RE: Ford Mustang made (a bit) safer
Thursday 6th July 2017
Euro NCAP caused a bit of a stir back in January when it revealed everyone's favourite budget V8, Ford's new Mustang, had scored just two stars in its latest round of crash testing. This was the worst performance in almost a decade, and the organisation's members didn't hold back. "Ford has made a deliberate choice, said Thatcham Research director Matthew Avery. "The car has been designed to score well in less wide-ranging US consumer safety tests and only minor updates have been made to meet required European [pedestrian] regulations." Throw in a lack of radar collision avoidance systems and you have, er, a car crash of a result.
Despite insisting the Mustang was "fundamentally a safe car", Ford kicked off some engineering upgrades, and it's the revised car that Euro NCAP says is now worthy of three stars rather than two. "A three-star Euro NCAP rating is never a cause for celebration," said Avery, but "Ford's rapid addition of a suite of standard-fit safety tech and its prompt updates to improve the performance of the airbags and restraints is to be applauded". All told, then, a result for Euro NCAP.
Ford Mustang made (a bit) safer
From two Euro NCAP stars to... three
So what's Ford done? First of all, it's fixed the underinflation of the airbags. Previously, the driver's head could strike the steering wheel, something that really shouldn't be possible in a car with full-size airbags. Standard equipment also now includes pedestrian detection, forward collision warning, autonomous emergency braking and a lane-keeping aid. Whose 'off' button will be worn smooth in many a PHer's 2017-on Mustang, we're sure.
The Mustang still isn't where it should be - it'll take a revised front end that's safer for pedestrians for that. Maybe that's where the 2018 facelifted car comes in, However, it no longer has substandard airbags, and is now more likely to avoid an accident in the first place. Another lesson for the One Ford initiative to digest.
Discussion
Whilst I agree in principle that a 3* rating is shoddy, you also need to consider that a 3* rating today is the equivalent of a 5* rating just a couple of years ago...
Look at some of the tech that's in it - radar collision avoidance, lane assist, emergency braking assistance... The 2007 Ford Mondeo has a 5 star NCAP rating, but doesn't have any of that stuff as standard. OK, that's a decade ago, but I'd wager the new Mustang is just as safe, if not safer with the new kit than the 2007 Mondy.
There's more 2007 Mondys on the road than Mustangs, I'd wager... And which one is more likely to have kids in?
Look at some of the tech that's in it - radar collision avoidance, lane assist, emergency braking assistance... The 2007 Ford Mondeo has a 5 star NCAP rating, but doesn't have any of that stuff as standard. OK, that's a decade ago, but I'd wager the new Mustang is just as safe, if not safer with the new kit than the 2007 Mondy.
There's more 2007 Mondys on the road than Mustangs, I'd wager... And which one is more likely to have kids in?
E65Ross said:
In this day and age, even a rating of 3 stars is pretty shoddy, no?
No. Euro NCAP is now more about how much driver assistance technology a car has, rather than safety in the event of an accident. You can see the former by looking at its equipment list, so it's rather pointless that so much weight is given to it. Far better to work out how it performs if the worst happens, and award stars based on that IMO. I'll be honest, I'm not too bothered if my car has lane assist or auto-braking or pedestrian detection or is nice and squidgy for someone who wanders out in front of me. I'll give an extra star to anyone who doesn't put all that electronic garbage on it.I don't doubt that the NCAP has contributed in part to vehicle safety improvements, but it's become a bit like the school system - everyone's aiming for the best possible results in a specific and controlled test, which may not be entirely representative of how the real world works.
On the other hand, under-inflating airbags is a serious issue, and you'd hope that Ford are retrofitting the fix to all of its customers' cars.
NJ72 said:
Whilst I agree in principle that a 3* rating is shoddy, you also need to consider that a 3* rating today is the equivalent of a 5* rating just a couple of years ago...
Look at some of the tech that's in it - radar collision avoidance, lane assist, emergency braking assistance... The 2007 Ford Mondeo has a 5 star NCAP rating, but doesn't have any of that stuff as standard. OK, that's a decade ago, but I'd wager the new Mustang is just as safe, if not safer with the new kit than the 2007 Mondy.
There's more 2007 Mondys on the road than Mustangs, I'd wager... And which one is more likely to have kids in?
Given the airbag under inflation I would disagree but its crash structure is probably better than the stuff from 10 years ago I guess its swings and roundabouts! I would still rather a car with proper airbags though.. Plenty of other manufacturers of sports cars have go it right first time, no reason a company as big as Ford shouldn't!Look at some of the tech that's in it - radar collision avoidance, lane assist, emergency braking assistance... The 2007 Ford Mondeo has a 5 star NCAP rating, but doesn't have any of that stuff as standard. OK, that's a decade ago, but I'd wager the new Mustang is just as safe, if not safer with the new kit than the 2007 Mondy.
