Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is amazing that they care so much about safety they even want their competitor's cars to be safe. They are a class act. I hope they continue that too. They say that the new Chinese owner Zhejiang Geely Holding Group is pouring a lot of money into the volvo cars . I hope they make it great.
They just introduced the new XC90 (their almost-full-size Crossover/SUV) to critical acclaim around the world. It has been called "the safest vehicle in the world" and "the safest car ever made". Much of its development was done under the ownership of Geely.
Volvo sales in 2014 dropped to a low point (56,366 units) and there was talk that they might pull out of the U.S. market. But 2015 sales increased by 24% to 70,047, so things are looking up!
The first Chinese-built Volvo arrived in the U.S. late last year. It's called the S60 Inscription, which is regular S60 sedan with a 3-inch longer wheelbase and the same amount of extra back seat legroom. According to the reviews, the materials and build quality are as good (or one review even suggested better) than the ones built in Belgium (where a lot of Volvos are built).
Under Geely's ownership, Volvo has also stated that their goal is to have NO deaths in any Volvo vehicle by 2020! That's a VERY bold statement, even if it isn't 100% possible. I think it shows that Geely realizes Volvo's safety reputation is the brand's greatest asset. As of now, they plan to leave Volvo headquarters and some Volvo production in Gothenburg, Sweden.
You may not be aware of this, but Volvo broke ground last year on a new factory near Charleston, South Carolina. Most U.S. Volvos will be built there. If it worked for BMW (also in South Carolina) hopefully it will for Volvo.
They're also planning quite a few new or revised models. A small/compact model called the V40 and a crossover to match called the XC40. The all-but-invisible S80 is being replaced by a new top-level sedan called the S90. The S90 has a lot of the XC90's safety tech.
Do you know the year of that car? The video was not in english but it was remarkable . Do you think a person could have survived that crash? Would a different car have done as well?
That video was a Volvo 850, which was introduced in the U.S. as a 1993 model but in Europe as a 1992. So that was very likely a 1992 model.
I honestly don't know if a person could survive that. The speed that it was going when it hit the ground was probably more than the human body could tolerate. I'm no expert, but as I understand it, at high speeds your body may quit moving while your organs keep going.....it's not pretty (or survivable) internally.
But the point was to show how well the car held up and how little of the body behind the A-pillar (the small pillar between the windshield and front door window) was deformed. The passenger compartment held up very well. I doubt any cars from the same year (or anywhere close to it) would have done as well.
Volvo has just as many "computer parts" as any other car.
It's obvious your mind is made up. If you go looking for complaints, you will find complaints. Few people give glowing on-line comments about a car in proportion to those that go online to complain....just human nature. Sure, lemons happen but they are way over-represented in the on-line comment world.
You'd have to go back pretty far to find a "non-computerized" car (whatever that actually means). That car will have inferior fuel management, inferior brakes, wonky steering, and smaller tires and wheels.
I'll take today's airbags over 20+ year old seatbelts and not much else.
I'll take today's 4-wheel disc ABS systems over 20+ year old under-sized disc/drum setups.
Tinkering around with carbs is fun...on a snowblower...but I'll take modern EFI or DI 100 out of 100 times.
etc.
Cars simply do not breakdown as much as you believe they do. But go ahead and do what you like, of course.
You don't recommend anyone research the car complaints?You do not want to know the problems other owners have had with the car you want to buy? What about recall info?
I will accept some computerized parts if I have to in order to get a car with a better crash test rating , since computer parts are there whether I want them or not on cars with extra safety measures like head curtain airbags but not too many computerizations and certainly not the fully enmeshed computers new cars have become. It really is just more to go wrong.
You know I was almost interested in a 2006 Kia Optima at one point because it got decent crash test ratings across the board from both the IIHS and the NHTSA and had head curtain airbags, and it was a much more bare bones car free of most of the electronic computerized parts compared to other makes and models of that age and it was built after Hyundai had acquired Kia so I thought the quality would have improved, the price was reasonable,and it also had decent mpg, but then I went to check the customer complaints and became so turned off I lost interest. I still remember one owner describing the car as a "piece of junk" . I also found out about the recalls which did not help either. Oh well.
Does anyone have an opinion about Subaru ? They seem to be positioning themselves to be the Japanese Volvo. I have read mixed reviews about them. Some say their awd can cause issues and needs extra maintenance while others say it improves car handling,and I do like wagons and 4 door hatchbacks. The mpg is certainly adversely affected. I have an article here from Subaru that claims it is the best awd made because unlike other car's awd system Subaru is a true awd because it is symmetrical. I have also read the tires on an awd need to have the same wear on the tread for the awd to work properly. The Subaru awd system does not work well with mismatched tired so if you damage one tire you may need to replace them all.
