You are here:
Auto News >
Cobalt gets low crash test rating

Cobalt gets low crash test rating

Posted May 26th 2005 2:52PM

CommentsAdd

GM's newest economy offering, the Chevy Cobalt, received two stars out of five in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's side crash test for the driver. When the Cobalt was tested for a frontal crash, it received five stars for the passenger and four for the driver. The Cobalt offers side curtain airbags as an option, but this test represented one without the side airbag.

NHTSA tested 19 models from various makers and the Cobalt was the only car to receive two stars in any category. Two other cars tested in the compact class, the Scion tC and Saturn Ion received better scores. The Toyota Avalon, Volvo V70 and Mitsubishi Galant received top scores.

Category: Car Buying

New Features

2009 Most Satisfied Owners
Toyota Recalls Gas Pedals
Most Reliable Cars
Toyota Recall

2010 Cars

Add a Comment

Sign in »

20 Comments

Filter by:

Phydeaux

Post#18: "They are so behind everyone else. They [Chevrolet] have recall after recall." The post fails to mention that Toyota has recall after recall also... Forbes: Toyota recalls record 1.27 mln cars in Japan http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2005/10/18/afx2283230.html USA Today: Toyota vehicle recalls double in 2005 http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2005-12-01-toyota-recalls_x.htm?csp=34

December 15 2005 at 6:29 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

cmattson

Any additional comments on how the current-generation Camry scored only 2 out of 5 scores in a side-impact rating in it's first year debut? Face it: every manufacturer has it's problems. To Toyota's credit, the 2nd year of the current-generation, the car improved to it's current side-impact rating of 3 stars. Let's give GM a year to see it next year's models correct/improve the issue.

September 09 2005 at 1:52 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Donnie

Cobalt? what kind of name is that. Sounds like a lawnmowwer to me. They should of called it the cavalier. It looks like one. I think Chevy can't make anything right. They mess up any new product they put out. the Corvette is the only vehicle they have worth having. They are so behind everyone else. They have recall after recall.

August 20 2005 at 10:39 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Richard Warren

If we are all so concerned about safety, why do we drive talking on the cell phone, after drinking, smoking, eating that Big Mac, doublesized fries (a proven killer)and continue over the speed limit? I'm old enough to remember when safety didn't matter at all to consumers, now we are consumed with it. While capping on GM, who was the first company to have all it's models with anti-lock brakes? GM. Who was the first company to have reinforced door beams back in the late 60's? GM. I agree with one of the letters here. What's wrong with choice? That's for any or all of the supposed "safety items. I can stop a car in shorter distances without antilock, I'd rather not have air bags, thank you, for a variety of reasons, I don't want stablity enhancement. Ever think how much all this "safety equipment" to protect us from ourselves has added to the car? By the way having driven a Cobalt as a rental I can tell you this, it's a nicely built small car, and a Cavalier it is not. Lets face it, safety is relative, get hit at the right angle, the right speed, you can be injured or die. Do you really think a nylon airbag will stop an SUV with it's bumper at window height, weighing nearly 3 times as much as a Cobalt, let you walk away uninjured?

June 13 2005 at 6:11 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

K Smith

GM's comment on the test... (found at http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewmediastatedetail.do?domain=12&docid=15158 ) GM Statement on NHTSA Side Crash Test on Chevrolet Cobalt Attributable to Alan Adler, Manager, Product Safety Communications The 2005 Chevrolet Cobalt is designed to help provide comprehensive safety before, during and after a crash. The New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) side impact test conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is one of these performance measurements. The Cobalt performs well in a range of internal and third-party crash tests. "We were surprised by this outcome," said Bob Lange, GM executive director of vehicle structure and safety integration. "We are trying to understand the variations between NHTSA's and our laboratories that led to this result." The result contrasts an "Acceptable" rating the Cobalt received in side-impact testing by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety earlier this year. It was one of only two compact cars of 16 tested to receive the institute's second-highest rating. The IIHS conducted tests with and without optional side curtain airbags. The NCAP test was conducted without side airbags. "We believe the overall structure of the Cobalt to be exceptionally good," Lange said. The Cobalt received the IIHS "Best Pick" designation following frontal offset barrier testing and received 4 stars for the driver and 5 stars for the passenger in the NCAP frontal crash tests. The Cobalt also received four of five stars in the dynamic rollover test that NHTSA conducts. CONTACT(S): Alan Adler 586-947-4624 alan.adler@gm.com

May 31 2005 at 11:07 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Rick Kappler

please read this Cobalt article http://www.ai-online.com/issues/article_detail.asp?id=660

May 31 2005 at 1:13 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

mikes

Just for comparison: the scion tc (japanese make) was not tested with side air bags (according to the website) and it scored pretty well in sideimpact tests. Also, a G6 (another GM car) was tested with SAB and did very well. However, SAB are not standard on the G6. Thus, both arguments - bias towards Japanese makes and baseline testing - are invalid. The testing seems pretty random. I heard that car companies are responsible for providing the vehicle they wish to test. Why does GM provide a G6 with SAB and cobalt without one? Who knows? If the institute determines which car to test, then they should establish criteria for testing instead of this randomness. Either test all cars with SAB if they are available or test all in their base configs.

May 27 2005 at 2:11 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

qcomdrj

Exactly. You want airbags, buy them. Nobody keeps you from ordering them. People don't like seatbelts that put themselves on for a reason. Some people don't wear it. I don't know that I trust airbag manufacturers still.

May 27 2005 at 1:38 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

paul

and please tell me why it should not be an option. i would think that choice is always a good thing. or is it that people are too stupid to make the choice for themselves and must be told what to have in their car.

May 27 2005 at 11:08 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

skaedenfeld

I think the idea, as posted above is that they test the lowest common denominator, which in the case of the Cobalt is devoid of extra airbags, which clearly shows the effectiveness of that technology in cars that have them, such as the Subaru that I was using as my example. This, to me provides an interesting comparison, not only of the crash-worthiness of a particular car, but also the safety attitude of the manufacturer. Personally, I wish they could test a base model, in such a case as when the base model is not offered with standard side and side-curtain airbags and then a higher model that does offer those airbags as an option. That way the consumer would see how effective this very affordable ($700 +/-) technology is. Unfortunately, that likely would never happen. I am not bashing GM, or any other American company, specifically. I think that any company who does not offer these extra airbags standard on every model they make is behind the times.

May 27 2005 at 10:36 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply