530E60NL

Dennis, you simply have no foundation whatsoever to make a claim like that. Extra stars have been gained through louder seat belt chimes, for heaven's sake.
[/quote]


In this case bmw is changing the doorlatches for better safety and steeringcolumn.. That's not a seatbelt chime for heavens sake.. I survived a very big accident and the second time I get into that kind of trouble I doubt I will live. So that is the reason why I said it is my humble opinion and I think this is the difference. Actually I don't care what the differences are between 3, 4 and 5 stars as long as I have the most stars I can get.

So for me there is a difference and I want my car to have at least 4 stars.. the 5th star is for pedestrian safety I know'.

Guest

Couldn't agree more.

A substantial portion of this 14 page thread is filled with conjecture, speculation, innuendo, suspicion, and paranoia that BMW is making changes to the e60 design for some nefarious purpose that BMW needs to conceal from existing e60 owners.

In the US, the insurance sponsored IIHS designs crash tests for automobiles based upon claim payouts by auto insurance companies -- thus, IIHS attempts to simulate the most common types of accidents that would result in common insurance claim payouts (whether property damage and/or bodily injury). There is no attempt by IIHS to simulate every type of conceivable accident because the insurance companies understand that many possible safety features and design elements are impractical, too costly or would otherwise not be used by driver/passengers (even old technology, like seatbelts, are infrequently used in many states). As no one appears to dispute here, the IIHS rated the e60 a "best pick."

It is obvious that the Euro NCAP tests are not the same as the IIHS tests, nor are the testing methodologies or metrologies identical. With this understanding, it does not appear logical or reasonable to accept (although it appears many have assumed) that, based on the NCAP tests in view of the IIHS results, the e60 is an unsafe vehicle having severe design flaws that BMW was required to address with fundamental structural changes, which BMW also needed to conceal from existing e60 owners, among others.

Existing e60 owners, such as myself, have no right to know or obtain any BMW confidential information related to changes, if any, made to the e60 solely to "improve" the NCAP test results. As a public relations matter, BMW may voluntarily disclose such information, but it has no legal obligation to do so.

As anyone who has previously worked on building a complex product such as an automobile knows, there are numerous changes to the components, assembly, testing, design, etc. during the product lifetime (especially in connection with 6-sigma type processes) -- a substantial majority of these changes would be unintelligible to unsophisticated e60 customers, so it would make little sense for BMW or any other manufacturer to publicly disclose them. For those who believe they are "sophisticated," then please promptly seek employment with BMW to make your unique contributions to e60 safety.

To the extent that anyone has suffered some type of bodily injury, property damage or other demonstrable loss from perceived safety design defects in the e60, such person may initiate litigation against BMW in an attempt to discover (and prove) that such changes would have eliminated or prevented their injuries, property damage or other losses. At this point, there does not appear to be any suggestion that anyone has suffered any such injuries, damages or losses....

Moreover, if the uncertainty created by the conjecture, speculation, innuendo, suspicion, and paranoia that BMW is concealing NCAP results and the associated changes BMW has or will make to address the NCAP results causes one to infer or believe that the e60 is an unsafe car, it would be wise for such person(s) to purchase a car other than the e60 for which they find acceptable NCAP results.

IdZer0

One thing needs to bes said I think: You cannot compare star rating between different groups (e.g. E60 vs a Renault Modus). The reason is explained in the NCAP FAQ point 22:
http://www.euroncap.com/content/faqs/faqs.php

"The frontal testing method mirrors a crash between two similar sized cars. Clearly a bigger car has an advantage if it hits a smaller car and Euro NCAP results can?t be used to predict the outcome of such crashes. "


So don't regard the star rating as an absolute indication of safety.

Compared to a Audi A6 or a MB E class of course, we are less safe.

skaffa

Money makes people to make funny things! We have put lot of that to our cars and now feel bad because it's not best possible in some way. Taking all matters in consideration I think I still have best car available.

That's true! But I hope we will get facts soon. I'm not scared (if woul be for like this, life would be most difficult), not yet.

Will fall in cat. 1

Safe or not safe... that's the question. But it's never so black&white. Safe=not a scratch or few marks or broken leg... Depend of speed and hundred different things.

Everyone who has studied they calculus know that lab tests are made in very controlled situations because they has to be reproduced. In real world there is too many X-factors to compare different products in real world based of lab tests.

I had a frend who died on back seat of the car in head on collision when both front seat passangers survived. His problem was that he was too tall and hit his head hard to the door frame. (helmet??)

I state again: how safe is Ferraris and Lambos (Jag, Aston, TVR, Mustang, Vette)? People are ready to wait years and pay millions. Safety is also low speed, tyres, driving style, attitude... If we put our life only to engineers hands... You all know what I mean?

In Finland government want to reduce speed limits again. Soon we drive with reverse only because it's "minus" speed and then no one dies, but more people will born. That's mathematics!

