curbs, drainage ditches, and anything else.
The combination of these two factors gives the smart its 3*, 21% rating.
Yes, I agree it would be nice to see how the entire car's structure protects the occupants in a rollover, and I believe the smart will do well with that, but it isn't part of the NHTSA tests, so I'm not going to blame them for not testing that factor.
BTW, the IIHS recently released a report on roof strength for SUVs and found the relative strengths were very important in rollover survival.
BTW, the IIHS recently released a report on roof strength for SUVs and found the relative strengths were very important in rollover survival.
That's part of the point - not that they need to change their tests, but that the just seeing 3 stars on the rollover column infers that the Smart does not do well in a rollover protecting you as everyone has been told about SUVs who also have those stars. To really help the consumer it behooves them to make that clearer, its not nec about changing their testing (although I honestly think that if they are going to keep putting forth the roof strength issue they should include that, its just incomplete and confusing otherwise since the liklihood/resistance of rolling is only a portion of the story when it comes to safety).
I'm just gonna quote myself from another thread since I think this rating is misleading..
You guys can justify it all you want. But the rating is the rating, and all cars are rated the same. You can drive safely, avoid rollover conditions, etc. You can do the same in any car.
The facts remain that the 2008 smart Fortwo is the ONLY car EVER tested by the NHTSA to have received a 3 star rating. EVERY car EVER tested except the smart received a 4-5 star rating. Magazines, TV shows, etc, are going to latch onto that and run with it.
And as for the "at least it is safer than a bike", I ride one most days, and have been riding for 38 years, so I know all about defensive driving.
You guys can justify it all you want. But the rating is the rating, and all cars are rated the same. You can drive safely, avoid rollover conditions, etc. You can do the same in any car.
I'm not justifying anything I simply think its unclear and misleading, the summary star rating page leading people to think the number of stars reflects the safety in the event of a rollover (heck that is exactly what I thought before this) not it's 'resistance' to rolling over. It's a shame is all, that and I would simply like to know the rest of the story on how it actually hold up in a rollover.
Anywho, I've been having a great time driving defensively (offensively too?) in this little bugger
I think after the Ford Explorer fiasco, everyone pretty well understood that the rating was for resistance to rollover, not how well it performs in a rollover. The news covered that pretty exhaustively.
The other thing that no one has mentioned is that some of the impact testing refers to impact by vehicles of similar size. This doesn't reflect the impact related to larger vehicles. Most likely, any impact on a smart will be with a larger vehicle.
Vehicle safety is a common dinner table conversation at family get-togethers. My sister-in-law is the manager at the Transportation Research Center impact testing facility, my father-in-law was one of the technicians that worked for her (he set up the tests and played with crash test dummies), and my brother-in-law is a test driver. TRC tests more cars than any other independent facility in the country. Despite that, I never listen to what they tell me to or not to buy. ;)
The other thing that no one has mentioned is that some of the impact testing refers to impact by vehicles of similar size. This doesn't reflect the impact related to larger vehicles. Most likely, any impact on a smart will be with a larger vehicle.
I dunno about you, but I only intend to swap paint with these guys:
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
Giants driving Old 442 convertibles! That would be dangerous. 
Today
Linear Mode
