Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+ Ford prins cu fofarlica la testele de impact, Dotari structurale montate in plus doar pt test

Ideea e simpla. Ford cand a realizat noul f-150 , a hotarat sa treaca pe aluminiu. Si a fost testat de catre iihs pe o anumita versiune (cea mai populara dpdv al vanzarilor) , cea Supercrew, unde a avut rezultate bune, insa cei de la iihs au decis sa o testeze si in versiunea extended cab. Unde a cam dat-o in.. balarii cu rezultatul la crashtest, din cauza ca ford pregatise special versiunea respectiva cu elemente structurale de siguranta (adica cel mai probabil au intarit o zona de protectie suplimentar) care nu s-au mai regasit si pe versiunea extended cab, pacalind astfel publicul cum ca toate masinile lor is sigure la impact, desi adevarul e ca extended cab-ul are probleme foarte serioase cu deformarea caroseriei, punand viata soferului in pericol, in caz de accident Of all the vehicles undergoing crash tests this year, few will be as closely watched as the new 2015 Ford F-150. That's not only because it remains the top-selling vehicle in America year after year, but also because it features an aluminum body instead of steel. While the F-150 performed well in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety test, one factor prompted the institute to undertake a second round of testing that uncovered a problem. Like most full-size pickups, the F-150 is available in several cab styles: the regular two-door, the extended SuperCab and the four-door SuperCrew. The IIHS typically takes the most popular version of a particular model for testing, and in the Ford truck's case that meant the SuperCrew. The F-150 performed well in all the tests the IIHS put it through, including the small overlap test in which the vehicle is driven 40 miles per hour into a five-foot-tall barrier impacting the front left corner of the vehicle. Its overall performance in the tests earned the F-150 a Top Safety Pick rating, missing out on the higher Top Safety Pick + rating only because it doesn't have an automatic braking system. But how do the other versions of Ford's best-seller hold up? Given that even less popular versions of the F-150 still sell more than many other vehicles on the market, the IIHS put an extended cab through the same battery of tests. It performed comparably except in one area: the small overlap test. In that case, the extended cab model's steering column was pushed eight inches into the cabin (dangerously close to the crash test dummy's chest), the dummy's head missed the airbag almost entirely and hit the instrument panel, and the dummy's legs would risk sustaining "moderate" injuries. The reason for the disparity is that "Ford added structural elements to the crew cab's front frame to earn a good small overlap rating and a Top Safety Pick award but didn't do the same for the extended cab," according to the Institute's chief research officer David Zuby. "That shortchanges buyers who might pick the extended cab thinking it offers the same protection in this type of crash as the crew cab. It doesn't." A Ford spokesman responded: "We addressed the IIHS small overlap front crash in our high-volume SuperCrew first, which accounts for 83 percent of 2015 F-150 retail sales. We are adding countermeasures in the SuperCab and the Regular Cab in the 2016 model year. Based on this IIHS data, both vehicles offer similar occupant protection levels." (For the full Ford statement, scroll down.) The small overlap test was first introduced by the IIHS in 2012. As mentioned earlier the extended cab performed about the same as the crew cab in all other tests, including the moderate overlap test. The Institute says it will also subject "multiple variants" of other pickups to the same standards. In its testing, the IIHS also looked at repair costs for the aluminum bodywork on the new F-150 as compared to the previous steel-bodied model, and found that repair costs to be 26 percent higher for the new model. Ford disputes those figures based on independent data. You can delve into the results broken down in the IIHS statement below, or get the gist of it from the accompanying video clip. sursa: http://www.autoblog.com/2015/07/30/iihs-fo...0-extended-cab/

