DodgeTalk Forum banner

2014 Dodge Grand Caravan/ Town & Country Small Overlap Crash Test

3K views 7 replies 5 participants last post by  CluelessinMO 
#1 · (Edited)
When I purchased my van brand new in April this year I was searching for a small overlap crash test. Crash testing is important to me and although the Chrysler vans did well in the moderate overlap, they do horribly in the small overlap test.

My previous vehicle, a Kizashi SE iawd did exceptionally well in this test.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoLSu5uF0ws

The IIHS just conducted a series of small overlap tests for the Chrysler minivans, Honda Odyssey, Nissan Quest and Toyota Sienna.

Both the Quest and Chrysler vans did horribly.
Shouldn't these be the safest of vehicles on the road?
It's a shame. :nono

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_-q1EJjA8o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZC8Ykl1esE
 
#4 ·
Statistics show that small overlap crashes account for a quarter (25%) of major crashes.
So 99% no. Let's not get bent up and and have to defend whats bad. The Caravan and T&C do poorly in this test. Even worse was the Nissan Quest. There are many vehicles that do exceptionally well in this crash test. Our vans do not. I've come to terms with it and it's easy to understand. Pop the hood of one of these vans and look at the frame. It really is a car with a widened body. These body panels do very little to protect you in an accident of this sort. They are just a skin. The vans do well in the moderate front crash test and side crash tests. Small overlap testing is reasonably foreign to most cars but not for long. It is the new benchmark for crash testing.


Being in law enforcement for almost a decade, I have NEVER covered an accident that had a "small overlap" crash.

Remember this is the IIHS that did this test. Who do they work for? Not the consumers, they work for the insurance companies. Their goal is to save insurance companies as much cash as possible during a claim even if it does make the cost of a vehicle increase, which the consumer has to pay for.
I have been hit in this manner at lower speeds thank goodness. Think about it. The chances of this accident happening in this manner are quite high. You're on a two lane road, oncoming driver is drunk, exhausted, not paying attention etc....this driver crosses the line at the last moment, too late or dangerous for you to swerve. Hits the drivers front corner. It's easy and again accounts for 25% of crashes. I respect your position on the IIHS and more than likely agree with you. But in truth a safer car is a better car. I don't want to die because of someones mistake or lack of care.

Hopefully Chrysler will better the strength and chassis of the new vans. The safety of families is pretty important. If they can make compact cars safe for this type of test, they damn well can make minivans safe too.
 
#3 ·
Being in law enforcement for almost a decade, I have NEVER covered an accident that had a "small overlap" crash.

Remember this is the IIHS that did this test. Who do they work for? Not the consumers, they work for the insurance companies. Their goal is to save insurance companies as much cash as possible during a claim even if it does make the cost of a vehicle increase, which the consumer has to pay for.
 
#5 · (Edited)
Being in law enforcement for almost a decade, I have NEVER covered an accident that had a "small overlap" crash.

Remember this is the IIHS that did this test. Who do they work for? Not the consumers, they work for the insurance companies. Their goal is to save insurance companies as much cash as possible during a claim even if it does make the cost of a vehicle increase, which the consumer has to pay for.


Not following the logic. When insurance companies have lower costs due to lower claims everybody benefits. In many cases medical/pain and suffering claims are the biggest part of any insurance claim. Then there's lost wages, doctors visits, support costs, funeral expenses and on and on. Repairing the vehicle is comparative pennies. When cars pass crash tests it's an indication both insurance companies and the public will benefit.
 
#6 ·
Again, I've been in le for neatly a decade and I have NEVER covered an accident like this test. I have both 2 lane and 4 lane in the county I cover.

25% seems like a bs number the insurance institute came up with so they could fear people into buying more expensive vehicles then needed, which also saves insurance companies money.
 
#7 ·
Statistics can be made to show whatever the person compiling them wants them to be. Just look at the early global warming reports that were all the sudden changed to "Climate Change" when the statistics didn't add up.

Even if the 25% statistic was correct, how many of them involved a square cornered immovable object. You will never convince me that hitting another car will do the same damage as the barrier they use in the test.
 
#8 ·
protect yourself

Not much you can do if you're on a two lane road and someone crosses the center line and hits you. But one thing I observe on 4 lane roads is that the majority of people tend to drive in the center lane rather than the outside lane. This makes it much more likely that someone coming from the other direction will be able to veer over and create a situation similar to the two lane road scenario. By coincidence, I also recently looked at the corner impact ratings and viewed the video. I'm now making it a practice to drive in the outer lane on a 4 lane street just so I will be less likely to encounter such an impact.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top