stole this from another site.



350Z and Honda fanboys, double-check your blind spots. The 350Z and S2000 are on Forbes's list of most dangerous cars, gleaned via a pair of usual car-data suspects. While Consumer Reports largely calls out cheap-o subcompacts and aging pickups and SUVs sans curtain air bags, The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety notes the Nissan has a death rate that's around double that of the average sports car. Mainly, they say, due to its young, inexperienced and hoontastic driver base. The S2000's shortfall is curtain airbags, thanks to its, well, convertible top. Where the hell were these guys when the Fiat 124 faced down runaway Buick LeSabres on the nation's highways? [Forbes]

What do you think about this latest data?

I did some researching and Forbes top 20 most dangerous cars the 350Z is not on that list though several thought to be well made vehciles are, some to mention are the Honda S2000 and several Nissan/Mazda mini SUVs and Trucks.

 

Well maybe I am ok since I still drive my 1973 FIAT 124 that I purchased new in 1974, so I guess I learned to drive safely and I am ok in the S

 

The lack of curtain airbags makes it horrendously unsafe?

Tell that to the people I've seen posted that have driven off cliffs/embankments and ended up upsidedown and walked away with relatively minor injuries.

Meh..

 

i guess accident statistics (the many flipped s2000s with only minor cuts on occupants) mean nothing to forbes. side curtain airbags FTW... whatever

 

Grass>Side curtains

 

Safety nazis suck. You would think the S2000 would get extra points for not being rollover prone like fully loaded 15 passenger vans. The Insurance Institute has too much of an agenda for me to pay attention to.

 

Who buys a sports car to be safe? Did Sterling Moss or Mario Andretti worry much about their safety? (If they had, they would never have pursued the profession that they did.)

If you want to be safe, buy a Volvo or Saab tank.

I think most of us on this forum live in a different universe from the inordinately safety-conscious, milquetoast, fraidy-cats in society. And viva la difference.


(This isn't to denigrate "hondaBeater" for starting this thread in the least.)

 

Imo, no car's safe in an accident.

I've seen people surviving through horrible crashes (i.e. the car looks like a piece of junk) in cars that people perceive them to be dangerous (like Civics), while others suffering terribly through crashes in supposedly "safe" vehicles (e.g. Mercedes S-class).

Anyway, the S2000 is a smaller car. And I would imagine that if you conduct collision tests, the crash test dummy would be worse off compared to another bigger car with 10 airbags. But then, there are too many variables that I think that small difference won't make a huge diff. Ultimately it's how and what the car collides with that matter the most. Just my thoughts ...

In any case, the S2000 is small, and doesn't have side airbags and less safety features. Won't be surprised if it doesn't receive high safety ratings ...

 

I guess four and five star crash ratings, and excellent structural reinforcements just don't cut it anymore - now we need 43 airbags in the car too.

 

Ive seen pletny of people walk away from rollovers in this car. Big to Forbes