Thread: Won’t be retro...

Really need to have a look at the data behind all those stars. What the various results were for each area of assessment they used to rollup to the simplistic star number. NHTSA, IIHS, ENCAP, ANCAP, etc all assess differently and then there's the periodic "re-grading" where a 5-star car under the previous protocol drops to 2 or 3 under the new assessment. Confusing doesn't come close. How does the average punter keep up? New Defo/LR2020 will absolutely be 5-star everywhere to the newest protocols IMHO. No way they'd release a (truly) all new model off a brand new, cutting-edge platform and not easily meet the criteria everywhere on Earth. They know it'll get harder to maintain over time so you have to have something up your sleeve...
When NCAP started they believed that a 5-star car was near impossible to achieve (to that criterea it'd struggle to get 2 stars at best nowadays). A decade later many manufactures were meeting it. So they made it harder. Rinse repeat. And they made it harder. Rinse repeat. And then they added a bunch of other criterea regarding avoidance tech so it became increasingly less about crash safety and more about potentially avoiding the crash in the first place. And it'll continue to evolve and change and get more confusing.
The companies that continue to design for real world crashes (Volvo as one notable) tends not to get caught out by new test methods where those that design to meet the exact tests can have sone horrific results. Look up SORB testing in the US as a good example of this. Most cars failed it catastrophically at introduction as they were optimised around the 40% overlap deformable barrier test that had been the mainstay.

For JLR to say that they are going to take on Toyota or even Nissan with the new Defender is a huge call without much substance.
Firstly because the mining and agriculture sectors want "Live" axels and the high payloads offered by both Toyota and Nissan plus the reliability of a well established dealer network Australia wide for these makes.
Will the new defender be able to take a 1200kg payload, Will the new defender survive the wet salty underground environment, Will the new defender have a "Reliable" and a well established dealer network that will cover their vehicles Australia wide and will the new defender come with a 5-7 year warranty?
These are But a small number of things that JLR will have to address IF they have any chance of moving into the Jap share of the market.

Originally Posted by trout1105

For JLR to say that they are going to take on Toyota or even Nissan with the new Defender is a huge call without much substance.
Firstly because the mining and agriculture sectors want "Live" axels and the high payloads offered by both Toyota and Nissan plus the reliability of a well established dealer network Australia wide for these makes.
Will the new defender be able to take a 1200kg payload, Will the new defender survive the wet salty underground environment, Will the new defender have a "Reliable" and a well established dealer network that will cover their vehicles Australia wide and will the new defender come with a 5-7 year warranty?
These are But a small number of things that JLR will have to address IF they have any chance of moving into the Jap share of the market.

What particular on the record quote are you referring to?

Originally Posted by trout1105

The Australasian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP) awarded the 79 Single-Cab five stars for safety, its maximum, in October 2016. The 79 Dual-Cab and other 70 Series models have not been rated.

Toyota don't sell many twin cabs or wagons to the mines, who were demanding the 5 star safety, so they only upgraded the single cab. Minimum expense/effort. Too bad if you're touring with your family in the twin cab or wagon ...

Originally Posted by cjc_td5

My understanding is that the Jeep low star rating primarily related to pedestrian safety, not occupant safety. A function of its angular front design. The Jimny poor rating related to occupant cell integrity, a much poorer outcome.

Google some photos of the crash results OS - if you're driving a Wrangler and hit something solid you're going to lose your legs.

Originally Posted by ozscott

Tech, tech and more tech. Suits some but not others. In a sense I don't mind the tech provided it doesn't disable the vehicle if the tech malfunctions or fails completely.

Cheers

firstly, I love tech. Pretty much a tech geek, but tech for the sake of tech is plain and simple stupidity.
At my old work(currently out of work now, so it was my old work), we had Scanias.
Not a bad truck, but it's tech in many instances was worst than stupidity.
I had one instance where I was ona 3 lane arterial road, long smooth left hand sweeper, I had to hold the right lane as I was coming up to my right turn in a couple hundred meters.
This 3 lane arterial also has left and right turn lanes too at the interesections(ie. 5 lanes wide there).
Coming up to the interection, there was a car waiting for their green arrow. Truck slammed brakes on automatically!!! .. scare all the brown stuff outta me, as I wasn't expecting it.
I had a clear road ahead .. no cars, traffic, obstructions .. naught!
The trucks camera sensing collision system/cruise control thought I was headed for the right turn car(due to the sweeping bend nature of the intersection).
There was no way a collision was going to happen, perfect ambient conditions .. etc.
You can't tell a computer to think like a person .. no matter what those AI programming geeks tell us.
Maybe the truck has no learned that the next time such a specific situation is encountered it may not suddenly and violently slam it's brakes on for no reason.
Too late for me tho, it happened, and if they want to use such tech .. they should make sure it's pretty much perfect before releasing it to the public.
Could have easily been a accident eg. like a rear ender if I had traffic behind me or something.
Do I like tech .. for sure, look forward to it .. currently waiting for NBN to get activated so I can get into my home newtork .. so tech .. no problem for me.
BUT! .. when it's BS tech and it doesnt' work perfectly, it shouldn't 'almost cause an accident' .. it should be banned.

