Wheels 'Ford Mustang V8 scores ‘poor’ 2-star safety rating'

[GAFA]

Official statement from Ford below. As it state below without all the automatic safety techniolgy fitted, the highest rating any car can archive is 2 stars.

The Australian automotive magazines/ web sites were in a rush to post the 2 star rating (negative), but don't seem to be in a rush to post the statement below which contains the FACTS.


Statement by Ford on Mustang crash testing.
Statement:

· Mustang is a safe car meeting, or exceeding, all applicable safety standards globally. We are disappointed by the Ford Mustang Euro NCAP and ANCAP ratings.

· Mustang’s safety credentials are demonstrated by the five-star NHTSA NCAP rating awarded in the US as well as a ‘good’ IIHS rating.

· ANCAP adopted the Euro-NCAP result for the Mustang and both the E-NCAP and ANCAP results were published simultaneously on Wednesday 25 January. Mustang was tested under that latest E-NCAP protocol which is significantly more rigorous than previous protocols. Under this protocol, the maximum rating Mustang can receive, without Drivers Assistance Technologies such as Autonomous Emergency Breaking (AEB), is two stars.

· The Euro NCAP rating is based on four pillars (Adult Occupant Protection, Child Occupant Protection, Pedestrian Protection and Safety Assist), with a very strong focus on family car and SUV safety characteristics and specific safety assist features, which are usually not part of the standard equipment of cars in the Mustang category.

· The latest Euro NCAP protocol overall rating is based on 4 pillars and the results for Mustang are:
o Pedestrian Protection: five-stars (64%). The Mustang is equipped with a state of the art pop-up hood, which actively reduces the risk of injury to pedestrians.
o Adult Occupant: Four-stars (72%). ANCAP comments that in the frontal offset test the driver’s head contacted the steering wheel and the passenger’s head contacted the dashboard. Despite this, the dummy head injury values for Mustang shown in the ANCAP Technical Report for the Frontal Offset Test are still very low. The ANCAP Technical Report states for injury outcomes in the frontal offset test, driver and front passenger neck protection is rated as green/good and head protection is rated as yellow/acceptable. In the full width frontal test, the driver’s head and neck protection is rated as green/good. The overall adult occupant protection for Mustang rated by ANCAP using the latest Euro NCAP protocol is ‘acceptable’ (four-stars).
o Child Occupant: Three-stars (32%). Euro NCAP has a very strong focus on family car safety characteristics. The child occupant tests are focused on children of 10 years and younger (or equal to 140 cm and below). An important element of the Euro NCAP child safety rating includes elements such as ease of ingress/egress of the child seat, an area where 2-door coupes have a disadvantage.
o Safety Assistance Features: Two-stars (16%). Euro NCAP has a strong focus on specific safety assist features, which the Mustang is not currently equipped with in Australia such as Autonomous Emergency Braking. The two-star result (16%) in the Active Safety Assist pillar for not offering DATs such as AEB, determined the overall result of a two-star rating.


· Ford is committed to continued improvement in vehicle safety, and the 2018 Mustang in Australia will be equipped with driver assistance features such as AEB and Lane Keeping Aid.

· Mustang is the only vehicle in the sports car class to be tested under the rigorous new E-NCAP protocol.

· The Mustang features a suite of advanced safety features as standard including an ‘active’ pop-up bonnet, as well as driver and front passenger airbags, driver and front passenger knee airbags. It also offers standard curtain airbags, and driver/passenger side impact airbags. A Driver and front passenger seatbelt reminder system is standard.

