2006 Legacy = Double Best Pick

[Drakuun]

']I'm certain that side curtain air bags have never been an option on any Legacy in North America. They were either standard equipment (beginning with 2005 model year) or not available at all (all model years prior to 2005).

 

I think only the GT's had them in '03. I remember it because it was one of the points my dealer made ad-nausiem when trying to get me to buy the GT they had on the lot.

[legandrex]

I am going to walk home from work tonight!

[Jon in CT]

I think only the GT's had them in '03. I remember it because it was one of the points my dealer made ad-nausiem when trying to get me to buy the GT they had on the lot.

Some 2003 model Legacys had side airbags (in the seat). None had side-curtain airbags.

[Drakuun]

']Some 2003 model Legacys had side airbags (in the seat). None had side-curtain airbags.

 

Well then I guess my dealer was either lying, or didn't know cause thats what he told me.

[raz-0]

Ok, people need to quit your whining.

 

Here's a pic of 2005.

 

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/image.ashx?rh=259&id=2

 

here's a pic of 2006.

 

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/image.ashx?rh=602&id=2

 

 

If you google around, you can also find the 2005 side impact test video footage.

 

You will notice that there is a significant difference in the airbag deployed form the seat. You will also notice that the frame of the car is less bent up, thus reducing intrustion into the cabin.

 

One thing not made readily clear, is that for some reason IIHS decides that the dummy best for this test is a 4'11" 5th percentile female dummy. The reason dummy got a poor rating for the torso was because the short bummy basically had the shoulder in teh gap between teh curtain and set bags. The poor pelvis rating was because the seat bag does not deploy too far down and the degree of intrusion into the cabin meant that much mroe of an impact to the pelvis. Head injury protection was good because the head hit smack dab into the curtain airbag.

 

Tey redid the seat airbags, the curtain airbags appear to be essentially the same. The seat airbags now cover the pelvis, and extend higer to minimize the gap the shoulder could be exposed in.

 

If you are 5'2" or more, I'd suspect you'd not get the poor torso results with the 2005 airbags. On top of that, there looks to eb changes to how the crumple zone functions, which they couldn't retrofit even if they wanted to. Also of note is that they changed the ATD (anthropomorphic test dummy) positioning guidelines for the most recent test procedures. The key change in this is likely that previously they did not put the adjustable shoulder belt height doohicky in the lowest position, now they do.

 

 

The simple fact is that unless you are a very short, torso-heavy female, you probably aren't getting screwed. If it is THAT important to you, buy 2006 seats and you should be in much better shape. That being said, the head score is the biggest factor for not being killed in the crash. You might fracture your pelvis, break yoru collar bone, and puncture a lung. Your hip might ache when it's rainy out, but you won't be a vegetable and you won't be dead.

 

Also remember the test is arbitrary in many ways. Cars with a wheelbase of 250cm or less get whacked 61cm behind the front axle. cars that are 250.1-289.9 get whacked in a position determined by (wheelbase/2)-64. That means, for example, the legacy gets whacked 69.5 cm behind the front axle, while the altima gets whacked 75.9 centimeters behind the front axle. Having compared the two videos, I'd suggest this made a noticable difference in cabin intrusion.

 

Don't put too much faith in a test rating. The point of IIHS's tests are to push manufacturers to spend money building cars that result in them paying out less claims. It is not necessarily a valid tool to compare car X vs car Y objectively.

 

 

Msot of all, remember that you are nto forced to buy the safest car, nor is a car required to score well to be on the road. You are essentially comapring something that is an optional feature and up to you to shop around and educate yourself about.

 

Also, take comfort in the declining popularity of the SUV.. unless of course the changes to make the 2006 survive the IIHS SUV crash make it more dngerous in a car vs. car crash. Then you might want to start panicing and complaining again.

[Austin2.5i]

I figured I'd get these responses, but I though it was worth a shot in the dark to get some people thinking about writing to Subaru about this.

 

A couple things to mention

1. The curtain airbags did deploy in the at first but not in time. They weren't so much "defective" as they were "ineffective"

2. I love to hear the "who cares?" argument about safety. I'm sure that if a loved one was driving your car when it got hit from the side that you'd care.

3. If the structure is so vastly improved in 2006 then why are the intrustion rates so close?

4. No, I didn't wait for the IIHS test and I relied on the Aussie test when buying the car. Yes, I'm an idiot for not waiting for the US test. Given the Forester's rating, though, it amazed me to see a step backwards for Subaru.

 

Oh well......

[Jon in CT]

1. The curtain airbags did deploy in the at first but not in time. They weren't so much "defective" as they were "ineffective"

They were defective. Subaru's supplier failed to build them to Subaru's specifications. From Subaru's press release at http://vocuspr.vocus.com/VocusPR30/DotNet/Newsroom/Query.aspx?SiteName=Subaru&Entity=PRAsset&SF_PRAsset_PRAssetID_EQ=87101&XSL=PressRelease&Title=Releases&Cache=True:

... during the original side impact protection test conducted by the IIHS, the side curtain airbag of the Subaru Legacy sedan did not deploy properly. Investigation revealed that although designed and developed correctly, the side curtain airbags of early production 2005 Subaru Legacy and Outback sedan models were not built to manufacturer specifications. A recall was conducted to correct the problem.

2. I love to hear the "who cares?" argument about safety. I'm sure that if a loved one was driving your car when it got hit from the side that you'd care.

