2001-2004 model year fatalities

I tend to be a little suspicious of information from the IIHS since they exist to protect their own interests. In this case, they are reporting real world results instead of tests that they have engineered, so the information should be unbiased.

Some things that were not noted in the article:

- Of the 15 vehicles that had fewer than 20 deaths per million registered vehicle years,

6 are Toyota/Lexus; 2 are Hondas 2 are BMWs 1 Infiniti 1 GM (Chevrolet) 1 Audi 2 Mercedes

Volvo touts their safety, however none made the list. I am surprised that the Cadillac DTS, Lincoln Town Car, Mercury Grand Marquis, Ford Crown Victoria, Mercedes S Class, and Lexus LS were not on the list.

One of the things that is missing is that the cars don't drive themselves. People drive them. More often than not, that is the weak link.

The stats are a reflection of both the safety of the vehicles and the limitations of the drivers.

Jeff

Yup, something the article stressed several times.

"Ray O" ...

*shrug*

All surveys are quite subjective, but I found this one interesting for the lack of small Toyotas on the list. Thought Echoes would be at least in the middle (though mine's a 2000)

Natalie

It could be that the crumple zones in Echos are very cleverly designed with lots of passenger compartment padding, or Echo drivers are very safe drivers, or Echos don't have enough power to get up to lethal speeds ;-)

"Ray O" ...

On that last bit....

*fwap*

My car has considerable testicular fortitude!

Natalie

LOL! Or perhaps the Echo is so ugly that other cars keep away from it!

"Ray O" ...

HEY!

There are plenty of much uglier cars than Echoes out there! My little car is cute, anyway, you philistine.

Natalie

I'll agree, the Echo is not the ugliest ride on the road! ;-)

I can't put too much faith in a Consumer Report review of an IIHS report. IIHS is known for slanting data to enhance their reputation and promote their agenda. Just remember IIHS works for the Insurance Industry, not for you.

The latest version of the actual IIHS report is at

. The Echo has a good Driver Death Rating- for the 2001-2004 models, the Driver Death Rate was 70 (the confidence range was 34 to 106). This was much better than the average mini car (148) and only a little worse than the average small car (103).

Here are how other Toyota models rated: Toyota Echo 70 (34-106) Toyota Avalon 39 (23-56) Toyota Camry 55 (44-66) Toyota Celica - 119 (69-169) Toyota Matrix - 44 (9-79) Toyota Sienna - 17 (0-35) Toyota Highlander 2WD - 30 (10-50) Toyota Highlander 4WD - 14 (4-25) Toyota Sequoia 2WD - 18 (0-40) Toyota Sequoia 4WD - 36 (9-63) Tacoma 4WD - 85 (61-109) Tacoma 2WD - 96 (73-118) Tundra 4WD - 65 (40-89) Tundra 2WD - 69 (44-93)

This is a much better performance than Toyota vehicles of 5 years ago. For instance the 4Runner went from being one of the most dangerous SUVs to one of the safest.

There are some glaring inconsistencies in the DDR numbers that suggest they are not particularly accurate. For instance a 4WD Explorer had a DDR of 47, the essentially identical 4WD Mountaineer had a rating of

1. A Crown Victoria had a DDR of 45, and a Mercury Grand Marquis had a rating of 75! They are essentially the same car, and the sample size was almost the same. I can only attribute the difference to a statistical quirk or vastly different driver sets.

A couple of thing make this sort of rating less useful - there is no attempt to calculate deaths per vehicle mile, or account for the sort of people who drive the cars. Mustang convertibles have a much lower driver death rate than Mustang coupes - even a lower rollover death rate. I contend this is because the convertible costs a lot more and therefore are more likely to be driven by richer, older, and more experienced drivers. I'd say this is the same reason the Lexus ES has a much lower DDR than the structurally similar Camry (18 vs. 55).

I believe the Insurance Industry Injury Loss Rating is a better indicator of safety than driver death rates. It is still not perfect, but at least it better reflects how often and for how many miles the vehicles are driven. Injury Loss Rating are available at

. Ed

As long as there is still at least one Pontiac Aztec left on the road, the Echo is safe from being the ugliest vehicle on the road.

Ed

LOL! I'm in complete agreement there!

They also don't reflect how many miles a vehicle is driven. Ford Thunderbirds have a really good DDR, but I'll bet the average one isn't driven 10,000 miles a year. Less time on the road = less chance to be involved in an accident.

I also didn't like the way the IIHS used the F150 as a way of patting themselves on the back. They claimed that the lower driver death rate of the 2004 model compared to prior models validated their test results. While I agree that the 2004 model is safer, I feel that there many other factors involved. The sample sizes were vastly different. I bet the driver populations is as well (I know I wouldn't touch an F150 as a work truck - it is a silly cartoon truck now). The injury loss rating for all 2003-2005 Ford 2Dr and 4Dr Pick-ups is pretty much average for the class. If the 2003 and older trucks were so bad, the injury loss rating should reflect that - it doesn't. If you go back to old Injury Loss Rating from before the F150 was redesigned, it was still pretty much average - there was essentially no change between the results for the 2001-03 models and the 2003-05 models. Given how much better the current F150 did in the IIHS evaluations than the prior model, the injury loss ratings should have reflected the change - they don't. Of course the IIHS doesn't bother to explain this, they just pat themselves on the back because the DDR went down. I do think the 2004-on F150s are safer, I just don't think the IIHS tests are necessarily the best indicator of the improvement.

Ed

I personally think the Echo is a rather cute little thing. :-) My vote for ugliest goes to the Dodge Magnum. Ug-ly!

Cathy

"Ray O"...

Me too!

Natalie

K, thanks. That actually makes way more sense than what I posted.

Natalie

"Cathy F." ...

Yes, and we black folk seem to be especially fond of those damned things.

Aren't they essentially the same thing as the Chrysler 300?

Fug-ly, not ugly.

Natalie

Same running gear, different body. The Charger is closer to the 300. They all share the same platform.

Ed

"C. E. White" ...

And just as fugly.

Natalie