6th Generation Maxima (2004-2008)Discussion of the 6th generation Maxima. Come see what others are saying.
Welcome to Maxima.org!
Welcome to Maxima.org,
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access
to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to start new topics, reply to conversations, privately message other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join Maxima.org today!
The Nissan Maxima and relatively inexpensive Suzuki Verona, from Suzuki Motor Corp., both got "marginal" ratings in the Institute's latest tests, meanwhile, just one notch above its lowest rating of "poor."
"The results for the Verona and Maxima show that vehicles with weak side structures are unlikely to provide effective protection in serious side crashes, even if they're equipped with head-protecting airbags," the Institute said.
Yet the NHTSA ratings are good at 4 stars for everything but frontal driver side which gets a 5 star rating. The 04 and 05 get the same rating at their website.
Yet the NHTSA ratings are good at 4 stars for everything but frontal driver side which gets a 5 star rating. The 04 and 05 get the same rating at their website.
This was on good morning america this morning...I was debating on posting something...at least we have something on the side guys...better than some other options out there.
The malibu/max did very well when equipped with the airbags....another sad day here
Hmm. even after all the praise the dealer salesman gave me about how it's one of the best crash, side impact rated, tested cars on the market. I should drive to the dealer now and kick him in the nutz, and say for better protection you should wear a cup you lier! Now how bout that side impact test rating!!!
Seriously, at the time I didn't think there was much available as far as crash testing went, so I just took the dealers word for it. I know, and I somehow want to think the dealers really want to help the buyers - they don't!!! The whole reason why I got the Max was because of the praise the dealer put on the safty features and crash test ratings. They had no clue I was looking elsewhere either. Once again, another fold in my life of mishaps.
My question is, does everyone use the same testing methods?
__________________
"The true secret of giving advice is, after you have honestly given it, to be perfectly indifferent whether it is taken or not, and never persist in trying to set people right."
-Hannah Whithall Smith
Wow, that sux. I guess bieng hit by a SUV (stupid utility vecihle) will do us in. I hate trucks. These no need for most people to have that type of vechile. They block the view of other drivers. Try looking out your driveway with one of those over grown junk piles parked there, or at the corner at a stop sign. They give the driver a false sense of security with the 4wd thing. Most of the inexperienced drivers relise that when they try to stop. They waste gas. They destroy other cars when in an accidents. They are are annoying all around. They should tax the hell out of those trucks to try and get them off the road. The only thing I hate wose than truck are trips to the dentist. Sorry for the rant but it's how I feel.
Wow, that sux. I guess bieng hit by a SUV (stupid utility vecihle) will do us in. I hate trucks. These no need for most people to have that type of vechile. They block the view of other drivers. Try looking out your driveway with one of those over grown junk piles parked there, or at the corner at a stop sign. They give the driver a false sense of security with the 4wd thing. Most of the inexperienced drivers relise that when they try to stop. They waste gas. They destroy other cars when in an accidents. They are are annoying all around. They should tax the hell out of those trucks to try and get them off the road. The only thing I hate wose than truck are trips to the dentist. Sorry for the rant but it's how I feel.
I can agree with many of your sentiments. SUVs replaced station wagons and are the fasionable alternative to a minivan. As such, you see them everywhere. They are annoying to drive behind because their windows are often factory tinted to the point that you cannot see what the vehicle in front of them is doing. Some SUV drivers are unaware of just how much of an obstruction they can be when it comes to seeing past them. I doubt they'll ever be taxed off the road but hopefully us fickle consumers can become fixated with something different soon.
Wow, that sux. I guess bieng hit by a SUV (stupid utility vecihle) will do us in. I hate trucks. These no need for most people to have that type of vechile. They block the view of other drivers. Try looking out your driveway with one of those over grown junk piles parked there, or at the corner at a stop sign. They give the driver a false sense of security with the 4wd thing. Most of the inexperienced drivers relise that when they try to stop. They waste gas. They destroy other cars when in an accidents. They are are annoying all around. They should tax the hell out of those trucks to try and get them off the road. The only thing I hate wose than truck are trips to the dentist. Sorry for the rant but it's how I feel.
I agree that SUVs are definately worthless for most to even have. I just about weekly see one or two flipped over in an intersection around here. Especially if it is raining. Did you ever notice that most of these have only a single driver with no passengers and sometimes in parking losts I have to just sit and watch while someone driving one spends 10 minutes trying to negotiate a parking space. It is funny as hell and inevitably they almost always end up taking two spaces up anyway. I also have to laugh at what the gas has to be costing them to drive those monstrosities around.
