backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 74 comment(s) - last by HighWing.. on May 9 at 8:31 PM


Volvo has banked on its reputation for safety for years.

Technicians prepare a vehicle for one of the 400 crashes conducted yearly at Volvo's testing facility.  (Source: Reuters)
Safety comes first at Volvo

When most people think of the auto manufacturer Volvo, "safety" is normally the first word to come to mind. The company has a decades-long tradition of providing incredibly safe vehicles to the buying public and has banked on its safe image much like Toyota cherishes its "green" image in the eyes of consumers.

"No other brand dominates a category the way safety is owned by Volvo," said Consumer Reports' Jeff Bartlett. In addition, 77 percent of U.S. drivers consider Volvo to be the safest vehicle brand according to Consumer Reports.

Volvo isn't content with today's safety features which cover a wide gamut from tire pressure monitoring systems to side/head curtain airbags to anti-whiplash head restraints to blind spot monitors to active electronic stability programs. The company wants to use advanced technology to prevent the 1.2 million deaths and 50 million injuries attributed to automobile crashes worldwide each year.

"I think if you look into the future, we as a community will not accept that we have injuries," said Volvo's Jan Ivarsson.

Volvo is using its state-of-the-art crash testing facility to determine how its vehicles stack up in a variety of scenarios including smashing headfirst into a 850-ton barrier at 35 MPH, to smashing into a school bus to vehicle-to-vehicle side-impact crashes.

Volvo's safety team then examines the data from its crash vehicle and the test dummies to see how they can go about further improving on its safety features. Further technology that Volvo plans to add to its vehicles includes an "electronic bumper" that reads and processes information around the vehicle to alert the vehicle central "brain" -- the vehicle could then take over throttle, braking, and steering controls to reduce the likelihood of a crash.

Now imagine a whole city full of vehicles equipped with such technology -- the chances for a crash would be even more significantly reduced. Couple the advances with computer technology and sensors with the steady advancements in lightweight steel and aluminum construction for vehicle chassis' should the inevitable crash occur and we are left with an “injury proof” car.

"If you have a really long perspective, I think we will not have vehicles that will crash in the future," added Ivarsson. "You and I, in the future, we won't accept that. Why should we accept that?"

But for all of Volvo’s advancements in the area of safety, its competitors aren’t exactly standing still. Luxury car manufacturers like Lexus and Mercedes have sophisticated crash avoidance/occupant protection systems of their own. Lexus’ Pre-Collision system can adjust the throttle, brakes, and suspension to prevent a frontal collision – the system can even cinch the seatbelts to further protect the drivers in a crash. Mercedes’ PRE-SAFE system offers similar features in vehicles equipped with the feature.

Volvo, however, must stay out in front of such advances to further cement its place as the perennial leaders in vehicular safety.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

But they missed the boat on...
By Marlin1975 on 5/6/2008 4:14:31 PM , Rating: 3
Gas mileage. Even their smaller 4cyl car gets low 20's gas mileage.

When gas is $3+ a gallon on its way to $4+ safety takes a backseat. Right now people are buying up old Geo/Chevy Metros, Civics, etc... that are horrible in safety but get great gas mileage.

Safety of a car affects us when there is a accident, but gas mileage hits us every time we stop at the pumps.




RE: But they missed the boat on...
By FITCamaro on 5/6/2008 4:17:04 PM , Rating: 3
Well when you build your cars like tanks, yes they're safe, but they're also heavy.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By Marlin1975 on 5/6/2008 4:23:09 PM , Rating: 2
Actually I just looked it up they only have 5cyl motors now and the BEST city milage any of their cars gets is 20mpg.

Yea there safe cars, since you can't afford to drive them on the road you don't have to worry about getting into a car accident.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By omnicronx on 5/6/2008 4:55:05 PM , Rating: 5
Volvo has not had a 4 cylinder since the volvo 850 came out =P
I don't know why you think they only have 5 cyl inlines either.. the s80 is a v8. And just so you know inline engines are usually much lighter than V or flat engines.

I would also like you to keep in mind a civic with a 2 litre engine only gets around 27 MPG city.. meanwhile the s60 gets around 22MPG city, is more powerful, and much much safer.

Another big factor you forgot is highway mileage, an s60 matches the civic 2.0L in highway MPG with both hitting around 40.. City driving is not everything, most people are not going to buy a volvo for their daily 10k trip, highway mileage is very important.

Just consider this, my protege5 is great with city driving, but my volvo beats it hands down in highway driving. In fact my dads corvette gets better highway mileage than my protege, just because it only hits around 1500rpm in 6th gear going 120km/h =P


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By ElFenix on 5/6/2008 6:26:09 PM , Rating: 2
since when are inline engines of the same displacement lighter than a V engine? the N52 uses a magnesium block and still weighs about 25 lbs. more than a VQ35.


By FITCamaro on 5/7/2008 7:36:33 AM , Rating: 2
Inline engines do make more torque and sooner than a V engine though.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By Lord 666 on 5/6/2008 8:43:18 PM , Rating: 2
The S60 actually performs quite poorly with respect to safety ratings. Comparing a 2008 S60 to the 2008 Civic, I would take my chances with the Honda. The current S60 dates back to 2001 and is long overdue for an update. Volvo acknowledged the safety shortcomings of the S60 during the S80 redesign and ultimately might phase out the S60 in favor of the XC60.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23386028@N08/23574120... for a picture of the XC60.

