The Ford Mustang performed slightly better than rival muscle cars Chevrolet Camaro and Dodge Challenger in a series of crash tests conducted recently by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

 

While none of the three earned the institute's Top Safety Pick, which requires good or better ratings in five crashworthiness tests, the Mustang came closest.

 

The Camaro fell short in one category and lacks an available front crash prevention system, also known as forward collision avoidance warning. Tests found Challenger to be "most in need of improvement."

 

"Given that sports cars have high crash rates, it's especially important that they offer the best occupant protection possible in a crash," said Adrian Lund, IIHS president.

 

I really thought the Camaro would have performed better since its the " all new " and came out in Q4 of 2015. And it lacking an available front crash prevention system is a surprise too.

 

As for the (un)Challenger... Well its no surprise. Its a relic.

 

 

http://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2016/05/24/ford-mustang-chevolet-camaro-dodge-challenger-crash-safety-tests/84775394/

For me personally, I could care less about a "an available front crash prevention system" so that would never deter me from buying something. Radar cruise control..? Possibly. 

"The Camaro fell short in one category and lacks an available front crash prevention system, also known as forward collision avoidance warning."

 

You mean that annoying chime that most people just shut off anyway....?

 

We're not talking about something that hits the brakes for you... just the chime that tells you you're about to hit.....

 

But when it comes to the actual impact...

 

The only test on which Mustang fell below a "good" rating was on the small overlap frontal crash. he Mustang received an acceptable rating on that test, while the Camaro was rated good.......

....

The safety cage of the Camaro, which was redesigned for the 2016 model year, performed well, even better than Mustang, maintaining ample survival space for a dummy in the driver's seat.

 

Once you've hit, you're actually better off in the Camaro.  Yet the mustang is somehow better because it can tell you you're about to hit.

 

The only time you're better in a Mustang is if you flip the car over.....

 

The Mustang received a good rating for roof strength, while the Camaro and Challenger received an "acceptable" on that factor. 

 

Just goes to show you how poorly weighted this comparison is when the optional annoying chime that can easily be disabled by the driver trumps actual impact performance.

Ford guy posts a misleading article about crash ratings that paints the Mustang as the safest, then offers ignorant commentary. This is sure to spark a fair and thoughtful discussion. Perhaps GM made a mistake omitting the front collision alert entirely (available in the ATS), but don't put on some fake incredulous attitude about how you can't believe the Camaro doesn't have a feature that most of us don't want to begin with.

 

The Camaro bested the Mustang in the small overlap test, Mustang performed best in the roof stress test. Statistically, the test you want to succeed in for actual safety reasons is the small overlap, and THAT is the test that reflects a newer platform.

It is possible that Ford will update the Mustang's crash structure to deal with offset frontal collisions. It seems to have worked for their pickups.

None of the three are a top pick, and the Mustang is the first loser. Yay?

So I'm wondering. Did Ford's stock go up after this "report"?

So I'm wondering. Did Ford's stock go up after this "report"?

We should look at the history and see what the stock price was in may for all three companies and now to see who really won.

Iwatched all three crash tested on you-tube (Camaro, Mustang, Challenger) talk about being sad to watch!

Edited August 30, 20169 yr by A Horse With No Name
Capitalization