I live in Florida so I do not have to drive in snow but we do get slick roads from rain so I thought awd might be a good safety factor.
"It is no secret that some popular four-wheel drive systems function more as part-time traction aids for what are really front- or rear-wheel drive vehicles. With such systems, power is transferred away from the main drive wheels only when they slip. When there is no slippage, these vehicles essentially operate in two-wheel drive.
While such automatic “part-time” or “on-demand” systems can help prevent a vehicle from getting stuck in snow, they may not provide the all-road handling benefits of a true all-wheel drive system. In most cases the Subaru All-Wheel Drive can distributes power to all four wheels, reducing the load on each wheel and reducing tire slip, especially on slippery or loose surfaces. This improves overall responsiveness, safety and performance. "
" if you think that AWD will help your car better grip slippery corners or dodge an indecisive squirrel, you're sadly mistaken. A good set of snow tires is a better investment if you live where it snows frequently or if the highway department is poor at plowing roads."
Last edited by vanguardisle; 02-05-2016 at 10:00 AM..
That video was a Volvo 850, which was introduced in the U.S. as a 1993 model but in Europe as a 1992. So that was very likely a 1992 model.
I honestly don't know if a person could survive that. The speed that it was going when it hit the ground was probably more than the human body could tolerate. I'm no expert, but as I understand it, at high speeds your body may quit moving while your organs keep going.....it's not pretty (or survivable) internally.
But the point was to show how well the car held up and how little of the body behind the A-pillar (the small pillar between the windshield and front door window) was deformed. The passenger compartment held up very well. I doubt any cars from the same year (or anywhere close to it) would have done as well.
How do you think it would compare to the newer model cars in a crash?
You don't recommend anyone research the car complaints?You do not want to know the problems other owners have had with the car you want to buy?
Here's the problem. With the internet and it's anonymity, people will have free reign to complain about ANYTHING no matter how inane, and often do. Most people are happy with their cars, but few happy people ever post reviews or post on forums. This is true for any consumer good or service. Yelp, for example, has ceased being useful because people will complain just to see their words in print, not because they have any valid complaint. As an IT professional I see this in end users All. The. Time. Most of the time the complaint is an end user problem, not a problem with the tech they are using. Cars are NO different.
I just read a complaint of a BMW x1 where the owner didn't like the fact that he forgot the engine was running when he exited the car... And he didn't like the fact that the car's infotainment system only retained 1000 of his 11,000 contacts when he paired his phone to it. Complaints like that are inane and completely miss the point of a car. And you'd be surprised how many safety and operational and repair complaints are that stupid. So if you see a car with 1000 complaints online, rest assured that 90% of them are pointless or worse. And remember, that for every 1000 complaints, there are 100,000 satisfied customers.
Here's the problem. With the internet and it's anonymity, people will have free reign to complain about ANYTHING no matter how inane, and often do. Most people are happy with their cars, but few happy people ever post reviews or post on forums. This is true for any consumer good or service. Yelp, for example, has ceased being useful because people will complain just to see their words in print, not because they have any valid complaint. As an IT professional I see this in end users All. The. Time. Most of the time the complaint is an end user problem, not a problem with the tech they are using. Cars are NO different.
I just read a complaint of a BMW x1 where the owner didn't like the fact that he forgot the engine was running when he exited the car... And he didn't like the fact that the car's infotainment system only retained 1000 of his 11,000 contacts when he paired his phone to it. Complaints like that are inane and completely miss the point of a car. And you'd be surprised how many safety and operational and repair complaints are that stupid. So if you see a car with 1000 complaints online, rest assured that 90% of them are pointless or worse. And remember, that for every 1000 complaints, there are 100,000 satisfied customers.
This is 100% spot on. On-line review are a cesspool. Sure, I read them, but I have my own method of separating out the wheat from the chaff, so as to make them useful to me.
To the OP...how do you determine what cars are more computer controlled than another? I think you throw these terms around and really don't know what they mean. Cars have had "computer controlled" fuel and emissions for a long time now, for instance. Are you referring to entertainment and nav systems? Power windows? Alarms? Traction control? Steering systems? Adjustable shocks/suspension? HVAC?
I may choose to have or not have any of these sorts of items in my car, but not because I fear the bogeyman argument of "that's just more to break."
If you think Volvo and Subaru are less "computer enmeshed" or whatever you call it, you'd be mistaken.
This is 100% spot on. On-line review are a cesspool. Sure, I read them, but I have my own method of separating out the wheat from the chaff, so as to make them useful to me.
To the OP...how do you determine what cars are more computer controlled than another? I think you throw these terms around and really don't know what they mean. Cars have had "computer controlled" fuel and emissions for a long time now, for instance. Are you referring to entertainment and nav systems? Power windows? Alarms? Traction control? Steering systems? Adjustable shocks/suspension? HVAC?
