Sorry guys the IIHS small overlap test test mode is not as self serving as you think (although it does admittingly benefit the the insurance companies financially it also benefits the end user too from a safety perspective). That said, The National Highway Traffic Safety Admin (aka NHTSA) simply views statistics. Once cars get safer in certain crash modes they look at next biggest statistical injury type and then look to eliminate it. Most any type of company has a form of continuous improvement - no different in the world of auto safety.
NHTSA has already launched a new round of New Car Assessement Tests(aka NCAP) that will take effect starting for cars to be sold in the 2019 model year. These tests require much more expensive dummy types (much more expensive than the current already expensive ones) and more test modes.
I do not believe that anyone here feels that newer cars are less safe than older cars- quite the opposite. My premise is as you may have alluded to, there are not a set of goals established to reach. It is more like a self fulfilling prophecy. Or like a typical government agency, in that in the end the agency seems to exist for itself, evidenced by most not using zero based budgeting for a bonified, specific need and simply increasing their budgets every year and ensuring they spend the current and previous budgets so they can get more/greater amounts of money the following budget year, which in the end justifies their existence.
There needs to be specific goals set and not just moving from one thing to the next until the end of time with all of the unseen ramifications. There needs to be some types of cost-benefit analyses associated with the goals available to the people; I have not seen either.
I can afford to purchase any type of new vehicle I please, within the realm of the middle class. Vehicles keep getting more expensive every year and I can afford to purchase and drive them. However, there is a segment of the U.S. population who can't afford the newer, safer, more fuel efficient, more environmentally friendly vehicles due to the expense- who are relegated to the older, less safe, less fuel efficient, less environmentally friendly vehicles.
I would like to see cost-benefit ratios for any government regulation so we as a people can decide what is best for our futures and not have this function relegated to government officials who have a self-serving interest. Call me skeptical, but I do not trust government regulators.
At this point in time I am far more comfortable with vehicle safety than I am with food safety, medication safety, nursing home safety or a myriad of other things. We need a balance.
Last edited: