Safest cars by insurance saftly institute

[BuddyP]

While watching some of the news this morning they mentioned the top cars that the insurance institute claimed as the safest. To my suprise the Ford Five Hundred/Montigo tested best in the full size test, Saab 9-3 best in mid size with the Chevy Malibu in there also. I found it interesting that CNN went out of their way to note that Saab was owned by GM and it was good to see a US owned car in there.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

While watching some of the news this morning they mentioned the top cars that the insurance institute claimed as the safest. To my suprise the Ford Five Hundred/Montigo tested best in the full size test, Saab 9-3 best in mid size with the Chevy Malibu in there also. I found it interesting that CNN went out of their way to note that Saab was owned by GM and it was good to see a US owned car in there.

[post="53076"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

This made my local news as well.

Good story, LOTS of good exposure and shots of the 500 and especially Malibu, although they didn't mention the Saab-GM connection.

GM (and Ford for that matter) needs to promote this! It's a great accomplishment!

[Sixty8panther]

NO surprise there... the 500/Montego are like the modern day AMCs. They're so damn tall you wonder if they were going after the SUV crowd. It's mass is pretty obvious. I hate this current tall car trend.... Much more prefer the lower, longer, wider school of thought from days of yore. LAst time I saw a Ford 500 was walking out of a MObil on the run... the damn thing looks like a cartoon, tall and frunmpy.

[pow]

NO surprise there... the 500/Montego are like the modern day AMCs.

They're so damn tall you wonder if they were going after the SUV crowd. It's mass is pretty obvious. I hate this current tall car trend....

[post="53425"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

It's no heavier than a comparable Avalon or LaCrosse. The good ratings are probably attributable to its Volvo underpinnings.

[Whistler]

NO surprise there... the 500/Montego are like the modern day AMCs.

They're so damn tall you wonder if they were going after the SUV crowd. It's mass is pretty obvious. I hate this current tall car trend....

Much more prefer the lower, longer, wider school of thought from days of yore. LAst time I saw a Ford 500 was walking out of a MObil on the run... the damn thing looks like a cartoon, tall and frunmpy.

[post="53425"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I agree.

The 500 looks weird in traffic. Its no bigger than the Crown Vic, but its ride height makes it look out of scale with the other cars around it.

The Fusion has much better proportions.

[regfootball]

NO surprise there... the 500/Montego are like the modern day AMCs.

They're so damn tall you wonder if they were going after the SUV crowd. It's mass is pretty obvious. I hate this current tall car trend....

Much more prefer the lower, longer, wider school of thought from days of yore. LAst time I saw a Ford 500 was walking out of a MObil on the run... the damn thing looks like a cartoon, tall and frunmpy.

[post="53425"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

yeah, but its a hellova lot more comfy than all the old low rider cars i used to have. i can put up with some frumpy looks if it means i don't feel like i'm sitting in a bathtub.

you see, when i am driving i cannot see the tall car proportions and i honestly don't care if other drivers think it looks weird.

besides, many toyotas seem to be getting this same tall car look now and if toyota does it.......

comfort over looks. i'll take that tradeoff. Edited December 30, 2005 by regfootball

[I hope GMRULES again]

So is the Malibu safer than an Impala?

[pow]

So is the Malibu safer than an Impala?

[post="63551"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

They haven't tested the Impala yet, though it's very possible, considering the Malibu's European underpinnings.

[Newbiewar]

They haven't tested the Impala yet, though it's very possible, considering the Malibu's European underpinnings.

[post="63560"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

the impala has more saftey features... I would list them, but this is always the part of the "walk around" that i start lossing my attention span. (haha after you get done talking about under the hood and performance, you go to the drivers seat and discuss saftey features... blabla bla... "how much horsepower?") Edited December 27, 2005 by Newbiewar

[pow]

the impala has more saftey features... I would list them, but this is always the part of the "walk around" that i start lossing my attention span.  (haha after you get done talking about under the hood and performance, you go to the drivers seat and discuss saftey features... blabla bla... "how much horsepower?")

[post="63599"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The Malibu has side torso-protecting airbags, which the Impala doesn't have. I believe the Impy SS has Stabilitrak, though... does the Malibu SS have that? I know the G6 GTP has it.

