If you scroll down to the bottom where the chart is then you get a better idea of the costs since not very many people are going to have all 4 happen to them at once!

In my 04, I had a 5-8 mph accident and I hit a truck with a trailer hitch. Parts and labor to fix this were a little over $6K. This isn't that far from accurate but again look at each individual accident cost not all 4 of them together.

 

BS

My wife hit a guy going 20 mph and did a damage worth $800.

BS REPORT.

 

This report isn't about safety at all. Like I said, look at IRL cars. They are built to crumple at impact to take the force of the collision and protect the driver.

This report doesnt talk at all about how much the car can "handle" an impact. It talks about how expensive the materials are and how they should be cheaper. Who cares? I like the fact that the car has expensive materials and options in it. I'm glad it costs more to repair than a car without adaptive headlights or ICC.

Again the figure is BS because the only way you could do $14,000 in damage would be to be simultaneously hit from all four angles at the exact same height as their test bumper.

 

Another thing to think about here is that a lot of times the cars are designed to crumple and break in certain ways in order to protect the passengers. Those are the INTENDED weak points. If the car crumples at a given spot that may well make more things need to be replaced in a crash but I would still rather know I was safe than that the repair was cheaper.

 

This was exactly my point, thank you.

 

I disagree. My premium is only $10/period (6 months) more on my G coupe than it was on my Scion Xb.

I think everybody here is missing the point of this ridiculous article. The point was that the bumpers on these cars are LOWER than the tested impact points as mandated by the government. As a result, the bumper, which if tested at the actual height of the bumper on the vehicle would probably do just fine, is basically eliminated from the equation. Thus, instead of the bumper taking the impact, other body panels and mechanical parts are subjected to the damage.

The main point of the article is that the bumpers on our cars need to be taller and, in some cases, wider.

Anybody want to install a lift kit on their G? I thought not.

 

The article is not referring to saftey issues.. They are talking about the ramifications of a parking lot bump, not a large impact. Crumple zones have nothing to do with what the bumpers are designed for. A 5 mph impact should not cause $10K in damages... if the bumpers are designed correctly

 

the study looked at the new g sedan. wtf are you talking about? regardless, your single anecdotal story does not speak to what the insurance industry is doing as a whole. theirs is a simple numbers game. if the car has more risk (likelihood of accident * cost to repair accident) then they will jack up premiums to an "acceptable" rate to still make their intended profit margins.

 

Agreed... It's only a matter of time before rates are affected. Once the insurance industry gets the necessary stats, it will adjust rates accordingly.

 

This article doesn't say it causes that, the most was @ $5k for a front full. And again consider the technology in the front of this car vs the A4. To even cite the $14k figure is absurd and pointless unless it is insinuating that you can get hit in the front head on, the front corner, the rear corner and the rear head on - at the same time. Which of course you cant. So they/we need to stop saying that a 5mph crash causes $14k in damage because it just doesnt.

This quote is the worst of all"

"For example, the bumper on the Infiniti G35 luxury car is much lower than the one on the Infiniti FX35. An Institute test involving these vehicles indicates that in a collision into the back of the SUV, the G35 would slide right under the bumper system, especially if the driver were braking hard, which would cause the front end of the car to dip.

"Infiniti equipped this car with a bumper that wouldn't prevent damage in a minor collision with the same company's SUV," Nolan points out. "This makes no sense, and it won't be solved by tinkering with the bumpers on cars alone. The federal rules have to be applied to minivans, pickups, and SUVs too. Only then will we start to see good bumper match-up in collisions at low speeds.""

This is the frigging dumbest thing I have ever heard. So should every car from a G35 coupe to a Hummer SUT have the same bumper height/width? That makes zero sense, what an idiotic statement.

Actually this too:

2. Make bumpers taller so they engage the bumpers on higher riding SUVs and pickup trucks instead of underriding them, even during emergency braking.

So now you want to raise bumpers on certain cars - what happens when they hit a smaller car? Is the goal to raise all bumper heights to that of trucks and SUVs?

 

Actually once the Insurance companies get word on this your insurance will go up. The more expensive it is to repair the car the higher you pay per month. Nothing you can do to get around this.

 

one of the reasons these damage amount matters is that some people pay minor fender benders out of pocket, to lower insurance rates, such as: no premium increase, high deductible (1k), teenage drivers, etc.

so, if you were a father of 2 teenagers, and you drive a g35 sedan, but one of your kids incurred the rear bumper damage for 4k, you can expect your insurance rates to significantly increase. when i talk to body shop owners, they say that many parents of teenager drivers pay out of pocket, even if the damage is great, for insurance purposes.

safety of occupants is also a factor. the 07 g35 sedan rates very well in protecting occupants in crash, but alas, at a greater cost than some of the other cars.

fwiw, the nissan maxima has also been rated as an expensive car to fix for minor fender benders. g35 sedan is not moving too far from the family.

 

Hmmm...aren't you the guy complaining that your G is "too heavy", and you're selling it after six months? And you previously owned a Z06? Guaranteed that your Z06 cost more than your G, and IT can't handle a simple light impact...so why'd you buy it??

Could it be that perhaps, like most of us, the car's ability to not break parts in an impact is a lesser buying priority...?

 

This is great news!! this means I am much more likely to get a total loss and a new car than a poorly repaired one when some ditz hits me.

 

You may be shocked to hear what the insurance company will actually fix. My car was flooded a few months ago. The repair estimate was almost 20K and the insurance company decided to have it repaired (and not written off)