Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Drew Dowdell

Established GM Reputation for Safety Standards

27 posts in this topic

Established GM Reputation for Safety Standards

4608.jpeg

*brochure from 1974 Cadillac with Air Restraint System. GM was the first to offer airbags*

With all the negative press that has circulated about General Motors before and during its bankruptcy proceedings, customers should be aware that although financially troubled, GM is a recognized leader in car safety advances. The company pioneered the development of the now ubiquitous concrete barriers on national highways and was the first carmaker to install rear turn signals as standard equipment. Some of GM's safety innovations are obvious, while others are more subtle.

For instance, the company uses Event Data Recorders in electronic modules in its vehicles to capture information on vehicle and restraint function during crashes. The EDRs can be located in a number of spots including under the front seat or in 4-wheel drive steering modules. The EDR information is only accessed with the owner's consent, as an aspect of litigation, or as required by law, but the data aids in research to improve safety systems overall.

For the past ten years, GM, in partnership with Safe Kids USA, has taken a major role in family car safety education and has developed industry-leading rear seat comfort guides for children as well as a program to retrofit trunks against child entrapment. Currently GM and Chevrolet are supporting Safe Kids Buckle Up programs, an initiative for which they received the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Public Service Award.

In 2008, GM launched Stolen Vehicle Slowdown technology in 1 million 2009 models equipped with OnStar systems to help the police recover stolen cars and to cut down on the number of dangerous high-speed chases. In 2009 OnStar added an Injury Severity Prediction system intended to enhance automatic crash responses based on the degree of injury suffered by the vehicle's occupants.

Beyond such forward thinking programs, GM's 2009 vehicles performed especially well in crash test ratings with the Chevrolet Silverado series achieving five stars for front driver and passenger and side and rear impacts and four-star rollover ratings. Sedans like the Chevrolet Aveo and Cobalt varied between five and four stars across the boards although the Aveo 4-DR w/SAB (side air bags) received only three stars for side rear passenger impacts. The Chevrolet Avalanche, Equinox, Suburban, Tahoe and Trailblazer offered similar results although most of these vehicles received three star ratings in rollovers and the Trailblazer 4-DR w/SAB received only three stars for front driver safety. (For more detailed information on individual safety ratings per vehicle, see www.nhtsa.gov, the official site of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.)

As General Motors works to introduce new vehicles that meet enhanced fuel efficiency standards and likewise fulfill the public's desire for smaller, more economical cars and alternative energy propulsion units, more safety advances will undoubtedly follow. Atrophied management policies were responsible for the financial collapse of the former automotive giant, but GM engineers and designers have continued to do their jobs well for the consumers who drive General Motors products.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pontiac Ventura II had Air bag restraint optional in '73 before Caddy it was the Industries first.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say Cadillac offered it first ;) I said GM offered it first.

I could only find a brochure for the Caddy.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure Olds was first. Offered as an option on the '73 Toronado.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pretty sure Olds was first. Offered as an option on the '73 Toronado.

GM used to do their own car shows for the employees & retirees thats where i saw it first in '73 big bumper(5mph) in frt. , little bumper (2.5 mph) in back. IT was a big display the only elevated car cause the air bag was built here at Inland.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 73 Olds Tornado was the first car sold to the public with airbags, then some Buicks and Cadillacs followed in 1974-1976. Ford and Chevy experimented with airbags on government fleet cars. GM (being such innovators of safety) deleted the shoulder seat belt from airbag cars, and they had 7 fatalities because of the airbag, and abandoned them in 1976.

Mercedes S-class in 1980 had the first SRS system which used 3-point seatbelts that locked in place before the airbag deployed. And of course all cars use that system now. We can also thank Mercedes for safety cage with front/rear crumple zones, ABS, traction control, stability control, and brake assist.

Edited by smk4565
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 73 Olds Tornado was the first car sold to the public with airbags, then some Buicks and Cadillacs followed in 1974-1976. Ford and Chevy experimented with airbags on government fleet cars. GM (being such innovators of safety) deleted the shoulder seat belt from airbag cars, and they had 7 fatalities because of the airbag, and abandoned them in 1976.

Mercedes S-class in 1980 had the first SRS system which used 3-point seatbelts that locked in place before the airbag deployed. And of course all cars use that system now. We can also thank Mercedes for safety cage with front/rear crumple zones, ABS, traction control, stability control, and brake assist.

I call B/S on about half of these so called Benz 1st's ast your post almost reads from MB web site. Also if the US Gov. & auto industry had not done the leg work for the Mighty MB they wouldn't have bettered the US systems. The US had manual 3pt. belts in '68.

