Logo



The IIHS Just Made Cars Heavier (Again)

Safety is of huge importance in automobiles, there is no arguing that. Over the past few decades, the work of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has held auto manufacturers to a higher standard for protecting occupants in a crash situation. The caveat to all this increased safety is additional weight and technology infiltrating cars. The fact is safety sells, and cars that can tout being a “Top Pick” usually see the benefit in increased sales so car companies are building to these tests. Today, the IIHS introduced the world to its first additional test since its original offset test, the small overlap frontal test. What is the test and how is it relevant to MINI? Read on.

In the test, 25 percent of a car’s front end on the driver side strikes a 5-foot-tall rigid barrier at 40 mph. A 50th percentile male Hybrid III dummy is belted in the driver seat. The test is designed to replicate what happens when the front corner of a car collides with another vehicle or an object like a tree or utility pole. Outside of some automakers’ proving grounds, such a test isn’t currently conducted anywhere else in the United States or Europe. Basically, the test is testing the structural integrity (for crash purposes) of the wheel well and firewall as the test is designed to miss the engine and frame structures.

The test was conducted on eleven segment-similar vehicles including the BMW 3 Series. Substantial damage inflicted on the driver’s side of each vehicle and is clearly evidence of the test’s unusually violent nature. The new rear wheel drive BMW F30 Series scored a middle of the pack “marginal”.

One would think that front wheel drive vehicles (cars like the MINI) would have an advantage in this test because they offer more mass and drive train components (which tend to be more substantial) in that are but in this first round that was not entirely the case. The Acura TL and Volvo S60 earn good ratings, while the Infiniti G earns acceptable. The Acura TSX, BMW 3 series, Lincoln MKZ and Volkswagen CC earn marginal ratings. The Mercedes-Benz C-Class, Lexus IS 250/350, Audi A4 and Lexus ES 350 earn poor. All of these cars were 2012 models.

What this all means is that either brands are going to introduce new heavier, higher strength steel into these areas (like Volvo already does) or do poorly on the test and watch safety conscious consumers flock to other cars that perform better. For MINI it’s an interesting issue. A nimble and relatively lightweight car like the MINI is great at active safety – the ability to get out of an accident before it occurs. The added weight potentially needed to perform better could dull the quick reactions of the MINI and reduce one of its biggest safety attributes.

That said there is one caveat to all this aside from safety. This could force others outside of the BMW Group to look into carbon fiber on a larger scale and help improve safety and decrease weight simultaneously. We can dream right?

The above video is a good example of the BMW Group’s focus forward on safety and how they design cars for real world safety (not just to pass tests).

Written By: Michael

  • pipe

    Satisfying safety and efficiency concomitantly may represent a costly equation when carbon fiber “sheet metal” is factored in. Will consumers be willing to pay the price? And will higher MSRPs negatively impact sales volume?

  • mike

    “The IIHS Just Made Cars Heavier (Again). “

    Seriously? Do you have a spouse or kids? If you want speed at the cost of safety then you might as well go strip out all your airbags, abs module, and seat belts to save a few pounds.. Better yet go buy a motorcycle.

    **I posted this a few hours ago btw.. did someone delete it??

    • BimmerFile_Michael

      No- you posted on BF and it was answered.

      • mike

        Yup, my bad. Sorry, I didn’t mean to drag the same conversation to two sites..

        • mike

          feel free to delete the comment btw.

  • Evan

    The real question is what percentage of accidents are at 25% versus 40% offset? The actual probability of each event is important as maybe 32% offset is the most common which would then include the engine and more of the bumper structure versus 20% being most common and the entire fender and wheel and A-pillar structure being more important. Every few years, a new test is added. Full front to off-set and now extreme off-set. The real world data is what’s important with these. Perhaps this will lead to side curtain airbags that more completely deploy forward and over a small portion of the a-pillar and windshield along with different force distrubtion in the sub-fender structure. Hopefully weight won’t be much more and the cost won’t be much. This is much more significant for smaller vehicles like the MINI of course. In the end, any BMW/MINI product is well-tested on the safety front with people living and or walking away from accidents I couldn’t believe were survivable.


Sort by MINI model

MotoringFile on Instagram








MINI Model Cheat Sheet

1st Gen MINI
R50: One & MC Hatch
R52: All 1st Gen MINI Convt.
R53: MCS Hatch
2nd Gen MINI
R55: Clubman
R56: Hatch
R57: Convertible
R58: Coupe
R59: Roadster
R60: MINI Crossover
R61: MINI Crossover Coupe
3rd Gen MINI
F54: Clubman
F55: Five Door Hatch
F56: Hatch
F57: Convertible
F60: MINI Crossover
F58: Traveller

Advertise with MotoringFile

If you or your company are interested in advertising on the most influential MINI website in the world, please visit our Advertising section. If you have further questions about becoming a sponsor or would like to see our rate sheet please feel free to contact us directly.
mini mini
Translate MotoringFile with Google: 
 

BF

MotoringFile Buyers Guides

R50 ('02-'06 MC) Buyers Guide
R53 ('02-'06 MCS) Buyers Guide

BF

SF



MotoringFile Reviews

Reviews:
'12 JCW Coupe
'11 Fiat 500 Sport
'11 Tesla Roaster 2.5 '11 Countryman Comparo
'11 Cooper S Hatch
'11 Countryman MCS (FWD)
'11 Countryman MC (auto)
'10 Mayfair MCS (auto)
'11 Countryman MCS (ALL4)
'10 MINI E
'10 Tesla Roadster Sport
'09 Cooper S Convertible
'09 JCW Hatch
'09 JCW Clubman
JCW Stage I vs JCW Stage II
'08 Clubman S (Auto)
1st Drive: '08 MINI Clubman
'08 Smart Fourtwo
Comparison: '08 BMW 135i
'06 R53 MCS vs '07 R56 MCS
'07 R56 JCW (Stage 1)
'07 MINI Cooper S Long Term
'07 BMW Z4 M Coupe
'07 MINI Cooper & Cooper S
Audio: '07 MC/MCS at the Track
'06 JCW GP Long term
Reader Review: JCW GP
'06 JCW Cooper S Long Term
Comparison: '06 Lotus Elise
Comparison: '06 Mazda MX5
Comparison: '06 UK Focus ST
Comparison: '06 Civic Si
Comparison: '04 TVR T350
Comparison: '06 Nissan 350z
Comparison: '06 VW GTI w/DSG
Podcast: Cooper S Auto
Podcast: BMW 325i
Podcast: JCW MC Soundkit
'04 JCW MINI Cooper Tuning Kit
'05 MCS: One Month Review
'05 MCS Auto
'05 JCW S 1st Drive
'05 MINI Cooper
'05 MCS Conv. Long Term
'05 MINI Cooper S
'05 MCS Cabrio 1st Drive
'04 JCW MCS First Drive
'04 MC w/JCW Tuning Kit
BMW M3 SMG Vs. MCS
'04 MINI Cooper CVT
'02 MCS 3 year Review
Autocrossing the MINI Range


cafepress