5 ms·

How does this work? I thought collision testing was performed independently, but government agencies and insurance organizations. Shouldn't that have detected

by raylad 3y ago

How does this work? I thought collision testing was performed independently, but government agencies and insurance organizations. Shouldn't that have detected any of these problems?

LegitShady 3y ago
It sounds like the tested vehicles weren't the same as actual production cars. Choosing to cheat on airbags seems like a big deal though. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/toyotas-daihatsu-will-expand-production-halt-over-safety-scandal-nikkei-2023-12-20/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/toyota... >The investigation found that the airbag control units used by Daihatsu in airbag tests for some models were different from the ones used in cars sold to the public, including Toyota's Town Ace and Pixis Joy models and the Mazda Bongo. ... >The misconduct also included false reports on headrest impact tests and test speeds for some models. The investigation found cases of misconduct were particularly prevalent after 2014 and, for one already-discontinued Daihatsu vehicle, went back as far as 1989.
- dsgnr 3y ago
  Also found a report about another problem they cheated on tests to pass: "They said the door trim on the affected vehicles had been modified with a "notch" to minimise the risk in testing that the door interior could break with a sharp edge and cause injury to an occupant when the side airbag deployed in an accident." https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/japans-daihatsu-broke-side-collision-test-procedures-some-toyota-cars-2023-04-28/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/japans...
  - Mtinie 3y ago
    The strange thing about that modification is that it appears on the surface to be a legitimate safety improvement. Could the underlying test be subpar?
    - LegitShady 3y ago
      it sounds like it wasn't in the production vehicle.
      - Mtinie 3y ago
        Right, but I’m wondering if the notch was actually useful for legitimate passengers in the event of an accident.
        LegitShady 3y ago
        why would that call into question the underlying test? Rather it calls into questions the design decision of the daihatsu team to know they could create a safer product but decide to not do so, and fake it on the safety tests.
  - mardifoufs 3y ago
    Stupid question: why didn't they add that part to the actual production cars? It doesn't sound like a complex system or problem (compared to say, reducing emissions versus just cheating in emission testing) especially since they already seem like they know exactly what they had to fix. Even then I'd understand if it was a one time thing (rush in production or design, no time to redesign) but this is systematic and across a wide range of models. I guess the other models in question had more deeply rooted design issues that can't be fixed with a less intricate tweak?
- stubish 3y ago
  We can't trust foreign companies for various reasons. The solution seems to be to do the testing locally, not using vehicles provided by the manufacturer for testing purposes. Which seems to be what happens in Australia: https://www.racv.com.au/royalauto/transport/cars/ancap-faqs.html https://www.racv.com.au/royalauto/transport/cars/ancap-faqs.... (The loophole would be using premium parts in early shipments, until testing has commenced, and switching components in later shipments. Not sure if we would catch that in components like airbags. We have already had Toyota recalls due to dodgy airbags.)
  - manuelabeledo 3y ago
    > We can't trust foreign companies for various reasons. US manufacturers have their own history of cheating.
  - Mtinie 3y ago
    > We can't trust foreign companies for various reasons. Removing the xenophobia: “We can’t trust companies for various reasons.”
    - stubish 3y ago
      I guess not, but local consumer protection laws at least provide a stick to beat trust into them when found out.
      - dharmab 3y ago
        The US safety test system has the same flaw- safety equipment is not randomly tested after certification. As an example, it's an open secret that over 40% of all USDOT certified helmets fail to meet the standard: https://ultimatemotorcycling.com/2020/02/05/2020-dot-certified-helmet-performance-test-data-update-failure-rate-increases/ https://ultimatemotorcycling.com/2020/02/05/2020-dot-certifi... (The EU uses a different standard which includes independent testing of random samples).

by raylad 3y ago

How does this work? I thought collision testing was performed independently, but government agencies and insurance organizations. Shouldn't that have detected any of these problems?

LegitShady 3y ago

It sounds like the tested vehicles weren't the same as actual production cars. Choosing to cheat on airbags seems like a big deal though. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/toyotas-daihatsu-will-expand-production-halt-over-safety-scandal-nikkei-2023-12-20/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/toyota... >The investigation found that the airbag control units used by Daihatsu in airbag tests for some models were different from the ones used in cars sold to the public, including Toyota's Town Ace and Pixis Joy models and the Mazda Bongo. ... >The misconduct also included false reports on headrest impact tests and test speeds for some models. The investigation found cases of misconduct were particularly prevalent after 2014 and, for one already-discontinued Daihatsu vehicle, went back as far as 1989.

dsgnr 3y ago
Also found a report about another problem they cheated on tests to pass: "They said the door trim on the affected vehicles had been modified with a "notch" to minimise the risk in testing that the door interior could break with a sharp edge and cause injury to an occupant when the side airbag deployed in an accident." https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/japans-daihatsu-broke-side-collision-test-procedures-some-toyota-cars-2023-04-28/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/japans...
- Mtinie 3y ago
  The strange thing about that modification is that it appears on the surface to be a legitimate safety improvement. Could the underlying test be subpar?
  - LegitShady 3y ago
    it sounds like it wasn't in the production vehicle.
    - Mtinie 3y ago
      Right, but I’m wondering if the notch was actually useful for legitimate passengers in the event of an accident.
      - LegitShady 3y ago
        why would that call into question the underlying test? Rather it calls into questions the design decision of the daihatsu team to know they could create a safer product but decide to not do so, and fake it on the safety tests.
- mardifoufs 3y ago
  Stupid question: why didn't they add that part to the actual production cars? It doesn't sound like a complex system or problem (compared to say, reducing emissions versus just cheating in emission testing) especially since they already seem like they know exactly what they had to fix. Even then I'd understand if it was a one time thing (rush in production or design, no time to redesign) but this is systematic and across a wide range of models. I guess the other models in question had more deeply rooted design issues that can't be fixed with a less intricate tweak?
stubish 3y ago
We can't trust foreign companies for various reasons. The solution seems to be to do the testing locally, not using vehicles provided by the manufacturer for testing purposes. Which seems to be what happens in Australia: https://www.racv.com.au/royalauto/transport/cars/ancap-faqs.html https://www.racv.com.au/royalauto/transport/cars/ancap-faqs.... (The loophole would be using premium parts in early shipments, until testing has commenced, and switching components in later shipments. Not sure if we would catch that in components like airbags. We have already had Toyota recalls due to dodgy airbags.)
- manuelabeledo 3y ago
  > We can't trust foreign companies for various reasons. US manufacturers have their own history of cheating.
- Mtinie 3y ago
  > We can't trust foreign companies for various reasons. Removing the xenophobia: “We can’t trust companies for various reasons.”
  - stubish 3y ago
    I guess not, but local consumer protection laws at least provide a stick to beat trust into them when found out.
    - dharmab 3y ago
      The US safety test system has the same flaw- safety equipment is not randomly tested after certification. As an example, it's an open secret that over 40% of all USDOT certified helmets fail to meet the standard: https://ultimatemotorcycling.com/2020/02/05/2020-dot-certified-helmet-performance-test-data-update-failure-rate-increases/ https://ultimatemotorcycling.com/2020/02/05/2020-dot-certifi... (The EU uses a different standard which includes independent testing of random samples).