[Robert Hall]

yeah, but its a hellova lot more comfy than all the old low rider cars i used to have.  i can put up with some frumpy looks if it means i don't feel like i'm sitting in a bathtub.

[post="53665"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The high SUV-like H-point (hip point of the seats) was an early marketing point for the 500/Montego, so Ford definitely is playing them up as a car alternative to SUVs...

I've gotten so used to driving an SUV that it's really awkward when I drive an old style lower-longer-wider car... I had an '06 Grand Prix as a rental last week--- really bad visibility out the back and rear 3/4s, and trying to parallel park it was a pain--you can't really sense where the edges of the car are..

[Croc]

SUVs are the best for driver visibility. You cannot convince me otherwise. Driving position is also much closer in them to a natural seating position.

[balthazar]

Actually, a regular cab pickup would unquestionably be better; much wider fields of vision with the windows closer to you.

[I hope GMRULES again]

They haven't tested the Impala yet, though it's very possible, considering the Malibu's European underpinnings.

[post="63560"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Maybe the insurance institute hasn't tested the Impala yet but somebody else has cause I remember watching the video about a month back and the Impala got 5 stars all around.

[regfootball]

NO surprise there... the 500/Montego are like the modern day AMCs.

They're so damn tall you wonder if they were going after the SUV crowd. It's mass is pretty obvious. I hate this current tall car trend....

Much more prefer the lower, longer, wider school of thought from days of yore. LAst time I saw a Ford 500 was walking out of a MObil on the run... the damn thing looks like a cartoon, tall and frunmpy.

[post="53425"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

but its so nice, sitting chair high and not feeling like your in a bathtub, er.....camaro....er, lesabre..... Edited December 30, 2005 by regfootball

[regfootball]

It's no heavier than a comparable Avalon or LaCrosse. The good ratings are probably attributable to its Volvo underpinnings.

[post="53432"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

yeah the FWD 500 is under 3700 pounds.....not much more than the lavalon or buick products. it does feel heavy and secure and stout. SAFE, even.

[Sixty8panther]

Sorry Reg but you'd have to bribe me with Drew Barrymore to get me to drive a 500 every day... let alone buy one.

I'm not into the tall car thing, not really into SUVs, not into mot crossovers and I hate minivans.

Either it's muclecars, compact sporty cars or Lower - Wider - Longer... that's my thing. The Datsun is an ugly pos, no doubt but it's mechanicals and quirkyness make it desirable to me.... a Ford 500 is just a overpriced Taurus to me... safe as a bank vault nonwithstanding.

I think the ultimate conservative sedan of late was the Park Ave ultra. :wub:







it's no '59 flattop but it sure beats the hell out of the Avalon and Lucerne, nevermind the 500/Montego.

just my $0.02

[2005 EquinoxLS]

The new Impala should be good in a crash test considering that the 2000-2005 got a 5 star rating. I know the Malibu is real good also. As for seating position I do like being up higher in the Equinox. But I also like the 1981 Bonneville and 1984 Buick Park Avenue too. Some people(My parents) like a little taller vehicle because you dont have to slouch at all to get into it. The Equinox is the perfect height for this. I dont fault the Ford 500 for being higher because there are a lot of people who want it like that. Want low. Get a sports car.

[Satty]

Fuck outward visibility. (Sorry, trying to see if we still have censors) 68 and I may not agree on most things, but we agree on this, lower is better, you feel more connected to the road, you feel like you are driving instead of piloting. SUVs have a lot of glass, so duh they have good outward visibility, so do station wagons. Sitting higher can, if you glance quickly, effect your depth perception (ok, maybe that one is just me) and allows for smaller vehicles to sneak into the massive blind spots, they really only offer the best outward visibility if you are looking forward. Forget about backing up or parallel parking, unless you get the backup warning thingys. In my experience, the best outward visibility for the driver comes from an honest to god station wagon. Because really, what does that higher vantage point get you in traffic? It doesn't matter to me if I am at eye level with the back glass of the Tahoe in front of me or with the tailgate badge, doesn't really help the fact that I'm caught in traffic, now does it?