Ideea e simpla. Ford cand a realizat noul f-150 , a hotarat sa treaca pe aluminiu. Si a fost testat de catre iihs pe o anumita versiune (cea mai populara dpdv al vanzarilor) , cea Supercrew, unde a avut rezultate bune, insa cei de la iihs au decis sa o testeze si in versiunea extended cab. Unde a cam dat-o in.. balarii cu rezultatul la crashtest, din cauza ca ford pregatise special versiunea respectiva cu elemente structurale de siguranta (adica cel mai probabil au intarit o zona de protectie suplimentar) care nu s-au mai regasit si pe versiunea extended cab, pacalind astfel publicul cum ca toate masinile lor is sigure la impact, desi adevarul e ca extended cab-ul are probleme foarte serioase cu deformarea caroseriei, punand viata soferului in pericol, in caz de accident

Of all the vehicles undergoing crash tests this year, few will be as closely watched as the new 2015 Ford F-150. That's not only because it remains the top-selling vehicle in America year after year, but also because it features an aluminum body instead of steel. While the F-150 performed well in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety test, one factor prompted the institute to undertake a second round of testing that uncovered a problem.

Like most full-size pickups, the F-150 is available in several cab styles: the regular two-door, the extended SuperCab and the four-door SuperCrew. The IIHS typically takes the most popular version of a particular model for testing, and in the Ford truck's case that meant the SuperCrew. The F-150 performed well in all the tests the IIHS put it through, including the small overlap test in which the vehicle is driven 40 miles per hour into a five-foot-tall barrier impacting the front left corner of the vehicle. Its overall performance in the tests earned the F-150 a Top Safety Pick rating, missing out on the higher Top Safety Pick + rating only because it doesn't have an automatic braking system.

But how do the other versions of Ford's best-seller hold up? Given that even less popular versions of the F-150 still sell more than many other vehicles on the market, the IIHS put an extended cab through the same battery of tests. It performed comparably except in one area: the small overlap test. In that case, the extended cab model's steering column was pushed eight inches into the cabin (dangerously close to the crash test dummy's chest), the dummy's head missed the airbag almost entirely and hit the instrument panel, and the dummy's legs would risk sustaining "moderate" injuries.

The reason for the disparity is that "Ford added structural elements to the crew cab's front frame to earn a good small overlap rating and a Top Safety Pick award but didn't do the same for the extended cab," according to the Institute's chief research officer David Zuby. "That shortchanges buyers who might pick the extended cab thinking it offers the same protection in this type of crash as the crew cab. It doesn't."

A Ford spokesman responded: "We addressed the IIHS small overlap front crash in our high-volume SuperCrew first, which accounts for 83 percent of 2015 F-150 retail sales. We are adding countermeasures in the SuperCab and the Regular Cab in the 2016 model year. Based on this IIHS data, both vehicles offer similar occupant protection levels." (For the full Ford statement, scroll down.) The small overlap test was first introduced by the IIHS in 2012.

As mentioned earlier the extended cab performed about the same as the crew cab in all other tests, including the moderate overlap test. The Institute says it will also subject "multiple variants" of other pickups to the same standards. In its testing, the IIHS also looked at repair costs for the aluminum bodywork on the new F-150 as compared to the previous steel-bodied model, and found that repair costs to be 26 percent higher for the new model. Ford disputes those figures based on independent data. You can delve into the results broken down in the IIHS statement below, or get the gist of it from the accompanying video clip.

sursa: http://www.autoblog.com/2015/07/30/iihs-fo...0-extended-cab/

Crash testurile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KCLyPip2Iw crew cab
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzxiTZcIyUE extended cab

Dpmdv amandoua se fac cam praf, da' extended cabu' se face incredibil de praf...

masinile cu sasiu scara (independent) se fac toate praf
tipul asta de sasiu este proiectat sa nu se torsioneze, nu sa absoarba impactul

plus ca zona de impact este in afara lui, se vede ca doar roata ia blocul in plin
extended cabu' aluneca si mai mult

Untitled.jpg ( Size: 387.1k ) Number of downloads: 753

atata doar ca ford isi minte cu buna stiinta clientii, punand dotari de siguranta cruciale (ce tin de structura de rezistenta a masinii) doar pe varianta de caroserie care stiau ei ca va fi aleasa de iihs. Omitand dupa aia sa zica ca acele dotari nu sunt prezente si pe celelalte versiuni de caroserie netestate initial

afocis, iar vb. tampenii ca de obicei
site-ul ala este un fel de 4tiuning

Dar Renault, cu Megane hatch fabricat in Turcia si cu Fluence, isi minte sau nu clientii referitor la cele 5 stele?
Aceste 2 modele au 5 stele asa cum are Megane 3 'adevarat'?



