It was only a minor blip on the radar, in the end.
On December 18, I posted here at SU about how the Saab 9-5 had just been awarded the maximum 5 stars by EuroNCAP.
Of course, later on the same day, GM announced that Saab would be wound down and all hell broke loose. The 5-star crash test slipped into the ether – which is why I’m bringing it back.
Arild has just brough to my attention that there’s a EuroNCAP video of the crash test now available on Youtube.
Here it is, and I’ve posted the EuroNCAP findings from the original post, below.
The crash test results for the 2010 Saab 9-5 have been released and I’m very pleased to share that the car received a 5-star rating from Euro NCAP.
Safety has always been a pillar of Saab design, right back to their earliest days. This result continues the tradition of a Saab being as safe as a car can be.
The full results of the tests, along with VIDEOS, diagrams and scores for various parts of the test are available at the EuroNCAP page.
Following are the comments by EuroNCAP on the Saab 9-5:
The passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal test, the windscreen pillar moving rearward only 2mm. Dummy readings showed good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger. Saab were able to show that occupants of different sizes and those sat in different positions would be similarly well protected. In the side barrier test, maximum points were scored with good protection of all body areas. In the more severe side pole impact, protection of the chest and abdomen was adequate. Protection against whiplash injuries in the event of a rear impact was rated as good.
Based on dummy readings in the dynamic tests, the 9-5 scored maximum points for protection of the 3 year infant. Forward movement of the dummy’s head was well controlled and both the 3 year and the 18 month dummies were properly contained by their restraints in the side impact. The passenger airbag can be disabled to allow a rearward facing child restraint to be used in that seating position. However, information provided to the driver regarding the status of the airbag is insufficiently clear. The dangers of using a rearward facing restraint without first disabling the airbag are not clearly indicated.
The bumper scored maximum points for the protection it offered to pedestrians’ legs. However, points outside Euro NCAP’s normal test zone were found to be injurious. From 2010, Euro NCAP’s assessment of the bumper will be broadened to include such points. The front edge of the bonnet provided poor protection as did the bonnet in most areas where an adult’s head might strike.
Electronic stability control is standard equipment on all variants as is a seatbelt reminder system for the front and rear seats.