If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Toyota Camry, America's favorite driving appliance, found to be about as safe as a Happy Fun Ball   (money.cnn.com) divider line 65
    More: Interesting, Camry, Happy Fun Ball, Toyota, crash tests, Honda Accord, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Dodge Avenger, Hyundai Sonata  
•       •       •

8040 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Dec 2012 at 3:52 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-20 03:02:10 PM
img.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-20 03:46:36 PM
I think everyone is going to suck at that test until they start to engineer for it.
 
The F-150 was a deathtrap before they started testing it.  Everyone gets better once their class starts getting included in tests.
 
www.iihs.org
 
This is just a regular offset.  The kind everyone in a Prius walks away from.  This 2003 F-150 blew the door off and killed the dummy.
 
2012-12-20 03:49:22 PM
I love to hate on Toyota and their appliance cars as much as the next guy, but they did give us these this year:

www.autoguide.com
And I wantwill get one.
 
2012-12-20 03:53:30 PM
Do not taunt Toyota Camry.
 
2012-12-20 03:57:07 PM

Wadded Beef: Do not taunt drive a Toyota Camry.


FTFE

/I know the joke
 
GBB
2012-12-20 04:00:55 PM
I love the fact that the IIHS keeps changing up their testing so that manufactures don't engineer the cars to just pass the "standardized" tests.
 
2012-12-20 04:01:04 PM
Okay. But the guy in the video says the car is still recommended despite failing that test because it did well in the other tests.

My prediction: This won't hurt Camry sales much at all.
 
2012-12-20 04:01:34 PM
This place and Underwriters Laboratories must be the raddest places to work
 
TWX
2012-12-20 04:01:37 PM
And a six-model-year-old, Daimler-designed Avenger gets top safety pick plus.

The Lexus they tested in the luxury car round also sucked the big one.
 
2012-12-20 04:02:38 PM

Rapmaster2000: I think everyone is going to suck at that test until they start to engineer for it.

The F-150 was a deathtrap before they started testing it. Everyone gets better once their class starts getting included in tests.


This.
 
The new test is something they JUST came up with. Give it a few years and everybody will be fine at that one. Then the IIHS will come up with something else. It's just not possible to engineer a vehicle for every possible collision that might happen. Even if you could, the vehicle would be heavy and likely have crap for visibility for the driver (pretty much guaranteeing that there's going to be wrecks).
 
TWX
2012-12-20 04:02:58 PM

GBB: I love the fact that the IIHS keeps changing up their testing so that manufactures don't engineer the cars to just pass the "standardized" tests.


I've enjoyed watching old American designs predating the new tests pass too...
 
2012-12-20 04:06:32 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: I love to hate on Toyota and their appliance cars as much as the next guy, but they did give us these this year:

[www.autoguide.com image 646x396]
And I wantwill get one.


I poked around one at the dealer's lot and decided I prefer Subaru's BRZ skin. Also, lose the shiatty LRR Prius tires. Low resistance hybrid tires on an alleged sporty coupe? GTFO.
 
2012-12-20 04:06:44 PM

Rapmaster2000: I think everyone is going to suck at that test until they start to engineer for it.


You could say that, or you could see that only the two Toyotas got a "poor" rating on this new test, while several got "good" and most were acceptable with three in the "marginal" category.

Yes, they will engineer to beat this standard in the future. Until then, Camry owners: aim for the meat of the target... a glancing blow might kill you!
 
2012-12-20 04:09:06 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: I love to hate on Toyota and their appliance cars as much as the next guy, but they did give us these this year:

[www.autoguide.com image 646x396]
And I wantwill get one.


Oh you mean this?

www.blogcdn.com
 
2012-12-20 04:09:11 PM
When I was in high school I had a job building wiring harnesses at the test facility in Northern VA. Cool place. A test crash in a quiet space kicks ass.

That said, I drive a 1992 Camry. Beat to crap, looks like hell, doubles as my hunting truck, plows through brush & mud and other drivers go out of their way to stay away from me. So far, I'd say my Camry is bulletproof.
 
2012-12-20 04:09:54 PM
[unintented_acceleration_joke.png]
 
2012-12-20 04:13:25 PM
In Toyota's defense, it was a 40mph test. I can't imagine most camry drivers would even survive the excitement of traveling at 40mph, let alone the crash.
 
2012-12-20 04:16:09 PM
akula:

It's just not possible to engineer a vehicle for every possible collision that might happen. Even if you could, the vehicle would be heavy and likely have crap for visibility for the driver (pretty much guaranteeing that there's going to be wrecks).


Unless you design a vehicle from the ground up as a safety mobile and sacrifice fuel mileage, cargo capacity, passenger room, acceleration, speed, range, visibility, ease to enter and exit, price, and anything else you can think of other than safety there is always something you could do to make a car safer.
 
2012-12-20 04:18:03 PM
New test. So that means the engineers at Toyota are very good at designing for the relevant tests and this wasn't one of them. Now that it is, Camry will do just fine in new models.
 