Originally Posted by goingbush

NQR. 'Most People' have a daily commute between 18km (city) & 35 km (rural) .

The cheapest EV available has enough range for a weeks worth of driving for the average lemming.

Doing the math, and going by the roughly 15K klms average that most cars seem to accumulate per year, there's a massive discrepancy there.
Keeping to round numbers here: 15000klms driven by the average motorist, that 18km/day is only part of the story.
That daily average = 6500(ish) klm a year(counted as a 7 day week, not 5!)
So where's the other 9+K klms going?
Obviously other driving duties.
SO facts and figures aren't all that they initially seem.
So the argument holds that for most general purposes EVs that have limited (200 or so klm) range don't really cut it as the one and only vehicle.
Some folks may work around it, but those missing 9000klms add up to some quite long drive times over the course of the year.
EV only folks hence need multi vehicle arrangements to maintain fully self sufficient mobility .. and then in this case the cost benefit of an EV may in fact be a cost handicap.
Obviously other factors will be involved for specific personal situations, but this notion that most folks only do XX klms per day isn't a reality.
What do they do when it's time to do the XXX klms per day, do they have an ICE vehicle sitting waiting just for those instances?

EVs really need to up their game in terms of range(for us here in Aus).

The reality of numbers don't add up.
ps. my 15+K Klm yearly average comes from Roy Morgan .. actual number is supposedly 15500 or something.

Originally Posted by trout1105

....
Firstly because the mining and agriculture sectors want "Live" axels and the high payloads offered by both Toyota and Nissan plus the reliability of a well established dealer network Australia wide for these makes.
.....

I have to be honest here and say this makes zero sense.
Miners and agriculturalists don't care if it's live .... or dead .. or independent or semi independent.
They want cheap(er) and reliable.
That's why you see live axle as the most predominant suspension type .. not because that's a requirement!

If company X made a vehicle that was both independent reliable and cheap .. you don't think those miners and farmers would want it?
On a tech side, live axles are an abomination .. full stop.
That's why they were abandoned all those years ago by every passenger car maker(on the whole). Unsafe, compared to a independent suspended vehicle in almost all situations.

Think of it this way.
The Baja 1000, quite a gruelling vehicle event, and the requirements for the suspension components are as arduous as any mining fleet.
In fact the race conditions dictate that the suspension needs to be stronger than strong. If you have ever followed or just heard of it, you know that live sprung LCs and Patrols are non existent, and all vehicle basically run independent suspension.
Far more flex and travel than almost any and every consumer grade off roader is capable of.
But they need to maintian a balance too. Their priority is safety and durability.
Safety as in they're travelling at insane speeds on impossible road conditions 4 foot high speed humps in effect .. at speed.
Imagine an LC79 doing that track at that speed .. airborne and then whacking down and on and on? Don't think so!
Miners want durable, for their generally well kept roads(by comparison!) Obviously they're not good roads, but compared to the Baja .. they're freeway like conditions.

it's all about balance, Cost. Safety(for the conditions) .. durability(they expect stuff to need fixing, but need that to be minimal).
There are far worse conditional requirements than what miners and farmers need, and independent suspension has served that sector perfectly well.

Even F1 suspensions are far far stronger than your average LC79 series! Cost to them isn't even a word tho .. so they'll spend $20 -30 K just on one of the wishbone arms.

I dunno if you've ever seen it, but many years ago Richard Hammond made a video on car stuff like tech and whatnot.
Just as a pointer to what you think durable really is. It's not LC79 and stuff like that. It's a balance.
Anyhow, he made a specific video about carbon fibre tailshafts, where the feature article tests their relative merits.
Highly recommended to look it up on Youtube .. just what it means to be durable.

Originally Posted by Arapiles

Toyota don't sell many twin cabs or wagons to the mines, who were demanding the 5 star safety, so they only upgraded the single cab. Minimum expense/effort. Too bad if you're touring with your family in the twin cab or wagon ...

The single cab was five star rated in 2016,as an example

To rate a vehicle as five star today that vehicle may not comply.

The rumours are that things are going to change so the rating in 2016 will last for, say, 6 yrs.

After that if the same model is available,it may lose its 5 star rating,unless it is modified to suit the latest 5 star rating,which could mean huge changes to the vehicle.

FWIW,i think the D4 was never tested,but the D3 was 4 star,in its day.

Originally Posted by scarry

FWIW,i think the D4 was never tested,but the D3 was 4 star,in its day.

and IRC the 1 star was lost due to lack of pedestrian safety (no kidding) not occupant safety.... I think we've all seen the photos of that horrific accident in S.Africa years ago. The family walked away from that relatively unscathed.