Thanks,
Marty

---
Martin Günsberg
Ford Australia Communications | Ford Motor Company

[asagaai]

Originally Posted by GAFA

Official statement from Ford below. As it state below without all the automatic safety techniolgy fitted, the highest rating any car can archive is 2 stars.

o Adult Occupant: Four-stars (72%). ANCAP comments that in the frontal offset test the driver’s head contacted the steering wheel and the passenger’s head contacted the dashboard. Despite this, the dummy head injury values for Mustang shown in the ANCAP Technical Report for the Frontal Offset Test are still very low. The ANCAP Technical Report states for injury outcomes in the frontal offset test, driver and front passenger neck protection is rated as green/good and head protection is rated as yellow/acceptable. In the full width frontal test, the driver’s head and neck protection is rated as green/good. The overall adult occupant protection for Mustang rated by ANCAP using the latest Euro NCAP protocol is ‘acceptable’ (four-stars).

Thanks,
Marty

---
Martin Günsberg
Ford Australia Communications | Ford Motor Company

Well- from my perspective the fact that driver and passengers heads hit steering wheel/dashboard and fact that in pole collision integrity of door is compromised is not good enough in a world sports car 2017.

If I am going to roll $70,000 of my money (with tax say gross earnings $110,000) for a sports car, it better have airbags that prevent head strikes in frontals, and doors that do not spring in the pole/side impact tests.

I personally am not fussed about all the other electronic crap, will rely on my awareness and driving skills.

But fundamental strong structure and airbags that work to me, I now place a premium on if I am going to buy a new car costing $70,000.

[Sprint XR8]

If the dummies heads bottomed out during the Front Offset test like ANCAP claim the Head Injury Count figure should be much higher.

Mustang Front Offset test 64km/h. Driver HIC 93. Front Passenger HIC 244

For comparison
Falcon 2008 Front Offset test 64km/h. Driver HIC 201. Front Passenger HIC 282

ANCAP state a HIC of 650 = 5% chance of injury and a HIC of 1000 = 20% chance of injury.

[HO 3]

^^^^^^^^^Something mysteriously tells me that commitment to vehicle safety for the upcoming 2018 model (typically released in Aug 2017) is now very suddenly energetic................very poor form Ford. Just a general coment from a Ford indoctrinated family that find themselves unable to gloss over a such a poor result in its entirety and not in isolation as some have chosen to do.

Cheers Mick

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Brazen

The safety requirements are pretty much identical for structural worthiness. It actually looks like Falcon would of scored close to 5 stars under the new regime too.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.ancap.co...pdf?1417387331

http://www.ancap.com.au/future-requirements

as more details emerge, we learn that ANCAP didn't actually test the car but just adopted the E-NCAP rating. All well and good if they are singing from the same hymn sheet... but they aren't.

one glaring difference is the rear seat scores. It would appear from the link that falcon rear seat occupancy wasn't tested. only driver and front passenger. while mustang driver and front passenger weren't quite to the same level in some areas, (head and legs mainly) they still passed with 'adequate' rating. the rear seat score is what dragged it down.

Originally Posted by Sprint XR8

If the dummies heads bottomed out during the Front Offset test like ANCAP claim the Head Injury Count figure should be much higher.

Mustang Front Offset test 64km/h. Driver HIC 93. Front Passenger HIC 244

For comparison
Falcon 2008 Front Offset test 64km/h. Driver HIC 201. Front Passenger HIC 282

ANCAP state a HIC of 650 = 5% chance of injury and a HIC of 1000 = 20% chance of injury.

so if i'm reading that correctly, a lower score is better?? if that is the case then its clearly another area where the goal posts have moved, or E-NCAP differs from ANCAP.

also, mustang is the only car of its type to be tested under this new regime, which is openly admitted to being geared more toward suv/passenger type vehicles. i wonder if this also means they have changed some of the testing protocols and procedures?

either way, its not surprising the media have held back on the facts in order to create a headline.

[.:4:.]

