Ford Mustang - Poor ANCAP Safety Ratings

prophet on 31/08/2020 - 12:11
Last edited 31/08/2020 - 12:15

I've been wondering whether Mustang owners/buyers know that the car has very poor safety ratings, especially considering how sprightly they typically like to drive.

Present Mustangs only have a 3 star ANCAP safety rating, which is the same rating given to LDV work vans. They've been rated poorly for both passengers and pedestrians. Older Stangs are not the safest either; the 2015-2017 models were only 2 star.

  1. Adult Occupant Protection: 72% (27.7 out of 38)
  2. Child Occupant Protection: 32% (15.8 out of 49)
  3. Pedestrian Protection: 78% (32.8 out of 42)
  4. Safety assist: 61% (7.4 out of 12)

https://www.ancap.com.au/media-and-gallery/releases/updated-…

https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/ford/mustang/be8eed

Keep in mind that ANCAP ratings are based on 50-60kph crash tests. So you can imagine how bad it will be at higher speeds.

https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-testing-explained

Poll Options

  • 114
    Who cares about safety ratings?? It's a Stang!!!
  • 26
    What the.. Are those ANCAP ratings for real? HAHAHAHAHAH
  • 76
    Of course I knew. Who doesn't check ANCAP ratings? HAHAHAH
Automotive

Comments

      • Hackney on 01/09/2020 - 13:13

        If I was purchasing mine in today’s market it would be in the 50-55k bracket.Prices have gone stupid.There are still some good buys out there,you just have to keep searching,& be picky in what you want.I noticed that we’re quite a few examples in the A.C.T quite a few months back,@ quite competitive prices,are now all gone.It is a shrinking market @ the moment.

        • Bob Svargis on 02/09/2020 - 08:44

          Totally. What I find interesting is that Ford hardly advertise it any more (other than on social media with Tara Moss) because they really don't need to. They seem to be moving a lot of stock in and out. Anecdotally from the dealerships I drive past regularly in Sydney, I rarely see the same 'stang there for more than a week or so.

          • Hackney on 02/09/2020 - 09:10
            +1

            @Bob Svargis: @symowallo.Used car prices(in general all makes) have gone up,because of stock levels,dealers (apparently) are just not willing to negotiate much discount & are not wholesaling much stock.They are reporting a 30% surge in car prices since April! (Source:Caradvice)Glad I bought my GT last Oct.Cheers:):)

  • striker5950 on 01/09/2020 - 20:09
    +2

    there should be a 4th option stating "stop with the HAHAHA its annoying asf"

  • striker5950 on 01/09/2020 - 20:13
    +1

    if you got 70k to spare go for an rs3 low km second hand. much better car IMO mustang is just for looks and sound, slow for the price, slow in a straight line and slow in the quarter mile compared to what else you can get for 70k. slow around corners too. im comparing it to an rs3 here, or a45 amg or a kia stinger gt (specially 2021 model oh man thats a nice spec'd car check it out)

    • Pipih on 02/09/2020 - 09:56

      RS3 or A45 is another level, I agree with you.
      KIA stinger GT yes this car is faster but this car will not around anymore, no body buy it. we don't even get the upgrade version for the V6 (AWD, more Kw)

    • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2020 - 10:03
      -3

      Yeah that's complete bullshit. Stock an RS3 does 0-100kmh in the same time as a 2020 Mustang (3.9 seconds) and the Mustang does the 1/4 mile in 11.83 @ 119.51 mph according to Road and Track. The RS3 takes 12.2 @ 114 mph according to MotorWeek. So it's significantly slower in a straight line. You've got no idea what you're talking about.

      • striker5950 on 02/09/2020 - 20:48

        wow you can read the brochure.. those numbers are inflated from factory by ford, you cant match them on a good day, however the rs3 is down played, its much faster than whats advertised by audi. in stock form the audi wins hand down, but if you also add a simple ecu tune to the audi and you can leave the mustang in the rear view in every category, same thing cant be said for the mustang as its naturally aspirated. so yeh you really dont know shit tbh

        • [Deactivated] on 02/09/2020 - 20:54
          -2

          That's literally an independant test. I even cited it. Quit your fanboy bullshit.

    • Euphemistic on 02/09/2020 - 11:08
      +2

      A Mustang isn’t purchased by numbers or by the head. It’s purchased with the heart (or the nether regions).

      Doesn’t need to be the best, fastest or whatever it’s just a new, comfortable, air conditioned, cruise controlled, reliable and relatively safe version of the 60s Mustang that everyone really wants.

      • [Deactivated] on 03/09/2020 - 11:01
        -2

        Except that a Mustang is unquestionably faster than a stock RS3 in a straight line. The guy literally has no idea what he is talking about.

