Crash Results for Late Model Vehicles
The ability of an auto to withstand a crash has a direct bearing
on the cost to insure it. The more susceptible a vehicle is to damage,
the more expensive—even in a minor crash—it will be to
repair. Other factors, such as design and susceptibility to theft,
also adversely affect auto insurance costs.
Collision coverage results
Insurance company claim departments collect information on loss
payments for vehicles that they insure. The data includes how often
collision claims are made on specific types of vehicles and for
how much. The Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) compiles these
statistics annually.
HLDI’s best and worst collision coverage results for selected
1999–2001 models are provided. Findings show that claims experience
doesn’t change substantially from model year to model year,
if the basic design remains essentially unchanged. A comprehensive
list of passenger vehicles for 1998–2000 model years is available
online at www.highwaysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ictl/ictl.htm,
the latest at close of publishing.
The difference in theft losses between the best and worst vehicles
shows great disparity. Jaguar’s XK series average overall theft
loss or loss payment per insured vehicle year is six and a half
times greater than the best vehicle, the Oldsmobile Silhouette.
In the average loss payment per claim category, the Jaguar XK8 sports
car outpaces the Chrysler Town & Country 4WD minivan with a
loss payment of over five and a half times greater than the minivan.
Large passenger and cargo vans tend to have lower insurance losses.
Sports and midsize luxury models and some midsize SUVs have the
highest. Vehicle size strongly affects collision losses. Smaller,
sportier cars, pickup trucks and SUVs have higher claims frequency
and average loss payments per claim.
Bumper standards
Bumpers that protect cars from damage in low-speed crashes have
been around for decades. Around 1915, before automakers started
equipping cars with bumpers, they were supplied as add-ons. Bumper
tests conducted as early as 1931 had vehicles remaining damage-free.
The first federal bumper standard started with 1973 models when
5 mph front-into-flat-barrier and 2.5 mph rear-into-barrier requirements
were introduced. The following year rear impact speed was increased
to 5 mph.
The US Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a bumper standard
prohibiting all but very minor cosmetic bumper damage starting with
1980 models. Cars were built to withstand low-speed impacts with
virtually no damage, meaning lower and less frequent repairs. Despite
the standard’s success, the DOT bowed to pressure from automakers
and rolled back requirements from 5 to 2.5 mph start-ing with 1983
models. The major argu-ment in justifying the rollback was that
2.5 mph bumpers would weigh less, reducing gas consumption. Insurance
Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) crash tests repeatedly show
that bumper performance is not related to weight. Some of the better
bumpers weigh less than their less effective counterparts and some
of the worst performing bumpers cost more than older, better performing
ones.
Current bumper standards specify that bumpers and safety-related
equipment must withstand a 2.5 mph crash without sustaining damage.
This applies to passenger cars only and does not include minivans,
pickups or SUVs.
2001 IIHS bumper crash tests
Bumpers should protect car bodies from damage in low-speed collisions,
the kind that frequently occur in congested urban traffic.
IIHS conducts four tests to assess bumper performance. The first
two, front- and rear-into-flat barrier, measure a bumper’s
overall energy-absorbing capabilities. The impact is spread over
the whole face of the bumper with no reason for any car to sustain
damage in either test.
The other tests, front-into-angle-barrier and rear-into-pole, measure
primarily the strength of the bumper reinforcement beam. These tests
are more demanding because they are more representative of real
crashes and involve concentrations of crash energy at specific locations.
Recent bumper tests are starting to prove that you don’t have
to give up safety for size. The 1998 Volkswagen Beetle survived
IIHS’ 40 mph test better than any small car it tested. The
chart on the facing page shows 5 mph barrier test results of some
of the newer IIHS-tested models.
Government crash tests
The government’s highway safety organization planned to crash
test 113 new model vehicles, with the first wave slated for completion
in December 2000. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) was expected to test 82% of all 2001 models sold in the
US for frontal impact safety. The test to be used is a 35 mph crash
into a fixed barrier. Side impact tests are also planned. For additional
information visit www.nhtsa.gov.
Recent claim loss changes
Up to a few years ago, a car’s make and model had not affected
personal passenger auto liability premiums, only those for collision
and comprehensive coverages. Some major auto insurers have raised
liability premiums for certain sport utility vehicles (SUVs), pickups
and large vans based on company data, including claims experience
and losses sustained in crashes with smaller vehicles.
Insurers are also analyzing claims and crash data, assigning premiums
based on a model’s safety record. Pickups and SUVs typically
have below-average insurance claims losses under collision coverage
but higher than average property damage liability losses, according
to a 1998 HLDI study. Property damage liability claims for large
utility vehicles are nearly one-third higher than the average loss
payment for all passenger vehicles. On the upside, large SUVs have
the lowest overall collision coverage losses, averaging about 40%
below that of other passenger vehicles.
Some insurers are starting to price medical payments coverage based
on the protection a vehicle provides in a crash. Models with advanced
safety systems would benefit from reduced medical payments premiums.
All losses are stated in relative terms, with 100
representing the average loss payment per insured vehicle year.
A loss payment result of 122 is 22% worse than average, a result
of 90 is 10% better than average. 100 (average) = $267, which is
the average loss per insured vehicle year for 1999–2001 models.
All losses are stated in relative terms, with 100
representing the average claims frequency per 100 insured vehicle
years. A claims frequency result of 122 is 22% worse than average,
a result of 90 is 10% better than average. 100 (average) = 8.7 claims
per 100 insured vehicle years for 1999–2001 models.
All losses are stated in relative terms, with 100
representing the average claims frequency per 100 insured vehicle
years.
A claims frequency result of 122 is 22% worse than average, a result
of 90 is 10% better than average. 100 (average) = $3,087 for 1999–2001
models.
Source: Highway Loss Data Institute, “1999–2001 Insurance
Collision Report”
Note: Repair costs for small and midsize cars reflect
February 2001 parts and labor prices. Repair costs for large family
and large luxury cars reflect November 2001 prices. Repair costs
for passenger vans and small pickup trucks reflect November 2001
prices. Small and midsize SUV repairs reflect November 2001 rates.
* Includes cost to replace air bags, which deployed
Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). A complete
list of crash-tested vehicles is available at www.highwaysafety.org.
 |
The Insurance
Institute for Highway Safety reports that only 5% of the 168
1999-model vehicles whose head restraints were tested received
the highest rating of “good” and one-third were rated
as “poor.” Whiplash-related insurance claims cost
$7 billion a year, and two-thirds of all auto accident injury
claims involve neck sprains. |
|
