Saxos not that bad are they?

FDV · Post by **FDV** » 02 Apr 2005, 01:19

My Saxo was complete toss! I did enjoy its handling but in std form it was poor. I had to add modifactions, bordering on chav like lowering etc to make it any good. And even then I went through 5 gearboxes and 12valves. A weakly made car thats fun but awful at the same time!

Post by **cheesesliceking** » 02 Apr 2005, 01:27

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Thunderbird

cheesesliceking, congratulations!!! [;)]
Please give me your address so that we can send you the prize... [8D]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
If my prize is a stuffed Sparrow I'll be very upet.....[:p]

nick · Post by **nick** » 02 Apr 2005, 03:12

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by pantherd90

Looking at the safety results - here http://home.zonnet.nl/CitroenCrashTest/index.html You'd be safer crashing in a Saxo than in a Xantia.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
It doesn't really work like that - the NCAP star ratings are not comparable between different classes of cars. A large family car with 1 star is still likely to be safer than a small car with two stars.

pantherd90 · Post by **pantherd90** » 02 Apr 2005, 06:59

You have a point, there is always other factors to consider (though this doesn't really apply between Xantia and Saxo..), different cars have different safety measures, some measures such as ABS can save many lives however they mean nothing when it comes to ranking the car in a crash test..
I'm not sure exactly how NCAP works, but I believe the scores are based on the damage done to the test dummy (forces on the different areas of the dummy) and other safety factors such as how easy it is to get the dummy out of the car and whether any safety measures failed..
Therefore types of car mean very little, the tests are all done at 40mph on frontal impact and 30mph on side impact and scores and ranked on how bad the dummy comes out at the end of it..
Whilst size of car may effect overall damage done to it in a crash, a larger car can still be worse for the occupants..
E.g. In the Xantia during a crash the steering wheel moves back nearly 6 inches and upwards 4 which could damage your chest/head during a crash and more worryingly the brake pedal moved forward an entire 8 inches [foot protection for both drivers feet was rated "poor" bottom of the range]. If, however you were in a Saxo involved in a 40mph frontal crash your feet would get out fine and the rest of your body in some cases would also be better off (when compared with a Xantia.
So there you go, try not to have nightmares and even though the Saxo scored slightly better than the Xantia (would have been equal if the Xantia insides were slightly better designed and if the dummy had got lucky in the crash..) you're still better off just buying a new car if you want safety (C2 and C3 got 4 stars, C4 5 stars [very high scorer..] and C5 Mk2 5 stars).

Kowalski · Post by **Kowalski** » 02 Apr 2005, 07:25

The Euro NCAP tests are done against deformable objects designed to simulate a collision with a vehicle of SIMILAR SIZE AND WEIGHT. A Xantia is a heavier stronger car than a Saxo, if the two were to collide head on which would you rather be in?

Car ratings ARE NOT comparable between classes.

pantherd90 · Post by **pantherd90** » 02 Apr 2005, 07:28

Ok, Ok.. :p But if I were to drive off the road and hit something, I'd rather be in the Saxo, if only because I like my feet.

nick · Post by **nick** » 02 Apr 2005, 20:38

But only if you drive off the road and happened to hit something the size & weight of a Saxo ! What would happen if you hit anything larger than that, (or what would happen if you were driving a Xantia & hit something the size & weight of a Saxo) is impossible to predict with any certainty from the NCAP test results.

JohnD · Post by **JohnD** » 02 Apr 2005, 20:44

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Kowalski

On a serious note, Saxos have had problems with rust to the point that several 97ish cars have been written off due to rust on structural chassis legs.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
They must have cured the rust, because we have a late 1998 model with no rust at all. Great little car! In fact, it sailed through its MOT yesterday. Next week, the Pug 306, next month, the Xantia, then the Xsara in July. One of the drawbacks of having daughters?

pantherd90 · Post by **pantherd90** » 02 Apr 2005, 21:05

Surely weight does not apply if the object is static. A deformable object is a deformable object, it doesn't really matter how much it weighs
In a frontal collision with another vehicle, no doubt weight applies, the smaller car will always be worse off (though as I said before, there are things to take into account such as a Citroen Xantia hitting a Saxo is still likely to mean the driver of the Xantia gets serious damage to his feet whilst the Saxo driver doesn't, simply because of design..). But hitting a deformable barrier really shouldn't matter all that much, in either car what really matters is how solid the barrier is and how much it deforms..
The simple line to take on all of it is, if you've got the money, don't buy an old car, even if you haven't, still consider buying a newer car.. In crash safety terms, both the Xantia and the Saxo are death traps, it's just the Saxo is a smaller cheaper death trap..
C4 is probably one of the best you could go for.. But it's still fairly expensive so perhaps go for a C2, which is safer than both the Xantia and the Saxo by far.

nick · Post by **nick** » 02 Apr 2005, 21:58

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by pantherd90

Surely weight does not apply if the object is static. A deformable object is a deformable object, it doesn't really matter how much it weighs
In a frontal collision with another vehicle, no doubt weight applies, the smaller car will always be worse off (though as I said before, there are things to take into account such as a Citroen Xantia hitting a Saxo is still likely to mean the driver of the Xantia gets serious damage to his feet whilst the Saxo driver doesn't, simply because of design..). But hitting a deformable barrier really shouldn't matter all that much, in either car what really matters is how solid the barrier is and how much it deforms..
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I accept what you're saying about the weight of the static barrier or object - it shouldn't matter.
However, in a situation where a smaller lighter car hits a larger heavier car, the bodyshell of the large car is likely be deformed less than in the NCAP test. The small car on the other hand is likely to be deformed more than in the NCAP test.
Without carrying out this very specific test you cannot predict to what extent specific parts of the cars (pedals, steering wheel etc) will move, or how much any particular design faults will matter. The Saxo may turn out to have better foot protection in this situation than the Xantia, or it may not.
I do agree that one specific design fault may render all other good safety features of a car pointless. For example in the late 80's a group of European car magazines got together and bought a selection of executive cars to crash test. Some where slightly safer than others, however the Renault 25 they tested suffered a fractured fuel line and burst into flames, despite the bodyshell not appearing to be that badly damaged. [xx(]

dillosk8ter · Post by **dillosk8ter** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:10

But I don't think anyone can look at the results of the Xantia and think it did that well.

nick · Post by **nick** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:14

True, but neither did the Saab 900, BMW 3 series or Rover 600. It was par for the course for an early 90's design. They were all overshadowed by the mk1 Mondeo which was relatively good for its time.

dillosk8ter · Post by **dillosk8ter** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:19

I know, I was really shocked by the SAAB and 3 Series results.

nick · Post by **nick** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:23

...and you never hear anyone say that they wouldn't drive a 900 or a 3 series because they're not safe though do you ?!
Admittedly the 900 they tested was just the glorified Cavalier version....

dillosk8ter · Post by **dillosk8ter** » 02 Apr 2005, 22:28

But heard plenty of people saying how god-awful those 900s were, poor build, reliability, poor drive.