5 stele - conform vechiului punctaj.

de fapt problema este lipsa montantului B si ford nu a scos, nu a pus ranforsari suplimentare.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFJeZX-SrJE

reno rulz, stim.

ps afofis ai primit sarcina sa denigrezi ford, tocmai cand are vanzari neasteptate de bune in fata reno?

This post has been edited by b76bgaarh: 31 Jul 2015, 09:16

Referitor la aceste 2 teste, daca esti in 'extended cab', nu prea ai vreo sansa. Cam iesi dauna totala, coliva si sicriul fiind necesare.

In cealalta, poate mai scapi cu cateva luni de spitalizare.

de fapt problema este lipsa montantului B si ford nu a scos,  nu a pus ranforsari suplimentare.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFJeZX-SrJE

reno rulz, stim.

ps afofis ai primit sarcina sa denigrezi ford, tocmai cand are vanzari neasteptate de bune in fata reno?

asa-i ca nu iti place sa citesti si iti place sa vb ca sa nu te auzi? inclusiv ford a recunoscut asta:

The reason for the disparity is that "Ford added structural elements to the crew cab's front frame to earn a good small overlap rating and a Top Safety Pick award but didn't do the same for the extended cab," according to the Institute's chief research officer David Zuby. "That shortchanges buyers who might pick the extended cab thinking it offers the same protection in this type of crash as the crew cab. It doesn't."

31 Jul 2015, 09:51:

afocis, iar vb. tampenii ca de obicei
site-ul ala este un fel de 4tiuning

da da da... eu is de vina, nu ford ca o fost prins cu fofarlica, chestie pe care si ei au recunoscut-o dupa ce iihs le-o descoperit excrocheria

This post has been edited by aphophis: 31 Jul 2015, 09:51

ford a zis ca investigheaza, nu a "recunoscut" nimic.


da tu spera in continuare.

Ford a facut o mizerie mare, asta e clar. Se vede clar asta.

Dar, off-topic, am intrebat si eu de cele "5 stele" ale lui Megane hatch din Turcia si ale lui Fluence. Renault a facut magarie in acest caz sau nu?

De ce?
A fost vreodata facuta la noi reclama la Megane 3 ca are 5 stele?
A zis reno vreodata ca Fluansu' e Megane 3 sedan?
Prost e ca la reno macar vezi ca dai cam 60% din pretul modelului vest-european, dar la ford tot cam p-acolo-s banii.

centurion nu e ca megan 3/fluence, e ca la clio iv care are decat airbag pt cap la scaunele fata pt ca la euroncap pe scaunul din spate se pune scaun de copil.


valabil si la captur.

In general, de la laguna II incoace, reno a stat bine la capitolul securitate, nu prea se moare in aceste masini..dar nu se mai repara...

Mai importanta viata decat o bucata de fier Daca din Renault scapi din cele 2 modele de Ford ...mai greu. Bine ca cele 2 modele nu se comercializeaza in Europa.

mai ales ca nici un reno nu a fost testat astfel.

ps da din ala care a iesit bine de ce nu scapi?