I still think it is a fad that is on its way out and if you notice aloit of the manufacturers are starting to move back towards station wagons again. Station wagons are what SUV people need anyway.
I am very unhappy to hear that our cars have only marginal side impact protection. Like another member posted earlier, side impact protection was a significant reason I bought my car. I just don't understand why the government even allows a vehicle to be brought to production without first demonstrating adequate crashworthiness. Designing a reasonably safe car cannot be rocket science. Nissan is a major manufacturer--it should not be allowed to escape its responsibilities to us consumers...
I am very unhappy to hear that our cars have only marginal side impact protection. Like another member posted earlier, side impact protection was a significant reason I bought my car. I just don't understand why the government even allows a vehicle to be brought to production without first demonstrating adequate crashworthiness. Designing a reasonably safe car cannot be rocket science. Nissan is a major manufacturer--it should not be allowed to escape its responsibilities to us consumers...
Last year it was top for safety. But this year it dropped because a lot of new car have come out with new saftey features. There was a lot of new models this year. Hey at least they used the Spirited Bronze color.
__________________
Thanks To MaximaGirl For The Sig
I had concerns about side impact crash worthiness the first time I saw a pic of the 6th gen. That was in early December of 2002 (I am aware Nissan did not actually release an official pic until Jan 5,2003).
The reason for my concern was the very high arching 'B' pillar. That length leaves a very long 'stretch' to be protected between the roof and the beams along the bottom of the car.
In looking at the structure of the 6th gen (which I did by removing a few mostly cosmetic interior parts), I feel collisions at the 'A' and 'C' pillars would be handled much better, as the length from the roof to the bottom beams is much shorter for both those pillars.
But, with money limitations, the only side testing ever done on any car is at the 'B' pillar, because it is the one nearest the driver's head.
And the results were about what I expected.
I'm just thankful the frontal crash test results for the 6th gen were excellent, and the 'active' head restraints (they move forward and upward during impacts from the rear) give Maxima passengers extra protection from neck injuries during rear end collisions.
I don't worry too much about the side impact IIHS ratings as this test is really subjective and can give you a false sense of security. While frontal and rear collision tests by both the IIHS and Govt. pretty much cover wherever a car can be hit, the side impact test is really kind of subjective. What are the odds of being in a side impact collision exactly at the B pillar area, as there is so much more area that can be affected. How would the tested cars fair if they were hit just above the drivers door toward the fender area, or, more toward the rear door than the drivers door, etc. etc.? Maybe some that passed would fail and vice versa. Just my opinion, but I think ramming a car at an exact spot for side impact is an imperfect real world test. Just wonder how many manufactures beefed up this part of the car just to pass the test and if you get hit a foot in front or behind the test area you'd be dead, hmmmm. Front and rear testing is probably pretty accurate, especially with the govt. doing head on and the IIHS doing offset, as there isn't much more area that can be tested.
All that said, I think the Max is as safe as anything else I've driven over the years. My last car was a 2002 Sebring Convertible. Just try surviving any kind of major accident in any convertible, yet people are now snapping up convertibles like hotcakes. If you want to be safe, drive sober, keep your eyes open and drive defensively, and, for goodness sake, WEAR YOUR SEATBELT. Walked away from a head on 20 years ago, no airbags then, but my sealbelt saved my life. Down here in San Antonio, we have a lot of highway deaths in pickups and SUV's because the idiots driving them won't wear their seatbelts and they are killed when they are thrown from the vehicle.
I don't worry too much about the side impact IIHS ratings as this test is really subjective and can give you a false sense of security. While frontal and rear collision tests by both the IIHS and Govt. pretty much cover wherever a car can be hit, the side impact test is really kind of subjective. What are the odds of being in a side impact collision exactly at the B pillar area, as there is so much more area that can be affected. How would the tested cars fair if they were hit just above the drivers door toward the fender area, or, more toward the rear door than the drivers door, etc. etc.? Maybe some that passed would fail and vice versa. Just my opinion, but I think ramming a car at an exact spot for side impact is an imperfect real world test. Just wonder how many manufactures beefed up this part of the car just to pass the test and if you get hit a foot in front or behind the test area you'd be dead, hmmmm. Front and rear testing is probably pretty accurate, especially with the govt. doing head on and the IIHS doing offset, as there isn't much more area that can be tested.
