Full report in .pdf format

VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS AND CRASHWORTHINESS BY YEAR OF VEHICLE MANUFACTURE: VICTORIA AND NSW CRASHES DURING 1987-2002 QUEENSLAND, WESTERN AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND CRASHES DURING 1991-2002

by Stuart Newstead Max Cameron and Linda Watson

Report No. 222 June 2004

Project Sponsored By

ii MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Report No. Report Date ISBN Pages 222 June 2004 0 7326 1732 4 69 + Appendices Title and sub-title: Vehicle Crashworthiness and Aggressivity Ratings and Crashworthiness by Year of Vehicle Manufacture: Victoria and NSW Crashes During 1987-2002, Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand Crashes During 19912002 Author(s) Type of Report & Period Covered Newstead, S.V., Cameron, M.H. and Watson, L.M. Summary Report, 1982-2002 Sponsoring Organisations - This project was funded as contract research by the following organisations: Road Traffic Authority of NSW, Royal Automobile Club of Victoria Ltd, NRMA Ltd, VicRoads, Royal Automobile Club of Western Australia Ltd, Transport Accident Commission and Land Transport Safety Authority New Zealand and by a grant from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau Abstract: Crashworthiness ratings measure the relative safety of vehicles in preventing severe injury to their own drivers in crashes whilst aggressivity ratings measure the serious injury risk vehicles pose to drivers of other vehicles with which they collide. Crashworthiness and aggressivity ratings for 1982-2002 model vehicles were developed based on data on crashes in Victoria and New South Wales during 1987-2002 and in Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand during 19912002. This study represents the first time New Zealand data has been included in a full update of the ratings. Crashworthiness and aggressivity were measured by a combination of injury severity (of injured drivers) and injury risk (of drivers involved in crashes). The ratings were adjusted for the driver sex and age, the speed limit at the crash location, the number of vehicles involved, the state in which the crash occurred and the year in which the crash occurred. These factors were strongly related to injury risk and/or severity for both aggressivity and crashworthiness. Both ratings estimate, with the appropriate focus, the risk of a driver being killed or admitted to hospital when involved in a tow-away crash, to a degree of accuracy represented by the confidence limits of the rating in each case. The crashworthiness estimates and their associated confidence limits were obtained for 255 vehicle models and were sufficiently sensitive that they were able to identify 128 models of passenger cars, four-wheel drive vehicles, passenger vans and light commercial vehicles that have superior or inferior crashworthiness characteristics compared with the average vehicle. Aggressivity rating estimates and their associated confidence limits were obtained for 202 vehicle models and were sufficiently sensitive that they were able to identify 80 models of passenger cars, four-wheel drive vehicles, passenger vans and light commercial vehicles that have superior or inferior aggressivity characteristics compared with the average vehicle. Also investigated was the relationship between vehicle crashworthiness and the year of manufacture of Australian passenger and light commercial vehicles manufactured from 1964 to 2002. Trends were examined by year of manufacture both for the fleet as a whole and by market group for vehicles manufactured from 1982 to 2002. The results of this report are based on a number of assumptions and warrant a number of qualifications that should be noted. Key Words: (IRRD except when marked*) Injury, Vehicle Occupant, Collision, Passenger Car Unit, Passive Safety System, Statistics Disclaimer: This Report is produced for the purposes of providing information concerning the safety of vehicles involved in crashes. It is based upon information provided to the Monash University Accident Research Centre by VicRoads, the Transport Accident Commission, the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority, NRMA Ltd, Queensland Transport, the Western Australian Department of Main Roads and Land Transport Safety Authority in New Zealand. Any republication of the findings of the Report whether by way of summary or reproduction of the tables or otherwise is prohibited unless prior written consent is obtained from the Monash University Accident Research Centre and any conditions attached to that consent are satisfied. A brochure based on this report is available from the sponsoring organisations and may be freely quoted. Reproduction of this page is authorised

Monash University Accident Research Centre Building 70, Monash University Victoria 3800, Australia. Telephone: +61 3 9905 4371, Fax: +61 3 9905 4363

VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA

iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report describes the development of further updated vehicle safety ratings for 19822002 model vehicles. The ratings produced cover both vehicle crashworthiness and aggressivity. Crashworthiness ratings measure the relative safety of vehicles in preventing severe injury to their own drivers in crashes whilst aggressivity ratings measure the serious injury risk vehicles pose to drivers of other vehicles with which they collide. Both measures are estimated from data on real crashes reported to police. The update is based on crash data from Victoria and New South Wales during 1987-2002 and from Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand during 1991-2002. This is the first time data from New Zealand has been included in a full update of the ratings. The rating of vehicle crashworthiness through analysis of real crash data, as carried out here, and through crash tests carried out by consumer groups such as the Australian New Car Assessment Program has encouraged manufacturers to improve vehicle safety. Both crashworthiness and aggressivity were measured by a combination of injury severity (of injured drivers) and injury risk (of drivers involved in crashes). Crashworthiness injury severity was based on 251,269 drivers injured in crashes in Victoria during 1987-2002, in New South Wales during 1987-1998 and in Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand during 1991-2002. Crashworthiness injury risk was based on 1,070,369 drivers involved in crashes in New South Wales during 1987-2002 and Western Australia and Queensland during 1991-2002 where a vehicle was towed away. Aggressivity injury risk was based on 581,073 drivers involved in crashes between two vehicles in New South Wales and Queensland and Western Australia where a vehicle was towed away. Aggressivity injury severity was based on 134,727 drivers injured in two-car crashes in Victoria during 1987-2002, in New South Wales during 1987-1998 and in Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand during 1991-2002. The crashworthiness and aggressivity ratings were adjusted for the driver sex and age, the speed limit at the crash location, the year in which the crash occurred and the jurisdiction in which the crash occurred. Crashworthiness ratings were also adjusted for the number of vehicles involved in the crash. These factors were found to be strongly associated with injury risk and injury severity. Adjustments were made with the aim of measuring the effects of vehicle factors alone, uncontaminated by other factors available in the data that affected crash severity and injury susceptibility. The crashworthiness ratings estimate the risk of a driver of the focus vehicle being killed or admitted to hospital when involved in a tow-away crash, to a degree of accuracy represented by the confidence limits of the rating in each case. Statistically reliable crashworthiness ratings were calculated for 255 individual vehicle models manufactured between the years 1982-2002. The estimates and their associated confidence limits were sufficiently sensitive that they were able to identify 128 models of passenger cars, fourwheel drive vehicles, passenger vans and light commercial vehicles that have superior or inferior crashworthiness characteristics compared with the average crashworthiness across all vehicles in the data. Compared to previous ratings updates that have classified vehicle models into one of 8 market groups, this study has defined 13 market groups for presentation of the ratings with average crashworthiness of vehicles in each market group estimated.

iv MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

Aggressivity ratings were calculated for 202 models of Australian and New Zealand passenger vehicles manufactured between the years 1982-2002. Aggressivity ratings estimate the risk of a driver of a vehicle impacting with the focus vehicle model being killed or admitted to hospital when involved in a tow-away crash. The degree of accuracy of the aggressivity ratings is represented by the confidence limits of the rating in each case. The estimates and their associated confidence limits were sufficiently sensitive that they were able to identify 80 vehicle models that have superior or inferior aggressivity characteristics compared with the average aggressivity across all vehicle models in the data. Average aggressivity for vehicles in each of the 13 defined market groups was also estimated. Estimated vehicle aggressivity towards drivers of other vehicles was found to have little or no relationship with ratings of vehicle crashworthiness, demonstrating the independence of the two complementary measures. It is concluded that the additional crash data has enabled the crashworthiness and aggressivity ratings to be obtained for a larger range of car models than was previously possible. The expanded data set has been able to produce more up-to-date and reliable estimates of the crashworthiness of individual car models than those published previously. However, the results and conclusions are based on a number of assumptions and warrant a number of qualifications that should be noted. The final stage of the project investigated the relationship between vehicle crashworthiness and year of vehicle manufacture for the Australian vehicle fleet for the years of manufacture 1964 to 2002. This study updated an earlier one that studied vehicles manufactured in the years 1964 to 2000. Similar to the previous study, this study shows similar patterns of improvements in crashworthiness with the greatest gains over the years 1970 to 1979 during which time a number of new Australian Design Rules aimed at occupant protection took effect. Further gains in crashworthiness have also been observed over the years 1986 to 2001, with notable steady gains during the 1990s. These results further suggest that the rating of vehicle crashworthiness through analysis of real crash data, as carried out here, and through crash tests carried out by consumer groups such as the Australian New Car Assessment Program has encouraged manufacturers to improve vehicle safety. Trends in crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture from 1982 to 2002 for each of the 13 vehicle market groups were also estimated, showing differential improvement in crashworthiness by market group by year of manufacture.


v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A project as large and complex as this could not have been carried out without the help and support of a number of people. The authors particularly wish to acknowledge: •

Mr David Attwood of the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) for the provision of TAC claims data

•

VicRoads Business Services Division for the provision of data from Victorian Police crash reports

•

Mr Geoff Murray, Mr Wesley Soet and Ms Shuk Jin of the Department of Main Roads Western Australia for the provision of data from Western Australia Police crash reports

•

Mr Geoff Meers, Mr Wayne Dale, Mr Scott Boyle and Ms Charlene Beck of Queensland Transport for the provision of data from Queensland Police crash reports and the Queensland vehicle registration system

•

Mr Tony Kursius of Queensland Transport for assistance with facilitating the provision of data from the Queensland vehicle registration system

•

Dr Graham Brisbane, Dr Nimmi Magedara and Mr Harry Vertsonis of the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) for their support of the project and the release of data from NSW Police crash reports

•

Mr Jack Haley, Mr Owen Johnstone and Dr Tasha Prabhakar of NRMA for their support for the project and for providing procedures to determine the models of vehicles crashing in NSW, Victoria and Queensland.

•

Ms Maria Pappas of NRMA who developed and applied the procedures to determine the models of vehicles recorded on NSW and Victoria Police crash reports

•

Mr Michael Adams and Mr Robert Ramsay of the NSW RTA who prepared and provided data files from NSW Police crash reports and gave helpful advice on limitations in the NSW crash data.

•

Mr John Goldsworthy of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau for his support of the project as well as valuable assistance in providing detailed comments on the project report.

•

Mr Mike Upton of the RACWA for his support for the project and assistance with facilitating the supply of Western Australian crash data

•

Dr Gray Scott and Mr Ross McArthur of VicRoads for their support of the project

•

Mr Michael Case, Mr Julian Del Beato and Mr Christopher Jones of the RACV for their support of the project and for advice on substantive changes in designs of specific models over the years

vi MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

•

Professor Caroline Finch, Mr Tri Minh Le, Mr Michael Skalova and Ms Chau My Le, all formerly of MUARC, for the development of the analysis methods in earlier years that formed the basis of the methods used in this report.

•

Dr Alan Miller, formerly of the CSIRO Division of Mathematics and Statistics for suggesting analysis methods used in this report to improve the sensitivity of the results and to determine the confidence limits of the estimates.

•

Officers of the Victorian, NSW, Western Australian, Queensland and New Zealand Police Forces and of the Transport Accident Commission who diligently recorded the information on crashes and injuries which formed the basis of this report.

•

Dr Barbara Bibby and Mr John White of the LTSA for their enthusiastic support of the project and management of the project contract.

•

Mr Stuart Badger of the LTSA for supply of the New Zealand crash data and advice on its use in the project.

•

Mrs Carol Hewitt of the New Zealand Land Transport Safety Authority for supply of the New Zealand vehicle registration data and advice on its use in the project.

•

Mr Stuart Worden of the LTSA and Mr Tijs Robinson, a former contractor to the LTSA, for their advice on specifications and sources of information on New Zealand vehicle models.

•

Mr Eugene Girardin for advice on the New Zealand used import vehicle market and the handling of these vehicles by the LTSA.


vii

CONTENTS Page No.

1.

INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT HISTORY...................................................... 2 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

2.

Crashworthiness Ratings ........................................................................................ 2 AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS ............................................................................................ 3 RATINGS FOR NEW ZEALAND VEHICLES .................................................................... 5 CRASHWORTHINESS BY YEAR OF VEHICLE MANUFACTURE AND MARKET GROUP .... 7 PROJECT AIMS ............................................................................................................ 8 CRASH DATA ............................................................................................................ 9

2.1 VICTORIAN CRASHES.................................................................................................. 9 2.2 NEW SOUTH WALES CRASHES ................................................................................. 11 2.3 QUEENSLAND CRASHES ............................................................................................ 12 2.4 WESTERN AUSTRALIA CRASHES............................................................................... 13 2.5 CRASH AND REGISTRATION DATA FROM NEW ZEALAND ......................................... 14 2.5.1 Crash Data........................................................................................................ 14 2.5.2 Registration Data.............................................................................................. 15 2.5.3 Merging the Crash and Registration Data ....................................................... 16 2.6 COMBINED DATA FROM THE FIVE JURISDICTIONS .................................................... 17 3.

MODELS AND MARKET GROUPS OF VEHICLES......................................... 18 3.1 VEHICLE MODEL IDENTIFICATION ............................................................................ 18 3.1.1 Australian Vehicles ........................................................................................... 18 3.1.2 New Zealand Vehicles....................................................................................... 19 3.2 POOLED CAR MODELS .............................................................................................. 22 3.3 VEHICLE MARKET GROUPS ...................................................................................... 23

4.

ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................ 26 4.1 OVERVIEW OF ANALYSIS METHODS: CRASHWORTHINESS........................................ 26 4.1.1 Logistic Models for Each Component .............................................................. 27 4.1.2 Combining the Injury Risk and Injury Severity Components ........................... 30 4.1.3 Market Group Analyses .................................................................................... 31 4.1.4 Trends in the Rating Criteria............................................................................ 31 4.2 OVERVIEW OF THE ANALYSIS METHODS: AGGRESSIVITY ........................................ 33 4.2.1 Logistic Models, Confidence Limits and Assessment of Aggressivity of Specific Vehicle Models and Market Groups .............................................................................. 34

5.

RESULTS .................................................................................................................. 36 5.1 VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS RATINGS .................................................................... 36 5.1.1 Injury Risk......................................................................................................... 36 5.1.2 Injury Severity................................................................................................... 37 5.1.3 Crashworthiness Ratings .................................................................................. 37 5.1.4 Comparisons with the All Model Average Rating ............................................ 39 5.2 AGGRESSIVITY TOWARDS OTHER CAR DRIVERS ...................................................... 43 5.2.1 Analysis by Market Groups............................................................................... 45 5.2.2 Statistically Significant Makes and Models ...................................................... 45 5.2.3 Relationships Between Aggressivity and Crashworthiness .............................. 48

viii MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

5.3 PRESENTATION OF CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS FOR CONSUMER INFORMATION .....................................................................................................................49 5.4 CRASHWORTHINESS BY YEAR OF MANUFACTURE OF THE AUSTRALIAN FLEET.........51 5.4.1 Injury Risk .........................................................................................................51 5.4.2 Injury Severity ...................................................................................................52 5.4.3 Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture.........................................................52 5.4.4 Discussion on the Analysis of Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture.........55 5.5 CRASHWORTHINESS BY YEAR OF MANUFACTURE AND MARKET GROUP FOR THE AUSTRALIAN VEHICLE FLEET .............................................................................................58 5.5.1 Injury Risk .........................................................................................................59 5.5.2 Injury Severity ...................................................................................................60 5.5.3 Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture and Market Group..........................61 6.

CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................65

7.

ASSUMPTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS ..........................................................66 7.1 7.2

ASSUMPTIONS ...........................................................................................................66 QUALIFICATIONS .......................................................................................................66

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................67

APPENDICES APPENDIX 1. Makes and models of cars involved in Victorian and NSW crashes during 1987-2002 and Western Australia, Queensland and New Zealand Crashes during 1991-2002 APPENDIX 2. Logistic regression estimates of injury risk by model and market group APPENDIX 3. Logistic regression estimates of injury severity by model and market group APPENDIX 4. Crashworthiness ratings of 1982-2002 models of cars involved in crashes during 1987-2002 APPENDIX 5. Aggressivity injury risk aggressivity injury severity and ratings of vehicle aggressivity (with 95% and 90% confidence limits), towards other vehicle drivers APPENDIX 6 Presentation of crashworthiness and aggressivity ratings for consumer information APPENDIX 7. Crashworthiness, injury risk and injury severity estimates by year of vehicle manufacture for the Australian vehicle fleet APPENDIX 8. Crashworthiness, injury risk and injury severity estimates by year of vehicle manufacture by market group for the Australian vehicle fleet


ix

VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS AND CRASHWORTHINESS BY YEAR OF MANUFACTURE: VICTORIA AND NSW CRASHES DURING 1987-2002 QUEENSLAND, WESTERN AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND CRASHES DURING 1991-2002

VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 1

1.

INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT HISTORY

For over a decade, the Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC) has been involved in a program of research examining issues relating to vehicle safety through the analysis of mass crash data records. Data on which the research to date is based has come from reports compiled by Police in various states across Australia, augmented by data on injury compensation claims resulting from transportation crashes compiled by the Victorian Transport Accident Commission (TAC). Work in the area initially commenced as two separate projects undertaken independently by different research groups. In response to recommendations in a report by the Victorian Parliamentary Social Development Committee (SDC, 1990) on its inquiry into vehicle occupant protection, MUARC commenced a project in 1990 to develop consumer advice on vehicle safety performance from mass accident data. Independently in 1990, the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) and the NRMA set out on a joint project to develop a ‘car safety rating’ system based on Police records of crash and injury involvement. The objective was to use vehicle crash records and injury data to develop ratings for the relative safety of vehicles. The NRMA and RTA entered into discussions with the CSIRO to conduct the necessary analysis, and by early 1991 had produced a relative ranking of vehicles. In mid 1991, the NSW and Victorian groups became aware of each others activities and, following discussions, agreed to proceed jointly rather than have two competing vehicle safety rating systems: one based on Victorian data and the other on NSW data. Later, the NSW RTA and NRMA agreed that MUARC should undertake the analysis of the joint NSW and Victorian data sets. The NSW RTA and NRMA performed preliminary work on the NSW database to provide a clean set of data with accurately inscribed models for each vehicle as far as possible. The data were then handed over to MUARC for analysis. 1.1

Crashworthiness Ratings

Initially, development of vehicle safety ratings focussed on vehicle crashworthiness. Crashworthiness ratings rate the relative safety of vehicles by examining injury outcomes to drivers in real crashes. The crashworthiness rating of a vehicle is a measure of the risk of serious injury to a driver of that vehicle when it is involved in a crash. This risk is estimated from large numbers of records of injury to drivers of that vehicle type involved in real crashes on the road. In 1994, MUARC produced vehicle crashworthiness ratings based on crash data from Victoria and New South Wales during 1987-92 (Cameron et al, 1994a, b). These ratings updated an earlier MUARC set produced by Cameron et al (1992b). Crashworthiness was measured in two components: 1. 2.

Rate of injury for drivers involved in tow-away crashes (injury risk) Rate of serious injury (death or hospital admission) for injured drivers (injury severity).

Multiplying these two rates together formed the crashworthiness rating. This is a measure of the risk of serious injury for drivers involved in crashes. Measuring crashworthiness in two components reflecting risk and severity of injury was first developed by Folksam Insurance, which publishes the well-known Swedish ratings (Gustafsson et al 1989).

2 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

The results of these ratings are summarised in Cameron et al (1994a) with a full technical description of the analysis methods appearing in Cameron et al (1994b). These ratings use an analysis method that was developed to maximise the reliability and sensitivity of the results from the available data. In addition to the speed zone and driver sex, the method of analysis adjusts for the effects of driver age and the number of vehicles involved, producing results with all those factors taken into account. Subsequent to the ratings of Cameron et al (1994a, b), six further updated sets of crashworthiness ratings were produced during 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2003 (Newstead et al 1996, Newstead et al 1997, Newstead et al 1998, Newstead et al 1999, Newstead et al 2000, Newstead et al 2003a). These covered vehicles manufactured over the period 198294, 1982-95, 1982-96, 1982-97, 1982-98 and 1982-2000 respectively, and crashing during 198794, 1987-95, 1987-96, 1987-97, 1987-98 and 1987-2000 respectively, incorporating some enhancements to the methods of statistical analysis. The 1999, 2000 and 2003 ratings incorporated police reported crash data from Queensland whereas previously only crash data from New South Wales and Victoria had been used. To this, the 2003 ratings also added police reported crash data from Western Australia for the first time. The crashworthiness ratings covered individual models of sedans, station wagons, four wheel drives, passenger vans and light commercial vehicles and were given as estimates of risk of severe injury for each model along with 90% and 95% confidence limits on each estimate. For each update, the rating figures were widely distributed in the form of a "Used Car Safety Ratings" brochure. 1.2

Aggressivity Ratings

When crashworthiness ratings were first presented internationally, at the 1992 IRCOBI Conference in Italy (Cameron et al 1992a), the authors were encouraged to expand the analysis to measure the risk of injury that each individual model represents to other road users, in addition to the occupants of the subject model. It was suggested that MUARC were in a unique position to consider this issue since its ratings were based on tow-away crashes. A reviewer’s comments on the paper presenting the first update of the ratings, to the 1995 IRCOBI Conference in Switzerland, emphasised the same issue. The reviewer wrote, “partner protection and collision compatibility are very important for overall road safety and they can no longer be omitted in the discussion about ‘car safety’”. They recommended that this “shortcoming” should be addressed in the introduction and conclusion of the paper, and this was done in the published version (Cameron et al 1995). Together, these international reactions to MUARC’s work in this area indicated that the crashworthiness ratings should be extended to add a measure of the “aggressivity” of individual car models when they crash. Aggressivity ratings measure the risk of injury that a vehicle poses to occupants of other vehicles it impacts, and to other unprotected road users such as pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists. The addition of aggressivity ratings represents further consumer advice, which purchasers of cars could take into account when choosing a specific model. Cameron, Newstead and Le (1998) completed an initial study that reviewed methods of rating vehicle aggressivity developed internationally, such as those by Broughton (1994, 1996) and Hollowell and Gabler (1996). Concepts from this review were then taken to develop a methodology for rating the aggressivity of Australian passenger vehicles making appropriate uses of the real crash data available in Australia. The methods developed were then successfully VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 3

applied to estimate aggressivity ratings for a selection of Australian passenger vehicles that had accumulated sufficient real crash history. The original study of Cameron et al (1998) investigated the feasibility and methods of providing aggressivity ratings for Australian passenger vehicles in terms of the threat that each subject model represented to: 1. Occupants of other cars colliding with the subject model cars, and 2. Pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists (if possible, separately) impacted by the subject model cars. Although the second type of aggressivity rating was considered by Cameron et al (1998), ratings of this type are problematic. In general, crashes involving pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists are seldom reported to the Police unless someone is killed or injured (usually the unprotected road user). This means that an estimate of the risk of injury cannot be calculated for the unprotected road users for inclusion in the second type of aggressivity rating. Consequently, the measure of aggressivity towards unprotected road users, described by Cameron et al (1998), is a measure of injury severity only (i.e. the risk of serious injury given some injury was sustained). As such, this aggressivity measure is less able to discriminate between the performances of individual vehicle models as it is based on relatively small quantities of data. These problems made the measure of aggressivity towards unprotected road users of limited practical value and it has not been further considered after the initial work. This problem described in estimating aggressivity for unprotected road users did not occur for measuring aggressivity towards drivers of other cars, for whom the available data allowed estimates of both the risk of injury and of their injury severity in a manner analogous to the crashworthiness rating described above. As in Europe and the United States, the aggressivity rating towards drivers of other vehicles (Cameron et al, 1998) considered in this study has been based on two-car crashes between light vehicles (i.e. heavy vehicle collisions have been excluded). The NSW, Western Australia and Queensland data on two-car crashes used in this study covers all Police reported crashes where at least one vehicle was towed or a pre-defined minimum damage level was attained. Consequently, the number of crashes in which neither driver was injured was available, at least so far as tow-away crashes are concerned. The measure of the aggressivity risk of injury (RO) of the other drivers colliding with the subject model, unadjusted for any other factors, is defined as: Injury risk of other drivers = RO = proportion of drivers involved in crashes of tow away or greater severity who were injured The injury severity of other drivers could be measured in a number of ways from the information on injury recorded on NSW, Victoria, Western Australia and Queensland Police reports and TAC claims (viz. killed; admitted to hospital; or injury requiring medical treatment). The measure of aggressivity injury severity (SO), used here is: Injury severity of other drivers = SO = proportion of injured drivers who were killed or admitted to hospital. Based on the definition of RO and SO above, an aggressivity measure for each subject car model was then calculated as:


