It's a common misconception that car crash safety stagnated during the 1980s, that there was little if any progress between the late 1970s, when the last of the first round of federal safety standards were passed, and the early 1990s, with its widespread adoption of airbags. Many even think that the heavy, body-on-frame cars of the 1970s are safer than the lighter unibody cars that became common in the 1980s.
For this post, we're calling the 1980s period September 1, 1979 to August 31, 1989. That is because model years typically start around September 1, so this covers the 1980 to 1989 model years.
Before the decade, 1960s brought us seat belts, first in lap form then in 3-point form by the end of the decade; the 1970s brought a whole raft of federal safety standards covering rollover, fuel tank integrity in rear impacts, and even rudimentary side impact standards.
But the 1980s had a lot of gains in frontal crashworthiness; at the time, a majority of crash deaths were from frontal impacts, so these gains went a long way, even if safety in other areas (such as side-impact) stagnated.
The "Democratization of Safety"
Going into the 1980 model year, cars that did more than the bare minimum on safety were a rarity. If you wanted something truly designed to protect you in a crash, you emptied your wallet for an expensive Volvo, Saab, Mercedes, BMW, or you paid an arm and a leg in gas with an American land yacht. (Remember, these were the fuel crisis years!) And even those were a gamble; consumers were left in the dark as to which cars actually lived up to their safety reputations. They had no idea that a 1980 Cadillac Seville really was one of the safest cars of the era, but the larger Dodge St. Regis was an absolute death trap. Or that a Chevy Chevette actually gave you a fighting chance, but a Honda (or most Japanese imports) meant a much higher chance of death in a high-speed front crash.
On October 15, 1979, the first NHTSA NCAP crash test results were released, and by the end of calendar year 1980, the vast majority of the car market was covered. For the first time, consumers knew which of those cars would protect them in crashes vs. which skated by the bare minimum standards. By the mid-1980s, all results would be released by the end of the model year, meaning all but the earliest adopters of a new design could easily see how safe it was in front crashes. Carmakers raced to improve performance in these tests.
The average 1979-1980 car had an average severe injury risk of 48% in this test (driver 46%, passenger 50%). The average 1988-1989 car had improved to 22% (driver 27%, passenger 17%)
(With trucks, vans and SUVs included in the 1988-1989 group, this number is 28% (driver 33%, passenger 23%). These vehicles had to meet lower safety standards prior to the 1990s, and were not even tested by NHTSA prior to 1983.
The Japanese Start Paying Attention to Crashworthiness
In 1979-1980, the average American passenger car had an average risk to occupants of 35% (driver 35%, passenger 34%) in the NHTSA NCAP test.. The average Japanese car was at 71% (driver 63%, passenger 79%). By 1988-1989, the Americans had improved to 20% (driver 26%, passenger 14%), while the Japanese had made massive improvements, to 18% (driver 23%, passenger 14%)! This means that while American cars had a 43% drop in relative risk, which is already pretty impressive, Japanese cars fell by 75%! Front passengers in Japanese cars' relative risk dropped by a whopping 82% on average!
(Note: these numbers don't include trucks, vans, and SUVs. Japanese-made captive imports, such as the Dodge Colt, are considered as Japanese)
This means that the gap had been fully closed. A little Japanese econobox was just as well-designed as an American land yacht to keep you safe in a crash.
The Safety Features That Made This Possible
Late 1980s cars typically offered few new high-profile safety features over their early 1980s counterparts. What did change was how well-implemented those features were. Crumple zones were beginning to become more common in the late 1970s, with a few mid-priced American designs such as the Chevy Citation adopting them. By the end of the 1980s, almost all cars had them, even if the only companies to give them widespread advertising were the traditional 'safety leaders' like Volvo and Mercedes. Crumple zones both limited intrusion and reduced the G loading on the passenger compartment, meaning the restraints didn't have to work as hard.
Seat belt retractors also improved during the 1980s. Early seat belts usually stretched too much and/or locked too late, allowing the dummies to violently strike the steering wheel and dashboard. By the late 1980s, seat belts were designed to lock much faster under hard deceleration, limiting movement and the force of impact against the steering wheel and dashboard.
Airbags were still very rare even at the end of the 1980s. Less than 10% of the 1988-1989 car models tested (5 of 52) had a driver airbag, and only one had a passenger airbag.
Improvement Was Greater for Passengers Than Drivers
You may notice that the level of improvement for passengers was greater than for drivers. While drivers had a 41% drop in relative risk (46% -> 27%), passengers enjoyed a massive 66% drop (50% -> 17%). This is because there is sufficient room for a seat belt alone to slow a dummy down from 35mph to 0 without striking the dashboard on the passenger side, and the dashboard can be extensively padded on the passenger side; the best-performing vehicles often used a combination of a well-designed seat belt and a well-padded dash. The steering wheel is far closer, and can only be padded to a limited extent (unless you use some type of inflatable barrier, aka the biggest safety gain of the 1990s)
Comments
Post a Comment