I may choose to have or not have any of these sorts of items in my car, but not because I fear the bogeyman argument of "that's just more to break."
If you think Volvo and Subaru are less "computer enmeshed" or whatever you call it, you'd be mistaken.
My criteria on computerization in cars stems from what is considered less reliable , more prone to malfunction and also what is considered more vulnerable to hacking.
I was also asking for an opinion on the subaru's awd.
My criteria on computerization in cars stems from what is considered less reliable , more prone to malfunction and also what is considered more vulnerable to hacking.
I was also asking for an opinion on the subaru's awd.
Computer/electronic controls are way more reliable, I have no idea how you think they are considered unreliable. How old are you? Old enough to remember a parent messing with a newer car to get it to start in the winter? The lovely vapor lock in the summer? Rigging up a c-clip because one broke on the carb linkage? Trying to get the timing right after replacing the distributor? Ah, those were the days.
Does anyone have an opinion about Subaru ? They seem to be positioning themselves to be the Japanese Volvo. I have read mixed reviews about them. Some say their awd can cause issues and needs extra maintenance while others say it improves car handling,and I do like wagons and 4 door hatchbacks. The mpg is certainly adversely affected. I have an article here from Subaru that claims it is the best awd made because unlike other car's awd system Subaru is a true awd because it is symmetrical. I have also read the tires on an awd need to have the same wear on the tread for the awd to work properly. The Subaru awd system does not work well with mismatched tired so if you damage one tire you may need to replace them all.
I live in Florida so I do not have to drive in snow but we do get slick roads from rain so I thought awd might be a good safety factor.
"It is no secret that some popular four-wheel drive systems function more as part-time traction aids for what are really front- or rear-wheel drive vehicles. With such systems, power is transferred away from the main drive wheels only when they slip. When there is no slippage, these vehicles essentially operate in two-wheel drive.
While such automatic “part-time” or “on-demand” systems can help prevent a vehicle from getting stuck in snow, they may not provide the all-road handling benefits of a true all-wheel drive system. In most cases the Subaru All-Wheel Drive can distributes power to all four wheels, reducing the load on each wheel and reducing tire slip, especially on slippery or loose surfaces. This improves overall responsiveness, safety and performance. "
" if you think that AWD will help your car better grip slippery corners or dodge an indecisive squirrel, you're sadly mistaken. A good set of snow tires is a better investment if you live where it snows frequently or if the highway department is poor at plowing roads."
Lots of people have opinions about Subarus. Many of us who live in New England are fanatical Subaru supporters. My wife and I have owned three and they've all been great cars: reliable, comfortable, and great in snow. You're always going to pay a mileage penalty for the AWD, and unless you live somewhere that gets a lot of snow, which I would define as north of the Middle Atlantic states, it's not worth it.
Oh, and for most Subarus you are considering the symmetrical AWD is electronically controlled.
I think being safe is also in the eye of the beholder. I look at these smart cars which apparently got great safety ratings but I wouldn't feel as safe in one of those as I do in my truck which probably got far worse safety ratings.
I wouldn't feel safe in a Smart Car, either, but only because it weighed so little compared to other vehicles, however perceptions of safety often have little to do with reality. For example, people feel safer in big trucks, even those built before they were required to meet car safety standards and were cracker boxes on wheels with steering columns that would act like a battering ram into the head and chest in case of a crash. One government test drops upside down vehicles 3 or 5 feet, and even late 1970s cars survived, but truck roofs usually pancaked completely. Mercedes cars until the mid-late 1980s looked great in the 35 MPH frontal crash because their fronts didn't collapse much, but actually they were very dangerous because that rigidity meant the occupants absorbed much higher forces. And in driving, when layman drivers did maneuverability tests they tended to rate the worst-handling cars as the best and the best-handling ones as the worst. When such tests were done with electronic stability control, drivers tended to think vehicles handled better when the stability control was turned off, even when they hit more traffic cones then than when the stability control was activated. The common complaint: the cars felt sluggish with stability control.
Perceptions of safety are in the eye of the beholder, but in reality safety is a matter of engineering and how careful the driver is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangman66
In the end, I feel when its my time to go, its my time and every safety precaution in the world wont prevent the inevitable.
And sometimes parachutes fail, but if I had to jump out of a plane I'd rather be strapped to one.
In 1972, the US had 54,000 traffic deaths in 1,100 billion miles traveled.
In 2013, the US had 33,000 traffic deaths, in 3,000 billion miles traveled.
If nothing had changed from 1972-2013, we'd have 140,000+ deaths a year. Why did the inevitable become less inevitable? We may have done all that's practical for crash survival, but insurance companies think the crash rate may drop at least 15% because of automatic braking systems, and some estimate we could have at least a 50% reduction with self-driving cars.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