Aggressivity to other car occupants = AO = RO x SO. This measures the risk of the driver of other cars being killed or admitted to hospital when involved in collisions with the subject model cars. Before this aggressivity measure was calculated, consideration was given to taking into account likely differences between the crash circumstances of the subject car models, which may result in a distorted view of its aggressivity only partly related to the characteristics of the subject cars. Factors available in the data to consider such differences include: • speed limit at the crash location • subject vehicle driver age (younger drivers may be driving at relatively fast speeds not fully

represented by the speed limit) • subject vehicle driver sex (male drivers may be driving at relatively fast speeds or more aggressively) • other car occupant age (older occupants are more susceptible to injury) • other car occupant sex (female occupants are more susceptible to injury, but males appear to be associated with relatively high injury severities) Logistic regression techniques have been used to adjust RO and SO, separately, for any major differences that emerge between models of the subject cars regarding these factors. The adjusted RO and SO have been multiplied together for each subject car model to provide the final measure of aggressivity, AO. Cameron et al (1998) also considered adjusting the aggressivity ratings for the injury outcome of the drivers of the focus model vehicles, hence providing an indication of the crash severity. This was found to make little difference to the relative aggressivity ratings between vehicle models and has not been further considered here. Cameron et al (1998) also considered using the injury outcome of the most severely injured occupant of the vehicle colliding with the focus vehicle model in estimating the aggressivity index. Again, little difference was found in the estimated aggressivity ratings when considering all vehicle occupants than when considering drivers only so this method was not pursued here. 1.3

Ratings for New Zealand Vehicles

In order to assess the viability of producing vehicle safety ratings for New Zealand (NZ), the New Zealand Land Transport Safety Authority (LTSA) undertook a feasibility study that examined all aspects necessary to produce the ratings relevant to New Zealand motorists and ideally including New Zealand crash data in the analysis. Two preliminary study stages were carried out to assess the basic feasibility of the New Zealand crash and registration data for producing vehicle safety ratings, as well as to examine the make and model composition of the New Zealand passenger and light commercial vehicle fleet (Voyce, 2000; Robinson, 2000a, 2000b). MUARC completed a review of the LTSA feasibility study (Newstead, 2000) that made recommendations on the future directions of the project to produce crashworthiness ratings for New Zealand vehicles based on analysis of real crash data. One of the key recommendations from the review of the feasibility study was to undertake a pilot study of the processes required to produce crashworthiness ratings for NZ passenger vehicles based on combined Australian and NZ crash data. The recommendation was based on the finding that only New Zealand injury crash data had sufficient information recorded to VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 5

reliably identify the make and model of the vehicles involved. The availability of only crashes involving injury meant it would not be feasible to obtain an unbiased estimate of injury risk from the New Zealand data. Furthermore, the number of vehicle models that could be rated from crash data in a country as small as New Zealand would be quite small making the ratings of limited value for consumer information on safety. Based on the finding that the New Zealand and Australian vehicle fleets had a high proportion of common vehicle models (Robinson, 2000b), the MUARC review recommended that the best way to produce accurate vehicle safety ratings for New Zealand covering a wide range of vehicle models would be to base the ratings on combined Australian and New Zealand data. Subsequent to MUARC’s review of its initial work, the LTSA engaged MUARC to undertake a 5-stage feasibility study into actually producing vehicle safety ratings based on combined Australian and New Zealand data. The first four stages of the pilot study further examined the New Zealand crash and registration data for its suitability and practical application in producing the ratings. Outcomes of the first four pilot study stages are reported in detail in Newstead (2002) and are summarised as follows. Stage 1: Obtain, merge and verify a sample of New Zealand crash and registration data. The LTSA feasibility study showed all required data fields for producing vehicle safety ratings including New Zealand data were present in the New Zealand crash data in Crash Analysis System (CAS) and in the Transport Registry Centre (TRC) held New Zealand registration data. Stage 1 of the pilot study demonstrated the practical ability to merge the crash and registration data, and verified the content and completeness of each of the required variables for a sample of crashed NZ vehicles. Stage 2: Analysis of a snapshot of the NZ vehicle register. In discussions with the LTSA and TRC there was some speculation as to the quality of the information in the make, model and year of manufacture fields of the registration data. The second phase of the pilot study obtained a snapshot at a point in time of the relevant fields for all passenger vehicles in the NZ vehicle register. Quality of the data was verified, particularly in the vehicle make and model fields. The range of vehicles with valid VIN/chassis numbers was assessed, as was the year of manufacture fields, particularly for second hand imported vehicles. Stage 3: Establishment and automation of NZ vehicle model decoding procedures. Much of the vehicle clustering analysis completed in the LTSA feasibility study was carried out by hand. To use NZ data on a large scale for computation of vehicle safety ratings with regular updates, a mechanism of automatically decoding vehicle makes and models in the crash data and appropriately clustering these for analysis was established as the third stage of the pilot study. Aspects of the process developed included the use of the Australian VIN decoding procedures on NZ data and the use of the existing make and model registration fields for model identification. Outcomes from this stage also confirmed the high degree of compatibility of the Australian and New Zealand vehicle fleets to ensure ratings based on the combined data will be of use to the New Zealand vehicle consumer population Stage 4: Methods for ongoing review of NZ model clustering: As in the Australian vehicle safety studies based on mass data analysis, ongoing monitoring of the vehicle fleet, particularly new vehicle model releases, is necessary to ensure defined vehicle 6 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

clusters for rating remain relevant and to identify new clusters to be formed. This stage of the pilot study identified the resources and methodologies necessary to achieve ongoing updates of the vehicle cluster definitions with a view to produce ongoing updates of vehicle safety ratings incorporating New Zealand data. The fifth and final stage of the pilot study was successful in developing and implementing analysis methodology to compute the initial set of crashworthiness ratings for New Zealand passenger vehicles based on combined Australian and New Zealand real crash data. The outcome of the final stage, reported in Newstead et al (2003b), produce a set of ratings for New Zealand passenger vehicles suitable for publication as consumer information. Preparation of the crash and registration data for the final stage, along with model identification and clustering utilised the techniques developed in Stages 1 to 4 of the pilot study. Addition of the New Zealand crash data to the existing Australian data enabled a greater number of vehicles to be rated for safety as well as improving the accuracy of the ratings of the vehicles previously rated using only Australian data. Stage 5 of the pilot study was also able to demonstrate the consistency of ratings estimated from combined Australian and New Zealand data with those estimated from Australian data only through rigorous checking and comparison of ratings estimated with and without New Zealand data. The final conclusion from stage 5 of the pilot study was that New Zealand crash and registration data was entirely suitable for estimating vehicle safety ratings when combined with Australian crash data sources. The high degree of similarity between the Australian and New Zealand vehicle fleet meant that the resulting ratings provide highly relevant consumer information on relative vehicle safety for a wide range of vehicles in both Australia and New Zealand. The only slight drawback for New Zealand vehicle consumers in estimating ratings from combined data is that a small number of popular vehicle models in New Zealand not sold in Australia cannot be rated. A parallel study to that reported here is underway to try and overcome this deficiency. 1.4

Crashworthiness by Year of Vehicle Manufacture and Market Group

Another focus of the vehicle crashworthiness ratings study has been to track historical improvements in the average crashworthiness of the vehicle fleet since 1964. In 1994, the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV) commissioned a study to investigate the effects of the year of manufacture of vehicles (vehicle year) on their road safety (Cameron et al 1994c). This project focused on investigating the relationship between crashworthiness and vehicle year of manufacture for the years 1964 to 1992. The aim of the original study of Cameron et al (1994c) was, to the extent possible, to measure the crashworthiness of vehicles of different years of manufacture. The method employed was designed to eliminate the influence of other key factors affecting the risk of injury that might also be associated with vehicle year (e.g. driver age and sex, use on high speed roads, etc.). The original study of Cameron et al (1994c) showed that the crashworthiness of passenger vehicles in Australia has improved over the years of manufacture 1964 to 1992 with rapid improvement over the years from about 1970 to 1979. Drivers of vehicles manufactured during 1970 to 1979 could be expected to have benefited from the implementation of a number of Australian Design Rules (ADRs) for motor vehicle safety which previous research has shown to be effective in providing occupant protection. The study has been updated with each vehicle crashworthiness ratings update. The most recent analysis included vehicles with years of manufacture from 1964 to 2000 (Newstead et al 2003a).


More recently, Newstead and Cameron (2001) have examined trends in vehicle crashworthiness by year of manufacture within specific vehicle market groups. In this study, only years of manufacture from 1982 to 1998 were examined because of the need to have vehicle model information on the data to be able to classify vehicles appropriately into market groups. Vehicles were grouped into 4 market categories: small cars (1400kg) and 4 wheel drive vehicles (Sports Utility Vehicles). Results of analysis found statistically significant differences in the trends in crashworthiness by year of manufacture between different market groups in both the injury risk and injury severity components of the crashworthiness measure. Results showed that whilst vehicles in the 4wd and large car groups had shown improvement in crashworthiness over time, vehicles in the medium and, particularly, the small car classes had shown deterioration in their crashworthiness performance as a class, especially in recent years. Reasons for the declining average crashworthiness of the small car classes in Australia were discussed and appeared to be explained by a shift in preference of small car buyers towards cheap small vehicles with relatively poor safety performance. These shifts in small vehicle buyer preference have occurred despite the introduction of Australian vehicle design rules and consumer vehicle safety information programs aimed at improving the safety of the Australian fleet, suggesting the urgent need for further action in these two areas. This analysis has also been updated for vehicles manufactured over the years 1982-2000 and is reported in Newstead (2003a). 1.5

Project Aims

The aim of this project was to update the previously published crashworthiness ratings and aggressivity ratings towards drivers of other vehicles of Newstead et al (2003a) including New Zealand data using the procedures developed in Newstead (2003b). The update included additional crash data from the years 2001 and 2002 for Victoria, NSW, Queensland and Western Australia and the years 1991-2002 from New Zealand. The updated ratings cover the drivers of cars, station wagons, four-wheel drive vehicles, passenger vans, and light commercial vehicles manufactured during 1982-2002 and crashing in Victoria or NSW during 1987-2002 or Queensland, Western Australia or New Zealand during 1991-2002. This project also aimed to update the estimates of crashworthiness by vehicle year of manufacture for the Australian vehicle fleet to include vehicles manufactured over the years 1964 to 2002. This component of this project also used the same methods and data sources as the crashworthiness ratings project, the exception being that pre-1982 vehicles were also included. For vehicle models from 1982 to 2002 that could be classified into a market grouping, the project also aimed to further investigate trends in crashworthiness of the Australian vehicle fleet by year of vehicle manufacture within each market group. Estimates of crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture for the New Zealand vehicle fleet as a whole and by market group are not investigated as part of this study, nor are trends by year of manufacture from combined Australian and New Zealand data estimated. This is because trends in crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture reflect the composition of a particular vehicle fleet in terms of the makes and models of vehicles in the fleet and their ages. The New Zealand and Australian vehicle fleets differ significantly in their mix of vehicle makes and models, particularly because of the used import program in New Zealand. Consequently, estimation of combined trends for the two countries by year of manufacture would not be meaningful. A separate research project is currently underway to estimate trends in crashworthiness of the New Zealand passenger fleet by year of manufacture. Results of that research project will be reported elsewhere. 8 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

2.

CRASH DATA

Data from Victoria, NSW, Queensland and Western Australia used to produce the crashworthiness ratings of Newstead et al (2003a) covering vehicles manufactured over the period 1982-2000 and crashing during the years 1987-2000 was again used here. Data from the New Zealand pilot study (Newstead et al, 2003b) covering the period 1991-2000 was also used. In addition, data for 2001 and 2002 from each of the four Australian states and New Zealand was obtained and integrated bringing the total period of crash data covered to 1987-2002. Subsets of these data were taken in order to estimate the aggressivity measures. Similarly, data from Victoria, NSW, Queensland and Western Australia used to produce the crashworthiness by year of manufacture estimates of Newstead et al (2003a) covering vehicles manufactured over the period 1964-2000 and crashing during the years 1987-2000 was again used here. As for the crashworthiness ratings, data from 2001 and 2002 from the four Australian states were also integrated for this analysis. The methods of selecting appropriate cases from each data source will be detailed here. 2.1

Victorian Crashes

The Transport Accident Commission (TAC) and its predecessor, the Motor Accidents Board, as part of their responsibilities to provide road transport injury compensation, have collected detailed injury data. For each claimant, a description of the injuries was recorded, as well as whether the person was admitted to hospital. TAC obtained some details of the occupied vehicle (but not its model) from the VicRoads registration system. When the TAC was established in 1987, it introduced a requirement that the crashes resulting in an injury claim should be reported to the Police, and started adding Police accident numbers (if and when available) to the claims records. TAC injury claims from all types of road users who were involved in crashes in the period 1987 to 1998 had been merged with Police crash reports for the previous crashworthiness ratings (see Cameron et al (1994a,b) for a description of the method of matching). The Police reports were for all persons involved in crashes regardless of the Police officer recording the person as injured or uninjured. This procedure was followed because it was possible for an injury claim to be made in circumstances where injury was not apparent at the time of the crash. Crashes are reported to the Police in Victoria if a person is killed or injured, if property is damaged but names and addresses are not exchanged, or if a possible breach of the Road Traffic Regulations has occurred (Green 1990). The levels of matching of TAC claims with persons recorded on Police reports for each year during 1987-2000, achieved by Newstead et al (2003a) for the last crashworthiness ratings, are shown in Table 1. The methods of matching for the data are detailed in Cameron et al (1994b). Table 1 showed that the rate of matching between the TAC claims data and police reported crash data for 1999 and 2000 was less than for most of the previous years. Closer investigation of the reasons for the poor match rate for these two years showed it was due to inconsistencies in the accident numbers attached to crashes in each file. Accident number is a key field used in matching the two data sources and is intended to be consistent for the same crash documented in each data system. In both 1999 and 2000, 30% and 35% respectively of the accident numbers in the TAC claims data were outside the range of accident numbers found in the police report data. Discussion with the TAC revealed that if a crash report is not available at the time of the claim, a TAC generated accident number is assigned to the crash. In the past, police accident numbers were assigned to the claims database retrospectively once they became available. However this VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 9

practice was reported to have ceased during 1999 leading to the large number of TAC generated accident numbers remaining in the claims data supplied. Due to the poor match rate between the 1999 and 2000 police data and TAC claims, Newstead et al (2003a) decided to use the 1999 and 2000 police crash data unmatched with TAC claims, although matched data prior to 1999 was still used. This decision was further necessitated because of problems in the 1999 and 2000 New South Wales crash data concerning injury severity coding that are described below. Victorian police reported crash data had been matched with the TAC claims data for use in the crashworthiness ratings project in the past in an attempt to improve the accuracy of the injury severity recorded by the police. The decision not to use matched data for 1999 and 2000 in Newstead et al (2003a) was not thought to compromise the study greatly, bearing in mind that only the injury severity level coded by police is considered in the data from any of the other Australian states used in the study. Any inconsistencies in injury severity coding introduced by changing from matched to unmatched data were controlled for in the analysis methodology. Based on the experience and arguments presented in Newstead et al (2003a), matching of the 2001 and 2002 Police reported crash data with TAC claims information has not been carried out in this update of the vehicle safety ratings. The unmatched Victorian crash data for 2001 and 2002 represented 22,472 injured drivers of 1982-2002 model vehicles involved in a crash where the driver was injured. These records were combined with the merged files of TAC claims with Police reports for 1987-1998 and police reported data only from 1999 and 2000, which represented 56,281 injured drivers of 1982-2000 model vehicles crashing during 1987-2000. The resulting file covered 78,753 injured drivers of 1982-2002 model cars. The information on these drivers was combined with data on drivers injured in NSW, Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand (see Section 2.4) to produce the updated crashworthiness ratings. Table 1:

TAC claims for injury compensation from crashes during 1987-2000 TAC claims Match rate TAC claims Year matched with (%) (all types of Police reports injured road users) 30,892 17,509 56.7 1987 28,427 16,672 58.6 1988 25,399 17,494 66.3 1989 19,633 13,886 70.7 1990 19,538 12,774 65.4 1991 19,251 13,118 68.1 1992 18,590 12,618 67.8 1993 19,341 11,927 61.6 1994 20,189 12,452 61.7 1995 19,954 14,034 70.3 1996 18,754 13,036 69.5 1997 18,561 12,395 66.8 1998 18,936 11,206 59.2 1999 18,881 10,525 55.7 2000 296,346 189,646 Total


For the study of crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture, of the merged TAC claims for driver injury during 1987-98 and injured drivers in police crash records during 1999-2002, 123,164 were injured drivers of cars, station wagons or taxis manufactured over the years 19642000. Again, the information on these drivers was combined with data on drivers injured in NSW, Queensland and Western Australia (see Section 2.4). Calculation of aggressivity ratings towards drivers of other vehicles required selecting vehicles involved in two car crashes followed by matching of the vehicle and occupant injury details for the two cars involved in the crash. For those vehicles manufactured over the period 1982 to 2002 injury details for the driver of the other vehicle in the crash were matched by returning to the full Victorian Police reported crash data files for 1987-2002. The data matching process identified 69,871 vehicles manufactured between 1982 and 2002 that had been involved in a crash with one other vehicle where the other vehicle had no restriction on its year of manufacture. Of the drivers of these other vehicles, 32,536 were injured and 37,335 were uninjured. It was not possible to use the uninjured records from the Victorian data, as they are incomplete due to the fact that only crashes involving injury are reliably reported in Victoria. Hence only the 32,536 records of other driver injury were used for calculation of the injury severity component of the vehicle aggressivity ratings toward drivers of other vehicles. Of the 32,536 injured drivers, 7,745 were severely injured. 2.2

New South Wales Crashes

The Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) in New South Wales supplied files covering 761,480 light passenger vehicles manufactured from 1982 to 2002 involved in Police reported crashes during 1987-2002 that resulted in death or injury or a vehicle being towed away. Model and year of manufacture have been added to each vehicle after matching with the NSW vehicle register via registration number and vehicle make. This was achieved using a procedure developed by the NRMA. The total crash files covered four-wheel drive, passenger vans, and light commercial vehicles as well as cars and station wagons of all years of manufacture crashing in 1987 to 2002. The method of assembly of this data is given in Cameron et al (1994b). NSW crash data files from 1987 to 1998 had injury severity of people involved in crashes coded using a four level scale. Levels used were: fatality, hospital admission, other injury and not injured. From 1998 onwards, the RTA identified inaccuracies by the Police in reporting injury severity that could not be rectified. In response, the RTA changed the injury severity coding in the NSW crash data to give only three levels: fatality; injury; and not injured. For the purpose of computing crashworthiness ratings, this meant the NSW data for 1999-2002 could not be used to estimate the injury severity measure in the same manner as previous rating updates. Preparation of the NSW data for final analysis involved merging the vehicle files (which also contained driver age and sex) with files supplied by NSW RTA covering details of the person casualties (killed and injured persons) and the reported crashes for the same years. Each vehicle/driver matched uniquely with the corresponding crash information, but only injured drivers could match with persons in the casualty files. A driver who did not match was considered to be uninjured. Of the 761,480 drivers involved in tow-away crashes, 113,670 were injured. Of the injured drivers, 72,678 were injured in crashes from 1987 to 1998 and had a valid injury severity level coded (serious or other injury). Of the 761,480 1982-2002 model year vehicles involved in crashes in NSW, 514,707 were coded as being involved in crashes with one other traffic unit (i.e. the crash involved a total of VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 11

two traffic units). In order to compare occupant injury levels in crashes involving two vehicles, it was necessary to match the crash and occupant injury information for each of the two vehicles involved in the crash. The data used for calculation of the crashworthiness ratings covered only vehicles manufactured from 1982 to 2002. Consequently, initial matching of only the crashworthiness data to determine pairs of vehicles involved in a crash identified both the vehicles in the crash when both vehicles were manufactured from 1982 to 2002. A second matching stage was then required to identify the details of drivers of vehicles manufactured before 1982 that had collided with the unmatched 1982-2002 model year vehicles in the crashworthiness file. This required retrieval of the remaining crash records in the 1987-2002 NSW crash files not used for crashworthiness ratings in order to match vehicles manufactured prior to 1982. The two stage data matching process identified 266,484 matched records of vehicles manufactured between 1982 and 2002 that had been involved in a crash with one other vehicle where the other vehicle had no restriction on its year of manufacture. Of the drivers of these other vehicles, 35,500 were injured. Of the injured drivers, 19,922 were injured in crashes from 1987 to 1998 and had a valid injury severity level coded (serious or other injury). These records were used for calculation of vehicle aggressivity ratings toward drivers of other vehicles. For the study of crashworthiness by vehicle year of manufacture, the NSW data represented 1,132,736 drivers of cars, station wagons or taxis manufactured from 1964 to 2002 who were involved in tow-away crashes. Of these drivers, 181,540 were injured, 119,503 of these during 1987-1998 and with a valid injury severity code. The presence of uninjured drivers in the merged data file meant that it was suitable for measuring the risk of driver injury (in cars sufficiently damaged to require towing). This contrasted with the Victorian and New Zealand data files, which could not be used to measure injury risk directly because not all uninjured drivers were included. 2.3

Queensland Crashes

Queensland Transport supplied files covering 246,250 light passenger vehicles involved in Police reported crashes during 1991-2002 that resulted in death or injury or a vehicle being towed away. The files supplied covered years of vehicle manufacture from 1982-2002 including models of four-wheel drive vehicles, passenger vans, and light commercial vehicles as well as cars and station wagons for which a model could be identified. The vehicle files (which also contained links to separate files with driver age and sex) were merged with files supplied by Queensland Transport covering details of the person casualties (killed and injured persons) and the reported crashes for the same years. Each vehicle/driver matched uniquely with the corresponding crash information, but only injured drivers could match with persons in the casualty files. As for NSW, a driver who did not match was considered to be uninjured. Out of the 246,250 drivers involved in tow-away crashes, 59,832 were injured. Of the 246,250 vehicles reported as crashed in Queensland and used in estimation of crashworthiness ratings, 165,981 were coded as being involved in crashes with one other traffic unit (i.e. the crash involved a total of two traffic units). In order to compare occupant injury levels between two vehicles involved in a crash, it was necessary to match the crash and occupant injury information for each of the two vehicles involved in the crash in the same 12 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

manner as for NSW. Using the same two stage data matching process as used for NSW and described above, the process identified 92,119 vehicles manufactured between 1982 and 2002 that had been involved in a crash with one other vehicle where the other vehicle had no restriction on its year of manufacture. Of the drivers of these other vehicles, 21,370 were injured. These records were used for calculation of vehicle aggressivity ratings toward drivers of other vehicles. For the study of crashworthiness by vehicle year of manufacture, the Queensland data represented 229,289 drivers of cars, station wagons or taxis manufactured from 1964 to 2002 who were involved in tow-away crashes. Of these drivers, 56,697 were injured. The number of vehicles crashing in Queensland and available for the year of manufacture analysis was less than expected. This is because a large proportion of the vehicles in the Queensland data from 1997 and 1998 had year of manufacture missing due to difficulties in accessing the vehicle register to determine vehicle details at the time of assembling of the data from these two years. Some of the vehicles with missing year of manufacture could, however, be assigned an accurate model code though the VIN decoding process described below despite the missing field. As with the data from NSW, the presence of uninjured drivers in the data file meant that it was also suitable for measuring the risk of driver injury (in cars sufficiently damaged to require towing). This contrasted with the Victorian and New Zealand data files, which could not be used to measure injury risk directly because not all uninjured drivers were included. 2.4

Western Australia Crashes

The Western Australian Department of Main Roads maintains a database of all crashes in Western Australia reported to the police. Crashes in Western Australia must be reported to police if anyone involved is killed or injured or the crash results in property damage greater than $1,000 (Road Safety Council of Western Australia, 2001). This means that, like NSW and Queensland, both injury and non-injury crashes are reported making the data suitable for inclusion in estimating both the injury risk and injury severity components of the vehicle safety ratings. Although the WA crash data is held as a relational database, WA Department of Main Roads supplied the data in a single flat file with a record for each person involved in a reported crash. Data covered the period 1991 to 2002. The files supplied covered 496,669 light passenger vehicles manufactured between 1982 and 2002 involved in Police reported crashes during 1991-2002 that resulted in death or injury or a vehicle being towed away. The files supplied covered models of four-wheel drive vehicles, passenger vans, and light commercial vehicles as well as cars and station wagons. Out of the 496,669 drivers involved in tow-away crashes, 60,174 were injured. Of the 496,669 vehicles reported as crashed in WA and used in estimation of crashworthiness ratings, 399,154 were involved in crashes with one other traffic unit. Of the drivers of the matched vehicles, 40,213 were injured. These records were used for calculation of vehicle aggressivity ratings toward drivers of other vehicles. For the study of crashworthiness by vehicle year of manufacture, the WA data represented 616,281 drivers of cars, station wagons or taxis manufactured from 1964 to 2002 who were involved in tow-away crashes. Of these drivers, 74,414 were injured.


