Another Jeep Wrangler crash test.

[Shots]

There's no doubt they're trying to make it as safe as possible. The key is that they have to do it while still retaining the appeal of the Wrangler, and keeping the cost in check. FCA has more to gain from better safety ratings, than by ignoring any potential deficits. The JL may not be as safe as some of the cars it was compared to, but it's safer than an older wrangler like a CJ. That means Jeep has been doing things to make the Wrangler safer. It may not be the safest vehicle on the road, but continual improvement shows that they keep working to make them safer. Jeep isn't ignoring safety.

Sponsored

 

[PavementWarrior]

There's no doubt they're trying to make it as safe as possible. The key is that they have to do it while still retaining the appeal of the Wrangler, and keeping the cost in check. FCA has more to gain from better safety ratings, than by ignoring any potential deficits. The JL may not be as safe as some of the cars it was compared to, but it's safer than an older wrangler like a CJ. That means Jeep has been doing things to make the Wrangler safer. It may not be the safest vehicle on the road, but continual improvement shows that they keep working to make them safer. Jeep isn't ignoring safety.

They are trying, but its a matter of getting it done.

No rear side airbags on a really narrow vehicle is not good, kids heads literally explode through side windows on impact. If they really wanna be a 4 door family vehicle, they need to aim for A not D-.

 

[Grimace-912]

Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn! ... R. Butler

 

[Shots]

When it comes down to it, if you're not happy with the quality of their crash test results, don't buy the vehicle. It's really that simple. Jeep has made improvements to make the Wrangler safer, which means they're not ignoring the issue. They could probably make it as safe as other vehicles, but that would increase the cost and potentially change the configuration/capability of the vehicle. People would surely complain that it cost too much, since they already do that now.
If you want an SUV that scores really well in crash tests, get a Mercedes GLC, or Mazda CX-5. Heck all of the top crash rated SUV's are more like cross-overs rather than SUV's, but they're safe. Jeep could go that way with the Wrangler, but the demand for the Wrangler would probably dry up fast.
I'm not saying Jeep should stop trying to make it safer, and they haven't. I'm also not saying the consumers should accept it as a Jeep thing, and stop asking for more. Obviously we've accepted the current level of safety since we bought them. I for one don't want a Wrangler that I can't take the top off of, and sits lower to the ground. If I wanted that I would have kept my Grand Cherokee. Maybe the Wrangler just isn't right for you, but there are safer Jeep options if you want them.

 

[sudeepi]

Again, it has to be said, the European safety rating is not a crash rating. It reduces the 3/5 crash rating to a 1/5 because automatic braking and steering aren’t standard features.

You mean, for those who can't drive a car by themselves by applying brakes when required, steer the vehicle to stay within a lane and expect a car to drive on its own?
LOL
Then why own a Wrangler? Just uber every time they want to hit a road.

 

[Al13]

I wonder what grade my Harley received?

 

[GGolds]

https://carbuzz.com/news/jeep-wrangler-gets-another-terrible-crash-test-rating

SIMPLE!. Crash a Wrangler head on into a Toyota Corolla, Camry, Honda Accord, Just about any compact car and see who would survive best. I am positive that the Wrangler occupants would fare far better in the Wrangler. The absurdity of smashing something against a well has and always will be ridiculous. Look at the NHTSA INSURANCE data for actual accident statistic and you will see a entirely different data on actual injury statistics. OH, and by the way the European standards for crash safety include things now available on the Wrangler, my 2019 has Automatic high and low speed breaking, lane change warning, rear traffic alert, ETC. Further more, what structural issues are they seeing. That Wrangler looks perfect from the firewall back. Not even a roof panel off.

 

[GGolds]

I wonder what grade my Harley received?

So true.

 

[GGolds]

What? You don't drive your Jeep 70mph into a concrete wall?

EXACTLY!!!!. Crash it against a Camry, guarantee the Wrangler occupants would do better.

 

[mwilk012]

SIMPLE!. Crash a Wrangler head on into a Toyota Corolla, Camry, Honda Accord, Just about any compact car and see who would survive best. I am positive that the Wrangler occupants would fare far better in the Wrangler. The absurdity of smashing something against a well has and always will be ridiculous. Look at the NHTSA INSURANCE data for actual accident statistic and you will see a entirely different data on actual injury statistics. OH, and by the way the European standards for crash safety include things now available on the Wrangler, my 2019 has Automatic high and low speed breaking, lane change warning, rear traffic alert, ETC. Further more, what structural issues are they seeing. That Wrangler looks perfect from the firewall back. Not even a roof panel off.

