Jeep Wrangler Forum

Jeep Wrangler Forum (http://www.wranglerforum.com/)
-   JK General Discussion Forum (http://www.wranglerforum.com/f274/)
-   -   Latest IIHS "Small Overlap" Crash Test (http://www.wranglerforum.com/f274/latest-iihs-small-overlap-crash-test-243011.html)

aypanthony 05-16-2013 09:37 AM

Latest IIHS "Small Overlap" Crash Test
 
Just wanted to post this, since many people are concerned with safety. I thought the JK did fairly well considering the extreme nature of the test. I assume they didn't use the hardtop, since this would represent the worst case scenario.

IIHS-HLDI: Jeep Wrangler 2-door

legitposter 05-16-2013 09:55 AM

So what they're saying is dont get into a massive accident in any vehicle. Thanks IIHS, got it!

panthermark 05-16-2013 10:09 AM

Wow, the 4 door did pretty good in the moderate catagory.

IIHS-HLDI: Jeep Wrangler 4-door

I'd like to see the side impact numbers with airbags.

David M 05-16-2013 10:52 AM

Here are the videos...

2013 Jeep Wrangler 2-door 40 mph small overlap front test

Overall evaluation: Marginal

2013 Jeep Wrangler 2-door small overlap test - YouTube


2008 Jeep Wrangler 4-door 40 mph moderate overlap front test

Overall evaluation: Good

2008 Jeep Wrangler 4-door moderate overlap test - YouTube

Lynskey 05-16-2013 10:57 AM

Why is the 2-door hitting a virtual steel corner and the 4-door hitting a padded corner? Totally different materials?

legitposter 05-16-2013 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lynskey (Post 3761729)
Why is the 2-door hitting a virtual steel corner and the 4-door hitting a padded corner? Totally different materials?

Because drivers of 2 doors tend to drive in areas with steel beside the roadway while drivers of 4 doors tend to drive in areas with padding along the roadway.

panthermark 05-16-2013 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lynskey (Post 3761729)
Why is the 2-door hitting a virtual steel corner and the 4-door hitting a padded corner? Totally different materials?

I don't think it is padded, but no matter what, they are different tests. One is a small overlay (2 door, almost glances), the other is a moderate overlay (4 door, about half of the front end impacts).

cosmos 05-16-2013 11:37 AM

so if you think you might hit something, don't clip it, ram it. Noted.

aypanthony 05-16-2013 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by panthermark (Post 3761752)
I don't think it is padded, but no matter what, they are different tests. One is a small overlay (2 door, almost glances), the other is a moderate overlay (4 door, about half of the front end impacts).

Yes, different tests. IIHS hasn't released the small overlap results for the JKU yet. It should perform similarly, I would guess.

Lynskey 05-16-2013 11:51 AM

Ah I didin't catch the 2 different test types. I thought they were the same and questioned the padding difference.

aypanthony 05-16-2013 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmos (Post 3761897)
so if you think you might hit something, don't clip it, ram it. Noted.

Yes. The small overlap test is difficult for vehicles to do well on because the barrier impact bypass's many of the crash hardened areas of a vehicle. Vehicles that historically received 5 star ratings, are failing this test.

hayoCT 05-16-2013 12:40 PM

So would aftermarket fender flares take the brunt of the force shown in the small overlap test any better than the Mopars?

aypanthony 05-16-2013 12:45 PM

I would think that metal flares would be ripped off in the same manner.

However, a heavy duty full width winch bumper may help deflect some of the impact.

RaiderRUBICON 05-16-2013 01:25 PM

A Rubicon would of scored higher.





lol

NFRs2000NYC 05-16-2013 01:28 PM

Would love to see them test a COD model or something like it, and see how different the results are with a steel bumper.

jkmohican 05-16-2013 01:40 PM

I think that with a full size metal bumper, the jeep itself will be better "looking" but their will be more damage, due to the lack of Cushioning that the stock bumper provides. All the energy that the metal bumper will see will get transferred to the body and people inside the jeep due to the metal not "crushing" so the energy isn't absorbed, causing more integral damage to the jeep, as opposed to the soft stock bumper that will absorb more of the force, so it may look worse, but you as a person will be better off.

