Quality Criteria for the Safety Assessment of Cars Based on Real-World Crashes Conflicting Ratings and Enhanced Consumer Information Report of Sub-Task 4.2 CEA/EC SARAC II QUALITY CRITERIA FOR THE SAFETY ASSESSM OF CARS BASED ON REAL-WORLD CRASH Funded by the European Commissi Directorate General TR SARAC II Quality Criteria for the Safety Assessment of Cars based on Real-World Crashes Project Number: SARAC_2_215 REPORT of Sub-Task 4.2 Conflicting Ratings and Enhanced Consumer Information Brian Fildes, Anthony Clark and Jim Langford Monash University Accident Research Centre Melbourne, Australia November 2005 CEA/EC SARAC II QUALITY CRITERIA FOR THE SAFETY ASSESSM OF CARS BASED ON REAL-WORLD CRASH Funded by the European Commissi Directorate General TR International Project Management Comité Européen des Assurances (CEA) Prof. Dr. Klaus Langwieder SARAC Members European Commission (EC) Comité Européen des Assurances (CEA) DG TREN 26 Boulevard Haussmann 28 Rue Demot FR-75009 Paris B-1040 Brussels Monash University Helsinki University of Technology Accident Research Centre (MUARC) Laboratory of Transportation Engineering Building 70, P.O. Box 2100 Clayton, 3800 Victoria, Australia FIN-02015 HUT, Finland BMW Group Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen Centro Zaragoza Vehicle Safety (BASt) Instituto de Investigación Sobre D-80788 München Brüderstraße 53 Reparación de Vehiculos, S.A. D-51427 Bergisch Gladbach Carretera Nacional 232, km 273 E-50690 Pedrola (Zaragoza) DaimlerChrysler AG Department for Transport FIA Foundation for the Automobile D-71059 Sindelfingen Zone 1/29a Great Minister House and Society 76 Marsham Street 8 Place de la Concorde London, SW1P 4DR United Kingdom Paris 75008 France Ministry of Transport and Finnish Motor Insurers’ Centre FOLKSAM Insurance Group Communications of Finland (VALT) Research/Traffic Safety P.O. Box 31 Bulevardi 28, S-106 60 Stockholm FIN 0023 Helsinki FIN-00120 Helsinki Ford Motor Company German Insurance Association (GDV) Honda Motor Europe Safety Data Analysis (SDA) German Insurance Institute for Traffic Wijngaardveld 1 Automotive Safety Office (ASO) Engineering 9300 Aalst Belgium Köln-Merkenich / Spessartstraße Friedrichstrasse 191, D-10117 Berlin D-50725 Köln Insurance Institute for Highway ITARDA IVT Heilbronn Safety (IIHS) & Institute for Traffic Accident Research Institut für Verkehrs- und Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) and Data Analysis Tourismusforschung e. V. 1005 N. Glebe Road Kojimachi Tokyu Bldg. 6-6 Kojimachi, Kreuzäckerstr. 15 Arlington, VA 22201 USA Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 102-0083 Japan D-74081 Heilbronn Japanese Automobile Research Laboratory of Accidentology, Loughborough University Institute (JARI) Biomechanics and Human Behaviour Vehicle Safety Research Centre 2530 Karima, Tsukuba PSA Peugeot-Citroën/RENAULT Holywell Building Loughborough Ibaraki 305-0822, Japan (LAB) Leicestershire LE 11 3 UZ UK 132 Rue des Suisses 92000 Nanterre (France) National Organisation for Automotive Swedish Road Administration (SRA) Technische Universität Safety and Victims Aid (NASVA) Röda Vägen Braunschweig 6-1-25, Kojimachi Chiyoda-Ku, S-78187 Borlange Institut für Mathematische Stochastik Tokyo, 102-0083, Japan Pockelsstr. 14 D-38106 Braunschweig Verband der Automobilindustie (VDA) Volkswagen AG Westendstr. 61 1777 Unfallforschung D-60325 Frankfurt/Main D-38436 Wolfsburg CEA/EC SARAC II QUALITY CRITERIA FOR THE SAFETY ASSESSM OF CARS BASED ON REAL-WORLD CRASH Funded by the European Commissi Directorate General TR Document Retrieval Information Report No. Date Pages SARAC_2_215 November 2005 28 Title and Subtitle Conflicting ratings and enhanced consumer information Author(s) Fildes B., Clarke A. and Langford J. Performing Organisation Monash University Accident Research Centre Building 70, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3800 Australia Sub-Task Participants Pilot Brian Fildes Monash University Accident Research Centre Sub Contractors Timo Ernvall Helsinki University of Technology Jens-Peter Kreiß TU Braunschweig Max Cameron Monash University Accident Research Centre Advisors Robert Zobel Volkswagen Brian O’Neill IIHS Paul Fay Ford Anders Kullgren Folksam Insurance Thomas Hummel GDV Matthew Bollington Dept. Transport, UK Abstract This report set out to briefly review anomalies in ratings across one prospective and two retrospective systems to examine the extent of variable information provided to consumers by these different systems. The findings showed overall good concordance between systems, although these were a number of instances where ratings differed across these systems. A