BrickBoard Archives
The files contained in this listing have been automatically archived from the active forums. Because the vast majority of posts are now in one place, this archive is considered legacy. You should use the SEARCH feature OR choose your topic and select date tabs within the forum you choose.
200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Peter on
Wednesday, 24 December 1997, at 1:23 p.m.
I read on another (non-automotive) BB that in the U.S. from 1988 to 1993 there were no deaths to occupants of 200 series cars. Can anybody verify this? It seems hard to believe...
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Mr. Tool on
Wednesday, 24 December 1997, at 6:36 p.m.
volvo north america corp. customer service in rockleigh, n.j. could verify this.
..... happy holidays .... mr. tool
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Topi on
Thursday, 25 December 1997, at 3:58 p.m.
Why so? The damn 240 is THE safest car/truck/SUV on the road. Period ! A friend of mine got T-boned by a Lincoln Town Car. TownCar was totaled but I fixed his Volvo !! The ONLY way to die in 240 is to die for a BOREDOM...
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Tim Christensen on
Thursday, 25 December 1997, at 11:51 p.m.
I cannot quote source, but I KNOW that my wife and I read in a leading consumer magazine the same statistic; perhaps Consumer Reports. One must keep in mind, however, that there are not THAT MANY 240's on the road during those years. A more accurate measure is the number of deaths per passenger mile. In that statistic, a Greyhound bus is probably the safest thing on the road since it hauls a ton a people hundreds of thousands of miles.
Still, the safety of the 200 series cannot be discounted. For me, I spoke with tow truck drivers. That little bit of anecdotal inquiry indicated to me that the 200 series was very safe. All those guys said the same thing time after time, "I've never been to an accident site where the driver of a Volvo was killed." That's good enough for me.
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Dirk Mooibroek on
Monday, 29 December 1997, at 6:51 a.m.
I know quite a few years ago I also read something in one of those digests about since the inception of the 240 series in North America there have been NO fatalities in one. I found this hard to believe but after seeing quite a few in yards I DO believe it!!!
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Keith Hyndes on
Monday, 29 December 1997, at 4:39 p.m.
In OZ the NRMA/RACV recently published used car real-life test results. Can see at NRMA.COM.AU. They reflect the % chance of the DRIVER suffering serious injury (hospitalisation) or death in reported accidents (ie excludes low speed/ low damage incidents). The data was analysed by Folksam Insurance of Sweden, and was collated from 332,000 accidents in NSW and Victoria between 1987 and 1995, pertaining to 1982-1995 model cars. The best was Volvo 700 series at 0.94, Volvo 200 scored 1.52.
Other results of interest in order: BMW 5 series 1.24, Pug 505 1.29, Honda Accord 1.31, Merc 300/600 1.34, Toyota Cressida 1.47 and 1.57, Subaru Liberty 1.63, Merc 100 1.72, Merc 200 1.77, Saab 900 1.81, Holden Commodore 2.40, Ford Falcon EF 2.92. The average for the survey was 2.55. The last 2 I mentioned are large locally designed and built 'cars', both of which are heavier than a V240, partly due to them having truck engines. Smaller cars fared poorer, with mini cars scoring as badly as high 5.x. I remember similar US survey, but which quoted the death rate per vehicle registrations or kms, I think it was NHTSA or HDLI. Can anyone find it. I think the best was Saab 9000.
Drive long Drive safe
Keith 245/80 + 440/94
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by irv klein on
Friday, 26 December 1997, at 12:25 p.m.
I dont know about those years. But last week in the local news - I live in Philly - they showed a two car crash in which the drivers of both cars were killed. They didnt mention the the model of one car but the other they made sure to say was a Volvo - as if this was big news.
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Mark Klein on
Sunday, 28 December 1997, at 12:22 a.m.
Isn't the media wonderful.
Re: Volvo's safety.Why so good?[ALL/1998] posted by Topi on
Sunday, 28 December 1997, at 11:14 a.m.
Volvo (and Mercedes) has their own inspection team. After every big accident involving a Volvo, they're sent to inspect the wreck. They travel all over Sweden. Many times they take it to the factory, too. Everyhing is carefully recorded, analyzed and studied to make things safer. So it's not an accident Volvo and Mercedes are the two safest cars on the road. BTW: US testing is NOT the correct way to test car's safety. It's very, very seldom cars will crash "head-on". 99% of the time they'll crash off-angle, or "corner-to-corner". This is the way Volvo and MB test their cars and build protection for REAL life accidents. In my oppinion, side air bags are more important than steering wheel bags (if you're using belts) and side bags are not causing any deaths, neither...
