Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Monday September 26, 2016
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-10-2013, 09:15 PM   #1
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default T^3 stands for Too Little, Too Late Toyota

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/12/10/t...fety-redesign/

Lol, it took CR delisting the Camry to get something out of Toyota.

Corolla, nope. RAV4, nope. Prius, Nope. Camry, AMIGAWD WE'S GOTTA DO SOMETHING! I hope it was a rough wake up call.

Quote:
Many Toyota vehicles haven't been performing well in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's (IIHS) small overlap frontal crash test, and the Camry is one of them. The 2012 and 2013 Camry both received "Poor" ratings, IIHS' lowest rating, in the test, which spurred Consumer Reports to take the car off its "Recommended" list. In response to the low ratings in the small overlap frontal test, and in a bid to maintain its best-seller status, Toyota will make changes to the Camry to improve its IIHS safety rating and to enhance its design, The Detroit News reports.

The Camry performed well in the moderate overlap frontal, side, roof strength and head restraints and seats crash tests, receiving "Good" ratings, IIHS' highest rating, in all four tests. That was enough for IIHS to award it a Top Safety Pick rating, just not TSP+.

Bill Fay, head of Toyota's US division, reportedly says, "It's still a five-star car. It still does very well in all the IIHS tests. It did not in [the small overlap frontal crash test], and we're busy making the necessary adjustments so that we can address that."

Most Toyota models haven't been put through the small overlap frontal test, but those that have haven't received better than a "Marginal" rating, IIHS' third-best rating. The Corolla received a "Marginal" rating, while the midsize Prius V, along with the Camry, earned "Poor" ratings. The RAV4 compact crossover also earned a "Poor" rating in the test.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 12-10-2013, 09:27 PM   #2
quentinberg007
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7887
Join Date: Jun 2001
Default

Are you naive enough to think they decided to start working on it just last month... when CR just announced it 4 weeks ago?

From what I've read, the Camry is getting retested this month. I'm sure they've been working on it since they first got word of the rating. Engineering changes take time.
quentinberg007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 09:35 PM   #3
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quentinberg007 View Post
Are you naive enough to think they decided to start working on it just last month... when CR just announced it 4 weeks ago?

From what I've read, the Camry is getting retested this month. I'm sure they've been working on it since they first got word of the rating. Engineering changes take time.
Are you naive enough to believe it's just the Camry? Do you even realize when the Corolla was tested? Go read up before you think the OTHER person is naive rather than yourself.

Oh right... Engineering takes time... Except Volvo hasn't refreshed or redesigned the XC90 for what? 5 years? And it passed the small overlap test without ANY modification to PREPARE for this test.

Naive my ass. Engineering takes time but that's no excuse for cutting corners to be numba 1 in sales.

Last edited by BigElm; 12-10-2013 at 10:33 PM.
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 10:18 PM   #4
quentinberg007
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7887
Join Date: Jun 2001
Default

The Small Overlap Test was developed in 2011. The cars in question were all well into development phase when Toyota was aware of the test. Their mistake was teaching to the test... without fully understanding what the small overlap was bringing to the table. Volvo, clearly, had more comprehensive in house testing criteria. Kudos to Volvo for going above an beyond. What killed these Toyotas in this test was intruding structure mostly around the left foot. If you actually looked at the results on the IIHS site, which I'm sure you did, you'd have seen that the injury ratings for head/neck, chest, and hip/thigh are listed as "good" for the Camry. The lower leg/foot section, where the structure intruded, is listed as "acceptable". But, since the structure intruded over x cm, the vehicle was judged as poor across the board for the small overlap test despite the injury results being mostly "good". For the Rav, Corolla, and Prius v, which all share a basic platform, the story is largely the same. Toyota needs to improve their testing regimen, no doubt. Their testing standards weren't a result of cut corners in the quest for number 1 sales. Again, I'm certain they have been frantically trying to figure out ways to effectively modify the platforms to do well on this test, but you don't start throwing countermeasure ideas out there without determining the root cause of the problem. I'm a manufacturing engineer and I can 100% say that throwing countermeasures at the problem is a great way to get unintended results.

