Element Only SUV Tested to get Acceptable Bumpers
Thread Starter
HC Racer H5
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
From: KCK
Element Only SUV Tested to get Acceptable Bumpers
Two small SUVs: "Honda is the only manufacturer in this series of tests that earns at least some praise for bumpers," Lund says.
In the flat-barrier impacts, the Element's front and rear bumper systems kept damage away from the expensive-to-repair sheet metal body parts. There was some body damage in the angle-barrier and pole impacts, but it wasn't extensive. And Honda has taken steps to keep down the cost of repairing the damage that does occur in low-speed impacts. For example, the headlight mount broke in the angle-barrier test, but this didn't mean the whole headlight assembly had to be replaced. Honda designed the headlight so that, if it's damaged, it will be more likely to break in a particular place, and then the manufacturer makes a kit available to repair it. Another plus is that the Element's rear bumper system is mounted below the rear body panel, so if the bumper is driven toward the vehicle body in a low-speed impact it won't necessarily contact the rear panel. This reduces the likelihood of damage to the car body. Partly because of this design, the Element sustained far less damage ($594) than the other vehicles in the rear-into-pole test.
In contrast, the Mitsubishi Outlander sustained $1,217 damage in the pole test and another $1,042 in the angle-barrier test. Damage extended beyond the bumper system in these two tests plus the rear flat-barrier test. The bumper covers had to be replaced after all but the angle-barrier test.
"It's a stark contrast between the two small SUVs," Lund notes. "Both the Element and the Outlander are brand new designs. There was an opportunity for both Mitsubishi and Honda to put a priority on the bumper designs so the owners of these vehicles wouldn't be hit with big repair bills after minor impacts. Honda did so, and it also built in aspects of the bumper intended to protect pedestrians. Mitsubishi didn't pay any attention to damage resistance in designing the bumpers on the Outlander, so owners are going to be spending a lot of money for repairs."
RL also scored poorly in the IIHS study
http://www.hwysafety.org/news_releas...3/pr031803.htm
In the flat-barrier impacts, the Element's front and rear bumper systems kept damage away from the expensive-to-repair sheet metal body parts. There was some body damage in the angle-barrier and pole impacts, but it wasn't extensive. And Honda has taken steps to keep down the cost of repairing the damage that does occur in low-speed impacts. For example, the headlight mount broke in the angle-barrier test, but this didn't mean the whole headlight assembly had to be replaced. Honda designed the headlight so that, if it's damaged, it will be more likely to break in a particular place, and then the manufacturer makes a kit available to repair it. Another plus is that the Element's rear bumper system is mounted below the rear body panel, so if the bumper is driven toward the vehicle body in a low-speed impact it won't necessarily contact the rear panel. This reduces the likelihood of damage to the car body. Partly because of this design, the Element sustained far less damage ($594) than the other vehicles in the rear-into-pole test.
In contrast, the Mitsubishi Outlander sustained $1,217 damage in the pole test and another $1,042 in the angle-barrier test. Damage extended beyond the bumper system in these two tests plus the rear flat-barrier test. The bumper covers had to be replaced after all but the angle-barrier test.
"It's a stark contrast between the two small SUVs," Lund notes. "Both the Element and the Outlander are brand new designs. There was an opportunity for both Mitsubishi and Honda to put a priority on the bumper designs so the owners of these vehicles wouldn't be hit with big repair bills after minor impacts. Honda did so, and it also built in aspects of the bumper intended to protect pedestrians. Mitsubishi didn't pay any attention to damage resistance in designing the bumpers on the Outlander, so owners are going to be spending a lot of money for repairs."
RL also scored poorly in the IIHS study
http://www.hwysafety.org/news_releas...3/pr031803.htm
Toyota Racing = Cheaters
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,536
Likes: 0
The Element may be the only SUV tested of two that day to get an Acceptable rating for bumper, but the Ford Escape/Mazda Tribute also got an Acceptable rating for bumper test in a previous test with a slightly higher repair cost of $661 average.