In general, de la laguna II incoace, reno a stat bine la capitolul securitate, nu prea se moare in aceste masini..dar nu se mai repara...

la L2 s-a stat bine, acum este in picaj

31 Jul 2015, 12:44:

Dar Renault, cu Megane hatch fabricat in Turcia si cu Fluence, isi minte sau nu clientii referitor la cele 5 stele?
Aceste 2 modele au 5 stele asa cum are Megane 3 'adevarat'?   
5 stele - conform vechiului punctaj.

ce s-a fabricat in turcia a fost gunoi

This post has been edited by IRONICK: 31 Jul 2015, 13:44

mai ales ca nici un reno nu a fost testat astfel.

ps da din ala care a iesit bine de ce nu scapi?

Da, asta am omis-o, la testele din europa nu este inclus acest test, deci nu am de unde sti cum s-ar comporta un renault in acest caz, sau oricare alta masina europeana, poate wv, audi, toyota, nissan, volvo... posibil sa fi omis alti producatori cunoscuti in europa care produc masini si pentru state.

This post has been edited by RazvanF: 31 Jul 2015, 13:57

Afofis, sa nu-ti scape ca la un impact dintre ford-ul ala si un Renault de 5 stele, care e cu totul alta clasa, o sa iasa Ford-ul mai bine..

legatura fiind care? Ca unii cauta scuze fordului pentru o magarie evidenta, facuta cu nesimtire? Tot renault e de vina ca ford isi inseala clientii?

aphophis,

Sunt 2 aspecte aici:

1. Da, in ceea ce priveste varianta 'extended cab', e un mare rahat ceea ce a facut Ford. Cred ca aici nu sunt discutii. In cealalta varianta, 'crew cab', rezultatul nu este atat de naspa pe cat ar parea a fi.

2. In ceea ce priveste testarea, uite in pozele de mai jos diferentele intre americanii de la IIHS si europenii de la EuroNCAP. Am pus in ambele cazuri un Audi. Americanii testeaza (cred) pe 25% din suprafata frontala, europenii testeaza (cred) undeva pe la 45% din suprafata frontala. Asta inseamna ca testele americanilor sunt mai dure, deci clar deformarile vehiculelor vor fi mai mari in acest caz. Deci, ceea ce ar parea dezastruos la F150 in SUA, ar putea fi acceptabil in Europa. E doar o parere.

Oricum, pe strada, la un accident intre F150 si Megane, as vrea sa fiu in F150.

Attached thumbnail(s)
IIHS.jpg ( Size: 50.14k ) Number of downloads: 508
Euroncap.jpg ( Size: 65.81k ) Number of downloads: 470

Nu sunt de acord cu „prins cu fofârlica”. În general versiunile de caroserie au diferențe în ceea ce privește structura de rezistență adaptate maselor și comportamentelor torsionale. Mă îndoiesc că vesiunile coupe, hatchback și break ale unei mașini (de exemplu Megane) au structuri identice. De aici comportamentele diferite.
În testul americanilor sunt două diferențe care sar în ochi față de euroNCAP: dimensiunea zonei de impact (mult mai mică la americani) și tipul obstacolului (rigid vs. deformabil). În aceste condiții, manifestarea momentelor de rotație ce apar sunt mult mai evidente și fenomenul de ricoșeu mult accentuat iar distrugerile structurilor mult mai evidente (suprafață de contact mai mică și transfer de impuls mai mare).
De exemplu, o mașină poate fi afectată pe lateral mult mai mult decât una care are o tendință mai mică de a se roti sau decât una care s-a rotit mai mult. Ciudat dar o structură prea rigidă s-ar putea să ducă la avarii mai spectaculoase dar nu neapărat mai periculoase. Vezi și Golf 2015, același test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_f3CAnH7WIM
Pentru 2014, cica ar avea sasiul din aluminiu.

O astfel de gogoneata a facut cu ceva ani in urma si Opel, mi-a spus-o un roman care traia in Germania, si de unde Opel a ajuns sa fie considerata masina prostului in Germania.

Gata, ai facut 25 de posturi, poti trimite mesaje private, asa ca las-o mai moale cu postarile la Stiri.

Stai s-apară un moderator, să i le șteargă pe toate.