Last edited by BigElm; 12-10-2013 at 10:34 PM.
quentinberg007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 04:22 AM   #5
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quentinberg007 View Post
Their testing standards weren't a result of cut corners in the quest for number 1 sales.
Really? You're seriously saying that in broad daylight about Toyota that has their executives promising to redesign a single car from their entire line up because it was pushed off the top of the "most sold" list? I can't tell if you're trolling or just ignorantly biased.

Volvo has always touted safety. Toyota has always played the reliability card. Volvo got thrown around the table by their owners. Toyota worked on rebuilding their reputation that took such a minor hit from the dumbass unintended acceleration fiasco.

And don't talk to me about different car segments (luxury vs. non-luxury). Toyota ASKED IIHS to wait and test the new redesigned RAV4 and still did poorly when Subaru brought the 2014 Forester to the same test and did the best. Of course Subaru made modifications to do well in this test and that's not a secret. However, the fact that Subaru did well in this test and Toyota didn't, and given the sale numbers globally for both manufacturers, this is clearly cutting corners to garner more sales on Toyota's behalf.

Toyota obviously prioritized all else before it made safety the (not a) top priority. You might be a manufacturing engineer but do you realize that a centimeter or even a millimeter in a human decides the difference between a shattered tibia or a minor sprained ankle? The IIHS standards are not so stringent that even Euro NCAP scoffs and disregards. The Euro NCAP does a similar test to begin with.
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 06:25 AM   #6
quentinberg007
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7887
Join Date: Jun 2001
Default

Camry has been the top selling car for the past year other than a few months in early 2013. It was the top selling car in November. I don't understand where you get the idea that they are only fixing this because they lost a sales crown.

You are taking some comments made by executives in an interview and are jumping to conclusions from it (that Toyota doesn't plan on fixing the other 3 vehicles... They were likely discussing the Camry in the interview when the topic came up; the raw interview isn't out there from what I can find). I'm certain that fixes are in the works for the other models because Toyota has a vested interest in having their vehicles being top safety plus picks. The Rav4 and Corolla make up a ton of their volume and aren't likely to be ignored. They weren't being devious. Their internal standards were not tight enough to accommodate the new testing and these 4 vehicles were just ready to hit the market when the test was revealed. I imagine the previous Corolla, Camry, and Rav would have done worse than the current models, so delaying the model redesigns doesn't do anyone any good. They are working to fix the issue. If they said they were going to wait until 2017, when the Camry is due for a full redesign, I'd 100% agree that they were purposely cutting corners. What's done is done and they are trying to get a fix out as soon as they can.

And, again, automobile development and manufacturing is all about standards. Toyota has internal standards that they use across the board for everything; they are famous for their standardization. Standards do change when they find a problem. I'm certain every vehicle in development now is being tested with small overlap in mind. It was too late in the design game for the Camry, Corolla, Rav, and the Prius v. There wasn't a guy at TMC that said he was going to save the company a few bucks by blatantly ignoring a safety test.

Last edited by quentinberg007; 12-11-2013 at 06:31 AM.
quentinberg007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 09:52 AM   #7
WRXHillClimb
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 206907
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Rochester, MN
Vehicle:
2014 EvoX GSR

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A W View Post
Toyota obviously prioritized all else before it made safety the (not a) top priority.
Good. I'm glad someone isn't in a hurry to jump on the "safety must always improve at any cost" bandwagon. **** the IIHS. They outlived their usefulness when deaths caused by cars fell under .1% of the population's total deaths.
WRXHillClimb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 10:12 AM   #8
Rootus
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 89821
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: A Series Of Toobs
Vehicle:
2015 STI LE