        • Euphemistic on 03/09/2020 - 11:51

          On paper it’s faster. In real life it’s faster by a fraction of a second and a couple of miles per hour. A seat of the pants test you would hardly notice and get a different drivers and the other would likely win in a race they are that close.

          Both are stupid fast and unlikely to be used to their potential 99% of the time anyway.

          • [Deactivated] on 03/09/2020 - 11:54
            -1

            @Euphemistic: 5mph is a big trap speed difference.

            • Euphemistic on 03/09/2020 - 13:14

              @[Deactivated]: It’s not when you are talking about already being well above 45km/h over pretty much any current speed limit.

              • [Deactivated] on 03/09/2020 - 13:34
                -1

                @Euphemistic: That’s such a stupid retort. Obviously 1/4 mile times aren’t relevant on the road. It doesn’t change the fact that they’re relevant measures of a car’s performance. Which is what we are talking about.

    • AngusD on 03/09/2020 - 13:23
      +1

      RS3 is a seriously nice car, albeit pretty plain looking and loses a bit of its appeal now they've neutered the sound by adding that particulate filter. Audi interiors are absolutely the best in the business, too. RS3 is more practical than the Mustang, too, although if practicality is an issue you're probably not considering a Mustang in the first place. But I don't trust them from a quality point of view - 3 year warranty is unacceptable on any new car these days, let alone cars as expensive as Audi and BMW. And if you buy 2nd hand you're going even further out on a limb.

      • [Deactivated] on 03/09/2020 - 15:33

        I think Mercedes make much better interiors than Audi. But I do think Audi interiors are better than BMWs. Even on 7 series BMW insist on including awful scratchy plastic on many surfaces like the seat controls and around the buttons/gear selectors. It's nasty when you're spending big bucks on a car. I find Audi interiors pretty dated, but the new MMI is a big improvement aesthetically, if not functionally.

        • AngusD on 03/09/2020 - 15:58

          Bigger problem for me with Audi, being somewhat old-school about these things, is the lack of a manual transmission option pretty much across the board (I think the R8 might have it available, but I don't play in that league :P). Not sure if Mercedes are in the same boat, and I know BMW still offer the manual in at least some models. If we're just talking about a regular sort of car or a luxury thing then auto is fine, but if I'm buying a performance-oriented car - ie something that I'm buying first and foremost for the fun of driving it - then I want it manual.

          We looked at (but didn't buy) the BMW 1 series and Audi A3 when shopping for a new car for my wife last year and yeah, the Audi sh@t all over the BMW interior-wise. Didn't look at the Mercedes, but the BMW was behind even the Mazda 3 which we ended up buying (with the auto transmission :P), despite being more expensive (and that's before you start adding on options that are standard on the Mazda).

          • [Deactivated] on 03/09/2020 - 16:58

            @AngusD: You’re going to get a shitty interior on any car in that price range to be honest. Those are not luxury cars, they are small town cars, I’m not sure what you were expecting. I’ve not been in the new 1 series, but my sister has a 2019 model and the interior on that is definitely better than a new Mazda 3 that belongs to a colleague. But her 1 series does have an assload of that shitty BMW scratchy plastic.

  • CalmLemons on 01/09/2020 - 21:00
    +5

    You don't buy a Mustang because you want a safe car.

    If you want a safe car, buy a c class Mercedes, a volvo or a tesla.

    People buy Mustangs because they WANT a Mustang.

    Tests are bad now due to poor rear passenger safety (who rides in the back of a mustang ffs) and they used to be bad due to pedestrian safety. Two things people who drive mustangs don't give a flying fk about.

    lol

    • toomuchdogfur on 02/09/2020 - 13:35

      who rides in the back of a mustang ffs

      Exactly, I wonder how many of the folks focused on the ANCAP scores have actually been in a Mustang.

      The last one I touched (2016) had literally 15 cm of legroom, and even if you could fit, the depth was too shallow for all but the shortest of people. Room for a child, perhaps, but there are so many reasons to not-buy a Mustang as a family car that I wouldn't imagine this would be a realistic use case.

      • AngusD on 03/09/2020 - 09:59

        What if you work with the disabled and you ferry a lot of multiple-amputees around? Huh? HUH???!?

        :P

  • monky on 01/09/2020 - 21:14

    Woah… Crash car bad???? Scary…

  • bmerigan on 01/09/2020 - 21:36

    I think you should consider what things it loses points on and whether they really matter to you.
    Less points doesn't directly equal less safety.
    For example, not having a seatbelt warning chime loses points.

  • smartazz104 on 02/09/2020 - 07:31
    +2

    With the way most people drive in this country I can see why they need 5 stars.

  • thesaver on 02/09/2020 - 07:34
    -1

    This low score makes me want to buy this car even more. It's nice to see a car not giving in to the over the top safety people.