Everyone cares about safety. If you're too cheap to trade up to a 2006 Legacy to better protect your loved ones, who are we to criticize.

3. If the structure is so vastly improved in 2006 then why are the intrustion rates so close?

The structure isn't "so vastly improved." Subaru introduced some changes that are invisible cosmetically to improve side impact performance. Subaru is continually introducing changes, even during the course of a model year's production.

4. No, I didn't wait for the IIHS test and I relied on the Aussie test when buying the car. Yes, I'm an idiot for not waiting for the US test. Given the Forester's rating, though, it amazed me to see a step backwards for Subaru.

Well, you bought a car that can ace the ANCAP and NHTSA crash tests. What are you whining about?

[melayout]

Austin,

 

1. Sue Subaru

2. Get what you "deserve"

3. Stop whining

 

KThxBye

[RockyMtnGT]

I feel REALLY bad for anyone who bought an 04 now...Maybe we should all chip in and ask Subaru to split the difference, so all the 04 people can drive '06s with a turbo, navigation AND better side impact protection...

 

Who's first?

 

PS the people driving 1999's should ask for their $$$ back...they got jacked

[StringFellow]

Ok, people need to quit your whining.

 

Here's a pic of 2005.

 

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/image.ashx?rh=259&id=2

 

here's a pic of 2006.

 

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/image.ashx?rh=602&id=2

 

 

If you google around, you can also find the 2005 side impact test video footage.

 

You will notice that there is a significant difference in the airbag deployed form the seat. You will also notice that the frame of the car is less bent up, thus reducing intrustion into the cabin.

 

One thing not made readily clear, is that for some reason IIHS decides that the dummy best for this test is a 4'11" 5th percentile female dummy. The reason dummy got a poor rating for the torso was because the short bummy basically had the shoulder in teh gap between teh curtain and set bags. The poor pelvis rating was because the seat bag does not deploy too far down and the degree of intrusion into the cabin meant that much mroe of an impact to the pelvis. Head injury protection was good because the head hit smack dab into the curtain airbag.

 

Tey redid the seat airbags, the curtain airbags appear to be essentially the same. The seat airbags now cover the pelvis, and extend higer to minimize the gap the shoulder could be exposed in.

 

If you are 5'2" or more, I'd suspect you'd not get the poor torso results with the 2005 airbags. On top of that, there looks to eb changes to how the crumple zone functions, which they couldn't retrofit even if they wanted to. Also of note is that they changed the ATD (anthropomorphic test dummy) positioning guidelines for the most recent test procedures. The key change in this is likely that previously they did not put the adjustable shoulder belt height doohicky in the lowest position, now they do.

 

 

The simple fact is that unless you are a very short, torso-heavy female, you probably aren't getting screwed. If it is THAT important to you, buy 2006 seats and you should be in much better shape. That being said, the head score is the biggest factor for not being killed in the crash. You might fracture your pelvis, break yoru collar bone, and puncture a lung. Your hip might ache when it's rainy out, but you won't be a vegetable and you won't be dead.

 

Also remember the test is arbitrary in many ways. Cars with a wheelbase of 250cm or less get whacked 61cm behind the front axle. cars that are 250.1-289.9 get whacked in a position determined by (wheelbase/2)-64. That means, for example, the legacy gets whacked 69.5 cm behind the front axle, while the altima gets whacked 75.9 centimeters behind the front axle. Having compared the two videos, I'd suggest this made a noticable difference in cabin intrusion.

 

Don't put too much faith in a test rating. The point of IIHS's tests are to push manufacturers to spend money building cars that result in them paying out less claims. It is not necessarily a valid tool to compare car X vs car Y objectively.

 

 

Msot of all, remember that you are nto forced to buy the safest car, nor is a car required to score well to be on the road. You are essentially comapring something that is an optional feature and up to you to shop around and educate yourself about.

 

Also, take comfort in the declining popularity of the SUV.. unless of course the changes to make the 2006 survive the IIHS SUV crash make it more dngerous in a car vs. car crash. Then you might want to start panicing and complaining again.

 

Awesome post Raz! You hit ever point right on the head!!! Based on the pictures you posted, it appears the biggest difference is the placement of the airbags (like you mentioned). I bet if the 05s had seats with similar airbags, testing results MAY be very similar. But would installing 06 seats in an 05 result in better crash tests, not necessarily.

 

The biggest and most significant comment you made is where the impact was located. Do people really think that all side impacts are at the same location/angle as the crash tests? An impact difference of a couple inches could make a huge difference.

 

I take the crash ratings and look at the overall ratings and make a general decision on how good the car is. The 06s have better ratings, but the 05s are still a really safe car. Look at the Mazda 6! I considered buying a Mazda 6 wagon before buying the OB. I made the right decision.

 

Relax guys....the 05s are safe and each evolution of the Legacy will get better. Maybe if you want the safest car, get a 12 or 24 month lease.

 

 

-S

[gt_ltd]

I heard the new Wife 2006 is better (younger, nicer, and hotter) than Wife 2005.

[StringFellow]

I heard the new Wife 2006 is better (younger, nicer, and hotter) than Wife 2005.

 

I heard she rides better too!

[gt_ltd]

time for a test drive.

[team23jordan]

i wear a airbag suit

 

 

http://www.fjrowners.ws/forum/messages/2654/10270.jpg

 

[Jon in CT]

Exclusive picture (from all over the Internet) of the Michelin Man's love child.