Nissan Patrol 4x4 (Africa)

Michael wrote:

SJC wrote:het maar min tyd vir internet gehad die laaste maand en n half...

Werk jy nou ook bietjie soos die res van ons?

SJC wrote:https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings ... rol/4deeeb


I think weight advantage should be the deciding aspect.
A 3 star rated 3 ton vehicle will aleays come out tops when colliding with a 5 star rated 1 or 2 ton vehicle....

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/nati ... d076eee04a

Light city cars' high ANCAP ratings do not protect in real world crashes

Mark Hinchliffe, National Features
August 8, 2012 4:00pm

LIGHT city cars with high official safety ratings are under-achievers in real-world crashes, according to the latest survey.
While most new light cars score four or a maximum five stars in the Australian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP), they are disadvantaged by their weight when crashing into bigger and heavier vehicles, RACQ safety spokesman Steve Spalding said yesterday.

He was commenting on the 20th annual Used Car Safety Ratings of 313 cars in 5.8 million crashes in Australia and New Zealand. It is compiled by Monash University's Accident Research Centre with support from state auto clubs and transport departments.

"Drivers can be about 10 times more likely to die or be seriously injured in a crash driving a used car with a poor safety record compared with a top performer,'' Mr Spalding said.

The survey found the safest vehicle for occupants and other road users was the BMW X5 SUV (2001-2008), while the most dangerous was the early 1980s Daihatsu HiJet which was 11.5 times worse than the X5.

NRMA vehicle safety expert Jack Haley said 29 vehicles scored their Safe Pick rating of which 19 were small, medium or large cars, most manufactured since 2001, demonstrating the advances in affordable safe vehicles. There were only 19 safe picks last year and none in the first survey.

However, Mr Spalding pointed out that light cars were the worst performers in the survey, despite many having good ANCAP scores.

"Often light cars' scores don't correlate with how they perform in ANCAP,'' he said.

"The Hyundai Getz is a good example. It's a four-star ANCAP performer, but gets one star in the real world. Also, the Yaris gets five stars, but we only give it three.

"The problem is the ANCAP crash test doesn't take into account weight. The heavier car will always come off better in a crash.

"In the real world, crashes happen at different angles with different circumstances. ANCAP only does offset front and side impact tests.''

The research rated cars not only on the protection they provide the driver but also the level of risk they present to other road users in a collision. Those that scored highly on both counts were labelled Safe Picks.

Mr Spalding suggested buyers should not just look at ANCAP, but also the Used Car Safety Ratings.

"While the top Safe Pick is a prestige vehicle, motorists can be assured there are Safe Picks in almost every class of vehicle covering a broad price range,'' he said.

"Alarmingly, the research shows that while novice drivers have the highest crash risk they often drive the least safe vehicles.

"By choosing safer vehicles, novice drivers could reduce their road trauma statistics by 60 to 80 per cent.''

NSW Centre for Road Safety general manager Margaret Prendergast said newer models provide drivers with better protection from injury in a crash than older ones.

"Motorists will see from the list that some of the most affordable used cars are the safest,'' she said.

Mercedes-Benz and Volvo barely rated in the top choices, despite being acknowledged as global vehicle safety leaders.

The spokesmen for the companies attribute that to the fact the active and passive safety systems in these vehicles means they don't crash as often.

Even BMW, whose 2001-08 X5 large SUV earned a mention as the safest vehicle overall, is bemused by the fact the newer - and safer - model introduced in 2009 didn't earn a mention.

BMW spokesman Piers Scott said the result vindicated BMW's safety-led research and development but questioned the applicability of the MUARC findings in terms of determining the best car to buy based on safety.

"The absence from the list of the newer model X5, which by all accounts is considerably safer, raises questions over how crash-worthiness has been assessed in this study".

Victorian Automotive Chamber of Commerce executive director David Purchase also noted the report didn't take into account the roadworthiness of the vehicles involved in the crashes.

