From: mdm@bnr.ca (Diane MacMartin)
Subject: Re: Safety: van vs. stn.wagon
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 12:44:56 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.010431.7133@cbnewse.cb.att.com> mikec@cbnewse.cb.att.com (michael.j.clifford) writes:
>My wife and I are thinking about buying a new/used vehicle within 
>the next 1 - 2 years.  We want to buy a vehicle that has room for seven or more,
>(a must for carpooling kids to school) and has room for 4 + luggage 
>(when traveling).
...
>The main sticking point is one of safety.

We have just bought a Toyota Previa.  Our requirements were very similar
to yours.  We've had it 2 1/2 weeks now and are totally pleased with it.
The Toyota is the only minivan which meets all US govt _CAR_ safety
requirements.

Apart from that, however, when we were considering other minivans I
called the Dept of Transport (Canada) and was put in touch with the guy
who tested vehicles.  My specific concern was that the Mazda MPV and
Previa fared poorly in the 35 km/h hit a brick wall test in terms of
driver injury.  (passenger positions okay in both cases)

He told me the following:

1.  The aforementioned test is performed, and the crash dummy is
    measured for head damage.  If it rates < 1000, the vehicle passes,
    otherwise fails. He has two concerns with this test:

    a - if you're planning on hitting a stationary item head on, this
        may correlate directly to your risk of injury; otherwise, too
        many factors apply to who is injured and how;

    b - the 1000 number is purely arbitrary.  Some people will survive
        with no damage the equivalent of a 2000 crash; some will be
        fatal with a 200.  It all depends on the person's skull.

2.  The safest place to be in a collision is in a larger vehicle, in
    general, regardless of whatever other constructs the manufacturer
    imposes on it.

    I figure that in a van/minivan, you are likely to be above the
    center of gravity of the other vehicle, and that probably in itself
    adds to the safety.

3.  The one factor that is NOT measured in terms of injury risk in
    collisions is the driver.  According to statistics alone, the most
    risk in terms of fatality is the Corvette, the safest is the Volvo
    station wagon.  However, of course the stats are skewed because a
    person who is safety conscious will be driving a "safer" car;
    that does NOT mean the Corvette is inherently built less safe than
    the Volvo.

His conclusion was that he could not really give me any recommendation
one way or another as to which vehicle is "safer" - they all have to
pass safety standards one way or another.   Perhaps you would have a
US govt safety expert to contact.

Hope this helps.

I would also like to mention this:  we just went from a 7-passenger
wagon to the Previa.  Of course, we considered another wagon but found
that station wagons are generally more expensive than minivans.  The
rear two positions usually face backwards causing fights as to who has
to / gets to sit backwards; the space is usually too small for adults,
anyway.  With 7-passenger seating there is NO room whatsover for even a
cooler.

The Previa has the most room behind the rear seats of the minivans we
examined, except for the Grand Voyager (which has a much larger
exterior).  Even with 7 passengers, there is plenty of space for other
stuff (school bags, coolers, luggage, etc.).  More leg room for the
passengers than the Mazda MPV.

-- 
Diane MacMartin       Bell-Northern Research, Ltd     Ottawa, Canada
mdm@bnr.ca            Any opinions are my own and do not represent BNR.
=========>> If this is printed on paper, please recycle it <<==========

Newsgroups: rec.autos