geneclark

Sorry Gizmo, but you did it again.

You simply cannot make that assumption based on the available data.
[/quote]

This is my first post, glad to be here! I've really enjoyed reading this thread as a potential e60 buyer (and previous owner of an e38).

Browellm,

The fact that BMW isn't supplying the data from the first test makes Gizmo's assumption reasonable.

There have been at least two studies about how EuroNcap results correlate to real-life injury risks. Both of the studies reach the conclusion that a car performing well in a test also will perform well in real life.

I'm no expert, but if you compare the results from IIHS and EuroNcap there seems to be a difference in for example injury parameter levels. A GOOD rating from IIHS could equate to a four star rating from EuroNcap. Also, there are no side-test performed for the e60 by IIHS.

All in all, IIHS and EuroNcap seem to have reach the same basic conclusion about the e60. It's interesting because it probably gives us a clue to what areas caused the problems in the first EuroNcap test, because the IIHS-test seems to have been done with an unmodified vehicle.

What I find most annoying is this answer from BMW:

Without wanting to question the results of the Euro NCAP in any way, it is important for BMW to design it's vehicles for real accident conditions in addition to those of a laboratory test (Euro NCAP) that demonstrably occur extremely rarely.

Please, this is an unacceptable and, quite frankly, a stupid answer!!!

browellm

Sorry Gizmo, but you did it again.

You simply cannot make that assumption based on the available data.
[/quote]

This is my first post, glad to be here! I've really enjoyed reading this thread as a potential e60 buyer (and previous owner of an e38).

Browellm,

The fact that BMW isn't supplying the data from the first test makes Gizmo's assumption reasonable.

[/quote]

Unless you support the notion of a global safety cover-up by BMW then I respectfully disagree. Gizmo is using hyperbole in place of the established facts in order to support his own argument.

I completely agree with the arguments around resale value of pre-modified cars - it is always a PITA for owners of ealier builds when changes (read improvements) occur through the model lifecycle.

But, I have no doubts about the safety and crash worthiness of my car as is

ISUK

I wouldn't be too concerned about this affecting resale values of the E60 in the UK. If the dealers started offering less as a part ex for early cars due to safety concerns this would rebound on BMW. The used market tends to be less choosey about such things and people accept that when buying used they won't necessarily get all of the latest safety features. Price is usually the number one factor in a used purchase. Your car won't plummet in value as a result of these tests even if it makes it into the pages of the car magazines. It would have to become a prime time news article on TV to damage the car and BMW's reputation and even then it would be a short lived phenomenon.

Another thing worth remembering is that this board is made up of enthusiasts. For every one of us on here there are thousands of E60 drivers who are not. They most likely are not even aware of, never mind discussing, the NCAP ratings.

geneclark

I completely agree with the arguments around resale value of pre-modified cars - it is always a PITA for owners of ealier builds when changes (read improvements) occur through the model lifecycle.

But, I have no doubts about the safety and crash worthiness of my car as is
[/quote]

The established facts are that the e60 has been tested by both IIHS and Euroncap in a frontal test. The conclusions with regards to the structure of the car was basically the same - a very strong passenger cage. With regards to meaurements (loads) on the dummy there seems to be loads high enough in the Euroncap test to give the car a four star rating (which could equal an IIHS rating of GOOD). IIHS actually comments on the possiblity of sustaining leg injuries...

However, IIHS has not done a side test of the e60. It's not impossible to assume, when taking the modifications for the secound EuroNcap test in account, that this test caused problems in the initial test of the e60.

Therefore, the assumption that drivers of unmodified cars are "quite likely to be at greater risk for personal injury during some accidents than those who drive modified E60's" is IMHO reasonable.

IF I owned an e60, I'd be most worried over the quoted response from BMW.

Shredder

[FYI, You can see my email to BMW UK and their [terrible] reply towards the end of Page 6 of this E60.net discussion]

In my email, I asked BMW UK the following.....

What PRECISELY were the changes made [by BMW] for the NCAP retests?

Can the same changes be made to my car to make it safer?

IMHO this issue is about BMW having the integrity to inform us precisely what safety related changes BMW made to their Euro NCAP test car after the original car (like ours) scored less than a four star rating.

If the changes to the software, for example, were to turn the volume up for the seatbelt reminder, then I really don't care about it. Likewise, if the sticker warning that rear-facing child seats shouldn't be placed in a front seat, isn't big enough or permanent enough (again, for example), then I don't care about that either.

I don't want to speculate about the changes BMW made, but I think we would all like to know BMW's answer to the questions above; especially the top one.

Who knows, the changes made may have been trivial...... then again....ah, let's not even think about it.

Dynamic Drive is fantastic

kscarrol

Very well said Nev, I agree 100% that BMW needs to step up and identify the changes. My only contention through this whole discussion has been that if there was some major saftey flaw that BMW corrected, the car would have gotten 2 or even 1 stars on the EuroNCAP test not 3 stars. While some folks may be upset or feel that the 3 stars is unacceptable, to me, it is not indicative of a dangerous car as some have implied.

Gizmo

Please review the posts before pointing fingers. I believe you will find that I have not been the instigator of personal attacks here (such as the one you level).

One may not be happy with the message, but there is no need to attack the messengers. Of course, we can all agree to disagree.

There are some facts here:

BMW redesigned portions of the E60 in order to achieve more satifactory safety ratings.

BMW has neither disclosed the nature of these repairs nor the potential deleterious effects of not having these modifications in older E60 vehicles.

I (and apparently some well informed others) believe that crash test data can be extrapolated to "real world" collisions. Otherwise, there would be no purpose of this testing (other than getting to smash-up some cars with dummies in them).

I'm happy to wait and see what information is forthcoming from BMW. I too hope that our cars are crash worthy and functionally just as safe as those E60's that have been re-engineered (but common sense should provoke some questions here).

Have a good evening.

clived

[quote=geneclark' date='Dec 1 2004, 09:58 PM]
I'm sorry, but any theory based on something that is "not impossible to assume" doesn't do it for me. It's "not impossible to assume" pretty much anything. It may however be totally misguided to do so

I'm getting the general feeling (and this isn't aimed specifically at you Gene) that the general concern here isn't safety, it's residual value. An entirely valid concern I might add.... but not one that needs to be supported by pure speculation and conjecture on E60 safety. The only fact here seems to be that BMW haven't said what they changed. Maybe they made the seatbelt warning chime louder... the report does mention "software" as one of the changed items

Clive

Iceman

But BMW doesn't want you to make your own decision...


Sorry Gizmo, but you did it again.

You simply cannot make that assumption based on the available data.
[/quote]

Ah, yes and no... I think he can, because IF the E60 is safe, why did they redesigned it? I think the reason is is, there is more risk in an unmodified E60. But, OK, you are right too, since we don't have the results from the first test - but IMHO we don't need them. The fact that BMW redesigned the E60 is quite some proof...


Well, MY only concern is SAFETY.
I don't care about the resale value!

Iceman

Welcome aboard, geneclark !