"Even modern vehicles with five-star (ANCAP) safety ratings, including ABS and ESC, need ongoing maintenance and regular servicing to operate at their best," he said.

"Something as simple as a worn tyre makes a vehicle unsafe whatever its age."

SAFETY RATINGS

(Top 5 in each category)

LIGHT CARS

Model/Year'Safety rating

Mazda2 07-10 5 stars

Holden Barina XC 01-06 3

Honda Jazz/Fit 02 -08 3

Toyota Yaris 05-10 3

Holden Barina TK 05-10 2

SMALL CARS

Honda Civic 06-10 5

Peugeot 307 01-09 5

VW Golf/Bora 99-04 5

VW Golf/Jetta 04-10 5

Volvo S40/V40 97-04 5

MEDIUM CARS

Audi A4 01-08 5

BMW 3 Series 05-10 5

BMW 5 Series 96-03 5

Honda Accord 03-07 5

Mazda6 02-07 5


LARGE CARS

Ford Falcon FG 08-10 5

Mercedes E-Class 96-02 5

Mitsubishi 380 05-08 5

Toyota Aurion 06-10 5

Ford Fairlane/LTD 99-02 4

PEOPLE MOVERS

Honda Odyssey 95-00 5

Kia Carnival 99-06 5

Toyota Tarago 00-06 5

Toyota Tarago 91-99 3

Mitsubishi Starwagon 95-98 2

COMMERCIAL VANS

Ford Transit 01-07 5

Vw Caravelle/Transporter 95-04 5

Ford Transit 95-00 4

Ford Falcon Panel Van 82-95 3

Toyota Hiace/Liteace 96-04 3

COMMERCIAL UTES

Mitsubishi Triton 06-10 5

Ford Falcon Ute BA/BF 03-08 5

Ford/Mazda Ranger/BT-50 06-10 5

Mitsubishi Triton 96-06 5

Nissan Navara 05-10 5

COMPACT SUVS

Honda CR-V 02-06 5

Subaru Forester 02-08 5

Ford/Mazda Escape/Tribute 01-06 5

Honda CR-V 97-01 5

Kia Sportage 98-03 5

MEDIUM SUVS

Ford Territory 04-10 5

Holden Captiva 06-10 5

Mitsubishi Pajero 00-06 5

Nissan Pathfinder 95-05 5

Toyota Prado 03-09 5

LARGE SUVS

BMW X5 01-08 5

Ford Explorer 01-05 5

Jeep Grand Cherokee 99-05 5

Land Rover Discovery 91-02 5

Nissan Patrol/Safari 98-10 5

So the moral of the story is "pick your target"

graham1 wrote:I just saw now on a 2001 4.5 that's for sale that it has airbags.
So I reckon I'll be safe with looking at any age 4.8 that it will have all the features to make the sale easy enough to my wife. Haha

Graham I got the 1999 4.5 GRX and its got ABS and airbags..so I think you should be safe with any 4.8 being well equip...(buy it)

Thanks all for the replies.
It was an easy sell for me in the end, you just need to be clever about these things and find the best way to sell things to the wife. Using the topic of babies and baby safety is actually just too easy.

The only bummer in this is the old GQ is going to have to go to make space for whatever 4.8 we find, so here we go again.

Here is a crash test for a Patrol Crash test

There is a very nice 4.8 avaliable it was one owner from new ideal for a moms taxi my wife gave a palio sedan a good beating and i just polished the front again....please note that airbags and babies in car seats dont go together

Just tell the wife the crumple zone on a Patrol is whatever you run into

Tinus lotz wrote:There is a very nice 4.8 avaliable it was one owner from new ideal for a moms taxi my wife gave a palio sedan a good beating and i just polished the front again....please note that airbags and babies in car seats dont go together

Hi Tinus, is it the one you put a picture up of in another thread the other day (I cant remember which thread it was now)?

Yes, for sure, no baby seat in the front when theres airbags

Graham please pm me the details for the GQ, might have a buyer.