I still much prefer the human eyesight crash avoidance system

[prydey]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

I still much prefer the human eyesight crash avoidance system

like most technology, many people don't accept it immediately. they see it as 'dumbing down' or an attack on their skillset.

the reality is, a computer will generally always outperform a human in crash avoidance. vision is limited to a certain range, both in distance and angle. using multiple sensors around the car, the computer has a much wider range of perception and feedback.

these systems are what is improving the fatality rates on our roads. the powers that be will like to tell you that its human behaviour that is changing, but guess what, human behaviour doesn't change. Cars are safer now due to computers, and thankfully its only getting better.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by prydey

like most technology, many people don't accept it immediately. they see it as 'dumbing down' or an attack on their skillset.

the reality is, a computer will generally always outperform a human in crash avoidance. vision is limited to a certain range, both in distance and angle. using multiple sensors around the car, the computer has a much wider range of perception and feedback.

these systems are what is improving the fatality rates on our roads. the powers that be will like to tell you that its human behaviour that is changing, but guess what, human behaviour doesn't change. Cars are safer now due to computers, and thankfully its only getting better.

I personally like to drive a car with some safety systems. My first car even had airbags and abs. My first work car had door locks. Atleast the new work car has some systems in place. I still prefer to drive in such a fashion that I don't kill myself

[XR6_power]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

I personally like to drive a car with some safety systems. My first car even had airbags and abs. My first work car had door locks. Atleast the new work car has some systems in place. I still prefer to drive in such a fashion that I don't kill myself

+1

You can be as careful a driver as you like, with a perfect driving record, it's not to say someone else is not going to run into you. I think in that situation, anyone is going to give thanks they have a safer car. Falcon's 5 star ANCAP rating certainly gave me some extra ammo when I nagged the wife into us buying the new FG II XR6 three years ago...

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by malazn mafia

That's what I want to know. If the FG-X or VF Commodore doors flew open in a pole test or the dummy bashed his head on the steering wheel before it inflated, the whole rating system is a farce, like the stupid 'moose test'. Isn't the whole point to avoid swerving or hitting poles in the first place?

The Mustang for didn't "fly open", nor did the dummy's "bash their heads" on the steering wheel read the breakdown of the details and you'll see those results were "adequate" !

The HIC scores for both airbag "issues" are better than Falcon.

Fear mongering is all I see in the detail compared to the stories here and in the media.

Some of this sounds like "Fake news"

[lra]

Mr. Ford ...... you have plenty of money, and a reputation to protect, so here is an idea.

Grab a couple of RHD Mustangs off the line, put them on plane to Oz, subject them to the same ANCAP test and ratings as was conducted on the Falcon (May ’13) and Commodore( Nov ’14) then put up the results, and for good measure a Monaro ( Dec ’05)

Forget about current driver electronic aids to avoid the crash, just assume that the worst has happened, and concentrate on structural integrity and passenger protection.

If it is better, then you safely state that the current Mustang is way safer than a 10 -15 year old design. If it is not better, then continue with your vague PC BS to excuse the situation and baffle the critics.

This saga is typical of Aus and US mentality, talk about it, point fingers, and obfuscate. I’ll bet that Jap and Korean manufacturers would have been more proactive about it by now.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by lra

Mr. Ford ...... you have plenty of money, and a reputation to protect, so here is an idea.

Grab a couple of RHD Mustangs off the line, put them on plane to Oz, subject them to the same ANCAP test and ratings as was conducted on the Falcon (May ’13) and Commodore( Nov ’14) then put up the results, and for good measure a Monaro ( Dec ’05)

Forget about current driver electronic aids to avoid the crash, just assume that the worst has happened, and concentrate on structural integrity and passenger protection.

If it is better, then you safely state that the current Mustang is way safer than a 10 -15 year old design. If it is not better, then continue with your vague PC BS to excuse the situation and baffle the critics.

The tests have not changed.

To get a 5 star rating you need one more price of safety assisted technology since 2015 you need 5 instead 6 e.g. Auto headlights or rear view camera. Falcon has 7, but still I'm betting would of lost a star here.

The occupants in the Mustang smacked their heads on the steering wheel and dashboard and rear seat occupants would sustain serious injuries. The door also popped open during side impact. This would of happened whether it was 2015,16 or 17 tests.

[Stefan]

Meh, yank cars....is there any surprise that there a quality in design issues.