2.5

Crash and Registration Data from New Zealand

Two sources of data from New Zealand were used in the calculation of vehicle crashworthiness and aggressivity ratings. The first data source provided was a crash file showing the registration, vehicle, driver and various crash characteristics for all police reported crashes in New Zealand for the years 1991 to 2002. The second data source was registration data giving details of all crash involved vehicles on the NZ register in each year from 1991 to 2002. Extracts from both data sources supplied for estimation of vehicle safety ratings are described below. 2.5.1 Crash Data NZ has an established database of reported injury crashes covering crashes over many years. Amongst many other things, this data is used to produce the annual publication summarising injury crashes in NZ (LTSA, 1998, for example). The crash data are stored in the Crash Analysis System (CAS) database managed by the Land Transport Safety Authority (LTSA) and covers both injury and non-injury crashes. Whilst non-injury crashes are available from CAS, the reporting coverage of non-injury crashes in NZ is not as clear. The problem is that it is not mandatory for a non-injury crash to be reported to the Police so the number, nature and degree of vehicle damage, if any, are not known. Because of this, and because of problems with vehicle model identification documented by Voyce (2000), only injury crash data from New Zealand were useful for estimating vehicle safety ratings. To facilitate the use of NZ crash data in computing vehicle crashworthiness ratings, it was necessary to include a number of key variables in the crash data supplied. Because the NZ data was integrated with the Australian data for analysis, it was important to match the data fields and levels within the data fields from the NZ data as closely as possible to those in the Australian data used to compute crashworthiness ratings. Extensive assessment of the content and compatibility of the New Zealand crash data in relation to that available from Australia is given in Newstead (2002). That study found the New Zealand injury crash data to be suitable for estimation of vehicle safety ratings in combination with the Australian data. The minimum key variables required in the New Zealand data to ensure compatibility with the Australian data, along with their coding levels were as follows. • • • • • • •

Year of crash (1991, 1992,…, 2002) Speed limit at crash location (=80km/h) Number of vehicles involved (1, more than 1) Level of urbanisation of crash location (urban, rural) Driver age (=60 years) Driver gender (male, female) Injury level of driver (killed, hospitalised, other injury, not injured)

Data in CAS are stored as a relational database, comprising a series of linked tables with each covering a different theme related to a crash. The LTSA supplied details of the data fields available in the CAS system through a data dictionary of the database. Data from three tables, crash, person and vehicle, covered all the required data filed listed above. Linking data in the tables together was achieved using the crash identification number (crash_id), traffic unit identifier (ltsa_role) and person identifier (pers_id) fields. Complete extracts of each data table for the years 1991 to 2002, without personal identifier information, were supplied for analysis. From these, it was possible to select the required data 14 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

for analysis from the supplied tables. In total, 123,707 crashes involving 211,408 units were recorded in the crash file during this period. It is noted that each unit in the file did not necessarily represent a vehicle that could be rated. A unit also included a motorcycle, bicyclist, pedestrian or heavy vehicle. 2.5.2

Registration Data

Information from the vehicle register on vehicle make, model and year of manufacture were vital to enhance the crash data for estimation of vehicle crashworthiness ratings. The New Zealand Transport Registry Centre (TRC) held the required data. Data was requested covering all vehicles appearing in the 1991-2002 New Zealand crash data with current or historical (archived) registration records. Registration records for vehicles appearing in the crash data were selected based on registration plate number. Variables required from the registration database were selected based on information from the Pre-registration Procedures Manual supplied by TRC with reference to information required for accurate vehicle model decoding. Variables requested were as follows (with reference to the PreRegistration Procedures Manual section where available). • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Vehicle registration number (plate number) Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) (4-A-1) Vehicle Type (4-A-3) Registration Indicator (4-A-5) Date of Registration Date of First NZ Registration (4-A-6) Country of Previous Registration (4-A-7) Make (4-A-8) Model (4-A-8) Sub-model Name (4-A-8) Industry Model Code (4-A-8) Year of manufacture (4-A-8) Body Type (4-A-9) Country of Origin (4-A-10) Assembly Type (4-A-10) CC Rating (4-A-10)

Of the variables requested, a number were vital for identifying and clustering model details for vehicles appearing in the New Zealand crash data. These were vehicle type, VIN, year of manufacture, registration number, the date of registration, the date of first New Zealand registration and whether the vehicle was sold new in New Zealand, was a used import or reregistered. One difficulty in retrieving vehicle registration information details for crashed vehicles based on only the registration plate number arose for registration plates that had been used on more than one vehicle model over time. It was not possible for the TRC to find the registration record that was current for a plate number just before the time the vehicle crashed. Instead, all records for the plate number of a crashed vehicle were retrieved from the registration system and archive. Where multiple records for a single plate number were provided, the most appropriate match based on the date of the crash, the date of registration and the date of first registration of the VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 15

vehicle in New Zealand needed to be established. The process for doing so is described below. In some cases a registration record could not be found for a crashed vehicle. This was most likely because either the registration plate details had been recorded incorrectly in the crash data or the vehicle was not registered. For the 211,408 units involved in crashes in the data supplied for 1991 to 2002, 186,872 registration records were extracted by the TRC from the New Zealand vehicle register. The total number of registration records is less than the number of units because registration records for some vehicle could not be identified along with some units being pedestrians and bicycles that are not registered. 2.5.3

Merging the Crash and Registration Data

In order to merge the Australian and New Zealand data for use in the analysis, the New Zealand registration and crash files had to be matched to provide full vehicle and crash information for each crash involved unit. This required the vehicle details obtained from the registration files to be matched with the crash files based on the registration number. This process raises some unique difficulties. First, in some instances the same vehicle may have crashed more than once between 1991 and 2002 causing multiple records for the same vehicle to appear in the registration file. Selecting those cases where the date of registration, the date of first NZ registration, vehicle make, model and registration details were identical identified these cases. Multiple entries were then deleted from the registration file. Second, it was possible that the same registration number may be associated with more than one vehicle over time and with multiple registrations of the same vehicle due to re-registration. If any of these vehicles were involved in a crash during the relevant period, all vehicles on the NZ register between 1991 and 2002 with the relevant registration numbers appeared as unique entries in the registration data file. In cases of multiple entries with the same registration number, it was necessary to identify which of the vehicles on the registration file best matched the vehicle involved in the crash as shown in the crash file. Registration details were matched to crashes by selecting the most recently registered vehicle prior to the accident date using both the date of the first New Zealand registration and the registration date of the vehicle. Finally, in cases where the registration number was unknown or incomplete the crash and registration data could not be matched. At the completion of the matching process, 187,326 entries remained in the merged file containing the relevant variables from both the crash and registration files. This process of matching used here is an enhancement of that described in Newstead (2002) for matching New Zealand crash and registration data. After merging of the crash and registration data, vehicle model details were decoded using the process described below following which two final selection criteria were imposed. Only vehicles manufactured after 1981 and only entries coded as cars, station wagons, vans, utilities or taxis were relevant to the analysis. This reduced the number of entries to 138,970. Of the drivers of these vehicles 67,557 were not injured or had unknown injury status, whilst the remaining 71,413 were injured to some degree. The injury details of the 71,413 injured drivers were used for estimation of the crashworthiness injury severity measure in conjunction with the Australian data. Records on the uninjured drivers in the New Zealand injury crash data could not be used in the calculation of the injury risk component of the crashworthiness ratings. This was because non-injury crashes in New Zealand, and hence uninjured drivers from these crashes,


were not suitable for use in the analysis and therefore records on all uninjured drivers in all crashes in New Zealand were incomplete. A subset of the New Zealand data described above and used for estimation of crashworthiness injury severity formed the basis of the data used in the calculation of the aggressivity ratings. For calculation of aggressivity ratings, only vehicles involved in two vehicle crashes were included. Within the New Zealand data this reduced the number of available vehicles to 77,848. Of the drivers of vehicles colliding with the 77,848 vehicles identified, 42,607 were injured whilst 35,241 were uninjured. Information on the injury level of the 42,607 injured drivers, 7,162 of who were seriously injured, was used in conjunction with the Australian data to estimate the injury severity component of the aggressivity ratings. 2.6

Combined Data from the Five Jurisdictions

When the data on the injured drivers was combined for analysis, it covered 383,842 drivers of 1982-2002 model vehicles who were injured in crashes in Victoria or NSW during 1987-2002 or in Western Australia, Queensland or New Zealand during 1991-2002. Of these 342,850 had a valid injury severity code, with 40,992 drivers injured in crashes in NSW during 1999-2002 excluded because of missing injury severity. Information on the 342,850 injured drivers was used to assess the injury severity of the injured drivers of the different makes and models when computing crashworthiness ratings. The information on the 1,504,399 drivers involved in towaway crashes in NSW during 1987-2002 or Western Australia and Queensland during 19912002 was used to assess the injury rate of drivers of the different makes and models for computing crashworthiness ratings. The combined data for estimation of vehicle aggressivity ratings covered 187,804 drivers of vehicles colliding with 1982-2002 model vehicles who were injured in two car crashes in Victoria during 1987-2002 or NSW during 1987-1998 or in Western Australia, Queensland and New Zealand during 1991-2002. Excluding the 15,578 injured drivers from NSW during 19992002 without a valid injury severity code left 172,226 cases for analysis. This information was used to assess the injury severity of the injured drivers colliding with the different makes and models when computing aggressivity ratings. The aggressivity injury risk component was estimated from information on the 757,757 drivers involved in two-car tow-away crashes in NSW during 1987-2002 or Western Australia and Queensland during 1991-2002. For the study of crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture, the combined data covered 373,778 drivers of vehicles manufactured between 1964 and 2002 who were injured in crashes in Victoria during 1987-2002, NSW during 1987-1998 and Western Australia and Queensland during 1991-2002. For the assessment of injury risk by year of vehicle manufacture, the combined data covered 1,978,306 drivers involved in tow-away crashes in NSW during 19872002 or Western Australia and Queensland during 1991-2002.


3.

MODELS AND MARKET GROUPS OF VEHICLES

3.1

Vehicle Model Identification

3.1.1

Australian Vehicles

A procedure developed by the NRMA located the crashed vehicles in NSW vehicle registration records after matching by registration number and vehicle make. The Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) or chassis number obtained from the register was decoded to determine the models of light passenger vehicles. The decoding identified some light truck and unusual commercial models that were not considered further. Of the vehicles manufactured during 1982-2002, all but around 4% had their model identified. Further details are given by Pappas (1993). The same VIN decoding procedure was used to identify vehicle models in the Queensland data, achieving a similar level of decoding accuracy to NSW. The Victorian vehicle register provided the make and year of manufacture of the crashed vehicle but not the model. Models were initially derived for cars manufactured during 1982-88 using logic developed and supplied by the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV) based on the make, year and power-mass units. Power-mass units (PMU) are the sum of RAC horsepower units (PU) and the vehicle mass in units of 50kg (MU). Refined logic was developed by MUARC based on make, year, PMU, PU, MU and body type, and extended to cover 1989-93 models. The MUARC logic was applied to the combined Victorian data in conjunction with the RACV logic to derive passenger car models for the model years 1982-93. For vehicles crashing in the years 1994 to 2002, where available, the Victorian vehicle register provided the VIN of each crashed vehicle along with the information described above. VINs are recorded on the Victorian vehicle register for most vehicles from 1989 year of manufacture onwards. Where a VIN was available for a vehicle appearing in the 1994 to 2002 crash data, the model information was decoded from the VIN using the methods of Pappas (1993). For limited quantities of the 1994-1998 data, where the VIN was not available, the RACV and MUARC logic, described above, was used to obtain model details. Attempts were made to obtain VINs from the Western Australian vehicle register, managed by the WA Department of Transport, for vehicles appearing in the Western Australian crash data. Due to an upgrade of the WA registration data system, however, VINs could not be obtained for this update of the vehicle safety ratings although it is possible they may become available for future updates. This meant the VIN decoding system used on data from the other three states to identify vehicle model details could not be used for WA. Detailed vehicle make and model information along with year of manufacture have been merged onto the WA crash data by Main Roads WA as part of a regular interrogation of the WA vehicle register. The make and model codes proved to be of sufficient detail to be used, along with the year of manufacture, to assign vehicle model groupings to vehicles crashed in WA consistent with the vehicle model groupings that are derived from the VIN decoding system. Only a small number of vehicles, typically in model change-over years, could not be accurately assigned a sufficiently accurate model code for use in the study. The process of decoding vehicle model information in WA was similar to that used for new vehicles in the New Zealand data without a valid VIN available, described below.


RACV, NRMA and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB, formerly FORS) provided advice on the particular models that had experienced substantial changes in design (and hence potential crashworthiness) during model years 1982-2002 and in which years the design was relatively constant. This resulted in certain models being split into ranges of years of manufacture. Where the new model was introduced near the beginning or end of a year (up to two months either way), this process was relatively straightforward (accepting a small misclassification in some circumstances). However, when the model changed near the middle of the year, the model for that year was kept separate and potentially treated as a "mixed" model (e.g. the Daihatsu Charade 1987 models). Where exact model decoding was possible from the VIN, without using year of vehicle manufacture, this was used. VicRoads previously provided advice on vehicle models that could be combined with each other (sometimes only for specific years) because they were essentially the same design or construction but registered as having different manufacturers. This information was used in the analysis to combine some models, otherwise one or both members of each such pair of models would have been excluded and a crashworthiness rating figure would not have been produced (Section 4.1.3). Model sharing in the automotive industry has declined in recent years alleviating this as an ongoing problem to some degree. As in previous crashworthiness ratings, models were excluded with fewer than 20 injured drivers and/or fewer than 100 involved drivers appearing in the crash data. The same selection criteria were also used for aggressivity ratings except exclusion was based on the number of injured drivers in the vehicles colliding with the focus vehicle model. These selection criteria were used to ensure stability in fitting the logistic regression models along with suitably small confidence limits on the estimated crashworthiness ratings. 3.1.2

New Zealand Vehicles

In order to integrate the New Zealand crash data with the Australian data for analysis, it was necessary to identify and classify the make and model type of each crash-involved vehicle in a way consistent with that carried out for the Australian data. A process of decoding vehicle model information in the New Zealand crash data was established and applied in Newstead (2002). The procedure developed is described here but broadly follows the principles outlined above for the Australian data. Identifying vehicle models and establishing appropriate clustering relied on the use of external resources giving details of vehicle model release dates and specifications. A summary of the key resources used for the New Zealand model decoding process is as follows. • IDENTICAR. The principal resource on vehicle model specifications and release dates has been Identicar published by GCL in NZ. Identicar has model run dates and limited information on specifications for all new and used imported passenger vehicles and light commercial vehicles available for sale in NZ. It has either photographs or sketches of each vehicle model covered along with details on the manufacturers’ chassis code that are broadly consistent with the industry model codes and chassis codes held on the NZ vehicle register. Information in the publication covers the period of vehicle manufacture from 1982 onwards which is the focus of the ratings system. It is recognised that the information presented in Identicar is not always completely accurate, particularly with respect to items of detail such as the manufacturer’s chassis code and detailed specifications of the vehicle. However, despite the noted problems, it was considered that the information presented is of VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 19

sufficient detail and accuracy for the publication to be used as an ongoing primary resource for vehicle model identification and clustering in the production of NZ crashworthiness ratings. • POLK AUTOSPEC. Polk AutoSpec has proved a valuable resource in identifying new vehicle releases in the Australian market for use in producing the Australian vehicle crashworthiness ratings. It has highly detailed information on vehicle release dates, original specifications and specification changes. It also has detailed photographs of each vehicle model released. For a number of years, Polk also published an AutoSpec covering the NZ new vehicle market that represented a valuable source of information on NZ new vehicle releases. In the NZ crashworthiness feasibility study, the AutoSpec publication was a valuable source of information on new vehicle releases in NZ with the photographs and specifications allowing accurate comparison of vehicle model lines with those from Australia thought to be similar. It was hoped AutoSpec could continue to be used as a primary resource for identification and clustering of new NZ vehicles in the process of producing crashworthiness ratings. Unfortunately, Polk are no longer producing the AutoSpec publication for NZ, a decision based on economic grounds perhaps reflecting the minority of total NZ vehicle sales that new vehicles now represent. Consequently, this resource was only useful for this research for the historical coverage of the publication whilst it was being produced. • REDBOOK. A valuable source of on-line information on vehicle specifications and release dates is Red Book. The Red Book web site for Australia (www.redbook.com.au) covers an extremely wide range of vehicles currently existing in the Australian fleet. Detail is given on each model variant including a sketch of the vehicle for visual identification and a brief summary of specifications. Information in Red Book is useful in the safety ratings projects for determining build dates of vehicle model series, and broad specification of different model variants. It is the most valuable source of information available for vehicles manufactured pre 1990. Red Book also has a web site specific to the NZ vehicle market (www.redbook.co.nz). It includes most of the range information on the Australian Red Book site apart from the sketches of vehicle models useful for visual identification. Importantly, it covers not only vehicles sold new in NZ but also a wide range of second hand imported vehicles, particularly the most popular models. The lack of pictures or sketches of vehicle models on the NZ Red Book site was offset through the use of other NZ automotive web sites such as Auto (www.auto.co.nz) to access pictures of vehicles. On line sources such as Red Book NZ provided the next most important source of ongoing vehicle identification and clustering information after Identicar. The New Zealand vehicle fleet is comprised fundamentally of two different types of vehicles. They are those sold new in New Zealand and used vehicles imported into New Zealand primarily from Japan. Because of differences in availability and quality of information in the registration data between new and used import vehicles, a different strategy for decoding model information for new and used import vehicles was used. As in the Australian data, the final aim of the model decoding process is to assign a model code (‘modelh’) to each crashed vehicle in the New Zealand data code dependent on the make, model and year of manufacture of the vehicle. A vehicle safety rating is then calculated for each vehicle set defined by a ‘modleh’ code with sufficient real crash experience. A full list of the ‘modelh’ codes and associated vehicle details is provided in Appendix 1. The process for


assigning the ‘modelh’ code for both new and used import vehicles in the New Zealand crash data follows. New Vehicle Model Decoding and Clustering The model decoding and clustering procedure used for passenger vehicles sold new in NZ is as follows. 1) Vehicles with a valid ISO standard 17 character VIN number were identified in the merged crash and registration data. The make, year of manufacture and VIN for these vehicles was then run through the VIN decoder developed for decoding vehicle model information in the Australian crashworthiness system. VINs beginning with a 7 (the world manufacturer code character for NZ) were identified and excluded from this process as the Australian VIN decoder does not contain the necessary data to be able to identify vehicle model details for vehicles with a NZ assigned VIN. The result of the VIN decoding process, where successful, was a direct clustering of each vehicle into one of the clusters defined for the Australian crashworthiness ratings study. Vehicles that had no cluster assigned after the VIN decoding process were identified for further processing and were added back to the remaining undecoded data. 2) Vehicles without an ISO standard VIN, those with ISO standard VINs issued in NZ (beginning with a 7) and those that failed the VIN decoding process were identified for the next processing phase. A total of 93,493 crashed vehicles that were sold new in New Zealand had vehicle model details identified in this way. a) Basic vehicle make and model details were identified from the vehicle make and model codes held on the vehicle register. These are equivalent to the make and model information contained in the NZ assigned ISO VIN where applicable and were found to be consistent with that in the crash data in comparisons made in Newstead (2002). b) Using "Identicar" and Polk "AutoSpec" to identify vehicle specifications and major model series changes, a process of clustering was developed. Definition of clusters used the vehicle make and model codes along with the vehicle year of manufacture. A translation table was developed that converted the vehicle make, model and year of manufacture combinations present in the crash data to the Australian equivalent model clusters. Development of the translation table was essentially carried out manually through necessity. One of the key difficulties encountered that necessitated manual development of the translation table was the numerous variations of the vehicle model codes in the registration data for the same vehicle. For example "Applause L" and "Applause X" for two different trim variants of the same Daihatsu vehicle (ideally the suffixes X and L should have been in the sub-model code field with only Applause in the model code). The model cluster translation table was updated for this study from the version used in Newstead et al (2003b) to reflect new model releases as well as new make and model code combinations appearing in the registration information of the crashed vehicles. c) In some cases, a broader range of body types and specifications of some NZ vehicle models was available than in Australia. Some of the different body types and specifications were likely to have differences significant enough to alter the crashworthiness of the vehicle. Identification of variants within a model range with body VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 21

types and specification dissimilar enough to have likely different crashworthiness to the equivalent Australian model was made using the body type, industry model code and chassis number data fields. Vehicle model variants identified with incompatible specifications or body types were excluded from the defined comparable Australian data clusters. Used Imported Vehicle Model Decoding and Clustering Identification of vehicle make and model details and appropriate clusters for the used imported NZ vehicles, was carried out using an identical process to that in section 2 of the process used for new vehicles above. This process was also used for vehicles identified in the registration records as re-registered or unknown. New car process (1) was not available for the used imports as almost none of these vehicles had a valid ISO VIN assigned in any country apart from NZ. The available source of information on vehicle model specifications were the "Identicar" publication that has a whole section devoted to the used Japanese imported vehicles, including great detail on the associated industry model codes for each vehicle, and the on-line sources “Redbook” and “Auto”. Use of the industry model code and or chassis number (which generally contains the industry model code) proved useful for the second hand imported vehicles in some instances. Final Decoded Data The three sources of decoded data (VIN decoded, new and used decoded entries) were then merged together to enable the final selection of vehicles for use in the analysis. Where insufficient information was available for the ‘modelh’ code to be determined from any of the processes described above, the ‘modelh’ code was assigned a value of ‘Z’, indicating unknown model. Two final selection criteria were imposed. First, only vehicles manufactured after 1981 were to be included in the analysis. Second, where no ‘modelh’ code had been assigned or a modelh code of ‘Z’ was assigned, it was necessary to exclude all entries not coded as cars, station wagons, vans, utilities or taxis. 3.2

Pooled Car Models

Vehicle model sharing amongst manufacturers retailing in the Australian market has been relatively common. Because shared models are generally identical, particularly with respect to safety performance, it is possible to pool such models for safety rating, allowing a more precise estimate of the safety of models for which data is pooled rather than considering each separately. There are also some models of Ford Falcon that expert advice has indicated did not change significantly from one series to the next that can also be pooled for the same reasons as the shared models. Both the pooled models and Falcon models combined are indicated in Table 2.