2012-12-20 04:19:04 PM
Don't mind the "appliance" epithet. I'd still get another Toyota (Don't have one now, but used to and loved it)

And FYI, saying the Ford F-150 improved because they started building to to better on the tests ignores that it was a horrible squishallthepassengersmobile for years and years. Your phrasing makes it sound like it was a horrible deathtrap just in pre-production and that no lives are at risk driving an actual production version.
 
2012-12-20 04:21:54 PM

LineNoise: In Toyota's defense, it was a 40mph test. I can't imagine most camry drivers would even survive the excitement of traveling at 40mph, let alone the crash.


I LOLd.
 
2012-12-20 04:29:42 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: I love to hate on Toyota and their appliance cars as much as the next guy, but they did give us these this year:

[www.autoguide.com image 646x396]
And I wantwill get one.


Me. Too.
 
2012-12-20 04:36:05 PM
Are Happy Fun Balls not safe?
 
2012-12-20 04:37:18 PM
I guess, but I got T-boned in a Prius a few years ago and both my son and I walked away without a scratch. The car took a few thousand dollars worth of damage but the frame held up like a champ. So there's that. *shrug*
 
2012-12-20 04:38:38 PM
I drive a Solara (80% parts overlap with a Camry).

6 years, 155K miles. Aside from scheduled maintenance the only thing it's needed done to it is alignment, tires, and wiper blades. Still on the original set of brakes, although I'll probably have to have them done by spring.

You couldn't ask for a better daily driver, it's completely dependable and low maintenance. First time I've had a car that didn't need a major repair before it was paid off.
 
2012-12-20 04:40:03 PM
My 84 Supra has cruise control, air conditioning and the sunroof still works with aplomb. My daily driver, it's still free from dents and will cruise at 80 all day long while delivering decent MPG.

Between Lexus, Scion and the parent company Toyota, they make the most reliable vehicles in the world.
 
2012-12-20 04:40:25 PM

bikerific: Are Happy Fun Balls not safe?


Safe as a "Bag of Glass" I guess
 
2012-12-20 04:42:48 PM
Toyota Camrys may stick to certain types of skin.
 
2012-12-20 04:44:11 PM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: I poked around one at the dealer's lot and decided I prefer Subaru's BRZ skin. Also, lose the shiatty LRR Prius tires. Low resistance hybrid tires on an alleged sporty coupe? GTFO.


Girion47: Oh you mean this?


I'd prefer the Subaru version but pricing is why I'm going with the Scion version. Scion has strict pricing while Subaru pricing is up to the dealership, or so I'm told. The Prius tires were intentionally mounted because they are easier to break loose than proper sport tires. Put some snow tires on for winter time and some Dunlop Direzza Star Spec's on for track days and you should be fine.
 
2012-12-20 04:46:30 PM

Oldiron_79: Unless you design a vehicle from the ground up as a safety mobile and sacrifice fuel mileage, cargo capacity, passenger room, acceleration, speed, range, visibility, ease to enter and exit, price, and anything else you can think of other than safety there is always something you could do to make a car safer.


Volvo managed to do it for 30+ years. The only bad thing you can say about them is they're boxy and stodgy. They'll keep going forever if you take care of them.
 
2012-12-20 05:00:27 PM

clyph: Oldiron_79: Unless you design a vehicle from the ground up as a safety mobile and sacrifice fuel mileage, cargo capacity, passenger room, acceleration, speed, range, visibility, ease to enter and exit, price, and anything else you can think of other than safety there is always something you could do to make a car safer.

Volvo managed to do it for 30+ years. The only bad thing you can say about them is they're boxy and stodgy. They'll keep going forever if you take care of them.


They look much better these days.

www.privatefleet.com.au
 
2012-12-20 05:06:58 PM

kg2095: clyph: Oldiron_79: Unless you design a vehicle from the ground up as a safety mobile and sacrifice fuel mileage, cargo capacity, passenger room, acceleration, speed, range, visibility, ease to enter and exit, price, and anything else you can think of other than safety there is always something you could do to make a car safer.

Volvo managed to do it for 30+ years. The only bad thing you can say about them is they're boxy and stodgy. They'll keep going forever if you take care of them.

They look much better these days.

[www.privatefleet.com.au image 500x351]


I wouldn't say that:

www.vpcuk.org
 
2012-12-20 05:16:30 PM

StopLurkListen: And FYI, saying the Ford F-150 improved because they started building to to better on the tests ignores that it was a horrible squishallthepassengersmobile for years and years. Your phrasing makes it sound like it was a horrible deathtrap just in pre-production and that no lives are at risk driving an actual production version.


No RapMaster2000's phrasing did not suggest that at all. And the attached image and description of the 2003 F-150 crash test is further evidence that your interpretation was not the intended one.
 
2012-12-20 05:18:24 PM

Wadded Beef: Do not taunt Toyota Camry.


Came for this.
 
2012-12-20 05:21:08 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: I love to hate on Toyota and their appliance cars as much as the next guy, but they did give us these this year:

[www.autoguide.com image 646x396]
And I wantwill get one.


a 30 grand car with 200 hp. Yeah thanks but PASS. Oh and its rear wheel drive so its pretty much a 30g paperweight in the winter. Get a WRX. Youre welcome.
 
