2012 Camaro is First Car to Ace All NHTSA Crash Tests

[khalsa013]

nice makes me feel much better............onstar+good rating= not injured

[a1cmatt]

some other crash test gone horrible.

http://www.youtube.com/user/CarPro19.../2/XHFsmsGPDVc

http://www.youtube.com/user/CarPro19.../0/VZ0b_jAshl8

[CAPT D]

These cars are built like tanks. I like how some of the test cars have the stripe package on them as well.

[RocketCutlass]

I noticed the washers flying across the inside at 0:35 in the pole video. That would probably hurt if your sitting in the back. I wonder where they came from.

[vroomapunk]

+1 on the fourth gens being safe, in a stupid mistake (not racing) I totalled my first one in front end collison, didnt have a scratch on me.

[cab2g]

they never redid the test for 2011. Guess it's 4 star even though it isn't rated...

[JWoj3540]

awesome post, thanks matt

[kbui]

Originally Posted by a1cmatt

some other crash test gone horrible.

http://www.youtube.com/user/CarPro19.../2/XHFsmsGPDVc

http://www.youtube.com/user/CarPro19.../0/VZ0b_jAshl8

The second video of multiple cars test is a good illustration of more mass and bigger vehicle always win when there are cars to cars impact. You are always going the be better off in the bigger vehicle even though your big vehicle have a lower safety rating than the smaller ones

[CamaroSkooter]

I need to trade in my '95 Blazer

[1BADLS3]

Originally Posted by kbui

The second video of multiple cars test is a good illustration of more mass and bigger vehicle always win when there are cars to cars impact. You are always going the be better off in the bigger vehicle even though your big vehicle have a lower safety rating than the smaller ones

Not always. Especially when you consider old versus new crash technology. I'd much rather crash in a new, modern small car, than say, a '72 Blazer.

Or this:

[PYROLYSIS]

So the 2012 got a higher rating than the 2010 Camaro? What Changed?

[kbui]

Originally Posted by 1BADLS3

Not always. Especially when you consider old versus new crash technology. I'd much rather crash in a new, modern small car, than say, a '72 Blazer.

Or this:

This is a misnomer and a wrong comparison. There was NO OLD crash technology compared to what we are seeing today: no seat belts systems that actually have sensors, inertial lockups, head rest...airbags, structures that crushed at controlled locations. In the early 80's auto companies were still using crude lumped mass/dampers/springs systems to do their crash designs. Occupant simulations were still only simple 2D (MVMA2D program) and can not even do out of position crash simulations. The safety requirements were also a lot simpler then...

Even with the lack of crash features in those older vehicles, if you are crashing a heavy vehicle with thick steel chrome bumpers and those stiff longitudinal rails (ladder frame) head on with a smartcar, I will guarantee the smart car driver will not be better off; the smart car just became your crush zone. Look at that second video, that damned truck didn't have any safety features, but the small cars in front of it are acting as pillows to help it slowed down

If you are talking about crashing those old and heavy vehicles against itself (rigid barrier) or one of similar size and mass, then those old cars are lousy. Structurally, they were only designed for frontal crash into a rigid barrier. The longitudinal rails were the main load carrying members in a frontal crash. Those body on frame design of those old vehicles (versus unibody structure) have all sort of weak spots such as: offset frontal crash, side impact, 45deg front corner, etc....You have a chance if you are not hitting it head on (away from the longitudinal rails) and are of reasonable size.

[ackeight]

Thank god they only destroyed v6's . Just playin

[a1cmatt]

I think this is the first year that any camaro has gotten a 5 start raiding from this.