Most Japanese cars have done well in crash tests on various structures, so why can't they still give consumers a sense of security? So much so that the owners of the Japanese car can only say the words "the car is used to drive, not to crash" to comfort me. Is it safe for Japanese cars?
First, the safety concept of Japanese cars is very advanced, but unrealistic
When we mention Japanese cars, the impression is that they are thin-skinned and "energy-absorbing", and their first reaction is that they are unsafe. Similar images can be found on the Internet, such as a Japanese car that hit a chicken, and the chicken crashed into the car and is still alive. In fact, this is a very safe design, but also a more advanced safety concept. If the car breaks down, it can be repaired, but where is the chicken, what if there is a person standing? Surely you'd rather have a bad car than get seriously injured?
This is the safety concept pursued by Japanese car companies: low injury! This philosophy protects not only the occupants of the car, but also the pedestrians and the occupants of the other car. Therefore, they do not regard the other car as an opponent, because it is not the other vehicle that hurts each other, but the energy generated by the collision.
It's like a husband and wife arguing, you always have to know that your enemy is not your other half, but the problem that both of you face and needs to be solved. This concept is undoubtedly advanced.
For example, Japanese cars are right to pursue extreme lightweighting. It is unreasonable for you to laugh at japanese car lightness, and in fact, all car companies are pursuing lightweight. It brings many benefits, such as better acceleration performance, braking performance, improved handling under the condition of constant power, and at the same time, it can also reduce the collision energy.
If all cars could follow this philosophy, there would be fewer casualties caused by traffic accidents than they do now. Because the collision energy is small, the damage to people will inevitably be reduced. It's just that the ideal is very full, the reality is very bone, in fact, in reality, this concept does not work. I give a simple example to understand, a 1-ton car and a 2-ton car collide, the collision is instantaneous, the two sides as a whole, to absorb 3 tons of collision energy, who suffers more loss? It must be the car that absorbs energy to the big car, and after the collision, the displacement of the car is greater, and the probability of causing a secondary accident is higher.
So, the heavier the car, the safer it is, and in most cases it is true. Of course, the premise is that its safety design itself is fine and can pass the crash test of various agencies. Many people use the example of the old model before, after the collision of the car is fine, but the people inside are gone - this is confusing, the safety design concept of the old car is problematic.
Therefore, the problem is, if everyone builds the car particularly light, then the overall safety will be higher, and the traffic accident mortality rate will be lower. However, if others don't make the car so light, then you will suffer a lot, your safety will be reduced, and the mortality rate will increase.
It's not appropriate to put bad money to drive out good money here—it's like, a group of people, in the mountains, encounter a tiger. If everyone didn't run away and take the weapon together to defend, maybe everyone wouldn't die. However, if everyone runs, and you are the only one who does not run, then you will die. And your death makes others safer... That's why I say that the safety concept of Japanese cars is advanced, but it doesn't work.
Second, is the Japanese car safe?
The answer to this question is basically polarization, one is to think that it is not safe, which is also in line with the impression of our public, and the Japanese cars around us are indeed more seriously injured in the accident. The other can come up with a lot of theories, using energy absorption and crash test results to prove that Japanese cars are safe, so who is right?
Ever heard the story of the pony crossing the river? Evaluating Japanese cars as a whole is not rigorous enough in itself. Let's put it another way - is domestic car safe? There are indeed road tanks, and there are all kinds of pull-and-cross. In fact, the performance of Japanese cars and brands is also uneven. However, overall, the level of security is low.
1, Toyota: the overall above the passing line.
Always say that Toyota what actual combat is not good, the first place in the exam - there is some truth to say, but at least the passing line of the crash test is passed, and the whole series of vehicles is not high or low, the number of air bags is the same! This must be praised by others. At present, the safety test standards of various countries and institutions are getting higher and higher, and it is not so easy to pass the exam, at least it shows that the bottom line of others is still there.
15 models, pay attention to the blue asymmetrical part on the right side of the bumper
Having said okay, let's talk about the bad side. First of all, Toyota is too test-taking. Vehicle safety design is not people-oriented, but more about how to pass the crash test. For example, in the United States IIHS was caught in the current unilateral strengthening problem, people collided with the main driving side, so the material materials on both sides of the body are different.
Secondly, it can save costs too much, and it can save money in invisible places, which is also a common disease of Japanese cars. Therefore, even if Toyota passes the crash test, it is only a pass, and if the difficulty of the test is increased, such as increasing the 25% bias collision speed to 70Km, then Toyota is likely to be frustrated - that is, Toyota only passes, without safety redundancy.
As mentioned earlier, the negative impact of lightweighting. Japanese cars tend to be lighter in the same class, so they generally suffer losses when colliding. The crash test is all about hitting the wall, and the vehicle only needs to absorb the energy generated by its own collision. Small, light vehicles have less collision energy at the same speed and are easier to reach the passing line. However, when you go on the road to actual combat, you will inevitably suffer losses when you encounter a big car. It is also reasonable to say that Japanese cars are not good in actual combat and that examinations are ok.
2. Honda: Sit up after lying flat
Saying that Honda buys an engine to send a car is not to say how good the engine is, carbon deposition, oil emulsification, and the engine is not much better, but the car material is really poor, and the configuration is low.
