CONSUMER NEWS    RECALLS    COMPLAINT FORM    SCAM ALERTS  


Complain about a product or service

Small Claims Guide | Class Actions | Lemon Law | FAQ | Resources | Newsletters | Spanish
Automotive    Education    Electronics    Family    Finance    Health    Homeowners    Shopping    Travel   
NEWS   Latest |  Archives |  Auto |  Cells, etc. |  Computers |  Financial |  Health |  Homeowners |  Parents |  Privacy |  Scams |  Seniors |  Travel

Feds' Roof Crush Rule Inadequate, Critics Charge

More testing needed to protect occupants




Advertisement

March 28, 2008

Rollovers

Nader Protests Feds' Roof Crush Plan
Treacherous Treads Still Taking Lives
Ford Class Action Settlement Leaves Consumers in the Dust
Feds' Roof Crush Rule Inadequate, Critics Charge
New Study: Stronger SUV Roofs Save Lives
Ford Loses $82 Million Rollover Verdict Appeal
Feds Delay Roof Strength Rule Again
Ford Settles Explorer Rollover Lawsuits
Safety Crusaders Seek Action on Roof Crush Injuries
Roof Crush Summit Highlights Safety Shortcomings
Feds Ignore Roof Crush Conference
Feds Delay New Roof Strength Rule
GM to Offer Rollover Airbags, Ford to Strengthen Roofs
Safety Groups Want Earlier Stability Control Rule
---
More about Rollovers ...

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) proposed performance standard for vehicle roofs falls woefully short of satisfying a congressional mandate to significantly improve the ability of vehicles to protect occupants in rollover crashes, Public Citizen said in comments filed Thursday with the agency.

NHTSA’s proposed roof crush rule fails to require manufacturers to test both the driver and passenger sides of vehicles and does not require a dynamic test that mimics an actual rollover, which would include taking into account passenger ejection and containment, the group said.

Instead, NHTSA’s rule relies on measuring the ability of the driver’s side roof to resist 2.5 times the vehicle’s weight, which is an increase from the existing standard but does very little by itself to improve safety, according to Public Citizen’s comments.

“Congress demanded that NHTSA do something to reduce the more than 10,500 deaths each year from rollover crashes, and what it got was a feeble proposal that seems more intent on appeasing industry than improving safety,” said Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook, who served as NHTSA administrator from 1977 to 1981.

“In fact, NHTSA estimates that the proposal will save, at most, only 44 lives a year. We need a comprehensive, dynamic testing standard that looks not only at roof strength but also what happens to passengers during a rollover.”

Congress instructed NHTSA in the 2005 highway bill to reduce rollover deaths by writing new performance standards that would improve vehicle stability, reduce passenger ejections and increase roof strength.

The legislation also clearly called for testing both sides of the vehicle roof.

Studies show that the initial impact of a rollover can substantially weaken the other side of the roof, which greatly increases the chance it will crumple and injure the occupant.

Public Citizen’s comments call for NHTSA to put more research into developing a test that focuses on protecting occupants during rollover crashes. The agency’s proposal is so inadequate that Public Citizen recommends NHTSA go back to the drawing board and produce a completely new proposal.



Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.


Consumer News

May 12 2008

Recent Recalls & Safety Alerts

READER SERVICES

Print, Email & More

Subscribe

Free consumer newsletters
Sign up now!





More automotive videos ...



Back to the top |

Advertisement


Home | Rogues Gallery | Good Guys | Complaint Form | News | Recalls | Search | Video | FAQ |
Consumer Resources | Small Claims Guide | Lemon Law | Newsletter | Contact Us
Advertise With Us | Testimonials | Newsroom | RSS Feeds | Radio | Job Postings




Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice.  ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof. 

Copyright © 2003-2008 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc.  All Rights Reserved.