G12 passive safety - designed for the test rather than real world? (hope I'm wrong)

AP · 10-07-2015, 03:19 PM

I've just read through the G12 introduction PDF on this website and noticed what looks like an anomaly.
In this document on page 28 where it talks about the body and repairs it states the following and I quote.

"

Additional US Version Components

US version vehicles must pass an additional crash test,the small overlap test,for the purpose of
optimum insurance classification.
The small overlap in the "Small over lap test" means that there is,in principle,a risk that the front wheel
will damage the bulkhead. This is avoided in the G12 in US version by additional components in the
front end.
In the event of a corresponding head-on collision,the crash frame is pressed against the front wheel.
As a result,the rim is guided so that the wheel is prevented from turning in. The tensioning straps
stabilize the position of the respective crash frame."

This is obviously in response to relatively new small overlap tests carried out by the IIHS which is mentioned on page 29.

The cynic in me thinks that the car is therefore designed to pass a test rather than necessarily be designed to be more "real world" scenarios.
I'm not saying that this test is not relevant but why is this not included for cars in other markets. Do they think cars outside of the US will not be involved in a small overlap crash?

Why have they left this out for markets elsewhere?

When I think of car safety, I think of Volvo and Mercedes. They do tests far beyond those required for the IIHS, Euro NCAP and other organisations.(at least that's what I led to believe from videos seen on youtune).

I hope I'm wrong on this about BMW.
I've no doubt they are very good , but this small anomaly makes me question them..

Any comments? have I got this wrong? Is the documentation incorrect?

E90Fleet · 10-09-2015, 04:19 AM

I have spent quite some time looking for this on the latest dealer parts system and every crash reinforcement plate currently listed is shared by US and Euro model.

I cannot find any difference between them structurally. (Maybe those parts are not on the system yet ???)

The US versions do have knee airbags, as per usual, where the others dont.
The knee airbags are really to prevent unrestrained passengers from moving down into the footwell area.
The US also gets the airbag deactivation sensor in the passenger seat to deactivate the airbag should the passenger not be heavy enough (ie a child)
Its not a new thing that only the US get these.

Many manufacturers have also complained about the US small offset crash test, saying its not a real life simulating test.

Will keep looking as more updates come along.

AP · 10-09-2015, 06:07 AM

thanks, good.
that technical documentation must be wrong or badly worded in that case. Glad its a global item, I was worried that they were engineering for a test in the US rather than be real world.

It'll be interesting to see how the new 7 is rated in the IIHS / EuroNcap tests especially with the CFRP that is a new technology for this type of car.

10-07-2015, 03:19 PM	#1
AP Major General 2762 Rep 5,083 Posts Drives: G30 M550 Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: UK iTrader: (0)	G12 passive safety - designed for the test rather than real world? (hope I'm wrong) I've just read through the G12 introduction PDF on this website and noticed what looks like an anomaly. In this document on page 28 where it talks about the body and repairs it states the following and I quote. " Additional US Version Components US version vehicles must pass an additional crash test,the small overlap test,for the purpose of optimum insurance classification. The small overlap in the "Small over lap test" means that there is,in principle,a risk that the front wheel will damage the bulkhead. This is avoided in the G12 in US version by additional components in the front end. In the event of a corresponding head-on collision,the crash frame is pressed against the front wheel. As a result,the rim is guided so that the wheel is prevented from turning in. The tensioning straps stabilize the position of the respective crash frame." This is obviously in response to relatively new small overlap tests carried out by the IIHS which is mentioned on page 29. The cynic in me thinks that the car is therefore designed to pass a test rather than necessarily be designed to be more "real world" scenarios. I'm not saying that this test is not relevant but why is this not included for cars in other markets. Do they think cars outside of the US will not be involved in a small overlap crash? Why have they left this out for markets elsewhere? When I think of car safety, I think of Volvo and Mercedes. They do tests far beyond those required for the IIHS, Euro NCAP and other organisations.(at least that's what I led to believe from videos seen on youtune). I hope I'm wrong on this about BMW. I've no doubt they are very good , but this small anomaly makes me question them.. Any comments? have I got this wrong? Is the documentation incorrect?
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

10-09-2015, 04:19 AM	#2
E90Fleet Lieutenant General 1311 Rep 10,185 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: South Africa iTrader: (0)	I have spent quite some time looking for this on the latest dealer parts system and every crash reinforcement plate currently listed is shared by US and Euro model. I cannot find any difference between them structurally. (Maybe those parts are not on the system yet ???) The US versions do have knee airbags, as per usual, where the others dont. The knee airbags are really to prevent unrestrained passengers from moving down into the footwell area. The US also gets the airbag deactivation sensor in the passenger seat to deactivate the airbag should the passenger not be heavy enough (ie a child) Its not a new thing that only the US get these. Many manufacturers have also complained about the US small offset crash test, saying its not a real life simulating test. Will keep looking as more updates come along. __________________ BMW if you are reading, I need a job, Please.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-09-2015, 06:07 AM	#3
AP Major General 2762 Rep 5,083 Posts Drives: G30 M550 Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: UK iTrader: (0)	thanks, good. that technical documentation must be wrong or badly worded in that case. Glad its a global item, I was worried that they were engineering for a test in the US rather than be real world. It'll be interesting to see how the new 7 is rated in the IIHS / EuroNcap tests especially with the CFRP that is a new technology for this type of car.
	Appreciate 0 Quote