A car emperor once disassembled, Honda Haoying, the whole car did not have a yield strength of more than 1000 megapascals of thermoformed steel, including the most critical A-pillar, B-pillar. In the crash test of the Zhongbao Research Institute, once the collision became famous, the A column bent and took an excellent one, and knocked the Zhongbao Research Institute to the knees. This car now sells more than 10,000 units a month, which can only be said that the Chinese people are fooling around. English poetry school, without much explanation, look at the picture, mainly look at the A-pillar on the end, basically, before 2020, Honda's car, hit one kneeling one. Therefore, I can only make a presumption of guilt - Honda makes cars without considering poor safety at all, and does not give you high-strength thermoformed steel at all.
However, this is also my personal stereotype, the latest Civic, the body of the high-strength thermoformed steel material is also a lot, the highest is more than 1500 megapascals, this car has not been hit, but from the material point of view, the collision is certainly no problem. I don't know if the new CRV, Haoying, and Accord have also been improved. At the moment, I can only make the presumption of guilt – because you have a previous conviction, I can only think that unless you prove yourself safe through a crash test, I can only think that you are not safe. Just like the previous Passat, what kind of 19 models collided into, I don't need to say, right? It is true that the new model has improved, but because of the previous crime, I still can't trust you unless I bump into it all. The lost word of mouth is not so easy to get back.
3, Nissan: progress to pass.
According to the IIHS statistics of the National Highway Insurance Association, Nissan accounts for three of the top ten highest death rate models in the world. I have a poor impression of this brand, and the security aspect is almost equivalent to that of the Korean system. However, judging from the recent crash results of new models, at least they have passed.
The feeling is still 19 years of mid-term insurance research, after hitting passat and Tiguan, all car companies have been shocked, and the strength of the body structure has been improved. Recently, Tianlai, Qijun, including Xuanyi, have all achieved good results.
But then again, Nissan's test is still more flattering, we can not see from the collision video, after the collision of the vehicle has a relatively large lateral movement, the car ran out obliquely, A column to avoid the frontal impact. If you switch to a 40% crash test, the effect may be different. When an accident occurs, it may not be a collision according to 25%, and the reversion displacement after the impact is also very easy to cause a secondary accident.
In fact, from the perspective of the body materials advertised by Nissan, in terms of safety, there is no way to give praise. The 14th generation of new Xuanyi, advertising the use of ultra-high strength steel above 980 MPa, is as high as 27.2%, and the proportion of high-strength steel above 590 MPa is as high as 43.6%. The use of Sun Qijun hot forming steel (more than 1000 MPa) is 8.23%, and the use of ultra-strong steel plates of 780 MPa and above is 37.7%. Let's compare the body materials of models with better safety: 74.2% of the high-strength steel used in the 4008 body, and 85% of BYD Han DM-p high-strength steel.
Therefore, in contrast, the safety of Nissan can only give a passing level, which is still the result of improvement. In actual combat, I am still more worried.
4. Others:
Japanese Sanjie accounted for the vast majority of sales, the rest of the brands will no longer comment one by one, Mazda's passive safety is better than Toyota, Nissan, in the Japanese car is more conscientious. In the crash test, the results were all good, only in 2020, Artez bent the A-pillar in the Central Insurance Research Institute. For example, the proportion of high-strength steel above 980 MPa in Unxella reached 30%, the use rate of high-strength steel above 590 MPa in the body was as high as 54%, and the Toyota TNGA was 46%, which was higher than the average of the Japanese system.
Suzuki has withdrawn from the Chinese market, there is no need to mention more, even if the small car has excellent crash test results, it will suffer losses on the road. Pay attention to safety, you don't buy a car, start with a compact level or above.
Subaru Is Proud
Subaru's reputation is also good, but when it comes to body materials, it seems to be uneven. The Proud Tiger and the Lion are trustworthy, while the Foresters and XV are almost meaningless. The overall rating is still higher than toyota's. After all, cars are also expensive.
Mitsubishi is still a bit hot on an Outlander, and zhongbao research is also kneeling, which is a failure.
summary:
In terms of safety, Japanese cars are certainly not taking advantage of the problem of car manufacturing concepts. As mentioned earlier, if everyone follows the concept of low-injury car manufacturing, then the overall traffic accident mortality rate will decrease, but if there is no consensus, it will inevitably form an "inner volume", and the more we follow the principle of low injury, the more we suffer losses.
In addition, it cannot be ignored that the common problems in Japanese cars and the bottomless compression costs, including steel and airbag fraud, also have a serious impact on safety. Circulating on the Internet, Japanese cars save fuel and cost lives, but it is not a wrong.
However, I still hope that everyone can look at the problem in two parts, and how to say how Japanese cars are, itself is not rigorous. Mazda and Subaru's overall performance is above average, we say Honda is bad, but Honda's new Civic is good. Then again, although people will inevitably be narrow-minded, what gives us a stereotype is the collapse of the overall reputation of Japanese cars, just like the Civic, even if the safety of the new model has been very good, it still cannot change our impression of Japanese cars.