Crumple zones, stability control, and brake assist look to be true MB innovation though.

Modern ABS

Chrysler, together with the Bendix Corporation, introduced a true computerized three-channel all-wheel antilock brake system called "Sure Brake" on the 1971 Imperial.[3] It was available for several years thereafter, functioned as intended, and proved reliable. General Motors introduced the "Trackmaster" rear-wheel (only) ABS as an option on their Rear-wheel drive Cadillac models in 1971.[4][5]

In 1975, Robert Bosch took over a European company called Teldix (contraction of Telefunken and Bendix) and all the patents registered by this joint-venture and took advantage out of this acquisition to build the base of the system introduced on the market some years later. The German firms Bosch and Mercedes-Benz had been co-developing anti-lock braking technology since the 1970s, and introduced the first completely electronic 4-wheel multi-channel ABS system in trucks and the Mercedes-Benz S-Class in 1978. The Honda NSX was the first to mass produced automobile with the modern 4-channel ABS system sold in the United States and Japan, it applies individual brake pressure to each of the four wheels.

In addition, ABS is now gaining popularity on Heavy-duty trucks.

Traction control

The predecessor of modern electronic traction control systems can be found in high-torque, high-power rear-wheel drive cars as a limited slip differential.[citation needed] Limited slip differentials are a purely mechanical system that transfer a relatively small amount of power to the non-slipping wheel, it still allows some wheel spin to occur.

In 1971 the Buick division of GM introduced MaxTrac, which used an early computer system to detect rear wheel spin and modulate engine power to those wheels to provide the most traction. A Buick-exclusive at the time, it was an option on all full-size models, including the Riviera, Estate Wagon, Electra 225, Centurion, and popular LeSabre family sedan. Cadillac also introduced the ill fated Traction Monitoring System (TMS) in 1979 on the redesigned Eldorado. It was criticized for its slow reaction time and extremely high failure rate.

Stability control = BMW 1st

http://www.safetyresearch.net/Library/SRS028.htm

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We can also thank Mercedes for safety cage with front/rear crumple zones, ABS, traction control, stability control, and brake assist.

oo oooo dont forget chrysler = ch 11... we can thank them for that too... <_<

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oo oooo dont forget chrysler = ch 11... we can thank them for that too... <_<

Seems to be a trend too bad Toyo couldn't follow suit :twocents:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it amazing how SMK thinks MB came out with all of those safety innovations. Even the Stability control which MB gets credit for was developed by Bosch, not MB. <MB provided the funding and the test vehicles>

You're giving credit to MB for developing SRS when all SRS means is Supplemental Restraint System. When the airbag was first developed by GM, it was though of as a replacement for seat belts. They went about it that way because GM was trying to improve vehicle safety at a time when people pretty much refused to wear seat belts.

It took the savants over at Mercedes Benz to figure out that seat belts should be worn along with airbags, and thus came up with the marketing term SRS. I wonder how much they paid for that one.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pioneering and innovative spirit of GM during the 1960s and 1970s were what made GM a leader. GM needs to find that same spirit again.

(Yeah, yeah. I know about the Volt. But what about other neat and innovative features on other GM models?)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a shame they lost the reputation in the '80s and '90s with disasters like the Astro, Blazer, and Grand Am.

Their newer cars tend to do better in crash testing, but they're not all class-leading. For mainstream cars, the Germans (basically VW) still do safety best.

Edited by pow
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a shame they lost the reputation in the '80s and '90s with disasters like the Astro, Blazer, and Grand Am.

Their newer cars tend to do better in crash testing, but they're not all class-leading. For mainstream cars, the Germans (basically VW) still do safety best.

Really? I thought Ford was up there. The Taurus has been a leader even back in the fish eye'd days.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The pioneering and innovative spirit of GM during the 1960s and 1970s were what made GM a leader. GM needs to find that same spirit again.

(Yeah, yeah. I know about the Volt. But what about other neat and innovative features on other GM models?)

Well there was Quadra Steer and the Envoy XUT not too long ago. I don't get why Quadra Steer never caught on. There's also OnStar.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Volvo = Safety leader these days, if anyone does. Not the Germans.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The pioneering and innovative spirit of GM during the 1960s and 1970s were what made GM a leader. GM needs to find that same spirit again.

(Yeah, yeah. I know about the Volt. But what about other neat and innovative features on other GM models?)

Onstar

Onstar turn-by-turn, you guys may not like it but it provides 75% of the functionality at 1/10th of the cost.

Onstar vehicle slowdown

Variable valve timing so simple that it makes iVtec look like a Rube Goldberg machine.

