In comparing the WRX/STI versis the EVO7, one of the things which makes the Suby attractive is the amount of armor that the thing has. I've seen pics of a WRX which rolled down a hill and the passenger area is untouched. My question is does anyone know how crashworthy the Lancer/EVO is? According to a saleman, the Lancer does have door beams, but the door frames don't look as rugged as the Scooby's and does that mean it isn't as safe in a rollover? Also, does the front end act as a "crumple zone"? One reason the Lancer/EVO goes so fast is that it is known as being lightweight? Does that mean that it's also skimping on structure?

 

uhm those crumple things are all required by federal regulations...uh im sure theyll be the same in an accident but who knows...the us lancer was one of the most worst performing cars in the bumper crash test in the country. so maybe the evo wont perform as well either

 

no car is "crash worthy". I think the Evo will be sort of semi-safe, meaning it won't be the worst but not the best either. In the end it all depends on what the crash is, cause any car has it's weak points, the Evo probably more than an E-Class.

 

The bumper tests also have nothing to do with crashworthiness. The bumper test is just a 'cost of repair' test for the bumper. In a real crash of any speed the bumpers don't do much.

In a "crash" the crumple zones, the direction that the engine moves and the strength of the passenger compartment make all the difference.

erik

 

i was in my bro oz's and he back up and hit a car. sound pretty bad we though the worst but when we went to check it out it look the same nothing happen.so i think there good.dont know about evo 's but if they have lancer name on them they have to be the best.

 

Or is is above the rear differential in a "saddle tank" arrangement. If it's near the rear, it's bad news in a rear end collision.

 

crashed oz

 

I see the rear demolished but no "crumpling" of the side doors, or intrusion into the passenger compartment. Also no burn marks. Any idea what the speed of the colliding car was?

 

Yeah, this is second hand info, but my mother (woo) was telling me she saw a crash report on the Lancer on the news a couple weeks back and it got great ratings. It's expensive to repair (as many of us saw/read from the 5mph bumper test), but in the event of a fairly major crash it's supposed to be pretty dern good. The idea is that the car crumples and crunches so that you don't. Expensive, but at least you're alive afterwards.

 

Here's what it says in the Lancer's brochure:

- RISE (Refined Impact Safety Evolution) chassis
- Front and rear crumple zones
- Tubular steel side-guard door beams


Also, the Lancer did as well as the Impreza did in the bumper tests, which wasn't really one of the worst in the country.

 

all that matters is that the cabin remains intact. I think the "crumple zone" insures that. that is after all where the driver and the passengers sits. If the front and rear gets demolished and I walk alway alive then I'm a happy camper.

 

I agree. From what I've seen and heard from a dealer now, the Lancer/EVO should be pretty crash worthy. The only thing that bothers me is that I found out that the gas tank is behind the rear wheels. Didn't seem to be a problem for that rear ender above, but a possible concern. With the integrity of the passenger compartment, the doors should still open after a rear ender, so if there is a fire, the occupants should still be able to get out. Something that I understand the Mustang doesn't do.

 

The Evo has a saddle tank, don't know about the OZ.

 

Just diverting off the topic here a little, but how many Evo 7 will the US test for compliant if the Evo makes it over?
For Aust the ADR crashed 2 TME into the wall to test its crashworthiness, which means 2 less TME to 2 less customers. I'm figuring US will do the same. After the ADR test the TME, modifications were made to make it compliant. Which was one of the reasons why the TME was so expensive when sold in Aust. But then Aust has bloody strict ADR.