  • NotSureIfSerious on 02/09/2020 - 08:09

    You already posted this exact thing in the other thread despite OP not asking or caring.

  • seraphim2017 on 02/09/2020 - 10:14

    People buy the cars they want to buy, if the car has good marketing and a name, people will desire it, and it's their money, so their choice. Generally I associate Mustangs with combover hair middle aged men driving with their bellies, but not all who drive them would fit that sterotype, I'm sure there are some normal people who would buy them too as a heart purchase.

    Its not what many people would want, its a rot box ford, but plenty of people really like them, so each to their own.

    If everyone was sensible, there would only be a small handful or marques, on the road, and mostly corollas! And that would be a bit boring!

  • Kamsi on 02/09/2020 - 11:06

    Back in the old days there weren't any ANCAP yet still people driving Kingswood :)

  • AngusD on 02/09/2020 - 12:37

    Doesn't bother me that much, wouldn't stop me buying one. I wouldn't be carrying anybody in the back seat anyway.

    The issue for me is more to do with features v costs. We bought a new Mazda 3 for my wife back at the start of this year. That is a superb car and the amount of safety tech in it in terms of sensors, cameras, etc etc etc is outstanding. My issue with the Mustang is that while those things aren't essential to my enjoyment of the car (I've got a 2012 Nissan 370Z which has even less safety kit than the Mustang), the fact that it costs $30k+ more than the Mazda and doesn't have the same level of equipment would put me off a bit.

    Obviously they're different cars, and you're getting a lot more on the performance side, but there's also a huge gulf in price which should net you a similar level of equipment as well as the performance. I'd really want to see a 360 degree camera (and cross-traffic alerts which I think it also lacks) on it for easier parking, too - it's a big car and coupes tend to have big blind-spots, too.

  • smartazz104 on 02/09/2020 - 12:53

    I've been wondering whether Mustang owners/buyers know that the car has very poor safety ratings, especially considering how sprightly they typically like to drive.

    But why?

  • tomleonhart on 02/09/2020 - 13:58
    +1

    I've worked in a location where a "mustang ownership" group would come and race every year. I've spoken to many owners and I can assure you those I spoke to do not care about ANCAP.

  • No ONE on 02/09/2020 - 14:01
    -1

    Well, Mustang are made that way so in case the driver f**ked up, they will be the first to migrate to the sky.

  • skeaono on 02/09/2020 - 14:58

    Wait, muscle car buys care about safety?

  • jsrz18 on 02/09/2020 - 20:51

    would love a mustang one day

  • p1 ama on 03/09/2020 - 01:18
    -1

    To be honest, oversimplification of complex concepts to try and explain them to people who don't really understand the nuances is always extremely difficult. The simple truth is that you can't simplify a car's safety rating down to just an "out of 5 star" rating. The physics of collisions are complex and the safety ratings test very specific scenarios which may or may not be realistic, along with applying a strange weighting scale which may not be applicable to how you use your car. There are hundreds of thousands of permutations of various road conditions, driver conditions and accident situations.

    Rather than basing something on whether it's "safe or not" as a binary choice, look at the information and make an informed decision. Firstly, much of the safety rating is based on rear passenger safety and children. How often do you have a rear passenger? How often are you carrying children. The tests are also heavily skewed in terms of front-end collisions. How likely are you to drive straight at brick walls?

    Simple truth is that the road toll is low, the risks aren't that great and your chances of survival have much more to do with the road conditions and factors largely out of your control as opposed to what car you're in. If you're in that bad of a crash where you die in a Mustang, even in a safer car, you'd still likely be dead, or be a vegetable.

    • Euphemistic on 03/09/2020 - 08:03
      +1

      to do with the road conditions and factors largely out of your control

      The biggest factor is completely in your control. A driver is responsible for a massive majority of crashes. Driver distraction is our current worst enemy on the roads.

      Road conditions and other factors can largely be controlled by learning to drive defensively and having a good understanding of the handling capability of the vehicle.

      • netjock on 03/09/2020 - 13:47

        Road conditions and other factors can largely be controlled by learning to drive defensively

        People in this country have somehow learned to drive offensively without taking a lesson… my 2c worth.

        • Euphemistic on 03/09/2020 - 15:21

          Definitely. ‘We’ have been trained that the speed limit is the speed you must drive at, and that by and large everyone follows the rules so you don’t need to expect the unexpected. Just take a look at the angst a thread about driving under the speed limit gets.

  • Duckie2hh on 03/09/2020 - 08:23
    +4

    Sshhhh, it's natural selection at work. Let it be, the world will benefit.

    • netjock on 03/09/2020 - 13:48
      +1

      Fools deserve to be parted from their money!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join