Though I appreciate everyones opinnions, I just don't share all.

Skaffa

EDIT:

My car is now more unsafe than any other 530d! Reason you maybe quess?

Skaffa

clived

No. As JohanDC said, pedestrian safety is given it's own 5 star rating - it does not change the crash test rating.

northernmonkey

After starting this thread and seeing the way the discussion has gone back/forth and off on some tangents I feel it only right that I provide an update on my own pursuit of this matter.

I have been in contact with BMW over the last fortnight. Below is a bulleted list of the main points (retyped in my own words NOT BMW's) of the letter I received from a senior BMW manager.

I am very pleased with this level of customer service and would like to give credit where it is due and add that the same manager telephoned me directly to discuss the matter and to go through the letter I was sent.

In a world of automated answering call centres well done BMW for taking the time to provide prompt, personalised customer service on a difficult subject.

This is a summary of points received and discussed......I would say that from my own point of view I am more than happy with the responses I have received from BMW and I think it was worthwhile asking the questions.

* some manufacturers put main emphasis of vehicle design work on Euro NCAP compliance. BMW focus on real life accident situations based on results gained from internal accident research. Goal is to achieve a safe survival space in the passenger cell in much more severe circumstances.

* offset frontal crashes as simulated by Euro NCAP, account for only 0.05 percent of accidents

* BMW's are sold across six continents which means they are subjected to more than 50 consumer protection and regulatory tests worldwide. Taking the USA as an example. Vehicles are tested at a significantly higher standard and at higher speeds. The E60 contains a rigid bodyshell designed to withstand significantly higher crash loads.

* IF BMW designed vehicles solely to achieve 5 Star Euro NCAP results this could lead to disadvantages in other accident situations. Quoted example, a vehicle subjecting occupants to low deceleration values at 64 kph would score well in Euro NCAP, but would be perceived as lacking in strength at higher impact speeds. BMW's priority is to provide a stable occupant cell

* EURO NCAP tests are important to BMW but the reporting of the modifications made following the initial tests is unusual as other manufacturers make changes before carrying out numerous retests, yet these are not reported as widely in the media.

* During the E60 retest the only changes made were to improve the score and did not increase the safety level of the vehicle, which still remain at a high standard (note US NCAP and IIHS tests). IIHS test corresponds to Euro NCAP test in terms of speed and test configuration.

* If BMW focused on only a few crash scenarios from a single testing body this would compromise safety overall.

skaffa

northernmonkey if You are happy for this... This has been that what I have tried to say whole time. NCAP is laboratory test, not real world.

Still I have to say that I would like to know what they changed. I'm just so curious.

Skaffa

northernmonkey

i am happy with the feedback and customer service.

one thing i forgot to add is that BMW mentioned during the initial tests euro ncap accidentally drilled thru the wiring loom behind the steering column which caused a lot of problems during the first test !

skaffa

Yeah, right:"look father I ride bike without hands" or "let's father show how..."

German.... They had to put ceramic plate around harnes to prevent this kind of happenings.

Sorry Iceman.

Skaffa

geneclark

Guest wrote:

In the US, the insurance sponsored IIHS designs crash tests for automobiles based upon claim payouts by auto insurance companies -- thus, IIHS attempts to simulate the most common types of accidents that would result in common insurance claim payouts (whether property damage and/or bodily injury).

Good point.

Guest wrote:
There is no attempt by IIHS to simulate every type of conceivable accident because the insurance companies understand that many possible safety features and design elements are impractical, too costly or would otherwise not be used by driver/passengers (even old technology, like seatbelts, are infrequently used in many states). .

Too costly to be used by driver/passengers? But the car is already paid for (if it isn't stolen that is). If you're trying to say that it's too costly and impractical to test every conceivable accident scenario, then I agree.

Guest wrote:
As no one appears to dispute here, the IIHS rated the e60 a "best pick."

The tests IIHS can perform are "Front test", "Rear test" and "Side test". The e60 is a "Best pick frontal" - that's a difference.

Guest wrote:
It is obvious that the Euro NCAP tests are not the same as the IIHS tests, nor are the testing methodologies or metrologies identical. With this understanding, it does not appear logical or reasonable to accept (although it appears many have assumed) that, based on the NCAP tests in view of the IIHS results, the e60 is an unsafe vehicle having severe design flaws that BMW was required to address with fundamental structural changes, which BMW also needed to conceal from existing e60 owners, among others

As far as I can tell, the front test methodology is the same at least with regards to offset and speed, but the injury measurment levels are different. The results with (regards to specific measurements) from the front test should be the same. Ratings will however different, because of differences in the rating systems.

The big difference is that the EuroNCAP test also included a side impact test. So if you should compare the IIHS test with EuroNCAP you'd have to know the results of an IIHS administred "Side test". Do you know the results from the IIHS "side test"?