Table 2: Pooled Models of Cars Ford Laser 82-89 Ford Laser 99-02 Ford Telstar 83-87

with with with


Mazda 323 / Familia 82-88 Mazda 323 99-02 Mazda 626 / MX6 / Capella 83-86

Ford Telstar 88-91 Ford Telstar 92-97 Ford Falcon EA Ford Falcon ED Ford Corsair 89-92 Holden Commodore VR/VS Holden Commodore VN-VP Holden Nova 89-92 Holden Nova 93-96 Holden Astra 84-86 Holden Astra 88-90 Holden Barina 85-88 Holden Barina 89-93 Holden Apollo JK/JL 89-92 Holden Apollo JM/JP 93-97 Ford Maverick 88-97 Suzuki Scurry 85-87 Suzuki Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 82-99 Nissan XFN Utility Ford Festiva WA 91-93 Ford Courier 98-02 Ford Escape 01-02

with with with with with with with with with with with with with with with with with with with with with with

Mazda 626 / MX6 / Capella 88-91 Mazda 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos 92-97 Ford Falcon EB Series I Ford Falcon EB Series II Nissan Pintara / Bluebird 89-92 Toyota Lexcen 93-97 Toyota Lexcen 89-93 Toyota Corolla 88-92 Toyota Corolla 93-97 Nissan Pulsar / Langley 83-86 Nissan Pulsar / Sentra 87-91 Suzuki Swift / Cultus 86-88 Suzuki Swift / Cultus 89-00 Toyota Camry / Vista 90-93 Toyota Camry / Sceptor 94-97 Nissan Patrol 88-97 Holden Carry 85-90 Holden Drover 85-87 Ford Falcon Utility Mazda 121 87-90 Mazda B-Series 98-02 Mazda Tribute 01-02

It should be noted that some of the vehicle models identified in the Victorian, NSW, Western Australia and Queensland crash data have optional safety equipment, such as air bags, which could significantly alter the crashworthiness rating of the vehicle model when fitted. Notable examples in local manufacture include the Holden Commodore VR/VS, Toyota Camry 1993-97 and Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS, and TE/TF/TH, all of which have optional air bag fitment. It is, however, generally not possible to identify which particular vehicles of a model series do and do not have such optional safety equipment installed using the model decoding procedures described above. Consequently, for those vehicle models with optional safety equipment, the estimated crashworthiness rating represents an average of the safety performance for vehicles with and without the optional safety equipment weighted by the number of each in the crash data. As the ratings only measure the outcome of drivers involved in a crash, fitment of active (crash avoidance) safety features such as anti-lock braking systems had no effect on these ratings. As only drivers were considered, optional or standard safety features for the front seat passenger (eg. frontal airbag) or rear seat passengers would also not have affected the ratings. Other research has shown that these safety features not accounted for in this study may and to varying degrees have significant benefits for vehicle occupants in both crash avoidance and injury mitigation. 3.3

Vehicle Market Groups

Previous updates of the vehicle safety ratings have classified vehicle models, for the purpose of publication, into one of eight defined market groups (Newstead et al, 2003a). The market groups were defined as follows:


•

• • •

Passenger cars and station wagons: Large Medium Small Sports Luxury Four-wheel drive vehicles Passenger vans Commercial vehicles (less than 3000 kg GVM)

In response to changes in the Australian vehicle fleet, as well as changes in how the vehicle industry in Australia defines vehicle market groups, the update of vehicle safety ratings reported here has used a re-defined vehicle market group classification for publication. The new market groups defined are based heavily on those used by the Federal chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) for reporting Australian vehicle sales as part of their VFACTS publication (see www.fcai.com.au for further details). Rated vehicles have been classified into one of 13 new market group classifications, comprising 8 classes of regular passenger car, 3 classes of 4Wheel-Drive (4WD) vehicle (also known as Sports Utility Vehicles) and 2 classes of light commercial vehicle. These are defined as follows. Passenger Cars Light Small Medium Large People Movers Sports Prestige Luxury

Passenger car, hatch or sedan 3 or 4 cylinder engine, up to 1,500 cc. Passenger car, hatch, sedan or wagon, 4 cylinder engine, 1,501 cc - 1,900 cc. Passenger car, hatch, sedan or wagon, 4 cylinder engine, 1,901 cc upward. Passenger car, hatch, sedan or wagon, 6 or 8 cylinder engine. Passenger usage seating capacity > 5 people. Coupe or convertible Highly specified passenger cars, hatch, sedan or wagon, priced below the luxury tax threshold. Highly Specified passenger cars, coupe, convertible, hatch, sedan or wagon, priced above the luxury tax threshold.

Four-Wheel-Drive Vehicles (high ground clearance, off road wagon) 4WD Compact 4WD Medium 4WD Large

Index rating < 550 (typically less than 1700kg tare mass) Index rating 550 < 700 (typically between 1700kg and 2000kg tare mass) Index rating > 700 (typically greater than 2000kg tare mass)

Light Commercial Vehicles Van Utility

Blind & window vans. Two and four wheel drive, normal control (bonnet), utility, cab chassis and crew-cabs.

The classification of 4WD vehicles are based on an index developed by VFACTS that considers gross vehicle mass, maximum engine torque and the availability of a dual range transmission. The index typically classifies the vehicles roughly by tare mass as indicated on the classifications above. Some departures from the VFACTS classification have been made in presenting the ratings in this study. VFACTS defines a luxury 4WD category based on vehicle price as well as classifying sports cars priced above the luxury car tax as luxury vehicles. Here, 24 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

the luxury 4WDs have been distributed amongst the 3 defined 4WD categories based on tare mass, as the information for computing the classification index used by VFACTS was not available at the time of the study. All sports cars have been classified as such, regardless of price. There have also been some departures from the classification principles defined above for certain vehicle models that have a range of engine sizes and hence fall across two different defined categories. These are typically passenger vehicles and include, for example, cars like the Toyota Camry that come fitted with a large 4 cylinder engine in some variants and a 6 cylinder engine in other variants. In these cases, a value judgement has been made for each vehicle model individually based on the other vehicle models with which each typically competes in the market place.


4.

ANALYSIS

4.1

Overview of Analysis Methods: Crashworthiness

The crashworthiness rating (C) is a measure of the risk of serious injury to a driver of a car when it is involved in a crash. It is defined to be the product of two probabilities (Cameron et al, 1992): i)

the probability that a driver involved in a crash is injured (injury risk), denoted by R;

and ii)

the probability that an injured driver is hospitalised or killed (injury severity), denoted by S.

That is C = R × S.

Folksam Insurance, who publishes the well-known Swedish ratings, first measured crashworthiness in this way (Gustafsson et al, 1989). In the present report, each of the two components of the crashworthiness rating was obtained by logistic regression modelling techniques. Such techniques are able to simultaneously adjust for the effect of a number of factors (such as driver age and sex, number of vehicles involved, etc.) on probabilities such as the injury risk and injury severity. The Logistic Model The logistic model of a probability, P, is of the form:

 P  log it (P ) = ln  = β o + β1 X 1 + K + β k X k = f ( X ) . 1 − P  That is, the log of the odds ratio is expressed as a linear function of k associated variables or their interactions, Xi , i = 1,K, k . Estimates of the parameter coefficients of the logit function, i.e. the β$ i can be obtained by maximum likelihood estimation (Hosmer & Lemeshow, 1989). Logistic Confidence Limits for the Vehicle Models or Year of Manufacture Whilst it is possible to calculate the variance of fˆ ( X ) , in the context of crashworthiness ratings we are only interested in the component of variance due to one factor in fˆ ( X ) with the variance

due to the other factors in the model being of no interest. In practice, the component of variance due to the factor representing the vehicle model or year of manufacture is of interest, whilst the variance due to the remaining factors such as driver age and sex is common to all vehicle models or years of manufacture and hence of no interest.


To isolate the component of variance in the logistic model due to only one factor, say factor X i , the remaining factors were fixed at a predetermined level (their mean value). The variance of fˆ ( X ) , considering all factors apart from X i to be fixed, is then given by

(

( )

)

Var f$ ( X i ) = X i2Var β$ i

In the logistic models of injury risk or injury severity, X i was a [0,1] indicator function of either a particular vehicle model or market group or year of manufacture, depending on the analysis being performed. Hence the variance function given above equalled the variance of the coefficient β$ i . A 95% confidence interval for the logit function with respect to component X i is given by

(

)

f$ ( X ) ± 196 . Var f$ ( X i ) . Point estimates and confidence limits in the logistic space were transformed into probability estimates using the inverse logistic transform given by Pˆ =

4.1.1

e f (X ) ˆ

1 + e f (X ) ˆ

.

Logistic Models for Each Component

Obtaining the Covariate Models

Before adjusted crashworthiness ratings could be obtained it was necessary to consider logistic models of each of the crashworthiness components separately to identify possible factors, other than vehicle design, that might have influenced the crash outcomes in terms of driver injury severity. A stepwise procedure was used to identify which factors had an important influence. This was done without considering the type of car or year of manufacture in the model, as the aim was to determine which other factors were most likely to have had an influence across a broad spectrum of crashes. Furthermore, the car model variable had to be excluded from the logistic modelling process at this stage because of analysis convergence problems when the car model was competing against the other factors in the stepwise procedure. It was also not considered appropriate to allow interaction between vehicle model and other factors in the logistic model as this would imply that relative vehicle crashworthiness varied between models depending on the crash circumstance and occupant characteristics. Logistic models were obtained separately for injury risk and injury severity because it was likely that the various factors would have different levels of influence on these two probabilities. The factors considered during this stage of the analysis for both injury risk and injury severity were • •

sex: age:

driver sex (male, female) driver age (≤25 years; 26-59 years; ≥60 years)


• • • •

speedzone: nveh: state: year:

speed limit at the crash location (≤75 km/h; ≥80 km/h) the number of vehicles involved (one vehicle; >1 vehicle) jurisdiction of crash (Victoria, NSW, QLD, WA, NZ) year of crash (1987, 1988, … ,2002)

These variables were chosen for consideration because they were part of the Victorian, Queensland, New South Wales, Western Australia and New Zealand databases. Other variables were only available from one source and their inclusion would have drastically reduced the number of cases that could have been included in the analysis. State of crash was a necessary inclusion in the logistic model because each jurisdiction has its own level of general road safety performance that affects injury outcome. Including the state factor in the covariate model is necessary to adjust for rating bias towards those vehicle models that are sold and driven more in one jurisdiction than another. There is also some indication of reporting bias by crash severity in some jurisdictions that is also controlled by including the state variable in the regression models. Inclusion of a year of crash indicator in the model is necessary to adjust for the different trends in crash severity noted between each of the states (see section 4.1.5 below). All data was analysed using the Logistic Regression procedure of the SAS statistical package (SAS, 1989). Estimates of the coefficients of the logit function, β$ i , i = 1,K, k , together with their associated standard errors, were obtained by maximum likelihood estimation. In the modelling process, design variables for the various factors were chosen in such a way that the estimated coefficients represented deviations of each of the variable levels from the mean. Each factor in the model, including year of crash, was treated as categorical to allow maximum flexibility in the relationship between each and the outcome measure. For both injury risk and injury severity, a stepwise procedure was used to identify which factors and their interactions made a significant contribution to these probabilities. All possible first and higher order interactions were considered between all factors in the model. A hierarchical structure was imposed so that interaction between two variables was included in the model only when the corresponding main effects were also included. The resultant logistic regression models were referred to as the "covariate" models or equations. The average value of the injury risk or injury severity was obtained directly from the outcome variable of interest averaging across all cases in the analysis. Assessing Car Model or Year of Manufacture Differences

Injury risk and injury severity for individual cars were estimated after adding a variable representing car model or year of manufacture to the respective logistic "covariate" models. That is, car model or year of manufacture variable was included in the logistic model along with those factors and their interactions that were found to be statistically significantly related to the outcome variable in the stepwise modelling procedure and the model re-estimated in a single step process. Coefficients for individual car models or years of manufacture were computed to represent deviations of that car or year from the average. As mentioned earlier, this was to avoid non-convergence problems in the analysis when car model or year of manufacture was allowed to compete with the other factors in the stepwise selection process.


It was important to ensure that the logistic model adequately described the data and did not yield individual car model coefficients that were imprecise or unstable. For this reason, individual car models with small frequencies were pooled with similar car models in the rare cases where this was appropriate (see Section 3.2) or, more typically, they were excluded from the analysis. Car models were excluded if, after pooling models, there were either: i) ii)

less than 100 involved drivers; or less than 20 injured drivers.

Some further model exclusions were made for vehicle model classifications that had no practical interpretation. This included models in a particular year where there was a change from one series to the next and year of manufacture was necessary to determine the series break (such as Mitsubishi Pajero 1991). It also included some groups of highly aggregated models that would be of no intrinsic interest to consumers using the ratings (such as Jeep Others or Mazda Commercials). After exclusion, the regression analyses were performed on 297 individual car models (or pooled similar models). A list of all vehicle models considered, with those with sufficient data for analysis indicated, is given in Appendix 1. The variable representing car model was therefore categorical with 297 nominal levels. The choice of the design for the logistic model allowed the injury risk and injury severity estimates for each individual car model to be compared with the overall (average) rating for all cars. No such criteria were necessary for the year of manufacture analysis. For each car model or year of manufacture, a 95% confidence interval for the logit functions of injury risk and injury severity was obtained after first adjusting for the average value in the data and then allowing for the deviation from average for that particular car model. Estimates of injury risk and injury severity were obtained by de-transforming the logit functions as described above. A 95% confidence interval was determined after adjusting for the average values of the significant factors and their interactions. The precision of the estimates of injury risk and injury severity is measured by the width of these 95% confidence intervals. Assessing Market Group Averages

A similar approach to that for individual car models was used to assess car market group averages. A variable with 13 nominal levels representing the different market groups (see Section 3.3) was added to each of the "covariate" models. Deviations of each market group from the average were also assessed. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals for the estimates of both injury severity and injury risk were also obtained for each of the market groups. Assessing Market Group by Year of Manufacture Differences

Assessing year of manufacture by market group effects was carried out in the same was as for assessing year of manufacture effects alone. Instead of using a variable representing year of manufacture alone, however, a variable representing the interaction between year of manufacture and market group was used. This variable had 273 levels representing the 13 market groups by the 21 years of manufacture from 1982 to 2002 inclusive. Unlike the original study of Newstead VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 29

and Cameron (2001) that only considered trends in crashworthiness by year of manufacture for four market groups, this study has considered all 13 market groups defined in the main crashworthiness ratings analysis. 4.1.2

Combining the Injury Risk and Injury Severity Components

The final combined ratings of vehicle crashworthiness are given by: Crashworthiness Rating = Injury risk x Injury severity. For a given model of car or year of manufacture, j, the crashworthiness rating, C j , was therefore calculated as: C j = Rj × Sj

where Rj Sj

denotes the injury risk for car model or year of manufacture j, and denotes the injury severity for car model or year of manufacture j.

Noting the form of the logistic inverse transformation in section 4.1 above, we have Rj =

e

αj

1+ e

αj

,

Sj =

e

βj

1+ e

βj

where α j and β j are the values of the logistic regression function fˆ ( X ) for injury risk and injury severity respectively for vehicle model or year of manufacture j. Taking the natural log of the crashworthiness rating and using asymptotic statistical theory, the asymptotic variance of the log of the crashworthiness rating is Var (log e C j ) ≈

Var (α j ) αj 2

(1 + e )

+

Var ( β j ) β

(1 + e j ) 2

where the variances of α j and β j are as given in section 4.1 and the estimates of α j and β j are considered independent. The 95% confidence interval for the natural log of the crashworthiness rating is then

(

)

log e ( C j ) ± 1.96 ⋅ Var log e ( C j ) .

The 95% confidence limit for the crashworthiness rating is obtained by taking the exponent of the confidence limit of the logged crashworthiness rating shown above. Because each of the two estimated crashworthiness components have been adjusted for the effect of other factors by logistic regression prior to their incorporation into the combined ratings, the resultant crashworthiness rating is also adjusted for the influence of these factors. It should be


noted that the confidence interval for the combined rate reflects the variability in the car model only and not the variability in the other factors included in the logistic models. The same procedure was used to obtain crashworthiness ratings of each distinct market group and for each year of vehicle manufacture. 4.1.3

Market Group Analyses

In addition to the individual car model analyses, logistic regression analyses were performed based on broad market groups as defined in Section 3.3. The market group analyses provided reference ratings for models in each group. 4.1.4

Trends in the Rating Criteria

In each of the five jurisdictions contributing crash data for analysis in this project, there have been changes in road safety during the period of data collection that may have produced a change in the risk of serious injury in crashes, the measure being used to assess vehicle safety in this study. Furthermore, trends in road safety have not been the same in each jurisdiction. There was therefore some concern that there may have been a bias in the crashworthiness ratings related to the time period over which a vehicle model was able to crash. If, for example, there had been a general reduction in crash severity over time, the crashworthiness rating of the later model cars would tend to be lower on average, irrespective of design improvements, than would be expected if the general improvements in road safety had not occurred. Sales profile of vehicle models also differs significantly between jurisdictions. Consequently, if a vehicle model is crashed more in a jurisdiction with poor safety record it may appear to be less crashworthy if jurisdiction effects are not adjusted for in the analysis. This concern led to a need to investigate whether there were in fact, different trends in the risk of driver injury and/or driver injury severity between jurisdictions and over time. If changes were found these would need to be taken into account in calculating the ratings. The file of drivers involved in crashes in NSW, Queensland and Western Australia used to measure the driver injury rate, the first component of the crashworthiness rating, was analysed by the year and state in which the crash occurred to assess any trends. Results are shown in Table 3. Table 3 shows clear evidence of differential trends in injury rate between each of the three states from which data is used in this analysis component. It is also evident that the trends in injury rate are non-linear in each of the three states. These observations made it necessary to adjust the injury risk component of the crashworthiness ratings by both state of crash and year of crash as well as the interaction between the two to reflect differential trends across states. The non-linear nature of the trend also made it necessary to treat year as a categorical variable rather than a continuous measure.


Table 3:

YEAR

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Numbers of drivers of light passenger vehicles manufactured in 1982-2002 and involved and injured in tow-away crashes in NSW during each of the years 19872002 and in Queensland and Western Australia during each of the years 19912002. NSW

QLD

Total Injured

Total Involved

Injury rate (%)

Total Injured

Total Involved

4212 4788 5310 5596 5402 5819 5843 6135 6490 6971 7535 8577 9433 10806 10709 10044

32980 32584 37018 40125 39231 40033 40859 42433 45477 51931 54550 60603 66243 66089 57166 54158

12.8 14.7 14.3 13.9 13.8 14.5 14.3 14.5 14.3 13.4 13.8 14.2 14.2 16.4 18.7 18.5

1184 2171 2688 3464 4087 4329 6052 7131 5862 6140 8476 8248

7069 12076 14011 16592 17884 18770 20830 23773 23669 23612 39554 28410

WA Injury rate Total (%) Injured

16.7 18.0 19.2 20.9 22.9 23.1 29.1 30.0 24.8 26.0 21.4 29.0

2159 2509 2774 3652 4536 5380 6012 6413 5738 6262 6599 8140

Total Involved

Injury rate (%)

19429 20846 26341 33446 38934 45778 47915 51192 50613 50799 52760 57600

11.1 12.0 10.5 10.9 11.7 11.8 12.5 12.5 11.3 12.3 12.5 14.1

Table 4 shows analogous information to Table 3 for trends in injury severity across the five jurisdictions contributing data to this component of the analysis. Table 4 shows there are also clear differential trends in injury severity between each of the jurisdictions. This meant that adjustments for jurisdiction and year of crash, as well as their interaction, was also necessary for the injury severity analysis, with year of crash again treated as a categorical variable. A further point illustrated by Table 3 is the difference in average injury risk between crashes in NSW and WA and crashes in Queensland. The raw injury rate observed in Queensland is of the order of 1.5 to 2 times higher than that observed in NSW and WA. Whether this is because crashes in Queensland are actually more severe or because of a reporting bias towards more severe crashes in Queensland is unclear. Similarly, Table 4 shows average injury severity in WA is much lower than the other jurisdictions. This is possibly due to a different definition of severe injury in WA compared to the other jurisdictions although the definition given in the WA crash data coding manual does not reflect this. Regardless, neither of these differences is considered problematic in computing the ratings provided adjustment for jurisdiction of crash is made in the covariate models of injury risk and severity. The important point for ratings computation is that relative injury risk or severity between vehicle models is consistent across jurisdictions, regardless of the average risk or severity in each state. Interrogation of the data suggested this was the case.


Numbers of drivers of 1982-2002 light passenger vehicles injured in crashes in NSW and Victoria during each of the years 1987-2002 and in Western Australia, Queensland and New Zealand during each of the years 1991-2002.

