Most Crashed Car in the UK

[skilly1]

After a discussion with a friend he came up with a 'fact' that the 3 series is the most crashed car in the UK, and blamed a lot of it on aquaplaning as there is no weight on the rear wheels.

Specificity he said he would like to buy a BMW estate, but the Audi estate is safer due to this problem (not including 4x4 Audi's). Any truth in this?

[kambites]

I can quite believe that the 3-series is the most crashed car in the UK, because it's probably the model of car in which the most miles are driven.

[HellDiver]

Are you sure it's not the Focus ST? I hear they randomly oversteer.

[Hudson]

sounds like potential bks, however RWD + Spoilt kids having mummy and daddy buying them an M3 + wet roundabout....

So its possible

[hondafanatic]

It would more interesting to know what the most crashed car as a percentage of total sales would be.

I'd bet the S2000 is pretty high up there.

[Crusoe]

The car with the dubious honour of most likely to be involved in a road accident is the rather sedate Honda FR-V people carrier, with one in five owners staking a claim against their insurance.

Next in line for a bumpy accident claim record is a Volvo XC90 – with 16% of owners looking for pay outs after crashes. Then come the Lexus RX (15.5% of owners claiming) and the Mazda 5 (15.3% of owners claiming).

Other top 10 entries were Honda’s Jazz and CR-V, the Volkswagen Touran, Hyundai Santa, Toyota Rav and Mazda 3.

The numbers relate to the percentage of drivers making accident claims, and in no way reflect on the safety of the vehicles concerned but more on the driving skills and bad luck of their drivers.

The lowest claim rates were for the Mazda 2 TS TD with only nine accident claims recorded in the last five years. Also hovering around the 1% mark were Nissan’s Skyline, the Ford Focus RS and the Fiat Cinquecento.

Don’t forget, these figures relate to the accident claims made by drivers – not the safety records of the cars.

The figures were extracted from a year’s worth of customer quotes generated by an online insurance comparison site.

[kambites]

So basically, big tall cars are more likely to be involved in an accident?

The Mazda 3 looks a bit out of place there, though.

[simoid]

I would think Fiestas or Corsas, being the most popular cars over the past few years, and more likely to be driven by youngsters.

Although, there must be some number of miles driven in 3ers

[LocoCoco]

My 3 series likes to aquaplane. The one time I nearly wrote it off was because of that. My old Primera would go through that same puddle fine at significantly higher speeds.
I put it down to the fatter tires, had plenty of weight in the boot at the time.

[simoid]

kambites said:

So basically, big tall cars are more likely to be involved in an accident?

School run mums' cars!

[1]

skilly1 said:

After a discussion with a friend he came up with a 'fact' that the 3 series is the most crashed car in the UK, and blamed a lot of it on aquaplaning as there is no weight on the rear wheels.

Specificity he said he would like to buy a BMW estate, but the Audi estate is safer due to this problem (not including 4x4 Audi's). Any truth in this?

Complete bks. The 3 series has near 50/50 weight distribution and some of the most advanced active saftey features of any car. And 4x4 will not have any bearing on it either, 4 wheel drive gives you more traction, not more grip.

I suspect the most crashed car will have more to do with the type of driver it attracts and the active saftey features. Saxo VTR will be pretty high.

[Crusoe]

As a percentage of cars on the road there are loads of 3 series that are used for commutes to work and most never make an insurance claim. More likely the mum on the school run in her 4x4 or older person in their Toyota will claim after having a minor bump judging by those statistics and because they probably have low insurance costs and high no claims discount.

[cpl_payne]

skilly1 said:

... aquaplaning as there is no weight on the rear wheels.

Specificity he said he would like to buy a BMW estate, but the Audi estate is safer due to this problem (not including 4x4 Audi's). Any truth in this?

FWD or 4x4 is governed by the same laws of physics when the speed of the vehicle exceeds the limit at which tyres are still able to displace water from underneath. If the driver doesn't know how to identify aquaplaning and what to do when it occurs, no car will be safe for them, 4x4 or 8x8.

[CraigyMc]

skilly1 said:

no weight on the rear wheels

The E90 (saloon) 3 has a Front:Rear weight distributuion of 51:49. On a 1500Kg car (eg. 320d SE with Manual Gearbox is 1505Kg), the weight on the rear wheels is about 740Kg or so.

The A4 Saloon has a Front:Rear weight distribution of 55:45. On a 1465Kg car (eg. A4 170ps 2.0 TDI Saloon), the weight on the rear wheels is about 660Kg.

skilly1 said:

Specificity he said he would like to buy a BMW estate, but the Audi estate is safer due to this problem (not including 4x4 Audi's). Any truth in this?

Your friend hasn't got hist facts straight at all. This isn't about weight, or weight distribution.

I'd say that an understeering car with an average driver at the wheel is safer than an oversteering car with an average driver at the wheel, particularly when considering situations like inclement weather and hamfisted application of power. On that basis, the A4 would be safer.

This has a lot less to do with weight distribution than with which wheels are driven on the respective cars.

C

[Mikeyboy]

simoid said:

School run mums' cars!

otherwise known as cars in which people feel safe and therefore pay no attention.

[to3m]

The top 10 is interesting, and somewhat unexpected! Do you have a link?

As for the BMW 3 series, if it were to make an appearance it would probably be because it's fairly inexpensive, it's popular, even the crap ones are powerful enough to easily go fast, and (probably most importantly) it's rear-wheel drive. (No need to blame inclement conditions specifically!) It wouldn't surprise me if it WERE the most crashed car, if by "crashed" you mean "put upside-down in ditch just after sharp bend", rather than "snagged bumper on pillar in car park" or "scraped passenger door getting into garage".

Edited by to3m on Thursday 28th July 11:48

[rodgerramjet]

Crusoe said:

The numbers relate to the percentage of drivers making accident claims, and in no way reflect on the safety of the vehicles concerned but more on the driving skills and bad luck of their drivers.

Don’t forget, these figures relate to the accident claims made by drivers – not the safety records of the cars.

The figures were extracted from a year’s worth of customer quotes generated by an online insurance comparison site.

So were the figures gathered from the information that users of the website enter in order to get a quote, or were the user's details then checked against the insurance database to find out details of the individual claims?

If the data has been processed using info from that entered into the site ie customer X, looking for a quote on a Y has had an accident in the last 5yrs, then X could have had that accident in any number of previous cars not relating to the car they currently want a quote on.

If it's been processed using actual claims data, then it carries more weight. But that is not what is insinuated.

Edited by rodgerramjet on Thursday 28th July 13:03

[Gad-Westy]

Why would a REAR wheel drive 3-series have less weight over the REAR wheels than other cars? Absurd! Anyway, I'm fked, I drive a 3 series estate

[CraigyMc]

Gad-Westy said:

Why would a REAR wheel drive 3-series have less weight over the REAR wheels than other cars? Absurd! Anyway, I'm fked, I drive a 3 series estate

Part of my point was that it doesnt have less. It has more, with the examples given.

OPs friend doesn't have a clue.

[ADEuk]

Gad-Westy said:

Why would a REAR wheel drive 3-series have less weight over the REAR wheels than other cars? Absurd! Anyway, I'm fked, I drive a 3 series estate

A 3 series will have less weight over the DRIVEN wheels

so yes you're fked