Magna-ride

Mainstreaming of direct injection (no, Audi is not really mainstream)

The mid-size Crossover - Aztec and Rendezvous

The Avalanche midgate

Quadra-Steer

Night vision

in dash hard drive

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Onstar

Onstar turn-by-turn, you guys may not like it but it provides 75% of the functionality at 1/10th of the cost.

Onstar vehicle slowdown

Variable valve timing so simple that it makes iVtec look like a Rube Goldberg machine.

Magna-ride

Mainstreaming of direct injection (no, Audi is not really mainstream)

The mid-size Crossover - Aztec and Rendezvous

The Avalanche midgate

Quadra-Steer

Night vision

in dash hard drive

Infiniti had rear wheel steering in the 90s...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Volvo = Safety leader these days, if anyone does. Not the Germans.

Volvo likes to talk safety, but if you want to talk about structural rigidity, VW/Audi and Mercedes are tops.

The Tiguan has the strongest roof tested so far (strength-to-weight ratio of 5.82), and the C-class has the least intrusion of any car tested in the IIHS side crash test. Most Volvos only have "acceptable" side structures in that test.

Practically all newly released cars now score well in crash tests, Volvo and Ford included, but IMO VW/Audi has been leading the pack. When the IIHS releases a new test (first the side test in 2004, then the roof test in 2009), usually it takes manufacturers until the next generation to do well, but the Jetta, for instance, aced the side crash from the test's inception.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The pioneering and innovative spirit of GM during the 1960s and 1970s were what made GM a leader. GM needs to find that same spirit again.

Not happening. Part of that spirit was caused by divisional rivalry. That infighting kept everyone on their toes.

There is no divisional rivalry now. Everyone drinks from the same Kool Aid pitcher.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Infiniti had rear wheel steering in the 90s...

But GM put it where it made a difference: full-size trucks.

Too bad it was so expensive, it was a great idea.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Onstar

Onstar turn-by-turn, you guys may not like it but it provides 75% of the functionality at 1/10th of the cost.

Onstar vehicle slowdown

Variable valve timing so simple that it makes iVtec look like a Rube Goldberg machine.

Magna-ride

Mainstreaming of direct injection (no, Audi is not really mainstream)

The mid-size Crossover - Aztec and Rendezvous

The Avalanche midgate

Quadra-Steer

Night vision

in dash hard drive

The list of what GM did in the '50s, '60s, and '70s would eclipse that list I'm sure. I'm also sure that the impact that they had would also make what you listed look pretty pathetic in comparison, with the exception of direct injection.

To name a few that come to mind first, in no particular order:

-MaxTrac traction control

-Airbags

-"Manumatic" transmissions (e.g. AutoStick; the '70 - '72 Cutlass had a dual gate shifter that functioned exactly the same)

-The first production turbocharged engine

-Electronic circuit integration/digital microprocessor engine control

-Engine control systems with OBD codes

-PCV valves

-Anti-lock brakes

Edited by whiteknight
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not happening. Part of that spirit was caused by divisional rivalry. That infighting kept everyone on their toes.

There is no divisional rivalry now. Everyone drinks from the same Kool Aid pitcher.

I'm believing that theory too and when your rival sister division made it good you could use it till you made something better.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now it's all backstabbing and undermining - or it would seem so.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For mainstream cars, the Germans (basically VW) still do safety best.

Volvo likes to talk safety, but if you want to talk about structural rigidity, VW/Audi and Mercedes are tops.

I agree that pretty much all cars score well. Anything less than a 5 is a failure. For example, in the scores listed below there are 5 tests worth 5 stars each. If you got a 4 in all 5 tests you would be so bad you would be off the bottom of the chart.

But when you suggest that VW was tops did you perhaps mean "Best at being worst"?

Average scores from the NHTSB site for 2009 models:

Cars (out of 25):

Acura: 25

Ford: 23.25

Honda: 23

Mercedes: 23

Volvo: 23

Hyundai: 22.8

Pontiac: 22.6 (If the solstice had been fully tested they would have dropped down to ~22.)

Chevy: 22.5

Toyota: 22.2

BMW: 22

Buick: 22

Kia: 21.8

Caddy: 21.75

VW: 21.3

VW had no car that did better than 22 stars. VW has NO car that gets 5 stars in either front collision.

Acura has no car that gets less than a perfect 25 stars.

What was interesting to me is how few of these luxury brands test their cars:

Audi: 2 of 15

Lexus: 2 of 8

BMW: 4 of 11

Mercedes: 3 of 13

Edited by GXT
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0