Table 4: Year

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

NSW Injured

Severe Injury Rate (%)

Killed or Seriously Injured

Injured


920 1047 1099 1211 1195 1297 1254 1263 1380 1470 1798 2404

4212 4788 5310 5596 5402 5819 5843 6135 6490 6971 7535 8577

21.8 21.9 20.7 21.6 22.1 22.3 21.5 20.6 21.3 21.1 23.9 28.0

519 508 629 511 528 518 792 956 1165 1228 1203 403 2351 2682 2934 3158

2119 2513 2999 2334 2315 2537 2772 3225 3878 4327 4215 1339 10473 11235 11023 11449

24.5 20.2 21.0 21.9 22.8 20.4 28.6 29.6 30.0 28.4 28.5 30.1 22.4 23.9 26.6 27.6

Year

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

4.2

VIC


New Zealand

QLD

WA


Injured



Injured



Injured


1185 1543 1092 969 964 1065 1022 1015 1330 1121 1259 1312

5222 7813 5544 5494 6016 5653 5384 5321 6320 5226 6228 7192

22.7 19.7 19.7 17.6 16.0 18.8 19.0 19.1 21.0 21.5 20.2 18.2

380 640 739 1010 1153 1108 1491 1905 1627 1653 2223 2222

1184 2171 2688 3464 4087 4329 6052 7131 5862 6140 8476 8248

32.1 29.5 27.5 29.2 28.2 25.6 24.6 26.7 27.8 26.9 26.2 26.9

202 179 196 356 690 713 954 1011 599 651 596 1314

2159 2509 2774 3652 4536 5380 6012 6413 5738 6262 6599 8140

9.4 7.1 7.1 9.7 15.2 13.3 15.9 15.8 10.4 10.4 9.0 16.1

Overview of the Analysis Methods: Aggressivity

The measure of aggressivity to drivers of other cars (AO) being considered here is: AO = RO x SO where RO = Injury risk of other drivers


that is, the probability that the other driver sustains some injury given their vehicle is involved in a crash of tow-away severity or greater with the subject vehicle type, and SO = Injury severity of other drivers where SO is the probability that the other driver is killed or seriously injured given they sustain some injury in the crash where their vehicle is impacted by a vehicle of the subject vehicle type. The subject vehicle, described by its make and model or market group, is the specific type of vehicle whose aggressivity is being measured in terms of its threat of injury to the driver of the other vehicle with which it impacts. Each of the two components of the aggressivity rating, RO and SO, were obtained by logistic regression modelling techniques. In the same manner as for the crashworthiness ratings, such techniques are able to simultaneously adjust for the effect of a number of factors, which will be discussed below, on the aggressivity injury risk and injury severity probabilities. 4.2.1

Logistic Models, Confidence Limits and Assessment of Aggressivity of Specific Vehicle Models and Market Groups

A logistic model of the same form used for estimation of vehicle crashworthiness ratings was used for estimation of vehicle aggressivity ratings. The key difference in the logistic models for vehicle aggressivity was that the response variables being modelled were not the injury risk or injury severity of the driver of the focus vehicle, as for crashworthiness. Rather, the injury risk and injury severity of the driver of the other vehicle with which the focus vehicle model collided were modelled as the response variables. Given the similarity of the structure of the aggressivity injury risk, RO, and injury severity, SO, with their crashworthiness parallels, the method of computing confidence limits on each RO and SO was the same as given for the corresponding crashworthiness measures above. Before adjusted aggressivity ratings could be obtained it was necessary to consider logistic models of each of the aggressivity components, RO or SO separately, to identify possible factors, other than vehicle design, that might have influenced injury outcome to the other driver. As for crashworthiness rating estimation, a stepwise procedure was used to identify which factors had an important influence. This was done without considering the type of car (make/model or market group) in the model, as the aim was to determine which other factors were most likely to have an influence across a broad spectrum of crashes. Logistic models were obtained separately for injury risk, RO, and injury severity, SO, because it was likely that the various factors would have different levels of influence on these two component probabilities of the aggressivity measure. The factors considered in the covariate models for both aggressivity injury risk and injury severity were • speedzone : speed limit at the crash location ( = 80 km/h) • agefcd : age of driver of subject car (=60 years) • sexfcd : sex of driver of subject car • ageoo : other car driver age (=60 years) • sexoo : other car driver sex (male, female) • state : jurisdiction in which the vehicle crashed (Vic, NSW, WA, QLD, NZ) • year : year in which the vehicle crashed (1987, ..,2002)


These variables were chosen for consideration because they were available in each of the New South Wales, Victorian, Western Australia, Queensland and New Zealand crash databases. Logistic regressions were again carried out using the Logistic Regression procedure of the SAS statistical package (SAS, 1989) using maximum likelihood estimation, the marginal method for forming design variables and a hierarchical structure considering all possible interactions in a stepwise procedure. Aggressivity injury risk and injury severity for individual vehicle models was estimated after adding a variable representing the subject car model to the respective logistic "covariate" models. The car model variable was forced into the logistic equation and individual car model coefficients were computed to represent deviations of that car from the average. In a similar manner to the calculation of crashworthiness ratings, car models were excluded for the calculation of the aggressivity ratings if there were less than 100 vehicles with which they had crashed or there were less than 20 injured drivers in other vehicles with which they had crashed. After exclusion, the regression analyses were performed on 254 individual car models for calculation of aggressivity ratings. The variable representing car model was therefore categorical with 254 nominal levels. The choice of the design for the logistic model allowed the injury risk and injury severity estimates for each individual car model to be compared with the overall (average) rating for all cars. For each car model in each aggressivity measure, a 95% confidence interval for the logit functions of aggressivity injury risk, and injury severity was obtained after first adjusting for the average value of the "covariate" model and then allowing for the deviation from average for that particular car model. Estimates of injury risk and injury severity were obtained by the reverse logistic transform. A 95% confidence interval was determined after adjusting for the average values of the significant factors and their interactions. Aggressivity by 13 broad market groups, as defined for crashworthiness ratings, was also computed along with 95% confidence limits. The final combined aggressivity ratings for occupants of other vehicles are given by: AO = RO x SO For a given model of focus car, j, the aggressivity rating, AO j , was therefore calculated as: AO j = RO j × SO j where RO j denotes the aggressivity injury risk for car model j and SO j denotes the aggressivity injury severity for car model j. Computation of the variance and hence confidence limits on the quantity AO are carried out in the same way as for the crashworthiness measure, C.


5.

RESULTS

5.1

Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings

5.1.1

Injury Risk

Injury risk was estimated from the data on 1,504,399 drivers involved in tow-away crashes in NSW, Queensland and Western Australia during 1987-2002 (as described in Section 2). This data set is referred to as the "involved drivers". Because of missing values in one or more of the covariates driver sex and age, speed zone and number of vehicles involved in the crash amongst the 1,504,399 involved drivers, the final file used for analysis consisted of the 1,070,369 drivers for which all the covariate data was complete. The "covariate" model for injury risk was determined from the variables described in Section 4.1.1. The following terms were significantly associated with injury risk and were included in the logistic model: Base effect terms

Sex Speedzone Age Nveh State Year

First order interactions Speedzone*Nveh Sex*Nveh Sex*Age Age*Nveh Speedzone*Age State*Year

Second order interactions Age *Sex*Nveh Age*Speedzone*Nveh

No other term significantly improved the fit of the logistic model. The overall (average) injury risk for involved drivers in tow-away crashes in NSW, Western Australia and Queensland was 17.20 per 100 drivers. In other words, the probability that a driver involved in a tow-away crash in NSW, Western Australia or Queensland was injured was 17.20%. Appendix 2 gives the estimates of injury risk derived by logistic regression for 255 individual car models that had a sufficiently accurate crashworthiness rating after post analysis exclusions for wide confidence limits or high co-efficient of variation (see below). Injury risk ranged from 11.38% for the Audi A4 to 36.30% for the Subaru Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex. An estimate of the variability in the injury risk estimates was calculated from the width of the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Individual confidence interval widths ranged from 0.76% (Falcon XE-XF) to 14.96% for the 1991-2000 Toyota MR2. The small variability for the Falcon X series Sedan is not surprising since there were more cars of this model than any other in the data set and precision is known to improve with increasing sample size. The estimated injury risk for each market group is also given in Appendix 2. The large four wheel drive vehicles had the lowest injury risk (13.05%) and the light car market group had the highest (22.53%).


5.1.2

Injury Severity

The data on "injured drivers" covered 342,850 drivers of 1982-2002 model vehicles who were injured in crashes in Victoria, NSW, Western Australia, Queensland or New Zealand during 1987-2002 (as described in Section 2). Because of missing values in one or more of the covariates amongst the 342,850 injured drivers, the final file used for analysis consisted of the 251,269 drivers for which all the covariate data was complete. The "covariate" model for injury severity was determined from the variables described in Section 4.1.1. The following terms were significantly associated with injury severity and were included in the logistic model: Base effect terms Sex Speedzone Age Nveh State Year

First order interactions Sex*State Speedzone*Nveh Age*Sex Nveh*State State*Speedzone Speedzone*Age Age*State Age*Nveh State*Year Speedzone*Year

Second order interaction Speedzone*Nveh*State Speedzone*State*Year

No other term significantly improved the fit of the logistic model. The overall (average) injury severity for injured drivers in the data analysed was 21.01 per 100 drivers. In other words, the probability that a driver injured in a crash was severely injured was 21.01%. Appendix 3 gives the estimates of injury severity derived by logistic regression for 255 individual car models, or sets of combined models. Of the cars analysed, injury severity ranged from 10.46% for the 1994-2001 Peugeot 306 to 40.37% for the 1982-85 Holden Statesman/Caprice WB. An estimate of the variability in the estimates of injury severity was calculated from the width of the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Individual confidence interval widths ranged from 1.92% for the 1982-88 Ford Laser and Mazda 323 / Familia to 38.12% for the 1999-2000 Honda HR-V. The estimated injury severity for each market group is also given in Appendix 3. Luxury vehicles performed best with respect to injury severity, having the lowest average injury severity of 18.22%. The light car market group had the highest average injury severity of 22.39%. 5.1.3

Crashworthiness Ratings

The crashworthiness ratings for each car model and market group were obtained by multiplying the individual injury risk and injury severity estimates. Because each of the two components had been adjusted for the confounding factors, the resultant crashworthiness rating was also adjusted for the influence of these factors. Crashworthiness ratings were obtained for each individual model and market group after adjusting for the confounding factors. VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 37

Appendix 4 gives the crashworthiness ratings and the associated 95% confidence intervals for each of the 255 car models included in the analyses. Appendix 4 also gives the crashworthiness ratings with 90% confidence limits for each of the 255 vehicle models. Each rating is expressed as a percentage, representing the number of drivers killed or admitted to hospital per 100 drivers involved in a tow-away crash. Overall ratings for the market groups are also given. Each crashworthiness rating is an estimate of the true risk of a driver being killed or admitted to hospital in a tow-away crash and, as such, each estimate has a level of uncertainty about it. This uncertainty is indicated by the confidence limits in Appendix 4. There is 95% probability that the confidence interval will cover the true risk of serious injury (death or hospital admission) to the driver of the particular model of vehicle. The ratings in Appendix 4 exclude those models where: •

the width of the confidence interval exceeded 7, or

•

the ratio of the confidence interval width to the rating score exceeded 1.6 (this criterion was also necessary because smaller confidence intervals tended to occur for the lower rating scores, but the confidence intervals were relatively wide in proportionate terms).

Table 5 gives a summary of the estimated ratings for each of the 13 defined vehicle market groups. It shows the estimated injury risk and severity components and the resulting crashworthiness rating with upper and lower 95% confidence limits and the with of the 95% confidence limit. The relative ranking of the crashworthiness rating on each market group is also given in Table 5 although this should be interpreted with care as there is not necessarily a statistically significant difference between the average crashworthiness of vehicle market groups with different rankings. Statistical significance in average crashworthiness between market groups at the 5% level is only achieved when the 95% confidence limits do not overlap. Similar comments apply to interpreting results in Appendix 4.


Table 5:

Estimated Vehicle Crashworthiness by Market Grouping

Market Group

Injury Risk (%)

Injury Severity (%)

Crashworthiness Overall Rating* rank order

Overall Average

17.20

21.01

3.61

COMPACT FOUR WHEEL DRIVE MEDIUM FOUR WHEEL DRIVE LARGE FOUR WHEEL DRIVE COMMERCIAL - VAN COMMERCIAL - UTE LARGE LUXURY PRESTIGE MEDIUM PEOPLE MOVERS LIGHT SMALL SPORTS

20.16 14.46 13.05 19.20 16.40 15.94 14.06 14.95 18.15 19.69 22.53 19.69 18.08

19.83 19.77 21.38 21.38 21.52 20.28 18.22 20.78 20.85 22.03 22.39 21.09 22.13

4.00 2.86 2.79 4.11 3.53 3.23 2.56 3.11 3.78 4.34 5.05 4.15 4.00

=8 3 2 10 6 5 1 4 7 12 13 11 =8

Lower 95% Confidence limit 3.66 2.55 2.61 3.84 3.39 3.16 2.35 2.94 3.67 4.04 4.89 4.05 3.77

Upper 95% Width of Confidence Confidence limit interval 4.36 3.20 2.98 4.39 3.68 3.31 2.79 3.28 3.90 4.65 5.20 4.26 4.25

0.70 0.65 0.37 0.56 0.29 0.15 0.45 0.34 0.23 0.61 0.31 0.21 0.49

* Serious injury rate per 100 drivers involved 5.1.4

Comparisons with the All Model Average Rating

Based on the average injury risk and injury severity values in the data used to compute the ratings estimate, the average crashworthiness of all vehicles appearing in the data was 3.61% (3.61 serious driver injuries per 100 crash involvements). Computing the all model average in this way gives more weight to vehicles with greater representation in the crash data. Another way of computing the all model average rating is to simply take an un-weighted numerical average of the 255 vehicles with a sufficiently accurate crashworthiness rating to be published. This method gives equal weight to each vehicle in the average. For the 255 vehicles rated in this study, the un-weighted numerical average crashworthiness is 3.98 (3.98 serious driver injuries per 100 crash involvements). Ultimately the point against which ratings for individual vehicles are compared is arbitrary, whether it is either of the averages described above or some other point. For the purpose of comparing the crashworthiness ratings to an average value in this study, the un-weighted numerical average (3.98) was used. This was chosen as it gave better distribution of the vehicles into the five rating categories used for presentation of the ratings for consumer information (see Section 5.3). Any other comparison value could be used with equal legitimacy. Confidence limits were used to judge whether the true risk of death or hospitalisation for a driver of a specific model car involved in a tow-away crash is really different from the defined average for all models, i.e. 3.98 per 100 involved drivers. An upper limit below the average is indicative of superior crashworthiness, whereas a lower limit above the average suggests inferior crashworthiness. Other models also have crashworthiness ratings at the low or high end of the scale, but their confidence limits overlap the all model average. Although such models may also have superior or inferior crashworthiness characteristics, the database did not contain sufficient numbers of these models for the data to represent scientific evidence that this is the case. In terms of statistical significance, it should be noted that classifying vehicles as having inferior or superior crashworthiness compared to the defined average means only that vehicle models with ‘superior’ crashworthiness have statistically significantly better crashworthiness than VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 39

vehicles in the defined ‘inferior’ group. It is possible that vehicles within the inferior and superior crashworthiness categories also had statistically significant differences in crashworthiness. This could be assessed by examining overlap in the statistical confidence limits for any pair wise comparison of two vehicles. One of the main points in defining groups of vehicles with inferior and superior crashworthiness is to show that the analysis can differentiate with statistical precision crashworthiness between groups of vehicles within the rated vehicle population. Seventy-three models had ratings representing evidence of superior crashworthiness because their upper confidence limits were less than the average rating. These were distributed across market group classifications as follows: Compact Four Wheel Drives Medium Four Wheel Drives Large Four Wheel Drives Commercial – Vans Commercial – Utes Large cars Luxury cars Prestige cars Medium cars People Movers Small cars Sports cars

3 5 6 1 8 13 9 10 8 2 4 4

The specific models were (in order of estimated risk of serious driver injury in a crash, from lowest to highest): • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Peugeot 306 (1994-2001) Saab 9000 (1986-1997) Nissan Navara (1997-2002) Subaru Forester (1997-2002) Subaru Liberty / Legacy (1999-2002) Honda CR-V (1997-2001) Toyota Avalon (2000-2002) Volvo 700/900 Series (1984-1992) Ford Mondeo (1995-2001) Land Rover Range Rover (1982-1994) Honda Legend (1986-1995) Holden Vectra (1997-2002) Land Rover Discovery (1991-2002) Holden Calibra (1994-1997) Holden Astra TR (1996-1998) Nissan Patrol (1998-2002) Mercedes Benz E-Class W124 (1986-1994) Lexus ES300 / Windom (1992-2001) Mitsubishi Nimbus / Chariot (1992-1998) Ford Falcon Ute AU (2000-2002) Toyota Landcruiser (1998-2002)


• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Nissan Patrol (1988-1997) / Ford Maverick (1988-1997) Saab 900/9-3 (1994-2002) Ford Falcon AU (1998-2002) Jeep Cherokee XJ (1996-2000) Holden Jackaroo (1992-1997) / Isuzu Bighorn (1992-1997) Holden Jackaroo (1982-1991) / Isuzu Bighorn (1982-1991) Holden Rodeo (1996-1998) Mercedes Benz C-Class W202 (1995-2000) Volvo 850/S70/V70/C70 (1992-2002) Peugeot 505 (1982-1993) Honda Integra (1993-2001) Toyota Cressida / Mark II (1989-1993) Toyota Corolla (1998-2001) Mitsubishi Pajero (1992-1999) Ford Fairlane N & LTD D (1988-1994) Volvo 200 Series (1982-1993) Toyota RAV4 (1994-2000) Nissan Maxima / Cefiro (1995-1999) Toyota Tarago / Previa / Estima (1991-1999) Holden Commodore VT/VX (1997-2002) Honda Integra (1990-1992) Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante (1996-2002) Honda Accord (1991-1993) Nissan Bluebird (1993-1997) Nissan Navara (1992-1996) Ford Falcon Ute (1996-1999) BMW 3 Series E36 (1992-1998) Nissan Patrol (1982-1987) Toyota Hilux (1998-2002) Toyota Landcruiser (1990-1997) Ford Falcon EF/EL (1994-1998) Honda Accord (1994-1998) Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante (1991-1996) Holden Commodore VR/VS (1993-1997) / Toyota Lexcen (1993-1997) Toyota Camry (1998-2002) BMW 3 Series E30 (1982-1991) Ford Telstar (1992-1997) / Mazda 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos (1992-1997) Ford Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Apr (1992-1994) Toyota Celica (1981-1985) Ford Falcon Panel Van (1982-1995) Ford Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I (1988-March 1992) Honda Accord (1986-1990) Holden Statesman/Caprice VR/VS (1994-1998) Subaru Liberty / Legacy (1989-1993) Holden Apollo JM/JP (1993-1997) / Toyota Camry / Sceptor (1993-1997) Holden Commodore Ute VR/VS (1994-2000) Nissan Pulsar / Vector / Sentra (1992-1995) VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 41

• • • • •

Ford Telstar (1988-1991) / Mazda 626 / MX6 / Capella (1988-1991) Holden Commodore VN/VP (1989-1993) / Toyota Lexcen (1989-1993) Toyota 4Runner/Hilux (1989-1997) Holden Apollo JK/JL (1988-1992) / Toyota Camry / Vista (1988-1992) Ford Falcon XE/XF (1982-1988)

Fifty-five models had ratings representing evidence of inferior crashworthiness because their lower confidence limits were greater than the average rating. These were distributed across market group classifications as follows: Compact Four Wheel Drives Commercial – Vans Commercial – Utes Large cars Prestige cars Medium cars People Movers Light cars Small cars Sports cars

2 4 4 1 1 4 3 18 10 8

The specific models were (in order of estimated risk of serious driver injury in a crash, from highest to lowest): • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Daihatsu Mira (1990-1996) Holden Scurry (1982-2000) / Suzuki Carry (1982-2000) Suzuki Mighty Boy (1985-1988) Suzuki Hatch / Alto (1982-1984) Subaru Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex (1989-1992) Daihatsu Handivan (1982-1990) Nissan NX/NX-R (1991-1996) Toyota MR2 (1987-1990) Daihatsu Charade (1982-1986) Holden Barina (1986-1988) / Suzuki Swift / Cultus (1986-1988) Nissan Exa (1983-1986) Mitsubishi Starwagon / L300 (1983-1986) Honda City (1983-1986) Daihatsu Rocky / Rugger (1985-1998) Subaru Brumby (1982-1992) Nissan Micra (1995-1997) Holden Shuttle / WFR Van (1982-1987) Toyota Supra (1982-1990) Hyundai Coupe (1996-2000) Daihatsu Charade (1988-1992) Hyundai Excel (1986-1990) Ford Festiva WA (1987-1990) / Mazda 121 (1987-1990) Daihatsu Charade (1993-2000) Honda CRX (1987-1991)


• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5.2

Daewoo Espero (1995-1997) Ford Festiva WD/WH/WF (1994-2001) Mitsubishi Mirage / Colt (1982-1988) Holden Gemini RB (1986-1987) Holden Astra (1984-1986) / Nissan Pulsar / Langley (1984-1986) Honda Civic / Ballade / Shuttle (1984-1987) Holden WB Series (1982-1985) Holden Drover (1982-1999) / Suzuki Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 (1982-1999) Toyota Hiace/Liteace (1982-1986) Holden Barina (1989-1999) / Suzuki Swift / Cultus (1989-1999) Mitsubishi Cordia (1983-1987) Toyota Tarago (1983-1989) Nissan Gazelle / Silvia (1984-1986) Hyundai Accent (2000-2002) Ford Laser (1982-1988) / Mazda 323 / Familia (1982-1988) Ford Capri (1989-1994) Hyundai Excel (1990-1994) Holden Gemini (1982-1984) Holden Camira (1982-1989) Honda Accord (1982-1985) Mitsubishi Starwagon / Delica Starwagon (1987-1993) Hyundai Excel / Accent (1995-2000) Toyota Corolla (1982-1984) Nissan Bluebird (1982-1986) Nissan Pulsar / Vector / Sentra (1996-1999) Holden / Nissan Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra (1988-1990) Holden Barina SB (1995-2000) Toyota Corolla (1986-1988) Toyota 4Runner/Hilux (1982-1985) Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon (1982-1993) Holden Commodore VB-VL (1982-1988) Aggressivity Towards Other Car Drivers

Using the methods described above, logistic regression models of the injury risk and injury severity of the subject driver (i.e. the driver of the “other” vehicle) were built separately as functions of both vehicle model and market group of the vehicle colliding with the vehicle of the focus driver. Variations in the other factors listed in Section 4.2.1 were adjusted in the model by including them as predictors of the injury risk or injury severity of the focus driver, along with the subject vehicle model or market group. The logistic regression models of the injury risk of focus drivers showed the following factors to be statistically significant predictors and these factors were included in the logistic model: (factors age and sex refer to focus driver age and sex) Base effect terms Sex

First order interactions Sex*State

Second order interaction Sex*State*Year


Speedzone Age State Year

Sex*Speedzone Age*Sex Age*Year Age*Speedzone Speedzone*State Age*State Sex*Year State*Year Speedzone*Year

Age*Speedzone*State

In addition, the make and model of the subject vehicle was also a statistically significant predictor of focus driver injury risk when added to the logistic model. This indicated that there is differential performance between vehicle models in terms of their aggressivity towards drivers of other vehicles so far as injury risk is concerned. In the same manner, when vehicle market group was substituted for vehicle model in the logistic regression equation, it was also a significant predictor of focus driver injury risk. The average aggressivity injury risk in the data was 15.83%. The logistic regression models of the injury severity of focus drivers showed the following factors to be statistically significant predictors and these factors were included in the logistic model: (factors age and sex refer to focus driver age and sex) Base effect terms Sex Speedzone Age State Year

First order interactions Sex*State Sex*Speedzone Age*Sex Age*Year Age*Speedzone Speedzone*State Age*State Sex*Year State*Year Speedzone*Year

Second order interaction Sex*State*Year Sex*Speedzone*State Age*Sex*Speedzone Age*Sex*State Age*Sex*Year Speedzone*Year*State Age*State*Year Sex*Speedzone*Year Age*Speedzone*Year Age*Speedzone*State

The model of the subject vehicle was also a statistically significant predictor of injury severity, as was the vehicle market group when substituted for vehicle model in the logistic regression equation. The average aggressivity injury severity in the data was 16.12%. Final estimates of vehicle aggressivity towards the drivers of other vehicles were obtained by multiplying the estimated injury risk and injury severity components, described above, for each vehicle. Confidence limits on each of the estimated aggressivity ratings were calculated using the methods described in Section 4.2.1 above. The average aggressivity rating in the data, used for comparisons against aggressivity of individual vehicle models was 2.77%. Accurate aggressivity ratings were obtained for 202 of the 254 different vehicle models that satisfied the inclusion criteria described above. Of the 254 vehicle models satisfying the inclusion criteria for analysis described above, 52 vehicle models were excluded from presentation because of the criteria described immediately below. The estimated aggressivity


ratings and their injury risk and injury severity components for individual vehicle models are given in Appendix 5 along with 95% confidence limits on the estimated aggressivity ratings. The ratings in Appendix 5 exclude those models where: • •

the width of the confidence interval exceeded 7, or the ratio of the confidence interval width to the rating score exceeded 1.6 (this criterion was also necessary because smaller confidence intervals tended to occur for the lower rating scores, but the confidence intervals were relatively wide in proportionate terms).

