That's how I look at it. What is 2 stars today would be off the scales awesome compared to 10 years ago. Everytime manufacturers pass the tests, they (the insurance institute and the NHTSA) raise the bar, which is fine - but it doesn't mean all of a sudden the cars that fail are suddenly life threatening. In five or so years they'll probably raise the speed and weight of the barricade used to hit the cars, evertyhing will fail again, they'll run an "OMG! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE" Dateline special, and the manufacturers will scramble to build their cars better so they can be retested. (Honda or Toyota will be leaked the parameters of the test ahead of time so their cars can pass - whoever pays the biggest bribe) and life will go on.

Lancer has 4 stars for the back seat:

http://www.safercar.gov/NCAP/Cars/3551.html

 

Exactly....Half of the cars that are on the road pre-2000 would most likely be considered unsafe as compared to todays standard? I feel more safe in my evo than my old crx, that thing would be -4 when it comes to side impact on todays scale....5 years from now the vehicles rated 4 will be considered 2 or less because more safety features will be released which will raise the bar once again....The only reason the evo/lancer scored low is because no side airbags...but by far is the evo more safe than any 95 or lower year car....and another note: When your card is pulled and its your time to go, you will go whether your in a 5 star rated car or a 0 star rated car....We will all die so why not have fun while we still have time on this earth, life is already to short to be concerend with anything the Government sets standards for....

 

Holy cow, where did you hear that?

Car accidents kill about 40,000 people a year. The #1 cause of death is heart disease; about 800,000 deaths.

 

I do understand what you guys are saying about cars being a lot safer than they were. I definitely have to take that into consideration, but I just worry a lot about this stuff. Even still I want the Evo, and it got a good rating overall, I was just kind of shocked.

This is gonna be a hard one to pull off on the folks... but as most of you said, if I don't enjoy myself, what's the point anyway?

 

Eggy, one reason the IX is not being produced after this year is certain US safety standards that would require a complete re-engineering of major safety systems. Hence the new EVO X. Side protection (airbags) are relatively new, still, for that concern (and it does exist, yes) the IX doesn't measure up.
Still, I just ordered a new IX for my daily driver, and will pass on the (safer) WRX wagon to the kids, as they are just beginning to drive. I want them in the safer vehicle - I'll take my chances with my defensive skills in the IX
Still, nothing may be able to prevent that big rig with the sleeping driver scenario - if it's your time and all that...

 

I guess I'm just disappointed that the IX lacks some of the safety features the STi has... Why couldn't Mitsu just pony up for some side airbags? Just doesn't make much sense to me. Even still, lancers are plentiful here in Japan, so I know they are good cars.

Guess I have some thinking to do... again I am completely confident in myself... but I do worry about other people on the road, and I have to debate whether I want to risk safety for that little bit of extra performance...

damn...

 

why not get an sti then? its safer, priced the same, and it will make your parents happy ...... Or feed them a line of BS and say yeah its safe, 4 star front...and avg. the rear side impact and front side impact which would be 3 stars (4+2/2) Just hope they never look up the info on there own, at that point play dumb because you will already have the car

 

Death rates are tricky, you really can't judge by the overall death rate since most people that die are OLD. I would refer you to the following document:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr54/nvsr54_13.pdf

Specifically Appendix Tables 10 and 11, which do show that for age groups 14-35, most deaths are motor vehicle accident related. More specifically, the overall death rates for those age groups are about 90 per 100,000 (less than 0.1%), with motor vehicle accidents accounting for about 20 to 30 out of those 90, which is a significant portion.

 

Five stars or no stars, if you get hit by 40 ton coal truck that loses it brakes at 50mph or above you are dead. If you look at the test they do and how they do it, it is a certain weight barricade and a certain speed (in one case a 3000 pound barricade and 38mph). Then the results are based on how the dummies fare. 2 stars doesn't mean you die, it just means you may come out with a broken ankle or a concussion as opposed to just bumps and bruises.

Who knows, maybe we wouldn't have Recaro seats, if they had put in side air bags.

 

You do realize that 80% of statistics are made up?


If your primary concern is safety, get a Volvo. If it's not, get the Evo and don't worry.

 

none of u seem to want to say it, but yes the evos crash test rating sux. i believe its either a 2 or a 2.5 outta 5. there was a recent news report on a crash, and although they didn't say what it was, upon seeing the footage, it was an evo. the new reporter basically said the car shattered.

 

Aaron,

It caught my attention the way people are so concern about safety. Just look for a moment the typical american car:

rear solid axle
tall profile tires
drum brakes in the back
leaf suspension
soft suspension
flat seats
super soft steering

Often they have the worst braking rating, the worst handling in G. I honestly think you are 10 times safer in a Evo than is a Chevy Montercarlo SS which they cost similar.

To put things into real world conditions, lets say that you are much more safe if you had to swearve to the left or right voiding a collison with a deer, or safer to stop your car in the shortest distance possible or skillfully managed to take a curve in the rain with the AWD gravel mode setup.

Thousand of people die every year with SUVs, so far the SUVs are the most unstable vehicle in the market, I think you should talk to your parents and drift the subject to show them how actually the Evo is safer in other areas.

In a serious real crash the damage is going to be bad regardless, the Evo is going to be at least average or above average. Preventing the actual damage the Evo is going to be far superior.


My .2c

Carlos

 

+ The evo is basically a tin-can on four wheels.

 

Or a potentially explosive unguided missile, if you want to get graphic.

Bottom line is...life is risk. Getting out of bed is a risk. The Evo may not have very good crash ratings for TODAYS standards, but for "yesterdays", it's doing alright. It's not a car renowned for safety. It's a performance machine. That's what it does, and does very well. You gotta know the strengths and weaknesses in anything.

It shouldn't dissuade you from purchasing the vehicle, essentially.

 

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I was also assuming that eggy was in that age category.