There's more 2007 Mondys on the road than Mustangs, I'd wager... And which one is more likely to have kids in?
Now they've fixed the air-bag problem, the front seat occupant safety seems pretty decent and the pedestrian impact score is quite good.
The low score is coming from poor rear seat safety. I suppose 2+2s are always going to find this harder simply because there's not as much space to decelerate the passengers in a crash before they hit the seat in front.
The low score is coming from poor rear seat safety. I suppose 2+2s are always going to find this harder simply because there's not as much space to decelerate the passengers in a crash before they hit the seat in front.
E65Ross said:
In this day and age, even a rating of 3 stars is pretty shoddy, no?
Airbag inflation aside, the tests have highlighted that the back seats are where the problems are - there aren't any load-limiters or pre-tensioners on the rear seatbelts, so the points get penalised despite decent performance otherwise.Looking at the report from NCAP they haven't re-assessed the crash scores now that the airbags have been sorted, so it might be more like 4 stars if they re-tested it.
Has anyone on PH ever made a buying decision where the NCAP rating made or broke a deal, where it was the genuine deciding factor? Genuine question. I can honestly say NCAP ratings have never ever come on the radar of any car purchase I have made, then again I am single and don't carry passengers much, no kids in the back to be concerned about etc. Just curious.
Feels like the stars should stay for actual structual and safety features and another system should be added for safety enhancing aids, my 350z sure doesn't have any radar, breaking or other crap like that and I'd never buy a car based on having those fetaures, having bad airbags or structual failings should be highlighted more seriously. Surely any Dacia must score low based on lack of tech even if it's structually sound and safe in a crash?
To be honest, whilst safety is important, breathing is dangerous. On balance this would be a fuss about nothing. Don't crash if you don't want to get hurt, and don't go outside if you don't want to get crashed into.
Or drive great, modern cars like the Mustang, and go about your day knowing that you're not invincible
Or drive great, modern cars like the Mustang, and go about your day knowing that you're not invincible
Edited by Kenny Powers on Thursday 6th July 12:29
Biggest safety feature on a Mustang ... not abusing the throttle ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8i9-h8Gw2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8i9-h8Gw2s
Seatbelt pretensioning can be irritating as all hell if it's overzealous. I sometimes have to wait for my seatbelts to unlock if I've braked a bit harder than strictly necessary to stop on the line for a junction, because the lock is preventing me from leaning forwards to get a better left/right view.
Maybe it can be made less overzealous now it can know that you're not actually headed for an impact, just braking hard.
Maybe it can be made less overzealous now it can know that you're not actually headed for an impact, just braking hard.
GranCab said:
Biggest safety feature on a Mustang ... not abusing the throttle ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8i9-h8Gw2s
It would be difficult to contain one's anger at being hit by some talentless muppet like this whilst sat minding one's own business waiting to turn off the road.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8i9-h8Gw2s
If you look at the adult occupant protection, it's pretty rubbish if you're a rear passenger - https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/ford/mustang/2...
MDMetal said:
Feels like the stars should stay for actual structual and safety features and another system should be added for safety enhancing aids, my 350z sure doesn't have any radar, breaking or other crap like that and I'd never buy a car based on having those fetaures, having bad airbags or structual failings should be highlighted more seriously. Surely any Dacia must score low based on lack of tech even if it's structually sound and safe in a crash?
I think that the NCAP test should be split in 2 - a rating for how good a car behaves in a crash & what I assume is a tick box exercise in crash preventing technology (which they as far I can see isn't test to check if it works or throws up dangerous false activations).On the subject of NCAP ratings swing buying decisions - I wouldn't have bought my Leon if it wasn't a 5* car but that's more to do with that being expected in the class than being a real deal swinger. Plus the Leon is marginally better NCAP performancer than the more expensive Areca I was looking at (which the sales material goes on about how good NCAP performance it has).
Audi dealers got into a whole hill of trouble as the A5 wasn't NCAP tested & were stating that as it's the same platform as the A4 they would perform the same in a crash (which could be true).
But any cars you really want (911, Ferrari etc) aren't even NCAP tested - I bet a M4 & C63 are the most expensive cars that can make NCAP claims.
This is a bit unfair on the Mustang. Considering the vehicle and the testing criteria it's been subjected to, it's done rather well.
If you look at the detail, the car is safe, and probably safer then 75% of the cars on the roads today.