2012-12-20 05:21:55 PM
What about the upside down sliding on the roof through a gauntlet of low slung chainsaws test? Or the hit by a fiery pallasitic stony-iron meteorite travelling at 362 MPH and an approach of 64 degrees perpendicular to the plane of the horizon test?
 
2012-12-20 05:27:02 PM

BEER_ME_in_CT: Get a WRX


Already have one, it's in the profile meng.
 
2012-12-20 05:31:26 PM
Appliance? C'mon, my refrigerator and blender are far more interesting and enjoyable to use. Don't insult regular household appliances by associated them with such a boring hunk of metal.
 
2012-12-20 05:34:51 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: I love to hate on Toyota and their appliance cars as much as the next guy, but they did give us these this year:

FR-S.jpg


Been wanting to drive one, but nobody in my area has one in. Probably for the better as I might be tempted to trade in my beloved GTI.

Oh and on topic...Camrys suck.
 
2012-12-20 05:37:13 PM

Vermicious Knids: I guess, but I got T-boned in a Prius a few years ago and both my son and I walked away without a scratch. The car took a few thousand dollars worth of damage but the frame held up like a champ. So there's that. *shrug*


That's because there are certain shapes and geometries for cars which are better at absorbing, resisting and deflecting impacts away from the people inside. Unfortunately, those shapes aren't "cool", so they don't sell well to most segments of the buying public, especially young males and older males who think they're still young males. People who buy the Prius are practical, and more see their purchase like buying a tool instead of a fashion accessory.
 
2012-12-20 06:04:11 PM

Rapmaster2000: I think everyone is going to suck at that test until they start to engineer for it.
 
The F-150 was a deathtrap before they started testing it.  Everyone gets better once their class starts getting included in tests.

 
Came to say this.  I was surprised to see a rational statement right off the bat.  Nice job R!  
 
This is a brand new test just announced in 2012.  The 2013 Camry still received the IIHS Top Safety Pick Award, a point that TFA seems to have conveniently left off. After the next model change it will likely nail this additional test too.
 
2012-12-20 06:17:07 PM
Yet another reason to drive a big heavy 90's van. I don't have to worry about absorbing damage from a crash. The other explodomobile will fall apart as I blast through their tin can.
 
2012-12-20 06:26:50 PM
Do the red one, Bob.
 
2012-12-20 06:29:43 PM
I fail to understand the Toyota love.

Had to drive a Camry as a replacement rental for a while and I so hated it. Loosy-goosy, tinny feel to the drive, strange cornering and acceleration, and the totally blah look of it. What a yucky point-A to point-B car.

/Would not buy.
 
2012-12-20 07:01:39 PM

cefm: New test. So that means the engineers at Toyota are very good at designing for the relevant tests and this wasn't one of them. Now that it is, Camry will do just fine in new models.


I was impressed with Toyota's response. Basically, "thanks to IIHS for again pushing the envelope. Challenge accepted"
 
2012-12-20 07:03:36 PM
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball......

Love that episode of SNL.
 
2012-12-20 07:30:32 PM
ftfa Suzuki, on the other hand, recently announced it was pulling out of the U.S. auto market after years of poor sales here.

What?? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I loved the Suzuki Sx4 !

Well maybe your problem is naming your car Kizashi .... sounds like a fibre and grain-filled granola bar.

/Swift is just a copy of the Chevy Aveo.
//bring back the REAL 90's Suzuki Swift !
 
2012-12-20 07:31:00 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Yet another reason to drive a big heavy 90's van. I don't have to worry about absorbing damage from a crash. The other explodomobile will fall apart as I blast through their tin can.

 
I like this train of thought, but the 90's is too recent for safety.  Also, it's a van.  My new plan is to drive to work every day in an M4 Sherman tank.
 
2012-12-20 08:23:26 PM

Pope_Rodger: kg2095: clyph: Oldiron_79: Unless you design a vehicle from the ground up as a safety mobile and sacrifice fuel mileage, cargo capacity, passenger room, acceleration, speed, range, visibility, ease to enter and exit, price, and anything else you can think of other than safety there is always something you could do to make a car safer.

Volvo managed to do it for 30+ years. The only bad thing you can say about them is they're boxy and stodgy. They'll keep going forever if you take care of them.

They look much better these days.

[www.privatefleet.com.au image 500x351]

I wouldn't say that:

[www.vpcuk.org image 600x450]


Well some of them do anyway.

They also used to make a stunning looking car back in the olden days...

the-car-club.co.uk
 
2012-12-20 08:24:03 PM
toraque: Smeggy Smurf: Yet another reason to drive a big heavy 90's van. I don't have to worry about absorbing damage from a crash. The other explodomobile will fall apart as I blast through their tin can.

I like this train of thought, but the 90's is too recent for safety.  Also, it's a van.  My new plan is to drive to work every day in an M4 Sherman tank.


I was thinking M1 Abrams
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report