second task was to outline a computer-based web system to readily provide safety information for consumers as well as software to assist new vehicle buyers in their choice of a new vehicle with an emphasis on its crashworthiness and crash avoidance characteristics. Such a system is described here and it is recommended that resources be provided to develop and introduce this system and maintain its accuracy and usefulness for safety choice and promotion within Europe. Keywords: VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER, SAFETY, RESEARCH, CRASH ANALYSIS The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of CEA, GDV or any of the participants of the SARAC committee. CEA/EC SARAC II QUALITY CRITERIA FOR THE SAFETY ASSESSM OF CARS BASED ON REAL-WORLD CRASH Funded by the European Commissi Directorate General TR Acknowledgements The authors are especially grateful to the assistance provided by members of the SARAC committee for their valuable contributions in the provision of additional materials and review comments during the preparation of this report. With regard to the Website development, the authors wish to thank David Logan for his valuable input in the development of the system, David Ng for his technical support and for providing Java code framework for search functions, and Clay Douglas for his support and advice throughout the design of the website itself. We are thankful to Joanne Tziotis for her assistance with the material used on the non-concordance of rating systems. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................1 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................3 2 NON-CONCORDANCE OF RATING SYSTEMS................................................................4 2.1 RATING SYSTEMS ........................................................................................................5 2.1.1 The “Which” Secondary Safety Rating System ............................................5 2.1.2 The AutoPlus Safety Rating System ............................................................7 2.2 SUMMARY....................................................................................................................7 3 ENHANCED CONSUMER INFORMATION........................................................................9 3.1 CONCEPTUAL VEHICLE SAFETY INFORMATION WEBSITE ................................................9 3.1.1 Research Objective ....................................................................................10 3.2 SITE DESCRIPTION AND PRINCIPLES ...........................................................................10 3.3 MENU STRUCTURE.....................................................................................................11 3.3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................11 3.3.2 High Level Menu Structure .........................................................................11 3.3.3 Mid Level Site Structure..............................................................................12 3.3.4 Low Level Site Structure.............................................................................13 3.4 PAGE LAYOUT ............................................................................................................14 3.4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................14 3.4.2 Partitioning of Information...........................................................................14 3.4.3 Search Function..........................................................................................15 3.4.4 Colours........................................................................................................15 3.4.5 Sub-Menu Software ....................................................................................16 3.5 SAFETY INFORMATION................................................................................................17 3.5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................17 3.5.2 Content .......................................................................................................17 3.6 VEHICLE CRASH PERFORMANCE INFORMATION ...........................................................18 3.6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................18 3.6.2 User Interface .............................................................................................18 3.6.3 Database.....................................................................................................21 3.6.4 Content .......................................................................................................21 4 DISCUSSION