• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Here's another reason to buy a Kia...

LMAO!
The worst damage ? $4,305 US ? occurred when the minivan was driven into a flat barrier. Both front air bags deployed, cracking the windshield and the top of the instrument panel.
 
How does Kia stay in business, anyhow?



<< The low-speed test is designed to imitate the impact that often occurs in commuter traffic and parking lots. The ratings ? good, acceptable, marginal and poor ? are based on how much damage is done to the bumper and other parts of the vehicle. >>


I remember reading that the new VW Bug and one of the Saturns did awesome on this test last year.
 


<< LMAO!
<EM>The worst damage ? $4,305 US ? occurred when the minivan was driven into a flat barrier. Both front air bags deployed, cracking the windshield and the top of the instrument panel.<EM> >>


🙂 That's pretty funny
 


<< How does Kia stay in business, anyhow?



<< The low-speed test is designed to imitate the impact that often occurs in commuter traffic and parking lots. The ratings ? good, acceptable, marginal and poor ? are based on how much damage is done to the bumper and other parts of the vehicle. >>


I remember reading that the new VW Bug and one of the Saturns did awesome on this test last year. >>



the people that cant afford a chrysler buy 'em

i've also seen them used as rentals
 
I remember a commercial on tv was touting the crash testing of these. What gives? Maybe the commercial lied 🙂
 
anything in a wagon like form is going to do poorly on these tests, because if you back up into something your crumple zone happens to be the rear cargo area so all sorts of stuff gets broken, more than a car or a regular truck, which have far more room to crumple, in general.

that said, the 4 mph front collision with the airbags popping out is frickin' ridiculous.
 
my friends used to have a KIA...haha what piece of sh#t...everytime they wanted to go someplace it was like 50/50 if they could make it...they did drive it from LA to Baltimore once....haha dont know how they made it...

they tried going back...broke down once in penn. got it fixed...broke down again in ohio and it was bad enough that it would take like 2 weeks to fix so they just flew the rest of the way
 
"He points out that the Sedona got the government?s top five-star rating in its front crash test. In that test, the vehicle is crashed into a barrier at 35 mph (56 km/h) and performance is judged by injury measurements on the crash dummies"

Wierd, I would assume if it can handle a 35mph crash it would be able to handle a 5 mph crash. That $4000 is almost how much the car costs itself... so if you get into an accident just go buy another one. lol.
 


<< "He points out that the Sedona got the government?s top five-star rating in its front crash test. In that test, the vehicle is crashed into a barrier at 35 mph (56 km/h) and performance is judged by injury measurements on the crash dummies"

Wierd, I would assume if it can handle a 35mph crash it would be able to handle a 5 mph crash. That $4000 is almost how much the car costs itself... so if you get into an accident just go buy another one. lol. >>


Perhaps the damage/injuries were equal.
That's pretty bad for a 4 MPH crash, but maybe it's not so bad for a 35 MPH test?

I'm just pulling this out of my rear, though.
 


<< "They are running these cars into a 325,000-pound (15,876 kilogram)concrete barrier with about 3 inches (7.6 centimetres) of steel on the front of it," >>



Errrr...... that would be roughly 20lbs per kilogram. That just ain't right...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top