They are a cheap POS car over there. We just go gaga over it, thinking it is exotic.

Sad that any cheap Korean grocery getter would likely blitz the "deigned and made in the USA, by Americans car" in design, fit, finish and even safety.

Yanks can't build a car any better than we can...that is the sad reality.

[GTP534]

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

The Mustang for didn't "fly open", nor did the dummy's "bash their heads" on the steering wheel read the breakdown of the details and you'll see those results were "adequate" !

The HIC scores for both airbag "issues" are better than Falcon.

Fear mongering is all I see in the detail compared to the stories here and in the media.

Some of this sounds like "Fake news"

You trying to "Trump" the Fake News purveyors"? Lol!

They won't let the facts get in the way of being sensationalist. The damage is done though in the way the Mustang has been portrayed - ANCAP didn't explain the differences and all the general public will see is 2 stars.

It's a bit more objective over on Mustang6G.

[uniacidz]

Dunno of link posted but a response from Ford

http://www.motoring.com.au/ford-says...g-safe-105638/






Sent via my ASUS ZE551ML

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Brazen

The occupants in the Mustang smacked their heads on the steering wheel and dashboard and rear seat occupants would sustain serious injuries. The door also popped open during side impact. This would of happened whether it was 2015,16 or 17 tests.

its been mentioned a couple of times already, but just in case you missed it, the head injury scores for mustang were LOWER than falcon!

how did falcon rear seat passengers fare? oh, look, they weren't tested. Also falcon does NOT have AEB(autonomous electronic braking) which is key to getting above 2 or 3 stars in the ENCAP score.

facts people, look at the facts, not the 'stories'!

[Sprint XR8]

Journo Boy's never going to drive a Mustang again.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/517368/i...mustang-again/

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by prydey

its been mentioned a couple of times already, but just in case you missed it, the head injury scores for mustang were LOWER than falcon!

how did falcon rear seat passengers fare? oh, look, they weren't tested. Also falcon does NOT have AEB(autonomous electronic braking) which is key to getting above 2 or 3 stars in the ENCAP score.

facts people, look at the facts, not the 'stories'!

Who do you think you are coming in here with your common sense, the natives are restless, they don't want common sense they want a lynching god dammit

[Nikked]

One thing this article has done, is separate those who read headlines and comment with the range of "american rubbish/falcon and or Australian cars are better/plastic carp" dribble...

And those who read articles, and cut through the media's fecial matter.

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by Stefan

Meh, yank cars....is there any surprise that there a quality in design issues.

They are a cheap POS car over there. We just go gaga over it, thinking it is exotic.

Sad that any cheap Korean grocery getter would likely blitz the "deigned and made in the USA, by Americans car" in design, fit, finish and even safety.

Yanks can't build a car any better than we can...that is the sad reality.

You just read the headlines then!

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Stefan

Meh, yank cars....is there any surprise that there a quality in design issues.

They are a cheap POS car over there. We just go gaga over it, thinking it is exotic.

Sad that any cheap Korean grocery getter would likely blitz the "deigned and made in the USA, by Americans car" in design, fit, finish and even safety.

Yanks can't build a car any better than we can...that is the sad reality.

Mate stop reading headlines and quotes and get into the detail of the test results and the regime used in this example.

If you were intelligent (after doing that) your response above may have been different.

[Dr Smith]

A Mustang released in 2014 gets a low rating in a 2016 criteria test...doesn't sound like a headline that would pack as much punch.

I wonder if anyone knows that heavier rear seat dummies are used in today's test compared to US tests, or that full frontal impact and a higher crash speed wasn't employed a few years ago either....

Of course all cars should have 5 star ratings , unfortunately one needs to research the facts to get a full understanding and as yet no online article has even gone close.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Sprint XR8

Journo Boy's never going to drive a Mustang again.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/517368/i...mustang-again/

Click bait pseudo Journalist.

No research no facts other than quotes from someone else's press release.

