Jeep Grand Cherokee And 2018 Ford Explorer Earn Dunce Caps In Latest IIHS Crash Tests

Not Tesla; no one cares.

How did the Model X do again? Oh yeah, highest rated SUV when it comes to safety.

SanCarlosJose must have believed Elon about the crash rating.

https://www.engadget.com/2017/06/13/tesla-model-x-earns-a-perfect-nhtsa-safety-rating/

Only SUV ever to get 5 stars in every category.

Also, any car hitting concrete at 75+ MPH head on will burst into flames, that applies to ICE cars and other EVs.

Why do you even comment anymore? Seriously? No one takes your commments seriously and you and Tesla have both lost credibility so just save it.

Read the article and stop being a dbag

No big deal for Ford. The new Explorer is almost here. This is a big deal for the Grand Cherokee because no replacement is even remotely in sight.

@SanJoseTeslaFanboy...these cars failed on the small offset test...the same test Tesla complained about when the Model S didn't do so well (I guess Elon has to make sure safety ratings stay high because his cars have a propensity to plow into fire trucks).

Regardless of Teslas scores (Seems like this website is becoming a Tesla Owners Club), the IIHS tests are nonsense. Car makers intentionally design cars to do well on these tests (this particular test was developed after the GC/Explorer were designed). You can see this as the only cars that got "Good" scores were just recently redesigned. The "real" safety score is the risk of fatality/severe injuries in a crash, and in a retrospective study of car crashes the that two variables stand out for improved safety are higher weight of the car and higher price of the car.

For those defending the poor ratings for these SUVs, below are the excerpts from the article:

"The 2018 Ford Explorer rated poor because its structure collapsed – intruding as much as 15 inches into the SUV – resulting in a high likelihood of injuries to the front passenger's right hip and left lower leg"

For the Jepp GC: "the passenger crash dummy's head in the 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee hits the dashboard through the airbag. The side airbag does not deploy and the door opens allowing the dummy's head to go outside the SUV."

These are not minor deficiencies: structural collapse, side airbag not deploying, ... I would avoid these SUVs like plague.

The IIHS is tasked by the insurance industry of creating data that will justify higher premium rates. The IIHS is not unbiased nor is it in any way consumerist. They are fully owned by the insurance industry.

That simultaneously have higher insurance premiums because they cost more.

So you want to be the dummy with the head sticking out of the window after the crash ? or having a metal bar sticking to your groin ?

The same sets of tests are performed, if your car don't do well then go back to the drawing board and improve it. Enough of the apologist nonsense.

Sorry Aspy - the IIHS is a vehicle of the Insurance industries - and is simply a way to compare the structure of the vehicles it tests in several COMPLETELY arbitrary controlled crash tests. TO DATE - no one has shown ANY relationship between the results of these crash tests and actual crash rates in real life. THe fact is - there are very few REAL LIFE crashes that actually mimic the controlled studies in any way.

Yes - manufacturers will attempt to modify their vehicles to survive THESE crash test to get a better rating - which THEY PAY to be able to release to the public - BUT - since it CANNOT be show that this actually makes a car or truck safer on the road - this is still a money grab for insurance companies - little else.

Again - I reiterate - there has yet to be shown ANY relationship between the results of these tests - which are highly controlled - and actual crashes in real life. ANd Until they can actually do that - IT IS NONSENSE - nothing else.

I do not work for ANY car company -

But - YOU can search the internet to find a study that links results of the IIHS tests - and real world crashes - EVEN IIHS cannot supply one. AS a result of stupid testing like this - manufacturers spend much money attempting to show good results on meaningless tests - rather than spending to make their cars and trucks strong in real life crashes. Recently - one company added a metal beam - to reduce the amount the fender crushes in a specific crash - admitting that the likelyhood of this making a difference in real life crashes was ZERO.

I work for TVR and our motto is "Well, don't crash then."

"there has yet to be shown ANY relationship between the results of these tests - which are highly controlled - and actual crashes in real life" - Ever heard of Murphy's law (not the Robocop version) ??

I believe the IIHS has good intentions in both making cars safer and reducing insurance payouts (which also helps drivers). The problem is that car companies will engineer cars to excel at these tests at the lowest cost possible. One story I remember reading that proves this: Initially IIHS only tested offset on the driver side, when they started testing passenger side offset a lot of cars that did well on the drivers side did poorly on the passenger side. And then a few years later cars started doing better on the passenger offset test.

The end result is that these tests only make cars marginally safer in most conditions and improve significantly only in the small set of parameters tested by the IIHS. One thing the insurance industry and govt knows but won't make public is that heavier vehicles offer better occupant protection. If you are truly interested in safety a large and expensive SUV (Ie. Mercedes GL, Lexus LX, Expedition/Navigator, GM full size SUVs) is the way to go.

https://www.thecarcrashdetective.com/big-cars-no-protection/

http://www.buffalo.edu/news/releases/2015/05/023.html