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Jack Austin on
Sunday, 28 December 1997, at 11:06 a.m.
I mentioned this discussion to a professor friend of mine and he recalled that someone he knows was in the middle of writing a thesis that involved the statistical analysis of automobile crashes/injuries/deaths, etc. over the past 15 years or so. He said that this person had a CD at his disposal (presumeable from the FEDS) that had ALL of the data accumulated from state records over that period of time. As soon as I am able to get my hands on it I'll place a full post about the information.
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by Lee Lowrey on
Monday, 29 December 1997, at 5:42 p.m.
It would be nice to see some of the data from the Feds on crashworthiness of Volvos. One indication of Volvo safety is insurance rates from automobile insurers; though we should all take their rate schedules with a grain of salt (e.g., insurance companies raises the rates on small cars a few years ago because they fare poorly in wrecks with large cars and now they're talking about raising rates on SUVs and light trucks because they cause so much damage in wrecks...) My wife always calls our insurance company before we buy a car and asks about insurance rates (we have 19-year-old male and 15-year-old male children with driver's licenses!) and they always tell her that Volvos have the lowest rates. The lowest rate for any new car with our carrier is currently the 850/70-series. Food for thought...
Re: 200 series safety/Insurance[ALL/1998] posted by Evan on
Tuesday, 30 December 1997, at 1:58 p.m.
Well, in Michigan, the basic minimum auto insurance is Personal Liability/Property Damage. That's what I put on my '83 244DL, as it only cost me $750 in the first place.
The cost? $92 for SIX MONTHS!
Name me one other car you can insure for $15/month.
Re: 200 series safety[ALL/1998] posted by LKB on
Tuesday, 30 December 1997, at 4:48 p.m.
Some random thoughts...
I. I believe Volvo currently has a policy of paying US $ 250,000.00 to the
estate of anyone killed in a new 1998 Volvo(it might be effective as of
the 1997 model year for the 850 series). I read this in an Edmund's guide.
(Can anyone verify this? I feel a little morbid to ask the dealer...).
II. Yes, Mercedes are quite crashworthy cars. I once saw one of those
"real video" TV shows where, on a German autobahn, a Mercedes S-series car
was travelling at an equivalent of 100 mph, when it hit ice on the otherwise
deserted road and flipped over a few times. It skidded on its roof for what seemed like 1/2 a mile. The tape showed the driver climbing out of the car
with a spring in his step.
The moral of the story was supposed to be "don't drive fast", but after
watching the tape, I thought the moral of the story should have been:
"if you're going crash at high-speed, do it in an S-series Mercedes." :-)
III. This brings us to the Princess Diana crash, in which four people were
riding in an S-series Mercedes. The only person to survive was wearing
his seatbelts. I believe the car was going, what, about 140 kph(?).
So crashworthiness is useless unless you're properly belted-in.
IV. This may be an obvious point(III, above), but it still makes me stop and think. Anyway, I just had to get it off my chest and don't mean to point
any fingers, or tell people how to live their lives. (Now, if I could just
get my mom to wear her rear shoulder belts when she sits in the back seat
of my 240).
V. The media, in that Philly. Volvo crash, did they mention if the occupants
were wearing belts? I would bet they weren't. The "media" are supposed to
be hammering the importance of seat-belts, whenever they report on car
crashes. (not that it makes a difference to me...)
VI. The media apparently can't get enough of Princess Diana, et. al. even after
her death. Go figure.
VII. I originally bought my 240 because it's a good-looking, adequate-sized,
rear-wheel-drive car for one person, that also happens to be safe.
I also like the upright windshield, and unobstructed all-around view, and
heated seats, and lumbar support, and headlights that go off when the
ignition is switched off, and the rear fog light, and fuel economy, and
the wide-open engine compartment, and the tight turning radius, and the
two-stage door locks, and, and, and, did I leave something out?!
Lord willing, I and or my future family members will be able to drive it
with its original sheet metal for a long time. :-)
(Thanks for reading this long message) --LKB
Re: 200 series safety(Sorry!)[ALL/1998] posted by LKB on
Wednesday, 31 December 1997, at 1:51 p.m.
I meant to post some random thoughts, not random formatting...
Next time, I will let this board's built-in editor do the formatting and stay out of its way. Sorry again, for the difficult-to-read post.
Re: 200 series safety(new info. source)[ALL/1998] posted by LKB on
Friday, 2 January 1998, at 11:14 a.m.
Check out www.swedishbricks.net/contents.html -- see their FAQs on "Safety."