These exclusion criteria are the same as that used in calculating crashworthiness ratings to ensure a minimum level of accuracy in the published aggressivity ratings. 5.2.1

Analysis by Market Groups

Table 6 summarises the estimated injury risk, injury severity and aggressivity ratings by the 13 broad market groups along with the estimated confidence limits on the aggressivity ratings. The estimated aggressivity rating is the expected number of vehicle drivers killed or seriously injured per 100 involved in two-car tow-away collisions where their vehicle impacts with one of the designated models or market groups. Table 6 shows large four-wheel-drive vehicles to be the most aggressive towards drivers of other vehicles, with an average of 4.07 drivers being killed or seriously injured for every 100 tow-away crashes with a large four-wheel-drive. Similarly, Table 6 shows light cars to be the least aggressive towards drivers of other vehicles, with an average aggressivity rating of 1.65. Table 6:

Estimated Vehicle Aggressivity Towards Other Drivers by Market Grouping

Market Group

Other Driver Injury Risk (%)

Other Driver Injury Severity (%)

Aggressivity Rating *

Overall Average

15.83

16.12

2.77

COMPACT FOUR WHEEL DRIVE MEDIUM FOUR WHEEL DRIVE LARGE FOUR WHEEL DRIVE COMMERCIAL - VAN COMMERCIAL - UTE LARGE LUXURY PRESTIGE MEDIUM PEOPLE MOVERS LIGHT SMALL SPORTS

14.92 17.06 20.28 19.42 17.89 15.70 14.83 14.92 14.52 17.66 12.00 12.60 14.55

14.06 16.89 20.09 16.74 17.65 16.69 17.68 15.73 15.12 15.45 13.73 14.26 16.46

2.10 3.10 4.07 3.25 3.16 2.62 2.62 2.35 2.20 2.73 1.65 1.80 2.39

Overall rank order

Lower 95% Confidence limit

3 10 13 12 11 =7 =7 5 4 9 1 2 6

1.78 2.68 3.77 2.95 2.97 2.52 2.31 2.16 2.09 2.41 1.54 1.72 2.16

Upper 95% Width of Confidence Confidence limit interval

2.48 3.59 4.40 3.59 3.36 2.72 2.97 2.55 2.31 3.09 1.76 1.88 2.65

0.70 0.91 0.63 0.65 0.39 0.19 0.66 0.38 0.22 0.68 0.22 0.17 0.48

* Serious injury rate per 100 drivers of other vehicles involved in collisions with vehicles from the given market group 5.2.2

Statistically Significant Makes and Models

Appendix 5 shows the estimated aggressivity ratings towards drivers of other vehicles for the 202 individual vehicle models rated. Ratings ranged from a minimum of 1.12 serious injuries per VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 45

100 tow-away crashes for the 1997-2002 Mazda 121 Metro / Demio to a maximum of 6.96 serious injuries per 100 tow-away crashes for the 1982-92 Ford F-series. Of the 202 individual vehicle models for which an aggressivity rating was calculated, 50 models had an aggressivity rating which was significantly less (better) than the overall average of 2.77 serious driver injuries per 100 tow-away crashes. These fifty vehicle models were distributed across market group classifications as follows: Compact Four Wheel Drives Prestige cars Medium cars Light cars Small cars Sports cars

1 3 7 17 21 1

The models were, in order of increasing aggressivity: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Mazda 121 Metro / Demio (1997-2002) Daihatsu Charade (1988-1992) Honda Civic (1982-1983) Daewoo Cielo (1995-1997) Honda Civic (1996-2000) Toyota Corolla (1982-1984) Mazda 121 / Autozam Review (1994-1996) Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CC (1993-1995) Nissan Maxima / Cefiro (1995-1999) Toyota Echo (1999-2002) Holden Barina (1986-1988) / Suzuki Swift / Cultus (1986-1988) Mazda 323 / Familia / Lantis (1990-1993) Honda Integra (1986-1988) Holden Barina (1989-1999 / Suzuki Swift / Cultus (1989-1999) Holden Drover (1982-1999) / Suzuki Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 (1982-1999) Daihatsu Charade (1993-2000) Honda Accord (1982-1985) Ford Festiva WD/WH/WF (1994-2001) Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon (1982-1993) Holden Gemini (1982-1984) Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CA (1989-1990) Holden Astra (1984-1986) / Nissan Pulsar / Langley (1984-1986) Mazda 323 / Familia / Lantis (1995-1998) Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CB (1991-1992) Ford Festiva (1987-1990) / Mazda WA / 121 (1987-1990) Daihatsu Charade (1982-1986) Honda Accord (1991-1993) Ford Laser (1982-1988) / Mazda 323 / Familia (1982-1988) Toyota Celica (2000-2002) Hyundai Excel (1986-1990) Toyota Starlet (1996-1999) Hyundai Excel (1990-1994)


• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Toyota Corolla (1986-1988) Honda Civic / Shuttle (1988-1991) Toyota Corolla (1994-1997) / Holden Nova (1994-1997) Ford Laser (1991-1994) Mitsubishi Mirage / Colt (1982-1988) Honda Civic / Ballade / Shuttle (1984-1987) Ford Telstar (1983-1986) / Mazda 626 / MX6 / Capella (1983-1986) Toyota Corolla (1989-1993) / Holden Nova (1989-1993) Holden Barina SB (1995-2000) Nissan Pulsar / Vector / Sentra (1992-1995) Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CE (1996-2002) Nissan Bluebird (1982-1986) Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda (1982-1984) Hyundai Excel / Accent (1995-2000) Ford Telstar (1992-1997) / Mazda 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos (1992-1997) Toyota Corona (1982-1988) Holden Astra (1988-1990) / Nissan Pulsar / Vector / Sentra (1988-1990) Holden Camira (1982-1989)

Similarly 30 models had an aggressivity rating which was significantly greater (worse) than the overall average of 2.77 serious driver injuries per 100 tow away crashes. These thirty vehicle models were distributed across market group classifications as follows: Compact Four Wheel Drives Medium Four Wheel Drives Large Four Wheel Drives Commercial – Van Commercial – Ute Large cars Luxury cars Prestige cars People Mover Sports cars

1 1 7 5 7 5 1 1 1 1

The models were, in order of decreasing aggressivity: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Ford Ford F-Series (1982-1992) Toyota Avalon (2000-2002) Nissan NX/NX-R (1991-1996) Volkswagen Caravelle / Transporter (1995-2002) Daihatsu Rocky / Rugger (1985-1998) Nissan Patrol (1998-2002) Land Rover Range Rover (1982-1994) Toyota Landcruiser (1990-1997) Toyota Landcruiser (1982-1989) Holden Rodeo (1982-1985) / Isuzu Pickup (1982-1985) Holden Rodeo (1989-1995) / Isuzu Pickup (1989-1995) Nissan Patrol (1982-1987) VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 47

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Mitsubishi Pajero (1982-1990) Toyota Hiace/Liteace (1996-2002) Toyota Hiace/Liteace (1990-1995) Volvo 850/S70/V70/C70 (1992-2002) Nissan Patrol (1988-1997) / Ford Maverick (1988-1997) Ford Fairlane N & LTD D (1995-1998) Toyota Landcruiser (1998-2002) Toyota Hiace/Liteace (1987-1989) Toyota 4Runner/Hilux (1982-1985) Mitsubishi Starwagon / L300 (1983-1986) Holden Commodore Ute VR/VS (1994-2000) Holden Commodore VT/VX (1997-2002) Toyota 4Runner/Hilux (1989-1997) Toyota Hiace/Liteace (1982-1986) Ford Falcon Ute (1982-1995) / Nissan XFN Ute (1982-1995) Ford Falcon EF/EL (1994-1998) Ford Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED (April 1992-1994) Ford Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I (1988-March 1992)

5.2.3

Relationships Between Aggressivity and Crashworthiness

In assessing the British vehicle safety indices, Broughton (1996) found a strong inverse relationship between the indices for crashworthiness and aggressivity. Figure 1 shows aggressivity plotted against crashworthiness for those vehicle models with both ratings. As Figure 1 shows, the inverse relationship between the two measures is not particularly strong. The dotted lines in Figure 1 represent the average aggressivity and crashworthiness of the vehicles assessed. Points in the lower left quadrant defined by the dotted lines represent vehicles with relatively low aggressivity as well as good (low) estimated crashworthiness. This area is populated by a number of small, luxury and prestige vehicle models as well as some medium vehicles and compact 4WDs. In contrast, vehicle models in the upper right quadrant of Figure 1 defined by the dotted lines show relatively poor crashworthiness and high aggressivity. There are a number of commercial vans and utilities in this quadrant along with some small vehicle models and medium and compact 4WDs. The remaining two quadrants are populated with vehicles that only perform well one of either crashworthiness or aggressivity. Light cars tend to have low aggressivity but also poor crashworthiness whilst large and medium 4WDs tend to exhibit converse traits.


Estimated Vehicle Aggressivity Towards Other Drivers vs. Crashworthiness Rating

Figure 1: 8.00% 7.00%

Aggressivity Rating

6.00% 5.00% 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% 0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

8.00%

9.00%

10.00%

Crashworthiness Rating 4WD - Compact

4WD - Medium

4WD - Large

Commercial - Van

Commercial - Ute

Large

Luxury

Prestige

Medium

People Mover

Light

Small

Sports

Absence of a strong relationship between the measures of aggressivity and crashworthiness confirm that the two quantities considered here are measuring two different aspects of a vehicle’s safety performance. Whilst one would expect some relationship between the two measures given their common but opposite relationships with mass (Broughton, 1996; Cameron et al 1998), the lack of a strong relationship suggests vehicle mass is only playing a small part in aggressivity rating relative to vehicle total safety design. The independence of these two measures does not seem to have been achieved to the same degree under other systems (UK Department of Transport 1995, Broughton 1996). 5.3

Presentation of Crashworthiness and Aggressivity Ratings for Consumer Information

Discussion in the previous work of Cameron et al (1998) noted, for simplicity of presentation and interpretation, particularly in the area of consumer safety advice, effort needed to be made to find a method of simultaneously using the information on vehicle crashworthiness and aggressivity. Possible solutions discussed included development of a single measure of total vehicle safety or, alternatively, development of some other cohesive method of summary presentation that reflects overall vehicle safety. In Newstead et al (2000), a method of presentation of the estimated crashworthiness ratings for Australian vehicles was devised that is similar in philosophy to the presentation method devised by Folksam Insurance for presentation of Swedish ratings. The method takes into account both the rating point estimate and confidence limits, but removes the emphasis from the point estimate. VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 49

An identical approach to presenting ratings has been taken here. Rated vehicles have been classified into five categories based on the range in which the confidence limits on the estimated ratings lie. The five categories are defined as follows. • • • • •

At least 15% safer than average: if the upper confidence limit on the estimated rating is less than 0.85 times the average crashworthiness rating for the vehicle fleet. At least safer than average: if the upper confidence limit on the estimated rating is less than the average crashworthiness rating for the vehicle fleet. Average: if the confidence interval on the estimated rating overlaps the average crashworthiness rating for the vehicle fleet. At least less safe than average: if the lower confidence limit on the estimated rating is greater than the average crashworthiness rating for the vehicle fleet. At least 15% less safe than average: if the lower confidence limit on the estimated rating is greater than 1.15 times the average crashworthiness rating for the vehicle fleet.

Presentation of the estimated crashworthiness ratings in this way is shown in Appendix 6. This presentation style has the advantage that it combines information about both the rating point estimate and confidence limit to classify the safety performance of the vehicle. This method of presentation takes the potential emphasis of the consumer off comparison of only the point estimate ratings, an emphasis that can be potentially misleading from the point of view of statistical confidence. Rather, the presentation method categorises vehicles according to the statistical significance of the difference of their estimated safety rating from defined points. Colour coding of the categories would typically be used with green depicting the safest category through blue, yellow and brown to red depicting the least safe category. 90% two-sided confidence limits have been used to categorise the crashworthiness ratings in Appendix 6. These are equivalent to 95% one-sided confidence limits if a directional hypothesis of crashworthiness greater or less than the average is being assumed. Appendix 6 also shows charts of the crashworthiness ratings and 90% confidence interval for each vehicle rated. On each chart is also indicated the average crashworthiness across all vehicle models (the yellow line) and 15% worse and better than the average crashworthiness (the red and green lines respectively). These charts illustrate how the categorisation of crashworthiness into the five categories described above is achieved. If the 90% confidence interval overlaps the yellow line, the vehicle is rated average. If the lower 90% confidence limit lies between the yellow and red lines, the vehicle is rated at least less safe than average. If the lower 90% confidence limit lies above the red line, the vehicle is rated at least 15% less safe than average. If the upper 90% confidence limit lies between the yellow and green lines, the vehicle is rated at least more safe than average. If the upper 90% confidence limit lies below the red line, the vehicle is rated at least 15% more safe than average. A single column at the right of the table in Appendix 6 summarises the aggressivity ratings for each vehicle. In a manner similar to the classification of crashworthiness ratings, the estimated aggressivity ratings have been classified into five categories with each represented by a symbol in the final column of the table. These are: • •

xx: Much more aggressive than average – if the lower confidence limit on the estimated rating is less than 0.85 times the average aggressivity rating for the vehicle fleet. x: More aggressive than average - if the lower confidence limit on the estimated aggressivity rating is greater than the average aggressivity rating for the vehicle fleet.


•

o: Average - if the confidence interval on the estimated rating overlaps the average aggressivity rating for the vehicle fleet. +: Less aggressive than average - if the upper confidence limit on the estimated rating is less than the average aggressivity rating for the vehicle fleet. ++: Much less aggressive than average – if the upper confidence limit on the estimated rating is greater than 1.15 times the average aggressivity rating for the vehicle fleet.

• •

Some vehicle models in Appendix 6 have no symbol in the aggressivity rating column. These vehicles have been involved in an insufficient number of two-car crashes to have an aggressivity rating estimated for them. Assignment of vehicle aggressivity ratings to categories in Appendix 6 is based on the 90% two-sided (95% one-sided) confidence limits on the ratings to be consistent with the assignment of crashworthiness ratings to categories. 5.4

Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture of the Australian Fleet

5.4.1

Injury Risk

Injury risk was estimated from the data on 1,978,306 drivers involved in tow-away crashes in NSW, Western Australia and Queensland during 1987 to 2002 (as described in Section 2). This data set is referred to as the "involved drivers". Because of missing values of some of the factors to be included in the logistic regression, and the exclusion of pre-1964 vehicles and unknown years, analysis was performed on data relating to 1,722,686 involved drivers, 297,894 of who were injured. The "covariate" model for injury risk was determined from the variables described in Section 4.1.1. The following covariates and interactions were statistically significantly associated with injury risk and were included in the logistic regression model. Base effect terms Sex Nveh Speedzone Age State Year (of crash)

First order interactions Sex*Speedzone Speedzone*Nveh Sex*Nveh Speedzone*Age Age*Sex Year*State Age*Nveh Nveh*State Nveh*Year Age*State Age*Year Speedzone*State Sex*Year Speedzone*Year Sex*State

Second order interactions Sex*Speedzone*Nveh Sex*State*Year Age*Speedzone*Nveh Age*Sex*Speedzone Age*Sex*Nveh Age*Nveh*State Nveh*State*Year Speedzone*Nveh*State Speedzone*State*Year Age*State*Year Speedzone*Nveh*Year

Third order interactions

Age*Sex*Speedzone*Nveh

No other variable or interaction term significantly improved the fit of the logistic model.


The overall (average) injury risk for involved drivers in tow-away crashes in NSW, Western Australia and Queensland was 17.29%. In other words, the estimated probability that a driver involved in a tow-away crash in NSW was injured was 17.29%. Appendix 7 gives the estimates of injury risk derived by logistic regression for the individual years of manufacture. The variability in the injury risk estimates relative to the year of manufacture can be seen from the width of the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. 5.4.2

Injury Severity

The data on "injured drivers" covered 373,778 drivers who were injured in crashes in Victoria or NSW during 1987-2002 or Queensland and Western Australia during 1991-2002 (as described in Section 2). Because of missing values of some of the associated crash factors and the exclusion of pre-1964 vehicles and unknown years, logistic regression was performed on data relating to 362,122 injured drivers 83,486 of who were severely injured (killed or admitted to hospital). The "covariate" model for injury severity was determined from the variables described in Section 4.2.1. The analysis identified a number of statistically significant covariate effects. These were: Base effect terms Sex Nveh Speedzone Age State Year (of crash)

First order interactions Sex*Speedzone Speedzone*Nveh Speedzone*State Speedzone*Age Age*Sex Year*State Age*Nveh Nveh*State Speedzone*Year Age*State Age*Year Sex*State Sex*Year

Second order interactions Sex*Speedzone*Year Age*Speedzone*Nveh Age*Sex*Year Age*State*Year Age*Sex*State Speedzone*Nveh*State Speedzone*State*Year

No other variable or interaction term significantly improved the fit of the logistic model. The overall (average) injury severity for injured drivers was 23.05%. In other words, the estimated probability that a driver injured in a crash was severely injured was 23.05%. Appendix 7 gives the estimates of injury severity derived by logistic regression for the individual years of manufacture. The variability in the estimates of injury severity relative to year of manufacture can be seen from the width of the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. 5.4.3

Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture

The crashworthiness estimates for each year of manufacture were obtained by multiplying the individual injury risk and injury severity estimates. Because each of the two components has 52 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

been adjusted for the confounding factors, the resultant crashworthiness estimate is also adjusted for the influence of them. Appendix 7 gives the crashworthiness estimates and the associated 95% confidence intervals for each of the 39 years of manufacture included in the analysis. Each estimate is expressed as a percentage, representing the number of drivers killed or admitted to hospital per 100 drivers involved in a tow-away crash. The true risk of a driver being killed or admitted to hospital in a tow-away crash is only estimated by each figure, and as such each estimate has a level of uncertainty about it. This uncertainty is indicated by the confidence limits in Appendix 7. There is 95% probability that the confidence interval will cover the true risk of serious injury (death or hospital admission) to the driver of a vehicle of the particular year of manufacture. The crashworthiness estimates and their confidence limits are plotted for each year of manufacture in Figure 2. The relatively wide confidence intervals observed on the estimates of crashworthiness for years of manufacture 1964 to 1969 and 2002 are a reflection of the smaller numbers of crashes involving vehicles manufactured in these years appearing in the data. Figure 2 shows general and significant improvement in vehicle crashworthiness with increasing year of manufacture over the years considered. Specifically, little improvement can be seen in the years 1964 to 1969 followed by rapid improvement over the period 1970 to 1978 with a plateau from 1979 to 1984. There is visual evidence of a decreasing trend in the period after 1984 as observed in previous work. The current analysis shows there is even evidence of significant gains throughout the 1990s with vehicles manufactured over the period 1994 to 2001 being statistically significantly safer on average than those manufactured in 1990. To summarise the magnitude of the improvement in crashworthiness seen in vehicles during the 1970s, the average crashworthiness estimate for the 1978-82 year vehicles was compared with the average for those manufactured during 1964-69. This showed a reduction of approximately 32% in the risk of serious injury for drivers involved in tow-away crashes between these two time periods. Further statistically significant improvements in crashworthiness have also been observed over the period 1986 to 2002. Comparing average crashworthiness of vehicles manufactured in the period 1978-82 with those manufactured from 1986-1990, 1991-1995 and 1996-2000 showed improvements of 15%, 25% and 30% respectively in each time period. 2002 year of manufacture has been excluded from these comparisons because of the relatively wide confidence limits on the crashworthiness estimate. The injury risk component of the crashworthiness estimate, together with its 95% confidence limits, is plotted in Figure 3. In a similar way, the injury severity component is plotted in Figure 4. Examination of these figures together shows the improvements in crashworthiness with year of manufacture observed in Figure 2 are due largely to a decrease in the probability of any injury given crash involvement (injury risk) with year of manufacture shown in Figure 3. There was a strong downward trend in injury risk with vehicle year of manufacture whilst Figure 4 shows a weaker, but still of the same general trend, effect of vehicle year of manufacture on injury severity.



Year of Manufacture

0.0% ADR 69

CRASHWORTHINESS RATINGS NCAP

ADR 29

ADR 4C

ADRs 4B, 5B, 22A

ADR 4A

ADRs 10B, 21

ADRs 11, 14, 22

ADRs 2, 3, 8, 10A

ADRs 4, 5A

1999

2003

5.0% 2002

10.0%

2003

15.0%

2002

Average = 17.3%

ADR 73

20.0% 2001

25.0%

2001

30.0% ADR 72

Injury risk by year of manufacture (with 95% confidence limits) 2000

Year of Manufacture 1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

0.0%

2000

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

1989

1988

1987

1986

1985

1984

1983

1982

1981

1980

1979

1978

1977

1976

1975

1974

1973

1972

1971

1970

1969

1968

1967

1966

1965

2.0%

1992

1991

1990

1989

1988

1987

1986

1985

1984

1983

1982

1981

1980

1979

1978

1977

1976

1975

1974

1973

1972

1971

1970

1963 1964

1.0%

1969

1968

1967

Figure 3:

1966

1965

1964

1963

Injury Risk Crashworthiness Rating

Figure 2:

Crashworthiness by year of manufacture (with 95% confidence limits)

8.0%

7.0%

6.0%

5.0%

4.0%

Average = 4.0%

3.0%

Injury severity by year of manufacture (with 95% confidence limits)

Figure 4: 35.0%

30.0%

Injury Severity

25.0%

Average = 23.0%

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

2003

2001

2002

1999

2000

1997

1998

1995

1996

1993

1994

1991

1992

1989

1990

1987

1988

1985

1986

1983

1984

1981

1982

1979

1980

1977

1978

1975

1976

1973

1974

1971

1972

1969

1970

1967

1968

1965

1966

1963

1964

0.0% Year of Manufacture

5.4.4

Discussion on the Analysis of Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture

The findings of this research are closely consistent with those of the original study by Cameron et al (1994a) for the years of manufacture common to both. This is as expected given that the data used in the analysis here is an extension of that used in Cameron et al’s study with the addition of crashes occurring in Victoria and NSW during 1993 to 2002 and Western Australia and Queensland during 1991-2002. As shown by Cameron et al, after a period of little change during the late 1960s, there was rapid improvement over the years from about 1970 to 1979. Drivers of vehicles manufactured during these years could be expected to have benefited from the implementation of a number of Australian Design Rules (ADRs) for motor vehicle safety which previous research has shown to be effective in providing occupant protection (Cameron 1987), namely: • • • • • • • •

ADR 4 (seat belts fitted in front seats) from January 1969 ADR 2 ("anti-burst" door latches and hinges) from January 1971 ADR 10A ("energy-absorbing" steering columns) also from January 1971 ADR 22 (head restraints) from January 1972 ADR 10B (steering columns with limited rearward displacement) from January 1973 ADR 4B (inertia reel seat belts fitted in front seats) from January 1975 ADR 22A (minimum-height adjustable head restraints) from January 1975 ADR 29 (side door strength) from January 1977.

In addition, the following ADRs introduced over the same period could also be expected to have provided increased injury protection for drivers: • • • • •

ADR 5A (seat belt anchorage points for front seats) from January 1969 ADR 3 (strengthened seat anchorages) from January 1971 ADR 8 (safety glass in windscreens and side windows) from July 1971 ADR 11 ("padded" sun visors) from January 1972 ADR 14 ("breakaway" rear vision mirrors) from January 1972 VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 55

• • • •

ADR 21 ("padded" instrument panels) from January 1973 ADR 4A (improved seat belt buckles), effective from April 1974 ADR 5B (improved location of seat belt anchorages) from January 1975 ADR 4C (dual-sensing locking retractor inertia reel seat belts) from January 1976.

The years of implementation of these ADRs are shown on Figure 2 for comparison with the crashworthiness estimates for the vehicles manufactured during the 1970s. This study extends previous work to provide estimates of the relative crashworthiness of vehicles manufactured in 2001 and 2002 as well as more accurate estimates for prior years, particularly the late 1990s. Figure 2 shows a clear trend to improving vehicle crashworthiness by year of manufacture throughout the 1990s. It is most likely that these improvements have stemmed from vehicle manufacturer reaction to two areas of activity in vehicle safety that emerged during the 1990s, namely; •

The introduction of programs to give advice to consumers on relative vehicle safety performance. Vehicle crashworthiness ratings ranking vehicles’ relative driver protection based on real crash data were first published in 1992 and have been updated regularly since then providing a measure of the relative safety of a large number of the most popular vehicles in the Australian fleet. The Australian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP), which rates relative driver and front left passenger protection based on controlled laboratory impact testing of vehicles, first published test results in April 1993 for 9 popular vehicle models. Regular releases covering many of the most popular new vehicle models followed. In the late 1990s, ANCAP was harmonised with EuroNCAP to provide a test protocol considering frontal offset and side impact tests as well as a pedestrian impact. The move to harmonisation with EuroNCAP has widened the range of models tested and increased the public profile of the test program, further emphasising safety as an issue for consumer vehicle choice.