Ivoryring 05-16-2013 01:43 PM

Watch the video of the small overlap - the bumper contact looks like it is in the 'all plastic' portion, so nearly entire impact looks to be borne by the driver side tire/axle/control arms. The impact point on this test looks like it is intended to be '25% of the front cross section'... and since most of that 25% is just the fender flare, which hardly counts as 'crumple zone'... the impact edge is just a few inches into the grill, and by my eye it looks like the hood and side act don't crumple so much as they act as a wedge creating a passenger-wards force overall.

Looking at this really makes me think a full width steel bumper would make a big difference in this type of crash. The energy it takes to destroy the bumper should mean there is less available to make it into the occupant space.

NFRs2000NYC 05-16-2013 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkmohican (Post 3762296)
I think that with a full size metal bumper, the jeep itself will be better "looking" but their will be more damage, due to the lack of Cushioning that the stock bumper provides. All the energy that the metal bumper will see will get transferred to the body and people inside the jeep due to the metal not "crushing" so the energy isn't absorbed, causing more integral damage to the jeep, as opposed to the soft stock bumper that will absorb more of the force, so it may look worse, but you as a person will be better off.

This would be true if the Jeep struck a solid object like a giant rock. I'd say 90% of things hit (the entire point of the offset test if for oncoming traffic accidents) are "crushable" like other vehicles...in which case, the crushing forces will be multiplied and transferred to the other object like the other car.

NFRs2000NYC 05-16-2013 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivoryring (Post 3762308)
Watch the video of the small overlap - the bumper contact looks like it is in the 'all plastic' portion, so nearly entire impact looks to be borne by the driver side tire/axle/control arms. The impact point on this test looks like it is intended to be '25% of the front cross section'... and since most of that 25% is just the fender flare, which hardly counts as 'crumple zone'... the impact edge is just a few inches into the grill, and by my eye it looks like the hood and side act don't crumple so much as they act as a wedge creating a passenger-wards force overall.

Looking at this really makes me think a full width steel bumper would make a big difference in this type of crash. The energy it takes to destroy the bumper should mean there is less available to make it into the occupant space.

The minor offset test looks like it is completely outside the driver's side frame rail, meaning, there is zero crumple protection there.

Ivoryring 05-16-2013 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkmohican (Post 3762296)
I think that with a full size metal bumper, the jeep itself will be better "looking" but their will be more damage, due to the lack of Cushioning that the stock bumper provides. All the energy that the metal bumper will see will get transferred to the body and people inside the jeep due to the metal not "crushing" so the energy isn't absorbed, causing more integral damage to the jeep, as opposed to the soft stock bumper that will absorb more of the force, so it may look worse, but you as a person will be better off.

"All the energy" is only true if the metal bumper doesn't deform at all. The goal of crumple/crush zones is to shed as much energy in the crush/crumple action as possible so that a lower portion makes it to the occupants. In a crash "paper thin" and "rock solid" are both bad ends of the spectrum... a happy middle in between is what is needed.

Obviously IIHS performs these tests to get controlled samples rather than relying on real world varying crashes.

I would be interested in seeing shots of full offroad bumpers after actual crashes and/or animal impacts - I'm sure that the ends, hanging out past the frame rails do get crushed.

jkmohican 05-16-2013 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ivoryring (Post 3762329)

"All the energy" is only true if the metal bumper doesn't deform at all. The goal of crumple/crush zones is to shed as much energy in the crush/crumple action as possible so that a lower portion makes it to the occupants. In a crash "paper thin" and "rock solid" are both bad ends of the spectrum... a happy middle in between is what is needed.

This is true. The metal bumper will "crush" and "crumple" but only so much. I, for example, have a Full width 85lb steel bumper with a short stinger. The design of the bumper is pretty easy to figure out. It has weak spots all along certain areas that are most likely prone to an accident (sides) and can crush, leaving less energy for me (driver) to absorb. But with some bumpers, at least from a physics stand point, they are just blocks of steel, in which case, "all the energy" goes to YOU and the body of the jeep. But I agree, a well sculpted metal bumper will be the best bet, because the plastic bumper will crush too much, and a big metal block bumper won't crush at all.

BacaraJKU 05-16-2013 03:09 PM

Side impact is way better than I had expected. Good to see since I normally have the kids in the car.

JKWrangler2012 05-16-2013 08:14 PM

I hope I'm wearing eye protection if I ever get tboned. Sheech that's a lot of glass!

dieselgiant 05-17-2013 05:55 AM

Remember though its trail rated.......


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:31 PM.