Volvo: The Safe Choice, Again?

Cammy Corrigan
by Cammy Corrigan

Ask a non gearhead on the street (or pub, restaurant, clubs, etc) “who builds the most reliable cars?” and names like “Toyota”, “Hyundai”, “Ford” and “Honda” will crop up. Ask who builds the safest cars on the road and almost certainly, the name “Volvo” will be said.

The thing is Volvo lost their safety crown a long time ago to those 35 hour a week working, industrial action initiating, part government owned Frenchies. Renault. Renault consistently set new standards in safety and crash tests, lapping up praise from Euro NCAP. Some of this technical know-how has even trickled into Renault’s partner, Nissan. The Nissan Qashqai (thankfully renamed Rogue in the U.S., although it wasn’t a big improvement) achieved the highest ever Euro NCAP score. But now, it seems, Volvo is fighting back to regain the coveted safety title.

Germany’s ADAC, the world’s largest automotive organization, has performed a comparison of different automatic speed and distance control systems, commonly called “ACC” – No, that’s not “ACCessory,” it stands for “Adaptive Cruise Control,” get with the program.

Formerly the realm of luxobarges, the frontal RADAR or laser systems that allow you to text in the thickest of traffic, now become common for the middle class. As a pricey optional ACCessory, of course

ADAC tested usability, added comfort, and avoidance of ACCidents.

The Volvo XC60 bested 6 other models (the other models being, the Audi A4, Volkswagen Passat CC, the Lexus IS, the Ford Mondeo and the Honda Accord). In their laudation, ADAC praise that “the Volvo system scores above all due to the fact that it consistently puts its emphasis on accident avoidance. The driver is informed about a danger by a red flashing warning lamp, which is projected onto the windscreen. At low speeds, below 30 km/h, the additional, integrated laser technology called City Safety also recognizes stationary vehicles and in a potential accident situation, brakes in time to stop the car.”

ADAC even heaped ACClaim on a mysterious feature of Volvo’s system, “with the ACC switched off, the driver is efficiently but not disturbingly warned, if below the safety distance.”

Volvo will ACCelerate their quest for beneficial gadgetry. The new S60, which is being premiered at the Geneva Motor Show, will of course have ACC, along with a “world first:”. Pedestrian Detection with Full Auto Brake (snappy name – PDFAB?). This system will brake automatically for pedestrians and can avoid a collision at speeds up to 35kph (nearly 22mph).

Watch out, Renault, the Swedes are in your rear view mirror, but don’t worry, they won’t crash into you. Now, should that deal with Geely ever get completed …

Cammy Corrigan
Cammy Corrigan

More by Cammy Corrigan

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 11 comments
  • Herb Herb on Mar 01, 2010

    Usually, I neither drive drunk nor blinded, so I can't see the point in having such a device. I'm in "alarm mode", already, when I drive. But I do not doubt that thanks to the usual alliance between useless busy bodies and fearful whiners this feature will become mandatory, sooner or later. Waiting for the "unintended braking" incidents I'm saving money to buy a decent old car.

    • See 1 previous
    • Turbo60640 Turbo60640 on Mar 01, 2010

      I agree, jmo. I am a very cautious driver, but was rear-ended pretty hard at a stoplight by a drunk woman. It was around 4PM on a Tuesday, and I never saw it coming. Thankfully I was not injured.

  • Nicodemus Nicodemus on Mar 01, 2010

    "The Nissan Qashqai (thankfully renamed Rogue in the U.S., although it wasn’t a big improvement) achieved the highest ever Euro NCAP score." Whoa, be careful with big statements like that. Post 2009 ENCAP tests use a different protocol to derive the score. The Qashqai was rated in 2007 and would not neccessarily score as highly if rated by the new protocol.

  • W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
Next