Just out of curiosity I looked up the crash test ratings of the 1993 Volvo 240 compared to my more modern VW Beetle and Volvo 850.
From the front impacts, the cars are 'OK' Side impacts is where the 240s shine.
http://www.autobuyguide.com/1993/12-aut/volvo/240/crash-tests/index.html
Meanwhile, my Volvo 850 which has both driver and passenger air bags got the same rating:
http://www.autobuyguide.com/1994/12-aut/volvo/850/crash-tests/index.html
My VW Beetle which has drivers/passenger and side airbags did worse than both Volvos:
http://www.autobuyguide.com/1999/12-aut/volkswagen/beetle/crash-tests/index.html
The 2008 Volvo S60 gets the same rating numbers as my Beetle, surprisingly:
http://www.autobuyguide.com/2008/12-aut/volvo/s60/crash-tests/index.html
I guess my point is that the onboard safety equipment doesn't always tell the story. The local news is featuring the fire department talking about how some of the newer cars like the Volvo XC90 are made out of Boron steel and it's hard for them to cut into those vehicles to extract people at an accident scene. Plus with all the airbags everywhere, they can trigger them while cutting the vehicle, further injuring the people inside.
So in summary, the 240s are antiquated in terms of modern safety features, but they still have really favorable crash test ratings. Better than most present day cars, surprisingly enough.
|