This guy is not a journo ( he's a disgrace to that profession ), he's a fraud.

I'm all ears if he goes through the details, specs, procedures, and results - but he won't.

Any ****** on the Internet can write crap like that.

[asagaai]

Looking at the Ancap results for Falcon FG- which has been rolled into FGX.

Side impact test at 50 kph -Driver-HIC 117

Test data on Ford Mustang- side impact test at 50 kph-Driver-HIC 74.

The lower the HIC the better.

Following is portion of a table from ANCAP explaining HIC data:

Measurement :

Good <750

Acceptable 750-899

Marginal 900-999

Poor 1000 or more

So based on this data, Mustang performs slightly better than Falcon FGX in frontal offset (as Sprint XR8 pointed out) AND in side impact testing at 50 kph.

The more one digs into these articles the less the rating of 2 makes sense in real terms. About the door latch popping, I now wonder just what that actually meant......in real terms

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by asagaai

Looking at the Ancap results for Falcon FG- which has been rolled into FGX.

Side impact test at 50 kph -Driver-HIC 117

Test data on Ford Mustang- side impact test at 50 kph-Driver-HIC 74.

The lower the HIC the better.

Following is portion of a table from ANCAP explaining HIC data:

Measurement :

Good <750

Acceptable 750-899

Marginal 900-999

Poor 1000 or more

So based on this data, Mustang performs slightly better than Falcon FGX in frontal offset (as Sprint XR8 pointed out) AND in side impact testing at 50 kph.

The more one digs into these articles the less the rating of 2 makes sense in real terms. About the door latch popping, I now wonder just what that actually meant......in real terms

Thank you !

Now we just need idiots like Maric to do the same research.

[five 7]

How do half of you get out of bed in the morning, your so worried about safety. Just drive what makes you smile the most. Safety never enters my mind when i drive my every day car (57 ford warm clevo drum brakes and a spear for a steering column) because I'm to busy smiling. Just be happy we have Mustangs for sale, i bet the biggest whingers will never buy one yet moan about it. Have fun in your kia/daewoo safety capsule, while out shopping for cheap gas haha.
And yup i'm in the process of buying a pos Mustang.
Cheers...

[P6LTD351]

Originally Posted by five 7

How do half of you get out of bed in the morning, your so worried about safety. Just drive what makes you smile the most. Safety never enters my mind when i drive my every day car (57 ford warm clevo drum brakes and a spear for a steering column) because I'm to busy smiling. Just be happy we have Mustangs for sale, i bet the biggest whingers will never buy one yet moan about it. Have fun in your kia/daewoo safety capsule, while out shopping for cheap gas haha.
And yup i'm in the process of buying a pos Mustang.
Cheers...

THIS x 10000000000

It's as if the lefties have even taken over the car enthusiast scene!!! Who gives a toss about safety in cars like these!!!

[GTP534]

^^^^^ It's not that we don't give a toss about safety. The Mustang is a safe car, it's the lack of objectivity in the journalism that's annoying. That guy Maric, he's a first class idiot. If he doesn't want to drive a Mustang fine, just don't tell me I have no conscience by driving mine.

There is no comparable vehicle to compare the Mustang against yet, the ANCAP Chief should be ashamed of himself for the way he has gone about this with no explanation of the facts. It's as though he's got his panties in a knot over Ford not obliging to hand over a Mustang and made it a vendetta.

It's also misleading on the ANCAP website where the Mustang is there with 2 stars and some other cars below it with 5; looks bad. But when one looks at the details behind the ratings there are some massive differences between them.

[CyberWasp]

How does rear passenger or ratings for child protection even come into the equation when buying a Mustang?

The Rating System is clearly broke and needs fixing as a 5 Star System is for buying Fridges not Cars.

[roddy1960]

G'day...Did anyone see the European crash testing NCAP video on the Stang...Anyone who wants to I've put a link over in the Videos Thread. On ther front impact the doors didn't seem to pop though..Actually didn't look too bad to be honest...Cheers Rod