You raise some interesting questions. I think the data probably already exist on which types of side impacts are the most dangerous--wouldn't the insurance companies already know that? My guess is that B-pillar impacts are most dangerous for front seat occupants, and C-pillars for rear occupants, but I'm sure the data must exist as compiled from accident reports. Maybe one of the techs who work on crash tests will read and respond to this thread, or maybe one of us knows such a tech who might venture an opinion. I suspect that if B-pillar results were unrepresentative/unimportant, the manufacturers of low-scoring cars would be shouting this from the rooftops. BTW, I think we can be fairly certain that Nissan didn't worry too much about passing the side impact test, based on current results. For the younger set, maybe a few broken ribs and a broken leg wouldn't be too worrisome, but I personally would prefer to avoid such consequences.
If you are gonna get hit, you are gonna get hit. Even if you had 10 Star front crash ratings there's still those jacked up Expeditions that will just roll over us anyway... I just drive defensively and enjoy the beauty of the Max.
If you are gonna get hit, you are gonna get hit. Even if you had 10 Star front crash ratings there's still those jacked up Expeditions that will just roll over us anyway... I just drive defensively and enjoy the beauty of the Max.
I totally agree with your final thoughts--drive defensively and enjoy the car, which is a terrific automobile. I don't agree with the previous portion of your remarks, which to me seems fatalistic and disregards the demonstrated probabilities of serious injury which depend upon the car's construction. I would prefer to use those odds to my advantage, which of course is the whole point of crash testing.
These no need for most people to have that type of vechile. They block the view of other drivers. Try looking out your driveway with one of those over grown junk piles parked there, or at the corner at a stop sign. They give the driver a false sense of security with the 4wd thing. Most of the inexperienced drivers relise that when they try to stop. They waste gas. They destroy other cars when in an accidents. They are are annoying all around. They should tax the hell out of those trucks to try and get them off the road. The only thing I hate wose than truck are trips to the dentist. Sorry for the rant but it's how I feel.
Thats what someone driving a "Smart" car could say abt. maximas as well!
I'm looking at possibly getting a used 2006 maxima. I've got a good deal in the works right now, HOWEVER, I just looked at the IIHS crash test with a marginal side impact...that could be a showstopper b/c safety is very important to me.
Were there any improvements done to the 2006 model after this test was conducted?
I saw a Maxima in a police chase on tv the other day and the Maxima rolled AT LEAST 7 times and the driver got out and started running w/o even missing a beat. Even the broadcaster said, "WOW that must be a VERY sturdy car, because in most any other car it would have definitely been fatal." Not sure what year that Max was though.. anyone else see that?
Well if they have not done any improvements after that crash test in the 2 years b/w 2004 & 2006 then that pretty much seals the deal and I'll pass on the Maxima.
It sucks though, bc from everything I've heard it would be a really good car that would last forever....
Well if they have not done any improvements after that crash test in the 2 years b/w 2004 & 2006 then that pretty much seals the deal and I'll pass on the Maxima.
It sucks though, bc from everything I've heard it would be a really good car that would last forever....
LOL, ok. I saw one at work that got smoked by a GMC Safari minivan direct on the pass side. The van looked worse then the maxima, even though both cars were a write off the pass of the maxima only had minor bruising to his right leg.
Its a solid car. But it has long doors, so i guess it all depends on where you get hit on the side.
I saw a Maxima in a police chase on tv the other day and the Maxima rolled AT LEAST 7 times and the driver got out and started running w/o even missing a beat. Even the broadcaster said, "WOW that must be a VERY sturdy car, because in most any other car it would have definitely been fatal." Not sure what year that Max was though.. anyone else see that?
yea I wanna see the video on this thing. I saw something about crash test rating and the 2004-2006 Maxima got great ratings, as a matter of fact it was better than the 2009 Maxima. I would do a bit more looking around if I were you. I will see if I can find the post I made with the links.
Nothing here. I found the NHSTA review and have seen a lot of people on the forum here with accidents that should have taken their lives but they lived to tell the tale and show pics of proof. I mean that was enough for me to know I was in good hands.
, that was good, I actually thought a 2005 Maxima was on the front page of msnbc.com
Linear Mode
