The Insurance Institute For Highway Safety named the Chevrolet Spark a Top Safety Pick this year, the only car in the subcompact class to earn the title. Even though the Spark proved to be the safest of 11 other vehicles, small cars still don’t do very well in crash tests.
The Spark earned an overall score of “Acceptable” (3 out of 4 stars), beating out big players in the segment like the Kio Rio, Ford Fiesta, Toyota Yaris and GM’s other subcompact, the Sonic, which all received a “marginal” rating of 2 out of 4 stars.
So, even with advancements in technology, it seems the subcompact class is destined to struggle with safety ratings. The matter was discussed briefly by International Business Times in the video below.
Comments
There is no way, that a manufacturer can make a sub compact 100% crash proof. In order to do so, the price of the vehicle would be astronomical.
Someone entering the sub compact as a buyer, should be aware of this. It would be legitimate advertising, to point out that the Spark is the safest car in its class.
There’s no way to make ANY car ‘crash proof’. All cars deform in a crash, some more than others.
In fact, I don’t think there is such a thing as ‘crash proof’; more like ‘crash mitigation’.
Kudos to GM/Chevrolet for having the safest car in the class.
Graw… I think you’re on to something that had been argued for thousand of years. Degrees versus absolutes.
I’m a believer in degrees… Mitigation works fine for me.
At 00:16 what does IIHS mean? The sign says ” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety”, but the narrator says” International Institute for Highway Safety”. Did he read the sign before recording the video?
I noticed that too. The IIHS is an American organization, so I’m not sure why he thought international would be apart of its name. He also said the Spark was the safest car “even though most people cant actually buy the car”, leading me to believe he thinks the only version of Chevrolet Spark you can buy is the Spark EV.
R Smyrna … I don’t buy into absolutes either, although there is the induction fallacy that gives me pause when I labour over scientific and engineering matters. Thankfully, I’ve not seen ANY instance in which the induction fallacy has given mean reason to think that the next Chevy Spark crash test would mean it would get a poor rating.
That’s why I choose the word ‘mitigation’, it’s how the Spark deals with small overlap crash test by reacting to the conditions it’s been subjected to. 1 mph faster or 1 inch further to the left and it’s ability to mitigate the conditions might be completely different.
That, and when I read ‘crash proof’ I thought of ‘bullet proof’, which is another misleading phrase 😉
The General has been very good lately with its crash test scores. But, they struggle with the small-overlap test. They need to improve the front corner structures on all of their models so the ratings go up. .