Quote:
Originally Posted by nmehes
Can anyone give me a good reason for not having side airbags as a standard feature (cost is not acceptable)? This should be the law. You can't buy a car without seatbelts. Why can you buy one without side curtains?
|
When talking side airbags, there are usually 2 separate ones: the side airbag that pops out of the seat back, and the side curtain airbag that pops out of the roof rail above the doors. Convertibles, of course, do not have a side curtain bag, in which case their side bags are bigger, to cover not just the chest area, but the head also.
Side and side-curtain airbags are much more difficult to operate, since there is so little crushspace in the side (virtually none, compared to the front airbags), so they have to work instantaneously. That makes them much more expensive. There is also the problem of the seats and the rest of the interior of the vehicle (the B-pillar, for instance) getting in the way of the inflating bag. That is why Mercedes-Benz, when it first introduced side airbags, had them popping out of the door or pillar and not the seatback.
So, maybe it would be difficult, engineering-wise, to add side airbags to the Colorado/Canyon and Ranger.
Sorry, you said cost no issue, but that is my argument (but then, everything comes down to cost).
Back to the topic of the Tacoma doing well... Toyotas have always done well in IIHS crash tests, usually better than its domestic competitors (and Ford has usually done much better than GM or Chrysler vehicles). Now, as soon as Toyota puts the new active-head restraint seats in all its vehicles, it should ace the rear crash tests also.
