gen1 850 crash performance/general safety

[cn90]

Car crash is so complex that I don't want to get into.

As already mentioned:
- Active system: ABS, Stability control ( a system that tries to help aggressive driver or slippery condition) etc. etc., that "prevents" an accident.
- Passive system: rigidity of the cage, seat belt tensioning system, door, # airbags.

Modern cars are safer? Yes and No, in general it is probably safer but:
- The ? 2012 Mazda XC90 has very poor off-set collision score, almost fatal.
- A friend of mine was killed in a 2012 Ford Focus, the drunk driver came from the opposite traffic and hit him at the driver's door area. My friend was dead at the scene.

I still feel safe in the S70.

[mecheng]

Some cars do well in crash tests, because all the parameters are known and they design accordingly. I've been told by many that Volvo makes their cars pass their own safety tests first, before they worry about one particular standard test.

I feel safe in my Volvo.

[misha]

I saw that video with old 940 wagon with Renault Modus a long time ago.
The rumour says that Volvo actually didn't had the engine under the hood when they performed a crash test and that the only purpose of that video was to help Renault a bit in sale of that tiny & funny Modus.Arguments are in posts under that video.

If you look more closely...there is not a single evidence of any fluid spilled at the sequence of impact and there should be a lot of fluids.

For me...that Modus is not even a car...it's a toy.

If anyone of you guys had a chance to see either model of Renault in crash or after...nobody would even think to buy one.Even the big luxury Vel Satis,Safrane,old 25....they look big and impressive,but they are complete junk in safety concerns.The material which they are made of is simply THIN.

Also a lot of them are semi-plastic and i'm talking about the roof,side panels,wings.

A friend of mine have Renault garage(service)and he personally drives various models of Renaults...that's how i know stuff about Renault.

[LOB]

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.

Well Ford Fiesta is rated by this insurance company (link above). The model prior to 2005 are death traps but the 2005-2011 has the same rating as the 850, 20% safer than average. The 2012 model is probably safer as wel but not rated due to to few real accidents to investigate. However a lot of newish cars are less safe than the 850 in passive safety. I do not know how stability control etc improves real world safety. According to a swedish expert at a swedish volvoforum the 740 was not designed for a offset crash, the 850 for 60% offset crash and the 2000-2007 V70 was designes for a 40% offset set crash. Sounds reasonable looking at this youtube video of this Renault Modus killing a Volvo 940 in a offset crash.

In this video the P80 crashes with the safest car there is out there (Volvo v70 2008-, 58% reduced risk of serious or fatal injury compared to the average swedish car)

[polskamafia mjl]

Of course it's easy to pick individual cars that may not perform well. I don't know what a 2012 Mazda XC90 is nor would I consider that all that modern since its now 2016 and certainly no car is death proof.

The trend, though, is clear; as an entire group, cars today are safer than they were 20 years ago. Individual outliers are just that, outliers. They don't indicate the overall trend and should be ignored in any meaningful analysis.

[j-dawg]

Ah, but this is what I'm talking about! I fear that we deny progress because we don't want to believe it. We pick at arguments when we have no real background or evidence. There is plenty of evidence suggesting that each of these safety technologies makes a car safer.

I saw that video with old 940 wagon with Renault Modus a long time ago.
The rumour says that Volvo actually didn't had the engine under the hood when they performed a crash test and that the only purpose of that video was to help Renault a bit in sale of that tiny & funny Modus.Arguments are in posts under that video.

If you look more closely...there is not a single evidence of any fluid spilled at the sequence of impact and there should be a lot of fluids.

Better-quality video here:

You can see the engine block in the Volvo - see the shot at 7:09, where there is unambiguously an engine right in the bay.

Either way, I don't base my conclusion on a video, I base it in data. It would be absurd for us, who (as far as I am aware) have no background in automotive safety, to say that the work of auto safety scientists and engineers - which has literally halved the per-mile rate of auto fatalities since 1989 - has not been fruitful.

But we are here to discuss Volvo P80s, not just old cars in general. To this end, I point you to more data:
http://www.iihs.org/media/0ffcabb0-5704 ... R-1997.pdf
The 850 is much safer than its contemporaries, at 0.32 deaths per 10,000 vehicle years (100 represents 1.0 deaths per 10,000 years, the average in 1997). Now let's compare this to 2011 data (from 2008-2001 model year cars):
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/driver-death-rates

Only three of the midsize cars listed are significantly worse than the 850. The majority of the four-door midsize cars cars listed meet or exceed the 850's safety record (divide by 100 to compare to the 850's 0.32), with five of the cars having a death rate at least 30% lower than the 850's and three of those having a death rate one third or less of the 850's. I am actually surprised at how well the 850 does by comparison, but the case cannot be made that it's safer to drive a Volvo than its modern equivalents.

(The average death rate for all cars in 2011 is lower than for the 850, but it looks like much of that is due to the rise in popularity of SUVs, which tend to have lower death rates than sedans owing to their mass and height. I am arguing that safety technology has made a difference. While mass and height, paired with strategies to prevent rolling, do keep you safer, they are not technologies. So I restrict my numbers to midsize cars.)

Bear in mind that the 850 had a death rate about half of that of the 740 in 1987, when the 740 was literally the safest car on the road, according to IIHS numbers. That should clearly illuminate the rate at which safety technology improves.