•

Drafting and implementation of three new Australian Design Rules (ADRs) specifying standards for occupant protection in passenger cars as part of the Motor Vehicle Standards Act. They are ADRs 69, 72 and 73. A brief description of each follows. o ADR 69 sets standards for vehicle occupant protection in full frontal collisions (involving the full width of the front of the vehicle). It was approved as a national standard on 16th December 1992, coming into effect for all newly released passenger car models (class MA) on 1st July 1995 and for all new passenger cars (class MA) sold from 1st January 1996. All newly released and all new forward control passenger vehicles (class MB) and off road passenger vehicles (class MC) were required to comply with the standard from 1st January 1998 and 1st January 2000 respectively. A similar staged compliance was also introduced for certain light goods vehicles (class NA1) on July 1st 1998 and 1st July 2004 for all newly released vehicles and all new vehicles respectively. The classes required to be compliant cover the majority of the passenger carrying vehicle fleet. o ADR 72 sets standards for vehicle occupant protection in side impact collisions through conduct of a dynamic test. It was approved as a national standard on 7th January 1997. It came into effect for all newly released passenger car models (class MA) on 1st January 1999 and for all new passenger cars (class MA) sold from 1st January 2004. All newly released and all new forward control passenger vehicles


(class MB) and off road passenger vehicles (class MC) were required to comply with the standard from 1st January 2000 and 1st January 2004 respectively. A similar staged compliance was also introduced for light goods vehicles (class NA) on July 1st 2000 and 1st July 2005 for all newly released vehicles and all new vehicles respectively. Again, the classes required to be compliant cover the majority of the passenger carrying vehicle fleet. o ADR 73 sets standards for vehicle occupant protection in an offset frontal collision (involving 40% of the width of the front of the vehicle). It was approved as a national standard on 20th July 1998. It came into effect for all newly released passenger car models (class MA) with a gross vehicle mass of less than 2.5 tonnes on 1st January 2000 and for all new passenger cars (class MA) a gross vehicle mass of less than 2.5 tonnes sold from 1st January 2004. No other class of vehicle is covered by this standard, including forward control passenger vehicles (class MB) and off road passenger vehicles (class MC).

It might be expected that consumer vehicle safety advice such as crashworthiness ratings and ANCAP, which rate a vehicle’s relative occupant protection, may encourage vehicle manufacturers to raise the priority of occupant protection in vehicle design so as to have their product perform well in these safety ratings. The implementation of the three new ADRs occurred from the mid 1990s but it is also possible that manufacturers worked towards meeting these standards in their new vehicles well before compliance was required, hence showing benefits over the period from the early 1990s onwards. Many imported vehicles already meet overseas design rules before their introduction in Australia as ADRs. The last two points of Figure 2 seem to suggest the downward trend in crashworthiness observed through the 1990s has reached a plateau or in fact reversed. This pattern has also been observed for the points in the latest years of manufacture in previous updates of the analysis of crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture. Comparison of successive updates shows that the last one or two years of manufacture in one update always tend to move down in a subsequent update. One possible reason for this phenomenon is that a high proportion of vehicles crashed within one or two years of purchased are likely to be owned by fleets. It is possible that fleet car drivers, who are often not financially responsible for the purchase or operation of vehicles, may drive less carefully and have higher severity crashes than observed in crashes in general. The high injury severity estimated for year 2002 vehicles (Figure 4) supports this claim. It should be noted that, based on the confidence limits on these points, there is no unequivocal statistical support for this suggestion. Furthermore, it is not possible to adjust for age of vehicle at time of crash in the analysis as it is linearly related to year of crash and year of vehicle manufacture, both factors already included in the analysis. Research is planned to establish other means of analysis to test the hypothesis that fleet vehicles, or vehicles newer at time of crash, have higher severity crashes. In interpreting the estimated trends in crashworthiness by year of manufacture, it should be noted that each estimate represents the average crashworthiness of vehicles of that year of manufacture appearing in the available crash data. As such, the estimated trends not only represent the effects of changes to vehicle safety standards through improved design and specification, to a certain degree they also represent changes in the mix of vehicles in the fleets from which the crash data are drawn. Trends may reflect changes in the proportion of each market segment represented in the fleet over time. Trends in crashworthiness within each specific market group are further investigated below. As found in Newstead and Cameron VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 57

(2001), trends may also reflect buyer choice for specific makes and models over time, with the crashworthiness of the more popular vehicle models altering the average. Specifically, Newstead and Cameron (2001) found that buyer preference based on price for less safe small cars during the 1990s was limiting improvement in the average crashworthiness of the fleet over that time. Because interpretation of the trends in crashworthiness over time are as described, what Figure 2 represents is a monitor of the real crashworthiness performance of the Australian vehicle fleet by year of manufacture. Given the data from which the trends are estimated cover four of Australia’s largest states, it is likely the estimates accurately represent national trends in Australia, despite the data not being available nationally. Trends are a function of improvements in vehicle design and specification, changes in the representation of market group in the fleet as well as buyer preference for specific makes and models. Future trends can be influenced by bringing about changes in any of these factors. Further updates of the study of crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture for the Australian vehicle fleet are planned for the future. Adding additional years’ crash data will improve the statistical accuracy of estimated crashworthiness for the years 2000 onwards as well as adding estimates for further years. In this study, the last one or two years’ estimates have relatively wide confidence limits reflecting the smaller quantities of crash data for vehicles manufactured in these years, particularly 2002. A parallel study is also being carried out to estimate crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture and year of first registration for the New Zealand vehicle fleet. 5.5

Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture and Market Group for the Australian Vehicle Fleet

Using the methods of Newstead and Cameron (2001), trends in vehicle crashworthiness by year of manufacture have been estimated separately for each vehicle market group. Unlike Newstead and Cameron (2001) who only estimated trends within four market groups of vehicle (small, medium, large and four wheel drive) analysis here has considered each of the 13 market groups into which vehicles are classified in the crashworthiness and aggressivity ratings presented above. Because vehicle model information was required to assign a market grouping, analysis of trends by year of manufacture within market group could only be carried out for vehicles manufactured from 1982 to 2002. In contrast to estimation of crashworthiness ratings by vehicle model, there was no minimum data requirement for a particular model to be included in the analysis. Hence all vehicle models for which a market group could be assigned were included. However, despite aggregation over vehicle models, it was not possible to estimate crashworthiness estimates for particular years of manufacture in certain market groups due to insufficient data quantities. In the analysis presented by Newstead and Cameron (2001), relative trends in crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture across market groups were presented after removing the overall trend in the combined data. A further difference in the analysis presented here compared to that of Newstead and Cameron (2001) is that the overall trend in the data has not been removed. This makes the analysis by market group presented here more directly comparable with the overall analysis by year of manufacture presented in Section 5.4 above.


5.5.1

Injury Risk

Injury risk was estimated from the data on 1,051,136 drivers of 1982 to 2002 vehicles with identified model and market group details involved in tow-away crashes in NSW, Western Australia and Queensland during 1987 to 2002. The "covariate" model for injury risk was determined from the variables described above. The following covariates and interactions were statistically significantly associated with injury risk and were included in the logistic regression model. Base effect First order Second order terms interactions interactions Sex Sex*Speedzone Sex*Speedzone*Nveh Nveh Speedzone*Nveh Age*Speedzone*Nveh Speedzone Sex*Nveh Age*Nveh*State Age Speedzone*Age Nveh*State*Year State Age*Sex Speedzone*Nveh*State Year (of crash) Year*State Speedzone*State*Year Age*Nveh Nveh*State Nveh*Year Age*State Age*Year Speedzone*State Sex*Year Speedzone*Year No other variable or interaction term significantly improved the fit of the logistic covariate model. A term representing the interaction of vehicle year of manufacture and market group was added to the covariate model and the model re-estimated. Figure 5 shows the estimates of injury risk by year of vehicle manufacture for each of the 13 market groups considered. Estimates have been smoothed using a linear smoothing function over a window of three years (the central year and a year either side). Smoothing of the estimates was carried out to better identify the trends in the data. Smoothing in this way also compensates for known error in the recording of the year of vehicle manufacture, an error typically up to one year from the true date of manufacture.


Figure 5:

Estimated injury risk by year of vehicle manufacture and market group

35.00%

30.00%

Injury Risk

25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00% 1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

Year of Manufacture Four Wheel Drive Compact

Four Wheel Drive Large

Four Wheel Drive Medium

Commercial-Ute

Commercial-Van

Large

Luxury

Medium

Prestige

People Mover

Small

Light

Sports

5.5.2

Injury Severity

The data for computation of injury severity covered 206,330 drivers of 1982-2002 model vehicles who were injured in crashes in Victoria or NSW during 1987-2002 or Queensland or Western Australia during 1991-2002. The "covariate" model for injury severity was determined from the variables described above and identified a number of statistically significant covariate effects. These were: Base effect terms Sex Nveh Speedzone Age State Year (of crash)

First order interactions Sex*Speedzone Sex*State Age*Sex Speedzone*Age Speedzone*State Year*State Age*Nveh Age*State Age*Year Speedzone*Year Speedzone*Nveh Nveh*State

Second order interactions Speedzone*Nveh*State Speedzone*State*Year Age*Speedzone*State Age*State*Year Age*Sex*State

No other variable or interaction term significantly improved the fit of the logistic covariate model. A term representing the interaction of vehicle year of manufacture and market group was added to the covariate model and the model re-estimated. Figure 6 shows the estimates of injury severity by year of vehicle manufacture for each of the 13 market groups considered. Estimates have again been smoothed to better identify the trends in the data. 60 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

Figure 6:

Estimated injury severity by year of vehicle manufacture and market group

40.00%

35.00%

Injury Severity

30.00%

25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00% 1981

5.5.3

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991 1993 Year of Manufacture

1995

1997

1999

2001

Four Wheel Drive Compact



Commercial-Ute

Commercial-Van

Large

Luxury

Medium

Prestige

People Mover

Small

Light

Sports

2003

Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture and Market Group

The crashworthiness estimates for each year of manufacture were obtained by multiplying the individual injury risk and injury severity estimates. Because each of the two components has been adjusted for the confounding factors, the resultant crashworthiness estimate is also adjusted for the influence of them. Appendix 8 gives the crashworthiness estimates and the associated 95% confidence intervals (in brackets) for each of the years of manufacture from 1982 to 2002 by each of the 13 vehicle market groups considered. Each estimate is expressed as a percentage, representing the number of drivers killed or admitted to hospital per 100 drivers involved in a tow-away crash. The true risk of a driver being killed or admitted to hospital in a tow-away crash is only estimated by each figure, and as such each estimate has a level of uncertainty about it. This uncertainty is indicated by the 95% confidence limits. There is 95% probability that the confidence interval will cover the true risk of driver serious injury (death or hospital admission) in a vehicle of the particular year of manufacture and market group. The crashworthiness estimates are plotted for each year of manufacture and vehicle market group in Figure 7. Again, the values in Figure 7 have been smoothed for reasons given above. Appendix 8 gives the unsmoothed estimates along with 95% confidence limits on each estimate.


Estimated crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture and market group

Figure 7: 8.00%

7.00%

Crashworthiness Rating

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

0.00% 1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

Year of Manufacture Four Wheel Drive Compact



Commercial-Ute

Commercial-Van

Large

Luxury

Medium

Prestige

People Mover

Small

Light

Sports

Comparison of estimates in Figure 7 with those in Figures 5 and 6 reveal differential trends in crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture between market groups are largely driven by differential trends in injury risk (Figure 5). This reflects the results shown in the previous section where trends in crashworthiness for the fleet as a whole were also largely driven by trends in injury risk. Figure 6 shows that gains in reducing injury severity have been modest over the study period whilst there is little differential in relative injury severity between any of the market groups over the whole time period. In contrast, significant gains in injury risk were estimated over the study period with significantly different average injury risk between market groups. Although there has been general improvement in crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture in each of the 13 market groups studied, Figure 7 shows there were differences in the rate and timing of improvement between each of the 13 market groups. For example, the light car segment has shown steady improvement in crashworthiness over the study period, with average crashworthiness for this sector being around 30% lower in 2002 compared to 1982. In contrast, the small car segment showed a steady improvement in crashworthiness of around 30% until the early 1990s but has shown little improvement since. Figure 7 clearly shows differential performance in crashworthiness between vehicle market groups, reflecting the same differences seen in average crashworthiness by market groups found in the make and model specific ratings presented above (see Appendix 4). It is, however, difficult from Figure 7 to gauge differential improvements in crashworthiness over time due to the complexity of the figure with 13 market groups as well as the relatively high variance in some of the year to year estimates, despite smoothing. To try and better measure differential time based safety improvements by market group, Figure 8 presents average crashworthiness by 62 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

5-year time blocks of manufacture. In addition, estimates have been scaled to be relative to the first time block (1982-1986) for each market groups. Whilst Figure 8 no longer reflects average differences in crashworthiness between market groups, it more clearly demonstrates differential performance between market groups in improving crashworthiness over time. Figure 8:

Average crashworthiness by year of manufacture and market group by year range relative to the 1982-1986 average

Change Relative to 1982-1986 Average

1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 1982-1986

1987-1991

1992-1996

1997-2002

Year Range Four Wheel Drive Compact



Commercial-Ute

Commercial-Van

Large

Luxury

Medium

Prestige

People Mover

Small

Light

Sports

Figure 8 shows that certain vehicle market groups have experienced greater relative improvements in crashworthiness over the study period than others. The people mover, light and medium 4WD and commercial van market groups have shown the greatest imrovements in crashworthiness over the study period of between 50 and 60 percent. Gains were consistent across time in all these segments apart from the medim 4WD segment that did not appear to improve in crashworthiness between the most recent two time blocks. At the other end of the scale, the large 4WD, small, light and commercial ute segments have shown the most modest gains over the study period of only between 20 and 30 percent. Like the medium 4WD segment, the small car segment did not appear to improve in crashworthiness between the most recent two time blocks. The remaining market segments showed improvement in crashworthness of between 30 and 40 percent. As for crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture for the fleet as a whole, trends by market group are driven by improvements in vehicle design and specification as well as consumer preference for specific vehicle models within a market segment. Trends within a market group can also be influenced by changes in the overall mix of vehicles in the fleet, specifically with respect to average mass and geometric properties. Newstead and Cameron (2001) discussed reasons why similar improvements in vehicle crashworthiness have not been seen across all market segments during the 1990s. One of the primary reasons cited for trends to poorer crashworthiness in the small car segment (a combination of the small and light car segments in this report) was a trend to consumers choosing to purchase the cheapest but least safe small vehicles on the market, rather than the safest vehicles, over that period. In contrast, purchases of VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 63

large vehicles remained with the 4 locally manufactured models of large car that have generally improved in crashworthiness from the mid to late 1990s. A further possible reason for trends to poorer crashworthiness in small cars discussed by Newstead and Cameron (2001) was the polarisation of the Australian vehicle fleet in terms of size. In the second half of the 1990s, buyers moved away from the medium vehicle class to buy predominantly either large or small cars. It was thought possible this polarisation has had detrimental effects on the total safety of the Australian fleet by reducing vehicle compatibility in collisions. This is a particular problem for drivers of small vehicles and could also potentially explain the trend to poorer crashworthiness in the light car class here. Reasons for relative lack of improvement in crashworthiness of the large 4WD category are not clear. It is possible it extends from the later implementation of relevant safety based ADRs implemented in the late 1990s and early 2000s described earlier, including not being required to comply with the offset frontal impact standard (ADR 73). This argument is not borne out, however, in trends in compact and medium 4WDs. They are covered by the same standards requirements but have shown some of the biggest gains in crashworthiness performance, albeit coming off a much poorer base in the early 1980s compared to large 4WDs as shown in Figure 7. Clearly further research needs to be carried out to better explain the trends observed in both Figures 7 and 8. As in previous updates of the analysis presented here, the current results have implications for those advocating replacement of older vehicles in the fleet on safety grounds. The results in Figure 7 suggest that if older large vehicles were replaced with predominantly small or light new vehicles with comparatively poor safety performance, this could result in a net reduction in total safety of the Australian fleet as a whole. For such a replacement strategy to be effective, it would be necessary to ensure older vehicles were replaced with new vehicles with the best possible safety performance and perhaps a preference away from certain classes of vehicle. Further research is currently being undertaken to explore this concept in greater depth. The results here also show that those organisations producing vehicle safety information for consumer use should be particularly vigilant in targeting buyers of light and small vehicles. Legislation also has an important role to play. Further tightening of vehicle safety standards through legislation seems warranted to ensure all vehicles on the Australian market, including those at the cheapest end of the market, improve their safety performance in the future. It may also be beneficial to target future campaigns and legislation at those vehicle classes that have showed the most modest gains in crashworthiness in recent times.


6.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional crash data has enabled the crashworthiness ratings to be obtained for a larger range of car models than in previous studies, now covering 255 different vehicle models manufactured from 1982-2002. The new data set has been able to produce more up-to-date and reliable estimates of the crashworthiness of individual car models than those published previously. For the first time, police reported crash data from New Zealand has been used along with data Australian in a regular update of the ratings. The rating scores estimate the risk of a driver being killed or admitted to hospital when involved in a tow-away crash, to a degree of accuracy represented by the confidence limits of the rating in each case. The estimates and their associated confidence limits are sufficiently sensitive that they are able to identify 128 models of passenger cars, four-wheel drive vehicles, people movers and light commercial vehicles that have superior or inferior crashworthiness characteristics compared with the average vehicle. Presentation of the ratings has been modified to reflect changes in the Australian and New Zealand passenger fleets, with vehicles being classified into one of 13 market groups, many more than the 8 market groups used in previous ratings. Additional crash data, including that from New Zealand, has also allowed updated estimates of vehicle aggressivity ratings towards drivers of other passenger vehicles for individual makes and models of Australian passenger vehicles to be obtained. Using the methods developed by Cameron et al (1998), the ratings of aggressivity measure the risk of serious injury a vehicle poses to drivers of other cars with which it impacts in crashes of tow-away or greater severity. Aggressivity ratings were calculated for 202 models of Australian and New Zealand passenger vehicles (passenger cars, four-wheel drive vehicles, passenger vans and light commercial vehicles) manufactured between the years 1982-2002. The degree of accuracy of the aggressivity ratings is represented by the confidence limits of the rating in each case. The estimates and their associated confidence limits are sufficiently sensitive that they are able to identify 80 models of passenger cars, four-wheel drive vehicles, passenger vans and light commercial vehicles that have superior or inferior aggressivity characteristics compared with the average vehicle. Estimated vehicle aggressivity towards drivers of other vehicles was found to have a proportional relationship with vehicle mass. It was also found to have little or no relationship with ratings of vehicle crashworthiness, demonstrating the independence of the two complementary measures. The crashworthiness of passenger vehicles in the Australian vehicle fleet (cars, station wagons, four wheel drives, vans and taxis), measured by the risk of the driver being killed or admitted to hospital as the result of involvement in a tow-away crash, has been estimated for the years of manufacture from 1964 to 2002. This study further updates the original one by Cameron et al (1994a) for years of manufacture 1964 to 1992. It shows similar patterns of improvements in crashworthiness with the greatest gains over the years 1970 to 1979 during which time a number of new Australian Design Rules aimed at occupant protection took effect. Further gains in crashworthiness have also been observed over the years 1986 to 2001, with notable steady gains during the 1990s. These results further suggest that the rating of vehicle crashworthiness through analysis of real crash data, as carried out here, and through crash tests carried out by consumer groups such as the Australian New Car Assessment Program has encouraged manufacturers to improve vehicle safety. Trends in crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture from 1982 to 2002 for each of the 13 vehicle market groups were also estimated showing differential improvement in crashworthiness by market group by year of manufacture. VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 65

7.

ASSUMPTIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS

The results and conclusions presented in this report are based on a number of assumptions and warrant a number of qualifications that the reader should note. These are listed in the following sections. 7.1

Assumptions

It has been assumed that: •

TAC claims records and, Victorian, NSW, Western Australian and Queensland Police crash reports accurately recorded driver injury, hospitalisation and death.

•

There was no bias in the merging of TAC claims and Victorian Police crash reports related to the model of car and factors affecting the severity of the crash.

•

Crashed vehicle registration numbers were recorded accurately on Police crash reports and that they correctly identified the crashed vehicles in the Victorian, NSW and Queensland vehicle registers.

•

The adjustments for driver sex, age, speed zone, the number of vehicles involved and the state and year in which the crash occurred crash removed the influences of the other main factors available in the data that affected crash severity and injury susceptibility.

•

The form of the logistic models used to relate injury risk and injury severity with the available factors influencing these outcomes (including the car models) was correct.

•

Information contained in the Police crash records allowed accurate matching of both vehicles involved in crashes between two passenger cars for the purpose of calculating aggressivity ratings.

7.2

Qualifications

The results and conclusions warrant at least the following qualifications: •

Only driver crash involvements and injuries have been considered. occupying the same model cars may have had different injury outcomes.

•

Some models with the same name through the 1982-2002 years of manufacture may have varied substantially in their construction and mass. Although there should be few such models in these updated results, the rating score calculated for these models may give a misleading impression and should be interpreted with caution.

•

Other factors not collected in the data (e.g. crash speed) may differ between the models and may affect the results. However, earlier analysis has suggested that the different rating scores are predominantly due to vehicle factors alone (Cameron et al 1992).


Passengers

REFERENCES Broughton, J. (1994) The theoretical basis for comparing the accident record of car models, Project Report 70, Safety and Environment Resource Centre, Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, Berkshire, U.K. Broughton, J. (1996) ‘The theoretical basis for comparing the accident record of car models’, Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 89-99. Cameron, M. H. (1987) ‘The effectiveness of Australian Design Rules aimed at occupant protection’, Proceedings, seminar on Structural Crashworthiness and Property Damage Accidents, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. Cameron, M.H., Mach, T., Neiger, D., Graham, A., Ramsay, R., Pappas, M. & Haley, J. (1992a) ‘Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings in Australia’, Proceedings, International Conference on the Biomechanics of Impacts, Verona, Italy, pp. 105-119. Cameron, M.H., Mach, T. & Neiger, D. (1992b) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings: Victoria 1983-90 and NSW 1989-90 Crashes - Summary Report, Report No. 28, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Cameron, M.H., Finch, C.F. & Le, T. (1994a) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings: Victoria and NSW Crashes During 1987-92 - Summary Report, Report No. 55, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Cameron, M.H., Finch, C.F. & Le, T. (1994b) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings: Victoria and NSW Crashes During 1987-92 - Technical Report, Report No. 58, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Cameron, M.H., Newstead, S.V., Le, T. & Finch, C. (1994c) Relationship between vehicle crashworthiness and year of manufacture, Report No. 94/6 Royal Automobile Club of Victoria Ltd, Melbourne, Australia. Cameron, M.H., Finch, C., Newstead, S., Le, T., Graham, A., Griffiths, M., Pappas, M. & Haley, J. (1995) ‘Measuring Crashworthiness: Make/Model Ratings and the Influence of Australian Design Rules for Motor Vehicle Safety’, Proceedings, International Conference on the Biomechanics of Impacts, Brunnen, Switzerland, pp. 297-310. Cameron, M.H., Newstead, S.V. & Skalova, M. (1996) ‘The development of vehicle crashworthiness ratings in Australia’, Paper 96-S9-O-14, Proceedings 15th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Melbourne, Australia. Cameron, M.H., Newstead, S.V. & Le, C.M. (1998) ‘Rating the aggressivity of Australian passenger vehicles towards other vehicle occupants and unprotected road users’, Proceedings, International IRCOBI Conference on the Biomechanics of Impact, Gothenborg, Sweden. Department Of Transport (1995) Cars: Make and Model: The Risk of Driver Injury and Car Accident Rates in Great Britain: 1993, Transport Statistics Report. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.


