CX-5 Takes Top Safety Pick...But only ones built after Oct 2013?

[V8toilet]

I bet all the CX5's built after October 13 are heavier now

 

[ZoomWilder]

Over the weekend, a Toyota rep at a new car show said this in regards to the small-offset crash test, "Although Toyota made some design changes to address this test, the test itself is flawed as a vehicle would deflect in such a crash, whereas the test jig rigidly locks the vehicle in place and does not represent a real scenario."

That's pretty dumb - not all accidents are with another vehicle. The test is meant to simulate hitting the edge of a wall or a pole (or tree). And the test is at 40 mph + 0 mph (the wall), if it were a car that lets say came across the road the impact would be your speed plus their speed, granted there would be more energy loss due to the crushing of their vehicle as well as yours and perhaps the curvature of the front ends of the autos would create vector forces pushing the autos away from one another. But trees don't move... outside of Fangorn...

 

[NorCal_MP3]

Mine is a 10/13 build with the new shifter...any way to know if the frame additions are on the car? Is there a visual check that can be done to tell? Will Mazda be willing to upgrade current older cars? Might be a simple bolt on frame addition...

 

[zorobg]

I think they made the change with the new straight shifter, which I think they started manufacture in October.

Apparently there is a discrepancy between the date of the change over to the straight shifter (the production of those allegedly started Sept 2013) and the date the IIHS web site is indicating the new safety improvements were implemented (after Oct 2013 which should mean Nov 2013 and newer). That being said, its really strange that Mazda will introduce significant midyear hardware update and then do another one two months later (there were actual changes to the frame in order to help meet the test requirements, not just airbag timing tweaks). So the question is, are all 2014.5's equipped with the new crash test gear, or is that only for those manufactured November and newer.

 

[Beefy]

That being said, its really strange that Mazda will introduce significant midyear hardware update and then do another one two months later (there were actual changes to the frame in order to help meet the test requirements, not just airbag timing tweaks)

It really isn't that big a deal, outside enthusiast forums like these. Constant iterations/improvements in manufacturing happen in many industries that do not necessarily require significant retooling, and individual changes can happen asynchronously. Sometimes we notice them visually (shifter) and sometimes we might not (subtle frame improvements). As long as the car meets the minimum spec and doesn't get quantifiably worse, its all good in my mind.

 

[CX-SV]

^ Agreed.

I don't see it as a guinea pig situation at all. It's normal for automakers to enhance safety by making mid-cycle mods for improved crash test performance. Ford Motor Co. for example has done it in the past on several past models mid-gen or mid-cycle.

In the case of the CX-5, it's Mazda taking the initiative to improve crash results on testing that is not even mandatory (IIHS-small overlap frontal crash versus mandatory NHTSA crash testing). I still see at as nothing but good news, because the 2013 CX-5 is still near the top of its class of compact SUVs, the model year 2014 just gets better. Mazda chose to do the right thing in a timely matter, ignoring politics and cost concerns.

 

[ZoomWilder]

^ Agreed.

I understand that it may not be a big deal to most, but it's information that I'm interested in knowing about my $25,000 investment for my wife. In particular if I do have an older model and one of the changes being improved airbag deployment programming, if I can get that firmware updated in my wife's CX-5 to make it safer. I'm happy with the auto either way - just interested in how to make it the best it can be.

 

[CX-SV]

I understand that it may not be a big deal to most, but it's information that I'm interested in knowing about my $25,000 investment for my wife. In particular if I do have an older model and one of the changes being improved airbag deployment programming, if I can get that firmware updated in my wife's CX-5 to make it safer. I'm happy with the auto either way - just interested in how to make it the best it can be.

Not going to happen. Most likely the improved IIHS test results were not result of airbag deployment.

 

[ZoomWilder]

Not going to happen. Most likely the improved IIHS test results were not result of airbag deployment.

Straight from the IIHS website:
"The Mazda CX-5 was introduced in the 2013 model year. Beginning with 2014 models built after October 2013, the front and side airbag programming and the front structure were modified to improve occupant protection in small overlap frontal crashes (note: information about when a specific vehicle was manufactured is on the certification label typically affixed to the car on or near the driver door)."