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRXHillClimb View Post
**** the IIHS. They outlived their usefulness when deaths caused by cars fell under .1% of the population's total deaths.
Vote with your wallet.
Rootus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 10:25 AM   #9
e11ys
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 77106
Join Date: Dec 2004
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Lexington, SC
Vehicle:
'02 Brodozer
'11 Outback 3.6R

Default

I'm assuming OP has some long-standing beef with Toyota. I don't really see what the big deal is.
e11ys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 03:00 PM   #10
Balantz
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 101457
Join Date: Nov 2005
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Vehicle:
Czar of Sweet Dance
Moves

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rootus View Post
Vote with your wallet.
I see what you did there.
Balantz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 09:24 AM   #11
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRXHillClimb View Post
Good. I'm glad someone isn't in a hurry to jump on the "safety must always improve at any cost" bandwagon. **** the IIHS. They outlived their usefulness when deaths caused by cars fell under .1% of the population's total deaths.
As usual, you can say that because you're not the 0.1%. In which case your justification hold little ground to begin with.
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 10:13 PM   #12
sxotty
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 95600
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Vehicle:
2003 WRX wagon
Silver

Default

Toyota does terrible every time they change crash tests. Same with roll over. They design to the test instead of just designing them to be safe. As tests get better though it follows they will as well. This is not a knock against them necessarily. It makes their cars more fuel efficient of they are lighter b/c they save metal to barely meet the test.
sxotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 10:22 PM   #13
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
Toyota does terrible every time they change crash tests. Same with roll over. They design to the test instead of just designing them to be safe. As tests get better though it follows they will as well. This is not a knock against them necessarily. It makes their cars more fuel efficient of they are lighter b/c they save metal to barely meet the test.
I agree 100%. Berdbirdberg just doesn't understand Toyota wants numbers, not quality and he can't handle the truth either way.
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 10:32 PM   #14
quentinberg007
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7887
Join Date: Jun 2001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A W View Post
I agree 100%. Berdbirdberg just doesn't understand Toyota wants numbers, not quality and he can't handle the truth either way.
I basically said exactly what sxotty said... even saying "teach to the test". They set their standards to the tests available at the time. When the test changed, their standards were no longer adequate. You are the one extrapolating that Toyota said "oh, **** these new tests, we want money money money!!!"
quentinberg007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 10:39 PM   #15
dcsti
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 77809
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne, FL
Vehicle:
2004 STi
Aspen White

Default

The only companies to get "good" ratings for small cars on the small overlap test are Subaru and Honda. It isn't just Toyota that's having trouble.

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/c...ary/small-cars

Interestingly, the Scion tC gets an "acceptable" but the Corolla is "marginal".
dcsti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 12:25 AM   #16
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsti View Post
The only companies to get "good" ratings for small cars on the small overlap test are Subaru and Honda. It isn't just Toyota that's having trouble.

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/c...ary/small-cars

Interestingly, the Scion tC gets an "acceptable" but the Corolla is "marginal".
Toyota was the only one to "vow" to bring the Camry back from it's hole that Toyota dug it into.
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 10:11 AM   #17
WRXHillClimb
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 206907
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Rochester, MN
Vehicle:
2014 EvoX GSR

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A W View Post
As usual, you can say that because you're not the 0.1%. In which case your justification hold little ground to begin with.
So would my recommendation against buying lottery tickets be the same? It's the same thing in that you just happened to get (un)lucky and end up in some awkward crash (probably due to your own stupidity) that no one has thought of yet and get maimed/die. These kinds of accidental deaths happen and will happen forever more to come. Stop trying to justify chasing nothing at the expense of everyone. It doesn't make sense.
WRXHillClimb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 10:13 AM   #18
WRXHillClimb
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 206907
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Rochester, MN
Vehicle:
2014 EvoX GSR

Default

In other news I bet you really loved volvo when they came out with their "Our design is ugly because it's SAFER!"

