[quirkySquirt]

Front:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv4_uqHM-gg

Side impact with pole:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oV2qnF87RI

I especially like that the window wipers are tested to make sure they work after the side impact. Whimsical.

Edit: Nevermind, looks like the wipers came on from the impact. Not as whimsical. Really digging the matte white interior, though.

 

[acarney]

I would love to see the small overlap front test...

 

[Splitting Atoms]

Results sure do look good. That pole test is brutal. I watched some other videos (like the XC90) and the Volt seems to do excellently here.

 

[Splitting Atoms]

I would love to see the small overlap front test...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8ia_MPTQrc

IIHS did that for us!

 

[Bullyveldt]

I am blown away the front windshield didn't even crack in that frontal crash! Shows how well the energy was dissipated and absorbed through the structure of the car.

 

[DonC]

Agree it's amazing how much energy is absorbed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8ia_MPTQrc

IIHS did that for us!

Thanks.

 

[Qinsp]

If I remember correctly, the 2017 Volt is the only IIHS Top Safety 'Pick+' and NHTSA 5/5/5/5 Star rating out of all domestic cars so far. Only some imports scored as well.

 

[hvacman]

For the many lives that will be saved with the Volt's incredible ability to protect its occupants in dire circumstances, thank GM engineering and specifically Gen 1 and Gen 2 Volt Chief Engineer Andrew Farah.

We on the forum frequently nit-pik about various minor engineering issues, saying "the Volt is great,but I wished they'd....(fill in the feature) like ....(fill in the manufacturer)". In this most important category, GM and the Volt beats them all. There are no "buts".

 

[KenC]

Frontal crash test was very impressive. Door frames look fine. Occupants look fine. Side impact not bad as well. It would have been nice to see the footwell on the offset crash, since it looked compromised.

 

[Splitting Atoms]

Frontal crash test was very impressive. Door frames look fine. Occupants look fine. Side impact not bad as well. It would have been nice to see the footwell on the offset crash, since it looked compromised.

If you go to IIHS' website, they have measurements for everything. You can compare against other vehicles. I believe the S90 and Model S are good benchmarks to look at.

 

[Insight Refugee]

*makes mental note to reference this thread when someone complains about poor visibility due to the A-pillar.*

Not that the visibility complaints are not valid, but the tradeoff is reasonable.

 

[acarney]

*makes mental note to reference this thread when someone complains about poor visibility due to the A-pillar.*

Not that the visibility complaints are not valid, but the tradeoff is reasonable.

The offset still looks brutal, but inside it doesn't look TOO bad and the car seems to handle it pretty well. The ratings and comments are very high as well. I hope I never have to experience these "features" in real life, but I like knowing the car handles them so well!

 

[Qinsp]

*makes mental note to reference this thread when someone complains about poor visibility due to the A-pillar.*

Not that the visibility complaints are not valid, but the tradeoff is reasonable.

It depends on how many accidents reduced visibility causes.

The safest vehicle is the one that doesn't hit things. A Yugo that doesn't crash is safer than a Volvo that does.

 

[Insight Refugee]

It depends on how many accidents reduced visibility causes.

The safest vehicle is the one that doesn't hit things. A Yugo that doesn't crash is safer than a Volvo that does.

I acknowledged there is a tradeoff, but now that I'm used to the blindspot, I think that tradeoff is reasonable.

 

[Qinsp]

I acknowledged there is a tradeoff, but now that I'm used to the blindspot, I think that tradeoff is reasonable.

It's not just the Volt. This is where all are cars are going. I'm surprised you are still allowed to buy convertibles.

 

[viking79]

If you go to IIHS' website, they have measurements for everything. You can compare against other vehicles. I believe the S90 and Model S are good benchmarks to look at.

Only compare with cars of same weight.
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/deskt...results-are-relevant-to-fuel-economy-policies
I.e., A heavier car that doesn't perform great in crash tests still tends to do better in a collision with a lighter car since it won't decelerate as quickly.

 

[Qinsp]

If you go to IIHS' website, they have measurements for everything. You can compare against other vehicles. I believe the S90 and Model S are good benchmarks to look at.

Does the IIHS have a rating for the Tesla Model S? Pretty sure the 7 seater would fail the rear collision test, which is something the NHTSA does not test. Not sure the 5 seater would pass either.

 

[bro1999]

Good timing for those videos. I have a guy interested in taking over my '17 Volt lease....those vids will surely help the cause.

 

[quirkySquirt]

I am blown away the front windshield didn't even crack in that frontal crash! Shows how well the energy was dissipated and absorbed through the structure of the car.

Actually, the windshield did crack if you take a look at time 2:40 in the frontal crash video: https://youtu.be/kv4_uqHM-gg?t=160

Frontal crash test was very impressive. Door frames look fine. Occupants look fine. Side impact not bad as well. It would have been nice to see the footwell on the offset crash, since it looked compromised.

As Splitting Atoms pointed out, IIHS has more info, including photo of the front footwell: http://www.iihs.org/frontend/iihs/ratings/images/api-rating-image.ashx?id=4084&width=800

I agree that the A pillar thickness is an acceptable trade off and that the safest vehicle is one that doesn't get in crashes. However, I think the A-pillar thickness is one I can mitigate by bobbing my head about. The A-pillar really only makes thin-profile pedestrians difficult to see. A small oncoming SmartCar is not concealed by the A-pillar (tested plenty when driving through downtown Seattle, so many of those freakin' smartcars) both when oncoming and when they make right-hand turns into my lane. I can see them just fine without needing to bob my head around the A-pillar.

I like the added crash safety for the bad drivers I have no control over. Like the one today on the phone and messing with their GPS in downtown Seattle, going 20mph in a 35mph bus lane, holding up both the bus and the cars behind it trying to make a right-hand turn (bus lanes can be used for right hand turns near an intersection and are marked so).

 

[KenC]

Actually, the windshield did crack if you take a look at time 2:40 in the frontal crash video: https://youtu.be/kv4_uqHM-gg?t=160


As Splitting Atoms pointed out, IIHS has more info, including photo of the front footwell: http://www.iihs.org/frontend/iihs/ratings/images/api-rating-image.ashx?id=4084&width=800

I agree that the A pillar thickness is an acceptable trade off and that the safest vehicle is one that doesn't get in crashes. However, I think the A-pillar thickness is one I can mitigate by bobbing my head about. The A-pillar really only makes thin-profile pedestrians difficult to see. A small oncoming SmartCar is not concealed by the A-pillar (tested plenty when driving through downtown Seattle, so many of those freakin' smartcars) both when oncoming and when they make right-hand turns into my lane. I can see them just fine without needing to bob my head around the A-pillar.

I like the added crash safety for the bad drivers I have no control over. Like the one today on the phone and messing with their GPS in downtown Seattle, going 20mph in a 35mph bus lane, holding up both the bus and the cars behind it trying to make a right-hand turn (bus lanes can be used for right hand turns near an intersection and are marked so).

Thanks for the photo, exactly, what I was picturing.