Well, it’s not that ridiculous. According to data collected by all 50 states, single vehicle accidents are more deadly on average than multi vehicle accidents. People hitting trees, poles, mountains, highway dividers, it happens.

 

[Chomper]

I'll go with insurance industry stats that show Jeep fatalities are lower than most other vehicles and that Jeeps are at the very top of cheapest vehicles to insure. If they were death traps this would not be the case.

Real world data over simulations every time.

 

[D60]

SIMPLE!. Crash a Wrangler head on into a Toyota Corolla, Camry, Honda Accord, Just about any compact car and see who would survive best. I am positive that the Wrangler occupants would fare far better in the Wrangler. The absurdity of smashing something against a well has and always will be ridiculous. Look at the NHTSA INSURANCE data for actual accident statistic and you will see a entirely different data on actual injury statistics. OH, and by the way the European standards for crash safety include things now available on the Wrangler, my 2019 has Automatic high and low speed breaking, lane change warning, rear traffic alert, ETC. Further more, what structural issues are they seeing. That Wrangler looks perfect from the firewall back. Not even a roof panel off.

See, I've always felt this way that mass had more to do with surviving a multi-vehicle collision than anything else.

I always say I'd take a '70's Cadillac over a new econo-box if the two vehicles had to collide (assuming the Caddy had 3 point seat belts)

But then I'm always assured that I'm wrong and the occupants of the brand new tiny car with airbags and crumple zones will fare better. I just don't believe it, so I guess I'm just destined to be wrong (shrug)

 

[GGolds]

Well, it’s not that ridiculous. According to data collected by all 50 states, single vehicle accidents are more deadly on average than multi vehicle accidents. People hitting trees, poles, mountains, highway dividers, it happens.

I was a Paramedic and Respiratory Therapist for 31 years. I've seen my fare share of motor vehicle accidents. I've seen all types of Jeeps, SUV's, Trucks, hit small or compact cars. Without fail the majority of the time the higher the chassis on a vehicle hitting a lower chassis vehicle, the truck, van, Jeep, SUV wins most of the time. High, heavy, and with all the air bags and safety features now the same in every vehicle, unlike the 70's and 80's. Utility vehicles, as they were called in the "old days", didn't have to comply with most safety standards that cars did. Now the all have to be equal in safety features. Jeep Wranglers from my experience crashed better then most cars it would hit. Passengers are just plain safer overall. Not perhaps, then crashing a Wrangler into, lets say a Ford F-250 for example, but you get my point. Even rollovers are rare now. That said, I'll take my Wrangler anytime. God willing nothing hits me or vise verse. Drive safe.

 

[GGolds]

When it comes down to it, if you're not happy with the quality of their crash test results, don't buy the vehicle. It's really that simple. Jeep has made improvements to make the Wrangler safer, which means they're not ignoring the issue. They could probably make it as safe as other vehicles, but that would increase the cost and potentially change the configuration/capability of the vehicle. People would surely complain that it cost too much, since they already do that now.
If you want an SUV that scores really well in crash tests, get a Mercedes GLC, or Mazda CX-5. Heck all of the top crash rated SUV's are more like cross-overs rather than SUV's, but they're safe. Jeep could go that way with the Wrangler, but the demand for the Wrangler would probably dry up fast.
I'm not saying Jeep should stop trying to make it safer, and they haven't. I'm also not saying the consumers should accept it as a Jeep thing, and stop asking for more. Obviously we've accepted the current level of safety since we bought them. I for one don't want a Wrangler that I can't take the top off of, and sits lower to the ground. If I wanted that I would have kept my Grand Cherokee. Maybe the Wrangler just isn't right for you, but there are safer Jeep options if you want them.

CRASH a Mazda CX-5 against a Wrangler and I guarantee the Wrangler occupants will be safer. Not a brick wall. Higher chassis to lower chassis. Simple physics.

 

[Steve0]

From an Aussie perspective the JL’s 1 star is a real disappointment, especially when you consider toyota’s 79 series landcruiser, which has a body on steel ladder frame with solid axels front & rear has a 5 star rating? I love the JL Rubicon, but jeep really missed the mark here…


http://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/toyota/landcruiser-cab-chassis/604bff

Sponsored