In Adult occupant protection it scored 4 stars - but this is namely due to the fact the occupant in the rear getting poor results to the lack of space on the full lap test. FR Driver and passenger performed well in frontal and side crashes.
In pedestrian and active safety it actually scored 5 stars! Honestly I'm surprised how well it did for pedestrian given that it has a big v8 under the hood. Well done Ford on that active bonnet...something not mentioned in the article.
NOW, the only reason it is a 3 Star vehicle is due to its performance in Child Protection.
You have to ask, would buy a Mustang just to fit 2 child seats in the back and do the school run?
And actually again if you look at the detail, it's not unsafe. Actually it performs reasonably well in a crash. Where it loses all it's points, which makes the whole car 3 stars is the simple fact that you cannot fit every single child seat you can buy down at your local Halfords in it. That's a fundamental space issue thing. Perhaps the next mustang will be an mpv?
Lastly, what makes this result even more impressive for me is that it was done with the 5L V8 engine and not the 2.3 eco boost. If you look through all the results, I think you'll struggle to find another vehicle tested with an engine that size. Most manufacturers test with there smallest engine variant as this gives best results, due to more crushable absorbing space.
If you look at the detail, the car is safe, and probably safer then 75% of the cars on the roads today.
In Adult occupant protection it scored 4 stars - but this is namely due to the fact the occupant in the rear getting poor results to the lack of space on the full lap test. FR Driver and passenger performed well in frontal and side crashes.
In pedestrian and active safety it actually scored 5 stars! Honestly I'm surprised how well it did for pedestrian given that it has a big v8 under the hood. Well done Ford on that active bonnet...something not mentioned in the article.
NOW, the only reason it is a 3 Star vehicle is due to its performance in Child Protection.
You have to ask, would buy a Mustang just to fit 2 child seats in the back and do the school run?
And actually again if you look at the detail, it's not unsafe. Actually it performs reasonably well in a crash. Where it loses all it's points, which makes the whole car 3 stars is the simple fact that you cannot fit every single child seat you can buy down at your local Halfords in it. That's a fundamental space issue thing. Perhaps the next mustang will be an mpv?
Lastly, what makes this result even more impressive for me is that it was done with the 5L V8 engine and not the 2.3 eco boost. If you look through all the results, I think you'll struggle to find another vehicle tested with an engine that size. Most manufacturers test with there smallest engine variant as this gives best results, due to more crushable absorbing space.
Dale487 said:
MDMetal said:
Feels like the stars should stay for actual structual and safety features and another system should be added for safety enhancing aids, my 350z sure doesn't have any radar, breaking or other crap like that and I'd never buy a car based on having those fetaures, having bad airbags or structual failings should be highlighted more seriously. Surely any Dacia must score low based on lack of tech even if it's structually sound and safe in a crash?
I think that the NCAP test should be split in 2 - a rating for how good a car behaves in a crash & what I assume is a tick box exercise in crash preventing technology (which they as far I can see isn't test to check if it works or throws up dangerous false activations).On the subject of NCAP ratings swing buying decisions - I wouldn't have bought my Leon if it wasn't a 5* car but that's more to do with that being expected in the class than being a real deal swinger. Plus the Leon is marginally better NCAP performancer than the more expensive Areca I was looking at (which the sales material goes on about how good NCAP performance it has).
Audi dealers got into a whole hill of trouble as the A5 wasn't NCAP tested & were stating that as it's the same platform as the A4 they would perform the same in a crash (which could be true).
But any cars you really want (911, Ferrari etc) aren't even NCAP tested - I bet a M4 & C63 are the most expensive cars that can make NCAP claims.
wst said:
Seatbelt pretensioning can be irritating as all hell if it's overzealous. I sometimes have to wait for my seatbelts to unlock if I've braked a bit harder than strictly necessary to stop on the line for a junction, because the lock is preventing me from leaning forwards to get a better left/right view.
Maybe it can be made less overzealous now it can know that you're not actually headed for an impact, just braking hard.
That's not what the pre-tensioners are, I think you're mixing up the pre-tensioner with the bit that locks the belt when you move quickly (the inertia reel I believe) - this bit is really just for heavy braking etc.Maybe it can be made less overzealous now it can know that you're not actually headed for an impact, just braking hard.
If you trigger pre-tensioners you'll know about it as small explosive charges detonate and pull the belt in tightly around you, any harder impact and you'll probably get the airbags out as well.
Overall, I'm pleased that they've improved the rating, although it's still not great due to the rear belts issue. The two star rating genuinely would have stopped me buying the car (if I had the money) as I just think it's utterly unacceptable for a company like Ford to put in such a poor show. Now they've fixed the airbags, I'd probably have one
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff