Safety of S70 vs newer cars

[WhatAmIDoing]

The stats bear this out. See IIHS' data for 1997 and 2014:
97: https://www.iihs.org/media/a2b46bf9-48f ... -table.pdf
14: https://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/driver-death-rates

The '97 850 death rate is 39 (ie, 39 deaths per million registered vehicle years). The average death rate for all 2014 vehicles is 30. If you factor in some of the things stated in this thread - drivers of new Volvos are safety-minded and thus probably drive more safely, drivers were more distracted in 2014 than in 1997, etc - then the evidence becomes more stark. You can try to discredit this data or pick at nits but it is the closest thing to useful data that you will find for the discussion we are having, and it reflects the greater trend that is easily verified: overall safer cars, fewer road deaths per mile driven, etc.

I do not posit that you will be killed if you crash an S70, or that you cannot die in a Renault Modus. I say only that, as lay people, you and I have a poor understanding of what causes car crashes to be fatal. If we want to know what is safe, we should look at the data...and the data say that a P80 Volvo is, at best, mid-pack compared to today's midsize sedans. Safety-wise, it's great value for money - it's probably better than the worst cars made today - but let's stop pretending we're better off than most people around us. We're not.

Based on the above statistical data, a 97 850 is as safe as the average 2014 car on US roads. Not the safest, but not alarmingly less safe, just average, which I think is pretty good for a 17 year old car in 2014. I don't think anyone was pretending they were better than anyone else, at best pretending they are just as good. In an 850 you are averagely safe, which is better than being below average.

Actually, it is pretty easy to understand the basics of a fatal crash. The four basic ways to die in an automobile crash are: sudden deceleration of body causing massive internal trauma, dismemberment, entrapment resulting in death by fumes, fire, or drowning, and simply being crushed to death. In an 850, I would be most worried about entrapment.

[precopster]

The outgoing P2 based XC90 had a zero deathrate in the UK up until around mid 2018. That model was hugely successful in the UK.
I don't know if anyone caught this as I think it was posted on Swedespeed not long ago.

This seems to backup the success of high mass vs smaller mass in an accident. Never did see a train damaged too badly by a Mini........

P.S Don't Volvo sell well enough in the USA post 2011 to have enough accident data published?

[abscate]

This seems to backup the success of high mass vs smaller mass in an accident. Never did see a train damaged too badly by a Mini........

There is lots of discussion on car train accidents, mostly involving questions like

" what wax do I use to get rid of this Mini mark?"

Enjoy summer, Mike. -15C this morning...

[Rattnalle]

This seems to backup the success of high mass vs smaller mass in an accident. Never did see a train damaged too badly by a Mini........

There is lots of discussion on car train accidents, mostly involving questions like

" what wax do I use to get rid of this Mini mark?"

Enjoy summer, Mike. -15C this morning...

"It'll buff out".

Seriously though. While higher mass might be safer for you it's like everyone trying to have the most nukes for their own safety. The entire thing becomes more dangerous since more mass means more energy to handle when it does go to shit. The risk of killing the person you collide with increases and when two heavy cars collide they both have to deal with much higher stress compared to when two lighter cars collide. When two trains collide head on (it has happened a few times) it won't buff out with any wax..

I also agree that with few exceptions newer cars are objectively safer as a general rule. All else equal. A good older car like a P2 will probably be better than most cheaper or simpler cars released during that cars production run, so a '99 S80 will likely still be decent if not the best compared to many cars released in '06 when the P2 was still made. 95 vs 2014 isn't a fair competition though. Likely exceptions are ultra compacts like the Toyota Aygo or the Smart ForTwo though I don't have anything to back that assumption up. A Corolla isn't really a small car though, it's small midsize like an S60.

Volvo did a P80 vs P3 V70 crash test that's on YouTube. There's not too much detail about outcome though but you can tell those 15 years of development has paid off.

[misha]

The only car that i would consider safer than 20 year old Volvo is a brand NEW Volvo.

Crash results on a paper for other new cars don't bothers me...since real life situations are totally different things.
I would always feel safer behind of wheel of an 20 year old Volvo than behind the wheel of a brand new Golf,Kia,Mazda...Toyota.

Those thick A pillars some of you mentioned on a 2017 Golf are pretty hollow inside....it's just a muscle mask.
Comparing one Golf with a big Volvo is a nonsense,even with a 20 years fast forward.
You can compare it with little Volvo(30,40 series)....and even those one are safer than one Golf.

Don't get me wrong...VW,Mazda,Toyota...even a Mercedes if you want...they are all good looking and quality cars,good engines...but when we talk about safety....they are waaay behind Volvo safety and their chasis strength.

[Rattnalle]

A modern Golf is as big and as heavy as a P80 Volvo in case you hadn't noticed. Even the Polo isn't small anymore.

One thing is for certain, Volvo's marketing department has done their job well.

[misha]

Yes...it isn't small....looks big but in fact... it's hollow.
Golf is low middle class car and it will always be that...no matter how "new"it is.
Volvo's strength vs.one Golf just isn't for comparison.

We had Golf 2 & 4,Audi A4 & A6,Citroen,Peugeot in our familly...but always at least one Volvo....since '70s to nowadays.
All were big cars except small 340 Volvo and Golfs.

Believe me....they are NOT for comparison.

Volvo is Volvo.

[j-dawg]

The only car that i would consider safer than 20 year old Volvo is a brand NEW Volvo.

Crash results on a paper for other new cars don't bothers me...since real life situations are totally different things.
I would always feel safer behind of wheel of an 20 year old Volvo than behind the wheel of a brand new Golf,Kia,Mazda...Toyota.

Those thick A pillars some of you mentioned on a 2017 Golf are pretty hollow inside....it's just a muscle mask.
Comparing one Golf with a big Volvo is a nonsense,even with a 20 years fast forward.
You can compare it with little Volvo(30,40 series)....and even those one are safer than one Golf.

Don't get me wrong...VW,Mazda,Toyota...even a Mercedes if you want...they are all good looking and quality cars,good engines...but when we talk about safety....they are waaay behind Volvo safety and their chasis strength.

Sorry to call you out man, but this is exactly what I'm ranting about above.

[Rattnalle]

Not to tread on anyone's toes but Serbia isn't exactly the bastion of road safety in Europe. It's on the side of the continent that we joke about.

[matthew1]

2019 Volkswagen Golf Alltrack/Curb weight
3,351 to 3,395 lbs

2000 Volvo S70/Curb weight
3,148 to 3,208 lbs

Source: Google search

Much of the weight of today's cars, despite sometimes significant weight reduction design/development/effort*, is to excel at crash testing.

Cars are as heavy as they've been in 40 years. VW Golf line is an economy car. Economy cars 30 years ago were lucky to break 2200 lbs.

*carbon fiber and aluminum body panels to save just a few tens of pounds, for example