Thread: Tesla Model 3
View Single Post
Old 10-31-2018, 02:00 AM   #691 (permalink)
JSH
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: PDX
Posts: 918

Adventure Seeker - '04 Chevy Astro - Campervan
90 day: 17.3 mpg (US)

Dieselgate - '14 VW Jetta Sportwagen TDI
90 day: 38.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 24
Thanked 447 Times in 312 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard View Post
The forces on the people in a crash in a Model 3 are significantly lower than even the Model S. The chances of injury in a Model 3 is something like only 6.3%, vs something like 9% in the Model S. And the Model X is only a bit higher than the S.

All three of them are well ahead of the rest of the field - of 5 Star cars. The worst of the 5 Star cars has a chance of injury of something like 29%.

So, there most definitely is a difference between cars with the same rating.

Also, Tesla has made many changes as they ramped up production. We don't know when the teardown car(s) were built.
The difference between the forces in the Model 3 and Model S mostly due to the difference between the vehicle weights. The more a car weighs the more force it must dissipate when that car smashes into an immovable object. A Model S weighs up to 1000 lbs more than a Model 3. Weight is a disadvantage when hitting a immovable object. The test is only tangentially relevant in the real world.

This is why the NHTSA very clearly says that crash ratings are not comparable between different classes of cars or cars in the same class that differ by more than 250lbs.

EDIT: Per the Jalopnik article linked above; the cut-off for a 5 star rating is a 10% chance of injury. A car with a 29% chance of injury would get a 2 star rating.

The Model 3 scored lower than the BMW 3 Series, Mercedes C-Class, and Audi A4 in IIHS crash tests. That blows a hole in the "Tesla Model 3 is the safest car ever" headlines.


Last edited by JSH; 10-31-2018 at 02:15 AM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JSH For This Useful Post:
oldtamiyaphile (10-31-2018)