Before Oct. 2013:
"Restraints and dummy kinematics:
The dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but slid off the left side as the steering column moved 12 cm to the right, leaving the head vulnerable to contact with forward side structure. Additionally, the seat belt allowed excessive forward excursion of the dummy’s head and torso. The side curtain airbag deployed too late during the crash and does not have sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with forward side structure and outside objects."

After Oct 2013:
"Restraints and dummy kinematics:
The dummy’s movement was well controlled. The dummy’s head loaded the frontal airbag, which stayed in front of the dummy until rebound. The side curtain airbag deployed and had sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with side structure and outside objects. The side torso airbag also deployed."

 

[ZoomWilder]

But yes - the main improvement was the cage. It just seems like if there is a programming upgrade available, it would be nice to get it.

 

[CX-SV]

But yes - the main improvement was the cage. It just seems like if there is a programming upgrade available, it would be nice to get it.

Exactly, and you are not going to get a piecemeal, partial, untested (alone separate from other structural improvements), non-integrated, incomplete, hack of something that is safety-related from Mazda. Not going to happen.

 

[STE92VE]

Straight from the IIHS website:
"The Mazda CX-5 was introduced in the 2013 model year. Beginning with 2014 models built after October 2013, the front and side airbag programming and the front structure were modified to improve occupant protection in small overlap frontal crashes (note: information about when a specific vehicle was manufactured is on the certification label typically affixed to the car on or near the driver door)."

Before Oct. 2013:
"Restraints and dummy kinematics:
The dummys head contacted the frontal airbag but slid off the left side as the steering column moved 12 cm to the right, leaving the head vulnerable to contact with forward side structure. Additionally, the seat belt allowed excessive forward excursion of the dummys head and torso. The side curtain airbag deployed too late during the crash and does not have sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with forward side structure and outside objects."

After Oct 2013:
"Restraints and dummy kinematics:
The dummys movement was well controlled. The dummys head loaded the frontal airbag, which stayed in front of the dummy until rebound. The side curtain airbag deployed and had sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with side structure and outside objects. The side torso airbag also deployed."

I understand nothing can be done with structural changes that were made to the frame but this air bag issue should be considered a safety recall and all affected vehicles should be re-programmed.

 

[STE92VE]

But yes - the main improvement was the cage. It just seems like if there is a programming upgrade available, it would be nice to get it.

+1

 

[CC58]

I understand nothing can be done with structural changes that were made to the frame but this air bag issue should be considered a safety recall and all affected vehicles should be re-programmed.

The re-programming happened in conjunction with structural changes. Its likely the reprogramming happened to match structural changes. Perhaps it fires a little sooner if structure is more rigid.

 

[ErgoZoom]

Increasing safety doesn't make the prior version a "safety recall." It appears that the reprogramming has to do with how the frame takes the impact. Without an adjustment to the frame there would be no useful point to reprogram the airbag deployment.

 

[STE92VE]

Increasing safety doesn't make the prior version a "safety recall." It appears that the reprogramming has to do with how the frame takes the impact. Without an adjustment to the frame there would be no useful point to reprogram the airbag deployment.

Then it appears this may be a "what came first? the chicken or the egg" question. Did they re-design the frame and then re-program the air bags since they knew there were deficiencies in the impact areas or were they independent events? Whatever, maybe those of us with pre Oct 2013 builds should drive a little more carefully or wear Bell helmets....

 

[CX-SV]

Whatever, maybe those of us with pre Oct 2013 builds should drive a little more carefully or wear Bell helmets....

Driving more carefully is my preference, with or without the optional Bell helmet. By doing that for 2 years of driving my CX-5 no crash/injury/death to report.

No, does not warrant safety recall if the 2013 CX-5 already exceeded government mandated safety regs for that year.

 

[STE92VE]

Driving more carefully is my preference, with or without the optional Bell helmet. By doing that for 2 years of driving my CX-5 no crash/injury/death to report.

(cool)

 

[NorCal_MP3]

Anyone email Mazda corporate yet? An office answer would put this to bed real fast...I haven't BTW...

 

[CX-SV]

You can get more off IIHS website than attempting to email corporate. Nobody has emailed corporate because expectations for meaningful response scrubbed by legal department will not be helpful.