0:03
estimates say about 50% of crashes like
0:05
that could be prevented but if your
0:07
automobile has an accident prevention
0:09
system and it's working the way it's
0:12
supposed to often front to rear crashes
0:14
with passenger cars occur at higher
0:16
speeds we also know that if a vehicle
0:18
strikes a large truck or a motorcycle
0:21
the consequences can be much more
0:24
severe that's why the Insurance
0:26
Institute for Highway Safety developed a
0:28
series of tests to decade ago to see if
0:31
automatic braking systems can do the
0:35
job but highway speeds have increased
0:37
and vehicles have gotten heavy so the
0:39
Institute has upped the test criteria
0:42
early on our previous test was conducted
0:44
at 12 and 25 M per hour so that's really
0:47
low in moderate speeds but when we look
0:49
at the real world data we see that many
0:51
front to rear crashes are occurring at
0:54
higher speeds but when they tested 10
0:58
popular small SUVs they found seven
1:01
crash avoidance systems struggled at the
1:03
higher test speeds of 31 37 and 43 mil
1:08
an hour now you've got a couple of
1:09
different ratings you've got the good
1:11
acceptable and then marginal what is the
1:13
difference between a a good test and and
1:17
a marginal test the Subaru Forester
1:19
which was the only vehicle to earn a
1:20
good rating it really uh provided
1:23
adequate warnings in all of our tests
1:25
when you compare that to some of the
1:26
lower rated vehicles um those vehicles
1:29
are much less consistent so we see
1:31
impacts with the motorcycle we see that
1:33
they don't do quite as well against the
1:35
passenger car and in many cases they're
1:37
not providing an adequate warning for a
1:39
driver in this type of test fixing
1:42
poorly performing Vehicles could be as
1:43
simple as a software adjustment or
1:46
having Automan is make the systems apply
1:48
the brakes a bit earlier at high speeds
1:51
working for you I'm the consumer guy
