Has anyone heard about safety on the new 05 Mustang. This is something that is very important to me. I have a family to think about. I lost a friend to a car accident in his 92 GT. Drunk crossed yellow line and hit. It was an offset crash, which is the worst. He was buckled in, but the car just crushed him inside it. Funny thing is that the drunk was driving a Hyndia accent coupe. They estimate his speed at 75 mph when he hit. My friend was stopped at a red light and got hit out of nowhere. Died instanlty, left behind a wife a 8 month old son about five years ago. I wonder if anything has been released about safety yet?
On a serious note
- Thread starter spanky442
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
Wylde
New Member
I would think it would be safer than the current model (how much, who knows). The big 3 get scrutenized more than anyone else for safety, and they are always striving to do better because it helps sell the product when it's considered safest in it's class. Like Winstar had that 5 star safety rating for years, they sold a lot of them because of that. Good for us.
the SN95's were rated at 4 and 5 (out of 5) stars for frontal crashes. i highly doubt that the 05's will be a step back.
66Satellite
Banned
- Feb 6, 2003
- 649
- 0
- 0
spanky442 said:
It would be hard to survive the accident you describe, though I don't think side-impact beams were required in 92 (though I know my 70s Volvo had 'em). But your best protection in a side-impact is going to come from weight--which is one thing I like about my Satellite, which weighs 4000 pounds and also lacks a C-pillar to bash my head on. The SN95 has some safety issues--mostly the gas tank setup--but I imagine the 05 should be plenty safe.
66Satellite said:
Yea, I thought offset front impact tests were done at 30 mph. I would be surprised if anyone was doing crash certification at speeds that high.
I think if someone hits you and there is a speed differential of 75 mph, you're pretty much screwed. As for the '05, I would think it is better than current just because there is more distance between the driver and the front bumper. Rear collisions should be better as well because of the fuel tank relocation. However, I haven't heard any official crash ratings so this is all speculative.
Sorry to hear about your pal spanky. That dude in the Hyundai should spend the next 20 years in jail and have his license revoked for life. Drunk driving penalties are way too lax in the U.S. IMO.
98CobraClone
New Member
I've worked a bunch of crashes and I can tell you that through the years.....the stangs have gotten better with protecting the occupants. I've never seen a 78 or older stang in a crash, but now the 03's......when struck in the front/side/or rear (as hard as it is to see) they hold up real well.
Here's some safety info from Ford
http://media.ford.com/products/pres...le_id=1052&press_subsection_id=424&make_id=92
Might help...
http://media.ford.com/products/pres...le_id=1052&press_subsection_id=424&make_id=92
Might help...
blazinsteed
New Member
We need more info I see you have access to the media stuff will you divulge some more info that we don't have yet?
blazinsteed said:
Most of the info is available to anyone. Just go to www.media.ford.com and start searching.
If you have Ford approved press credentials you can get access to the special section. But all there really is there is the same info, just released earlier so they can appear in the various publications around the same time that Ford officially releases the information.
I wouldn't worry about the safety record for the new 2005+ Mustang. Ford has to meet certain guidelines for safety on their cars. Safety technology has come a long way since 1992. Cars are a lot safer now than they were back then. If you are paranoid about this buy yourself a bigger vehicle. I don't know what else to tell you.
