gen1 850 crash performance/general safety

[zanzabar]

Thanks everyone for the lively discussion, I'm glad I posted the question. Sounds like I may have to go with the 1997+ V70 option after all, hard to beat the quality/safety/reliability/price ratio. I do really love driving that C320 though, what a car. I have a coworker who is willing to sell me hers at trade-in value when she's ready for an upgrade, so it's going to be very tempting to buy it when that time comes.

[1997volvo850]

At 2:20 in the Renault/Volvo video (there is no passenger winder in the Renault / or it's open)
you see the passenger's head extend beyond where the window should have been as the Renault rear
end whips around.

Great discussion.

[precopster]

The fact remains that for a budget of $2K-4K a 1993-2000 model Volvo FWD/AWD presents an unrivalled blend of safety, luxury and performance, and I guess that's why we're all here.

If many of us had larger budgets we would definitely look toward the P2 series cars but for many this may be a hike of more than 2-4K beyond our budgets. In perhaps two years the 2003 and later models will begin to be affordable on the second hand market (given that many of us may skip the 99-02 cars)

When comparing a 1995-2000 Camry or Nissan or Subaru or upper level Hyundai (if they even sell in the US) I know what I'd rather be in when testing the car's structural integrity.

Always been partial to the Lexus LS400 series which are now finally affordable cars with superb V8 engines and everything you'd ever need interior wise. Pretty safe, too. Don't know if forums for this make come close to this one, but for now I'm staying with Volvos.

[D_V_ENT850R]

Yeah the 850 off the cliff was awesome!! Didn't even break the windshield!! If it crumbles that takes the inertia away.. Which means you feel less of the crash impact= better for you! That fact that the car looks worse didn't mean it did bad, it did what it was designed to do! My 2 girls (10 month old, 5 year old) ride in my car and I feel safe with that! I would stay away from Merc. due to cost of repair, unless you have some $$$$$! My wife feels safer drivin the F-150 FX4 supercrew we have, but that's because she got rearended in her Civic by a drunk lady at 55mph while she was stopped, the rear wheel got jambed into the front door so she could not open her door and get out! I mean we can go over it and decide but you never can tell what would be safer. There are many vehicles out there and still even more morons out there so every crash will be different. Luck of the draw I guess!

[precopster]

From the Euro NCAP tests: http://www.euroncap.com/tests/volvo_s70_1998/54.aspx

"Volvo commissioned one such test to prove that the head-protecting airbag that has been fitted as standard on S70s from the 1998 model year would satisfy the test requirements"

Didn't know that the later S70s/V70s had the upper (thorax) airbag as well as the side airbag. Is this a Euro only inclusion or did the US spec cars have this also?

If so it would make me think twice before swapping any seats from an 850!!

[turbozutek]

We might all be forgetting a little something. The Renault has a very, very modern seating and seatbelt arrangement. It doesn't need a giant bonnet out front with 17 miles of crumple zone, because the pre-tensioners, airbags and seating can compensate by a huge degree for the organ damaging 'sudden stop' that the Volvo's crumple zones absorbed.

The shock-wave from the rigid passenger compartment is absorbed and dissipated through the floor, through the seat mounts in a special way, through the seatbelt mounts in a special way and a very fast computer analyses all this and then decides how much pre-tensioner is needed and how hard to fire the air-bags and with what directional bias. In this way the SRS system is actually doing the work of the crumple zones in older cars. In many respects, they do a much better job too.

The 900's had very little if anything in the way of this technology.

European cars are ever getting shorter and more compact, but safer at the same time, thanks to the fun stuff such as I've mentioned.

The EuroNCAP test for survivability has 'sudden stop' organ damage death at its core - and this is still a 5 star car, so forget how it looks on the video. With that in mind I don't think you can instantly say 'oh everyone in the Renault's dead for sure' simply from watching the crash footage.

Also there's Renault's other advanced safety system to think about - after a certain age they break down almost daily; keeping you safe by being unable to get into an accident.

Chris...

[microapp]

can't agree more, turbozutec! Renault appears to be evolving and maturing with distinction and style! Practically all Renault cabins provide more than adequate space to accommodate passengers and luggage.

[LOB]

According to a major insurance company "Folksam", investigating 178 000 accidents 1994-2015, Volvo 850 still 20% safer than the average car. The risk of serious injury or death is reduced by more than 20% compared to the average car. Not bad for a 25 year old car. However the statistics does only rate safety after an actual crash (passiv safety) and does not take active safety into account (e.g. "anti skid").

https://www.folksam.se/media/hur-saker- ... -19612.pdf
(How we achieved our results)

https://www.folksam.fi/sites/default/fi ... sultat.pdf
(results in sweish but the rating based on real accidents is at the far left colomn)

[j-dawg]

Thread resurrection! I'll put in my two cents.

As visually impactful as those videos of car crashes are, I hate seeing them, because my mind wants to pick away and argue, and I know that is stupid. There is no argument. Modern cars are safer. They're stronger, their crash protection is more effective, and they're better at avoiding crashes in the first place. Lacking access to test data and background knowledge, the pictures and videos are just graphic representations of something of which I have minimal real understanding. Better to know my ignorance than to make completely unqualified interpretations of complex phenomena - never mind that the tests would seem to confirm that modern cars are safer.

Per 100 million miles, there were 1.91 accident fatalities in the USA in 1991, when the 850 came out in Europe. In 2014 that number was 1.08, and that's including all the added distractions we have driving today. So as safe as my old Volvo is compared to its peers, it's based on engineering from more than a quarter-century ago. I am probably safer in my little Ford, 600lb lighter than the V70. It has stability control, side curtain airbags, freakin' knee airbags, and probably all kinds of other stuff the Volvo doesn't have that I don't even know about. It seems to protects passengers better in the crash tests (though I am now interpreting them, as I promised not to do), and it cost just over a third of what the Volvo did new. To drive the point home, the Fiesta isn't even considered a standout. Safety-wise, it's a basic car, but it's more than worthy of comparison to a safe car from the '90s.

[polskamafia mjl]

Yep, there's a lot of nice things about the P80 cars but, when compared to modern cars, safety isn't particularly great.