I admit to being surprised at how close to modern standards the 850 is, but the evidence shows it isn't really safer than comparably-sized cars being made six years ago, and I would easily believe that when numbers are collected from more recent cars the 850's relative performance will slip further. However, I'll have to step ack from my earlier statements of confidence in my Fiesta being a safer car. There were enough surprises in my dive through data today that I will withhold further comment until there is some empirical data on the Fiesta's death rate. On top of that, the numbers for other small and mini cars of 2011 don't look too promising for the Fiesta.

- The ? 2012 Mazda XC90 has very poor off-set collision score, almost fatal.
- A friend of mine was killed in a 2012 Ford Focus, the drunk driver came from the opposite traffic and hit him at the driver's door area. My friend was dead at the scene.

I'm sorry to hear about your friend; that is terrible. There is no empirical data on the safety of the 2012 Focus yet, but it was rated "good" for side impacts. I think there are some accidents that are just very difficult to protect against, and being T-boned is the worst of them. Cars are not yet good enough to save us from that every time. But I don't think that means they're not leaps and bounds better than they were in the 90s.

Regarding the Mazda, after looking through all this data I agree: there is so much within the design of a car that can affect the likelihood of survival, it's impossible to declare a car safer simply because it's newer. I do think that, once data from the last five years comes out, nearly all (rather than just most) midsize cars will be safer than an 850. But I am lucky: I would have made the same argument in 2008 for the same reason, but the data show that an 850 was safer than most 2005-2008 midsize cars (only half of which are safer than the 740 was twenty years earlier).

Why am I putting so much effort into this argument? Because (a) I wanted to make sure I was right, and I only partly was, and (b) I firmly believe that we cannot perceive issues of safety through the lens of hunches and anecdote. Other people have done the heavy lifting for us, and after reading through their work, I am ready to make the following statements: Cars are much safer now than they were 20 years ago; this is an easy thing to argue. Cars were safer in 2011 than Volvos were 20 years ago; this is generally true, but the below-average cars of 2011 are not, which surprised me. Finally, I predict that the number of sub-850 cars in 2016 will likely be much lower than it was in 2011, but I will wait for the data before I cite that as a fact.

For one last thought on the rate of improvement of safety in modern cars, I leave you with this piece of data from Edmunds:

Capture.PNG (19.76 KiB) Viewed 1448 times

Sorry for the wall of text. I spent a couple hours looking through crash test data, fatality numbers, etc, and I learned a lot. Thought I would share some of it.

[LOB]

The fatality nbr per specific car model says more about whos is driving the car than the safety of the car. Nowadays the 850 is driven by reckless youngsters, 20 years ago by responsible soccermums and fathers. Why not take a look at the stistics I have posted? 178 000 accidents beeing investigated. Much better than fatality numbers.... 850 still is safer than the average car (in sweden) when it crashes. Lacking stability control, total safety might not score so high!?

[zanzabar]

Cars were safer in 2011 than Volvos were 20 years ago; this is generally true, but the below-average cars of 2011 are not, which surprised me. Finally, I predict that the number of sub-850 cars in 2016 will likely be much lower than it was in 2011, but I will wait for the data before I cite that as a fact.

j-dawg! Thanks for picking this thread out of the catacombs. I agree with your analysis 100% In case anyone is interested, the OP (me) now drives a P2 V70, and OP's wife drives a 2014 Ford Focus - safety factored heavily into the decisions to buy both those cars.

[j-dawg]

The fatality nbr per specific car model says more about whos is driving the car than the safety of the car. Nowadays the 850 is driven by reckless youngsters, 20 years ago by responsible soccermums and fathers. Why not take a look at the stistics I have posted? 178 000 accidents beeing investigated. Much better than fatality numbers.... 850 still is safer than the average car (in sweden) when it crashes. Lacking stability control, total safety might not score so high!?

Rates are corrected for demographics (age, gender, etc), and all the numbers are from when the cars were 0-3 years old.

It's also worth noting that our safety standards in the USA are stricter than in Europe, so the 850 may run ahead of midpack there.

[oragex]

Ah, but this is what I'm talking about! I fear that we deny progress because we don't want to believe it. We pick at arguments when we have no real background or evidence. There is plenty of evidence suggesting that each of these safety technologies makes a car safer.

I saw that video with old 940 wagon with Renault Modus a long time ago.
The rumour says that Volvo actually didn't had the engine under the hood when they performed a crash test and that the only purpose of that video was to help Renault a bit in sale of that tiny & funny Modus.Arguments are in posts under that video.

If you look more closely...there is not a single evidence of any fluid spilled at the sequence of impact and there should be a lot of fluids.

Better-quality video here:

You can see the engine block in the Volvo - see the shot at 7:09, where there is unambiguously an engine right in the bay.

I agree, I remember the video, it's just that the top engine is dark. There was such belief that old Volvo were safe as a tank, which in some points was true, such as in full front head on crashes. However, there was a recent video with a 240 going a head on offset crash test, the car got destroyed.

Still, back in the days, Volvo was pushing the safety in it's cars ahead of the competition. I remember reading somewhere, Volvo was adding structural enforcement and conducting crash tests for offset head on collisions well before NHTSA introduced these tests on all vehicles. And there is another point: the quality of the safety systems. This is where I trust Volvo the most. Many car brands have failed to open the airbag at the right moment or even at all in the crash tests conducted by the NHTSA. I quickly remember in the first gen Honda Pilot, the driver would have been killed by a late airbag deployment. There was also a recent recall for airbags which could have projected metal parts at the moment of the deployment, I believe it was on some Honda.