S60 - http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=154 and http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=567

2008 Civic - http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=603 and http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=605

If you poke around my other Flickr pics, you will see why safety is the primary concern. Just waiting for the Accord diesel with rear side airbags to replace my 2006 Jetta TDI with rear side airbags.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By omnicronx on 5/7/2008 12:47:40 AM , Rating: 2
I would still rather crash in an s60 anyday.. from the roll bar to the countless amount of airbags, the volvo s60 is a much safer ride. If have actually seen someone wrap an s60 around a tree going 80, and walk away without a scratch.. I can't say I have ever seen (or heard for that matter) that happen in a civic.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By FITCamaro on 5/7/2008 7:37:36 AM , Rating: 2
I'm just not stupid enough to wrap my car around a tree at 80.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By mvpx02 on 5/8/2008 4:48:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm just not stupid enough to wrap my car around a tree at 80.


Nobody intends to wrap their car around a tree at 80 (or any speed for that matter).

That being said, one of my biggest fears when driving is what idiot is going to hit me, I'm not concerned that I'm going to hit something.


By afkrotch on 5/7/2008 2:40:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I can't say I have ever seen (or heard for that matter) that happen in a civic.


Probably because the person(s) who buys a Civic isn't a moron. Hence why they own a car that gets good gas mileage, has a better safety rating, and is half the cost. Also there's a huge surplus of aftermarket parts for the cars too.


By GlassHouse69 on 5/9/2008 1:30:02 AM , Rating: 2
According to state farm insurance, a honda civic has the highest claims per accident of medical injuries only 2nd to early 80's economy cars.

the 35 mph crash test is meaningless for its 5 star garbage rating. check your insurance agent as to what is the safest car. Volvo is really high up, my mini is actually in same blocked category. 4 tiers away from civic. I was going to buy a 2007 civic Si but I stopped when I found out about this. I now own a mini S, a much safer car to crash in.

i dont know about a s60, but it just HAS to be safer than a tin can "your the crumple zone" civic.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By Samus on 5/7/2008 6:49:04 AM , Rating: 2
No matter how expensive petrol is, you can't put a price on survival.

I justify poor gas mileage figured with my Focus SVT and Volvo S60R every time I drive them. They both only get 20MPG, but that's the price you pay for safety and decent power.


By afkrotch on 5/7/2008 3:05:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No matter how expensive petrol is, you can't put a price on survival.


You sure as hell can and Volvo charges you for those safety features. I'd much rather drive around a fully loaded Focus SES over any Volvo. Standard ABS, front airbags, side curtain airbags, seat airbags, tire monitoring, traction control, etc. All while being half the price.

With all the left over money, I could throw in an FIA rollcage.


By SilthDraeth on 5/7/2008 11:23:59 AM , Rating: 2
What you say may be true, but the majority of auto accidents happen within 5 miles of one's home. Especially side impact collisions and head on collisions.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By stryfe on 5/7/2008 5:37:01 PM , Rating: 2
You aren't making a fair comparison. First off, the S60 and Civic aren't in the same market segment, the S40 is a better match. In terms of exterior dimensions they're almost identical, the Civic (Sedan) being ever so slightly bigger.

The S40's base engine is a 2.4l 5cyl making 168hp and gets 22mpg.
The Civic's base engine is a 1.8l 4cyl making 140hp and gets 30mpg.

This gives the base Civic a 36% advantage in fuel economy.

Based on the numbers you'd think the S40 should be faster given it's bigger, more powerful engine. However it also weighs 500lbs more which negates the effect of the extra power/larger engine making this a reasonable comparison.

If you want to make a comparision to the Civic's 2.0l engine found in the sporty Si model then you'd have to make it with the S40 equiped with the T5 engine.

The S40 T5 has a 2.5l Turbo 5cyl making 227hp and gets 21mpg.
The Civic Si has a 2.0l 4cyl making 197hp and gets 27mpg.

This gives the Civic a 29% advantage in fuel economy when comparing sport models.

These numbers are for city driving of course. In effect Civic owners are getting a large "discount" on gas as compared to S40 drivers under city driving conditions.

You make a valid point that for highway driving the difference between the cars is negligable. The reason for this is the weight of the Volvo doesn't work against it while at cruising speed, it's accelerating over and over in city driving that kills it. If you're buying a car for highway driving the S40 has no strikes against it in terms of fuel economy as it would for most drivers who do primarily city driving.

None of this is to detract from Volvo in anyway. They've made their business on safety and safety means extra weight which inevitably means larger, more powerful engines are needed for competitive performance. If safety is the customer's number one priority than they should look no further than Volvo, they're incredibly safe and they're well built and good looking to boot! Just expect to pay for it at the pump.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By Spuke on 5/6/2008 5:15:33 PM , Rating: 3
The C30 is rated at 20/28 which is typical of that type of car.


RE: But they missed the boat on...
By RogueLegend on 5/6/2008 6:24:57 PM , Rating: 2
You're forgetting that on a very technical basis, Volvo is supposed to be an upscale/luxury brand. Typically, this variety of car (especially if you expect it to be safe) sits in a different price bracket and is aimed at people more likely able to afford gas prices.

I'm not disagreeing with the rising popularity of small/efficient cars, I'm just pointing out that Volvo targets a substantially different market. Take a look at most luxury brands. Even though more and more are offering more fuel economy- it's definitely not a primary focus, and the ones offering hybrid/alternative fuels are still in the minority. You probably won't ever see a subcompact luxury vehicle.


By nugundam93 on 5/7/2008 9:16:44 AM , Rating: 2
agreed. if you're buying a volvo, you're expected not to be the type who worries about how much gas costs. :D