WRXHillClimb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 09:43 PM   #19
john_knoxville
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 109568
Join Date: Mar 2006
Default

wrxhillclimb, just because deaths are down doesn't mean all other crash survivors walk away without a scratch. and believe it or not, not everyone who is involved in an accident has arrived there by virtue of their own stupidity; there is plenty of opportunity to get swept into one by the stupidity of others every time you leave your driveway these days (or perhaps you live & drive in Alaska ). i consider many factors when car shopping and do take safety ratings & reputation into account, both because i love myself as a person and i value my health & well-being. of course, YMMV. Merry Christmas everyone, be safe!
john_knoxville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2013, 07:30 PM   #20
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WRXHillClimb View Post
In other news I bet you really loved volvo when they came out with their "Our design is ugly because it's SAFER!"

I've always liked the waterfall taillights on the XC60, XC70, and XC90. ;D

It's odd you would try to say something so... ignorant? Trends and ideals change with the times so back then it was "in." I wouldn't really know if that specifically was "in" because I wasn't old enough to drive when that thing came out. But whatever helps validate your money > human life logic, amirite?
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2013, 07:34 PM   #21
A W
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 265433
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by john_knoxville View Post
wrxhillclimb, just because deaths are down doesn't mean all other crash survivors walk away without a scratch. and believe it or not, not everyone who is involved in an accident has arrived there by virtue of their own stupidity; there is plenty of opportunity to get swept into one by the stupidity of others every time you leave your driveway these days (or perhaps you live & drive in Alaska ). i consider many factors when car shopping and do take safety ratings & reputation into account, both because i love myself as a person and i value my health & well-being. of course, YMMV. Merry Christmas everyone, be safe!
1.) Wow, one of the most mature posts I've seen on NABISCO in a while and 2.) +1.

Some people (birdberdberg and WRXHillHighInsurancePremiums) seem to forget it takes two to tango.

Last edited by A W; 12-22-2013 at 07:54 PM.
A W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2013, 08:16 PM   #22
quentinberg007
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7887
Join Date: Jun 2001
Default

I quite enjoy how you applaud someone for a mature post and then proceed to the mature tactic of name calling.

I also find it funny that you lump me in with WRXhillclimb. We disagree about cars on a fundamental level and have had several heated exchanges in the past. Apparently me trying to explain how these poor results are dealt with in the business makes me the same as someone who wants to toss out the IIHS. He's entitled to that opinion, but it isn't one that I hold.

The retest of the Camry apparently brought it up to acceptable, btw. Now the IIHS has changed the requirement for a Top Safety Pick + to having some sort of auto braking system like Eyesight as an option for 2014, though, so it still isn't a Top Safety Pick +.
quentinberg007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2013, 08:51 PM   #23
chanomatik
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159474
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Mahwah, New Jersey
Vehicle:
2013 BRZ Ltd 6MT CBS
SNOSLO

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by john_knoxville View Post
wrxhillclimb, just because deaths are down doesn't mean all other crash survivors walk away without a scratch. and believe it or not, not everyone who is involved in an accident has arrived there by virtue of their own stupidity; there is plenty of opportunity to get swept into one by the stupidity of others every time you leave your driveway these days (or perhaps you live & drive in Alaska ). i consider many factors when car shopping and do take safety ratings & reputation into account, both because i love myself as a person and i value my health & well-being. of course, YMMV. Merry Christmas everyone, be safe!
lolwut?!
chanomatik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2013, 10:34 PM   #24
shikataganai
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 92634
Join Date: Aug 2005
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Vehicle:
'07 Land Cruiser
'12 RAV4 EV

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chanomatik View Post
lolwut?!
Empty land where one might encounter trees and fauna more often than other drivers. This neglects that people and vehicles are clustered in the vastness of Alaska in reality.
shikataganai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2013, 02:01 AM   #25
manticus
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 162857
Join Date: Oct 2007
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Location: Calgary, AB
Default

Uh, yeah chano... as far as we are all concerned, you live by yourself up in Alaska. I was pretty sure when you came to Canada you had probably never seen another human being before. Did my white skin scare you???
manticus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2016 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2016, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.