Green, P. (1990) Victorian Road Accident Database: Frequency Tables for Accident Data Fields: 1988, Accident Studies Section, VicRoads, Melbourne, Australia. Gustafsson, H., Hagg, A., Krafft, M., Kullgren, A., Malmstedt, B., Nygren, A. & Tingvall, C. (1989) Folksam Car Model Safety Rating 1989-90, Folksam, Stockholm, Sweden. Hollowell, W.T. & Gabler, H.C. (1996) ‘NHTSA’s Vehicle Aggressivity and Compatibility Research Program’, Proceedings, Fifteenth International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Melbourne, Australia. Hosmer, D.W. & Lemeshow, S. (1989) Applied Logistic Regression, Wiley, New York. LTSA (1998) Motor Accidents in New Zealand 1998, Land Transport Safety Authority, Wellington, New Zealand. Newstead, S., Cameron, M. & Skalova, M. (1996) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings: Victoria and NSW Crashes During 1987-94, Report No. 92, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Newstead, S., Cameron, M. & Le, C.M. (1997) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings and Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture: Victoria and NSW crashes during 1987-95, Report No. 107, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Newstead, S., Cameron, M. & Le, C.M. (1998) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings and Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture: Victoria and NSW crashes during 1987-96, Report No. 128, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Newstead, S., Cameron, M.H. & Le, C.M. (1999) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings and Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture: Victoria and NSW Crashes During 1987-97, Queensland Crashes During 1991-96, Report No. 150, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Newstead, S., Cameron, M.H. & Le, C.M. (2000) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings and Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture: Victoria and NSW Crashes During 1987-98 Queensland Crashes During 1991-98, Report No. 171, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Newstead, S. (2000). Review of the New Zealand Land Transport Safety Authority feasibility study into producing crashworthiness ratings for New Zealand vehicles. Report to the New Zealand Land Transport Safety Authority, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Newstead, S. & Cameron, M. (2001), ‘Trends in Australian vehicle crashworthiness by year of vehicle manufacture within vehicle market groups’, Proceedings of the 2001 IRCOBI Conference, Isle of Man, UK. Newstead, S., Cameron, M., Watson, L. and Delaney, A. (2003a) Vehicle Crashworthiness Ratings and Crashworthiness by Year of Manufacture: Victoria and NSW Crashes During 19872000 Queensland and Western Australian Crashes During 1991-2000, Report No. 196, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. 68 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE

Newstead, S., Delaney, A. and Watson, L. (2003b) Vehicle safety ratings estimated from combined Australian and New Zealand real crash data: Pilot Study, Report No. 203, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Pappas, M. (1993) NSW Vehicle Occupant Protection Ratings Documentation, Report to NRMA Ltd. and Road Safety Bureau, Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, NSW. Road Safety Council of Western Australia (2001) Reported road crashes in Western Australia, 2000, Road Safety Council of Western Australia, Office of Road Safety, Perth, Australia. Robinson, T. (2000a) Vehicle crashworthiness feasibility study. Clustering guide and methodology Land Transport Safety Authority, Wellington, New Zealand. Robinson, T. (2000b) Assessment of the fit between the New Zealand fleet and MUARC classes Land Transport Safety Authority, Wellington, New Zealand. SAS Inc. (1989) SAS STAT Users Guide, Version 6, Fourth Edition, Volume 2. Carey, NC: SAS Institute. Social Development Committee (1990) Inquiry into Vehicle Occupant Protection, Parliament of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia. TRC (2000) New Zealand Motor Vehicle Registration Statistics 2000 Transport Registry Centre, Land Transport Safety Authority, Palmerston North, New Zealand. Voyce, T. (2000) Crashworthiness study - data entry Land Transport Safety Authority, Wellington, New Zealand.


APPENDIX 1

MAKES AND MODELS OF CARS INVOLVED IN VICTORIAN AND NSW CRASHES DURING 1987-2002 AND WESTERN AUSTRALIA, QUEENSLAND AND NEW ZEALAND CRASHES DURING 1991-2002

FREQUENCY FOR EACH MODEL FOR ALL TYPES OF CRASHES (NSW/VIC/QLD/WA/NZ) Note: Only those models with a Market Group displayed were used in the crashworthiness analysis. MAKE/MODEL

Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Alfa Romeo Audi Audi Audi AUDI Audi Audi Audi Audi BMW Mini BMW BMW

164 33 75 90 GTV Sprint Alfasud Alfetta Guilietta Quattro 156 166 GTV / Spider 147 Others A6/S6/AllRoad A8 A4 A8/S8/A6 A3/S3 TT A4 Others Z3 E36 Mini Cooper 3 Series E30 3 Series E36

MODEL CODE

89-92 83-92 86-92 85-88 82-84 82-88 82-84 82-88 82-86 99-02 99-02 98-02 01-02 95-02 95-02 95-01 97-02 99-02 01-02 97-02 02-02 82-91 92-98

AL01Z AL02Z AL03Z AL04Z AL05Z AL06Z AL07Z AL08Z AL09Z AL10Z AL13Z AL14Z AL15Z AL16Z AL99Z AUD1Z AUD2Z AUD3Z AUD4Z AUD5Z AUD6Z AUD7Z AUDIZ BM10Z BM11Z BM3 A BM3 B

No. of No. of No. of uninjured injured involved drivers in drivers in drivers in NSW (87-2002) and NSW (87-2002) and NSW (87-2002) QLD, WA QLD, WA and (91-2002) (91-2002) QLD,WA (91-2002)

52 491 133 65 128 101 100 46 58 1 87 9 34 8 233 21 1 197 30 87 18 129 1015 91 5 2310 1993

7 91 18 7 13 19 20 10 7 0 16 3 2 1 45 3 0 23 0 12 1 22 162 14 1 356 351

59 582 151 72 141 120 120 56 65 1 103 12 36 9 278 24 1 220 30 99 19 151 1177 105 6 2666 2344

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 7 93 15 6 10 26 17 4 6 1 10 1 1 1 126 3 . 30 4 4 2 11 153 10 1 409 272

No. of severely injured drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD, WA, NZ (91-2002)

No. of injured drivers in NSW, Victoria (87-2002) and QLD, WA, NZ (91-2002)

ANALYSIS INCLUSION CRITERIA INV=100 INJ=20

4 27 4 3 9 4 5 5 2 0 1 1 0 1 31 0 . 10 0 0 0 1 45 3 0 89 64

11 120 19 9 19 30 22 9 8 1 11 2 1 2 157 3 . 40 4 4 2 12 198 13 1 498 336

0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

MARKET GROUP

Small

Sports Small

Prestige

Luxury Luxury

MAKE/MODEL

BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW BMW Chrysler Chrysler Chrysler Chrysler Chrysler Citroen Citroen Citroen Citroen Citroen Citroen Citroen Citroen Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu

3 Series E46 3 Series Others 5 Series E28 5 Series E34 5 Series E39 5 Series Others 6 Series E24 7 Series E23 7 Series E32 7 Series E38 7 Series Others 8 Series E31 Others Voyager Neon Neon PT Cruiser Others BX AX Xanitia Berlingo Xsara XM C5 Others Charade Charade 87 Charade Charade Charade Others Feroza / Rocky

MODEL CODE

99-02 82-88 89-95 96-02 86-89 82-88 89-94 95-01 90-99 97-01 96-99 00-02 00-02 86-94 91-93 94-00 99-02 00-02 91-00 01-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 89-97

BM3 C BM3 Z BM5 A BM5 B BM5 C BM5 Z BM6 Z BM7 A BM7 B BM7 C BM7 Z BM8 Z BM99Z CHR1Z CHR2Z CHR3Z CHR4Z CHRYZ CI1 Z CI3 Z CI4 Z CI5 Z CI6 Z CI7 Z CI8 Z CI99Z D1 A D1 B D1 C D1 D D1 Z D11 Z


332 795 693 464 267 26 5 202 127 95 6 15 1371 159 254 14 3 16 72 4 30 26 19 6 4 67 1669 284 4974 3877 260 620

81 143 83 69 30 9 0 17 17 5 3 1 216 26 58 3 1 1 4 1 7 3 5 1 2 3 521 80 1435 1099 162 137

413 938 776 533 297 35 5 219 144 100 9 16 1587 185 312 17 4 17 76 5 37 29 24 7 6 70 2190 364 6409 4976 422 757

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 63 123 82 69 27 9 1 24 22 6 2 1 272 26 47 3 3 9 26 13 11 . 5 1 1 3 621 84 1054 677 117 123




7 20 21 20 5 2 0 7 7 1 1 0 57 1 6 2 0 0 5 3 3 . 1 1 0 1 178 14 311 200 38 38

70 143 103 89 32 11 1 31 29 7 3 1 329 27 53 5 3 9 31 16 14 . 6 2 1 4 799 98 1365 877 155 161

1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1

MARKET GROUP

Luxury Luxury Luxury Luxury

Luxury Luxury

People Mover Small

Light Light Light 4WD - Compact

MAKE/MODEL

Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford

Handivan Hi-Jet Rocky / Rugger Pyzar Move Sirion Terios Handivan / Cuore Applause YRV Mira Delta F20/25/50/55/60/65 Others 1.5i Cielo Espero Nubira Lanos Leganza Musso Matiz Tacuma Others Laser/Met Laser Laser Laser/Met others Cortina Escort Falcon XE/XF Fairlane Z & LTD F

MODEL CODE

82-90 82-90 85-98 97-01 97-99 98-02 97-02 99-02 89-99 01-02 90-96

94-95 95-97 95-97 97-02 97-02 97-02 98-02 99-02 00-02 90 91-94 95-97 82-82 82-82 82-88 82-87

D12 Z D13 Z D14 Z D15 Z D16 Z D17 Z D18 Z D19 Z D2 Z D20 Z D3 Z D4 Z D5 Z D99 Z DA01Z DA03Z DA05Z DA06Z DA07Z DA08Z DA09Z DA10Z DA11Z DA99Z F01 B F01 C F01 D F01 Z F02 Z F05 Z F06 Z F07 Z


515 120 399 147 40 412 142 50 1964 1 447 1137 64 1257 301 1494 355 844 1422 230 65 130 20 60 4277 8455 1890 740 25 20 53730 4880

233 70 124 39 16 161 59 22 506 2 216 191 30 339 83 519 109 209 427 57 11 70 3 12 1024 2033 500 418 11 3 8858 795

748 190 523 186 56 573 201 72 2470 3 663 1328 94 1596 384 2013 464 1053 1849 287 76 200 23 72 5301 10488 2390 1158 36 23 62588 5675

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 191 63 83 26 13 88 59 17 365 2 182 117 16 359 76 396 75 167 300 42 12 45 2 11 869 2081 443 317 299 3 8218 773




MARKET GROUP

50 22 47 6 4 20 20 4 95 1 62 41 10 102 7 85 24 41 83 11 4 10 1 1 183 496 113 83 80 1 2531 241

241 85 130 32 17 108 79 21 460 3 244 158 26 461 83 481 99 208 383 53 16 55 3 12 1052 2577 556 400 379 4 10749 1014

1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1

Commercial - Van Commercial - Van 4WD - Compact Light Light 4WD - Compact Small Light

Light Light Medium Small Light Medium Light

Small Small

Large Prestige

MAKE/MODEL

Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford / Nissan Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford

Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EA, EB & EA Others Fairlane N & LTD D Fairlane N & LTD D Fairlane & LTD AU Fairlane N <D Others Mondeo Capri Festiva WD/WH/WF Falcon Panel Van Falcon Panel Van Falcon Panel Van Others Falcon Ute / XFN Ute Falcon Ute Falcon Ute Falcon Ute AU Falcon Ute Others Ford F-Series Spectron Trader Commercials Sierra Bronco Probe Falcon EF/EL Transit Transit Transit Others Explorer Falcon AU Taurus

MODEL CODE

88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 88-94 95-98 99-02 95-01 89-94 94-01 82-95 96-99 82-95 96-99 99 00-02 82-92 86-90

82-87 94-98 94-98 95-00 01-02 00-01 98-02 96-98

F08 C F08 D F08 Z F09 A F09 B F09 C F09 Z F10 Z F43 Z F44 B F45 A F45 B F45 Z F46 A F46 B F46 C F46 D F46 Z F47 Z F52 Z F53 Z F54 Z F55 Z F56 Z F61 Z F62 Z F64 A F64 B F64 Z F65 Z F66 Z F67 Z


33748 13590 579 3752 674 205 8 941 990 3810 3644 472 4 8528 1175 274 449 9 698 12 413 8033 3 119 108 24283 465 14 1 34 5771 243

5554 2216 161 521 129 41 2 175 256 1479 461 46 0 1302 205 48 69 1 102 2 58 1626 1 18 26 4256 74 2 0 13 1191 44

39302 15806 740 4273 803 246 10 1116 1246 5289 4105 518 4 9830 1380 322 518 10 800 14 471 9659 4 137 134 28539 539 16 1 47 6962 287

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 5118 1971 153 505 121 31 . 194 235 956 384 56 . 928 154 36 64 . 77 15 41 1201 1 13 27 3503 61 2 24 22 910 35




1319 557 39 155 39 6 . 33 56 322 93 7 . 319 45 11 14 . 21 1 14 361 0 6 3 924 17 0 4 11 178 8

6437 2528 192 660 160 37 . 227 291 1278 477 63 . 1247 199 47 78 . 98 16 55 1562 1 19 30 4427 78 2 28 33 1088 43

1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1

MARKET GROUP

Large Large Prestige Prestige Prestige Medium Sports Light Commercial - Van Commercial - Van Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute

Sports Large Commercial - Van

Large Large

MAKE/MODEL

Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ferrari Fiat Fiat Fiat Fiat Fiat Fiat FSM Holden / Toyota Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden Holden Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden

MODEL CODE

Ka Cougar Mustang Explorer Falcon BA Others

99-02 99-02 01-02 01-02 02-02

Argenta Croma Regata Superbrava X-1/9 Others

83-85 88-89 84-88 82-85 82-85

Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Calibra Statesman/Caprice WB Stateman/Caprice VQ Stateman/Caprice VR/VS Stateman/Caprice Others Commodore Ute VG/VP Camira Jackaroo / Bighorn Jackaroo / Bighorn Jackaroo / Bighorn Jackaroo Others Kingswood Piazza Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo

89-93 94-97 82-85 90-93 94-98 90-93 82-89 82-91 92-97 98-02

86-88 82-85 86-88 89-95 96-98

F68 Z F69 Z F71 Z F72 Z F73 Z F99 Z FERAZ FI01Z FI02Z FI03Z FI04Z FI11Z FI99Z FSM Z H1 Z H12 Z H14 A H14 B H14 C H14 Z H18 Z H2 Z H21 A H21 B H21 C H21 Z H22 Z H23 Z H24 A H24 B H24 C H24 D


80 49 1 7 1 17134 5 7 19 224 43 9 62 12 38026 228 169 749 1547 37 1220 14398 328 150 41 566 14 43 561 217 3026 899

30 11 0 1 0 3787 0 4 4 30 13 3 10 2 7202 30 24 102 281 11 225 3314 78 36 13 103 5 9 102 39 579 204

110 60 1 8 1 20921 5 11 23 254 56 12 72 14 45228 258 193 851 1828 48 1445 17712 406 186 54 669 19 52 663 256 3605 1103

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 28 6 . 4 5 6327 1 3 8 23 8 2. 42 6 6215 58 32 95 239 9 148 3509 150 69 17 83 2 17 92 36 391 148




6 0 . 1 1 1983 0 1 0 7 6 .1 7 1 1997 11 19 41 68 2 61 877 25 15 4 20 4 2 28 5 169 41

34 6 . 5 6 8310 1 4 8 30 14 3. 49 7 8212 69 51 136 307 11 209 4386 175 84 21 103 6 19 120 41 560 189

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

MARKET GROUP

Light

Small

Large Sports Prestige Prestige Prestige Commercial - Ute Medium 4WD - Medium 4WD - Medium

Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute

MAKE/MODEL

Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden / Toyota Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden

Rodeo Rodeo Others Shuttle / WFR Van WB Series Torana/Sunbird Gemini Gemini 85 Gemini RB Gemini Others Commodore Others Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore Ute VR/VS Frontera / Mu Vectra Commodore VT/VX Suburban Statesman/Caprice WH Astra Jap Astra TR Astra TS Astra Others Commodore VU Ute Commodore VY Commodore VY Ute Monaro Cruze Barina XC Zafira TT Barina SB Barina Others Commodore VB-VL Others

MODEL CODE

99-02 82-87 82-85 82-84 86-87

93-97 94-00 95-02 97-02 97-02 98-00 99-02 87 96-98 98-02 00-02 02-02 02-02 01-02 02-02 01-02 01-02 95-00 82-88

H24 E H24 Z H26 Z H27 Z H28 Z H3 A H3 B H3 C H3 Z H31 Z H33 Z H34 Z H35 Z H36 Z H37 Z H38 Z H39 Z H4 B H4 D H4 E H4 Z H41 Z H42 Z H43 Z H44 Z H45 Z H46 Z H47 Z H5 D H5 Z H6 Z H99 Z


533 2614 458 1482 5 5839 1280 661 1 22 26580 3875 66 1015 11246 3 195 741 488 1044 59 273 6 1 10 3 70 7 3026 438 45061 7691

152 392 99 231 0 1335 317 203 0 0 5043 675 10 221 2384 1 38 131 103 268 26 54 6 1 5 1 27 0 977 140 7995 1700

685 3006 557 1713 5 7174 1597 864 1 22 31623 4550 76 1236 13630 4 233 872 591 1312 85 327 12 2 15 4 97 7 4003 578 53056 9391

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 95 314 71 139 1 1421 312 228 . 13 4129 449 11 221 1881 1 24 150 135 175 21 42 6 . 6 1 25 . 654 116 7575 4808




28 77 26 81 0 353 73 49 . 1 1085 178 7 32 405 0 7 39 19 37 5 21 4 . 1 0 3 . 161 31 2363 1616

123 391 97 220 1 1774 385 277 . 14 5214 627 18 253 2286 1 31 189 154 212 26 63 10 . 7 1 28 . 815 147 9938 6424

1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0

MARKET GROUP

Commercial - Ute Commercial - Van Commercial - Ute Small Small

Large Commercial - Ute Medium Large Prestige Small Small Commercial - Ute

Light Large

MAKE/MODEL

Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi

Excel Excel Excel / Accent Trajet Elantra Santa Fe Getz Sonata Sonata Sonata Others Terracan Elantra Lavita Sonata S Coupe Lantra Lantra Lantra Others Coupe Grandeaur / XG Accent Others Mirage / Colt Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Charger/Valiant Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Starion Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE

MODEL CODE

96-02

HY1 A HY1 B HY1 C HY10Z HY11Z HY12Z HY13Z HY15A HY15B HY15Z HY17Z HY18Z HY2 Z HY4 Z HY5 A HY5 B HY5 Z HY7 Z HY8 Z HY9 Z HY99Z I01 Z I02 Z I04 Z I05 Z I06 A

2435 6989 11800 3 97 29 4 321 6 1 2 3 2103 744 1422 2033 45 372 97 805 697 10255 11789 22345 30 5606

706 2001 3782 1 29 6 2 65 2 0 0 0 457 216 357 477 12 94 14 242 186 2816 2083 3994 2 1115

3141 8990 15582 4 126 35 6 386 8 1 2 3 2560 960 1779 2510 57 466 111 1047 883 13071 13872 26339 32 6721

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 787 1667 2711 1 19 5 1 46 2 3 . 1 396 179 278 387 12 64 9 141 191 2658 2684 3842 1 995

82-87 89-90 91-92 93-95 96-02

I07 Z I09 A I09 B I09 C I09 D

133 3183 1462 3486 6130

32 738 289 848 1617

165 3921 1751 4334 7747

45 929 391 860 1187

86-90 90-94 95-00 00-02 00-02 00-02 02-02 98-01 02-02 01-02 01-02 89-97 90-96 91-95 96-00 96-00 99-00 00-02 82-88 82-84 85-90





206 402 654 1 4 1 0 14 0 1 . 0 89 42 69 87 2 25 1 39 30 683 664 1065 1 222

993 2069 3365 2 23 6 1 60 2 4 . 1 485 221 347 474 14 89 10 180 221 3341 3348 4907 2 1217

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1

23 239 56 222 263

68 1168 447 1082 1450

1 1 1 1 1

MARKET GROUP

Light Light Light Small

Large

Large Small Small Small Sports Light Light Medium Large Large Sports Small Small Small Small

MAKE/MODEL

Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Isuzu Isuzu Isuzu Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar

Nimbus / Chariot / Spacewagon Nimbus / Chariot Nimbus Cordia Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Galant Galant Galant Others Canter Starwagon / L300 Starwagon / Delica Starwagon Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Starwagon Others Commercials Pajero Pajero 91 Pajero Pajero Pajero Others 3000GT Challenger Pajero iO Others NKR Series NPR Series Others XJ6 XJ6 XJ6 XJ8

MODEL CODE

85-91 92-98 99-02 83-87 91-96

I10 A I10 B I10 C I12 Z I15 Z

515 431 104 1513 14604

104 83 15 298 2645

619 514 119 1811 17249

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 202 115 7 518 2534

89-93 95-96

I16 A I16 B I16 Z I21 Z I23 A I23 B I23 C I23 D I23 Z I24 Z I25 A I25 B I25 C I25 D I25 Z I26 Z I30 Z I34 Z I99 Z IS01Z IS02Z IS99Z J01 A J01 B J01 C J01 D

2 681 273 662 2721 3545 954 232 150 2581 1389 286 1733 52 113 3 70 5 6330 447 767 1164 250 302 52 5

0 151 57 84 635 777 170 52 67 554 266 32 260 9 41 2 15 3 1169 75 59 131 31 32 5 0

2 832 330 746 3356 4322 1124 284 217 3135 1655 318 1993 61 154 5 85 8 7499 522 826 1295 281 334 57 5

389 202 87 97 543 656 137 41 57 404 326 35 271 13 30 3 24 5 2762 48 35 119 25 31 2 .

83-86 87-93 95-98 98-02

82-90 92-99 00-02 92-97 98-02 99-02

82-86 87-94 95-97 98-02





38 15 3 138 562

240 130 10 656 3096

1 1 0 1 1

84 61 16 33 183 203 30 16 12 138 103 11 75 2 11 1 6 1 705 12 11 31 12 7 2 .

473 263 103 130 726 859 167 57 69 542 429 46 346 15 41 4 30 6 3467 60 46 150 37 38 4 .

0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

MARKET GROUP

People Mover People Mover Small Large

Medium

People Mover People Mover People Mover People Mover

4WD - Medium 4WD - Medium

Luxury Luxury

MAKE/MODEL

Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar Jaguar Jeep Jeep Jeep Jeep Jeep Jeep Kia Kia Kia Kia Kia Kia Kia Kia Kia Kia Lada Lancia Leyland Land Rover Land Rover Land Rover Ford / Mazda

XJ6 /XJ8 Others V12 Saloon XJS XJR XK8 / XKR S-Type X-Type Others Cherokee XJ Grand Cherokee Wrangler Grand Cherokee Cherokee KJ Others Sportage Ceres Mentor Credos Rio Carens Carnival Spectra Optima Pregio

Defender Discovery Others Laser / 323 / Familia

MODEL CODE

82-96 95-02 97-02 99-02 02-01

96-00 96-99 96-02 99-01 01-02 98-02 92-00 97-00 98-01 00-02 00-02 99-02 01-02 01-02 02-02

92-02 91-02 82-88

J01 Z J02 Z J04 Z J05 Z J07 Z J08 Z J09 Z J99 Z JAG Z JE01Z JE02Z JE03Z JE04Z JE05Z JEEPZ K01 Z K02 Z K03 Z K04 Z K05 Z K06 Z K07 Z K08 Z K09 Z K11 Z LADAZ LANCZ LEY Z LRO1Z LRO2A LROVZ M01 A


22 11 60 3 17 30 6 195 3 555 73 79 20 6 146 117 287 4 11 174 9 97 20 1 1 237 22 36 91 198 347 35796

3 2 9 0 1 3 1 28 1 81 12 11 4 0 20 25 82 0 6 61 7 16 9 0 0 82 2 7 26 52 40 9069

25 13 69 3 18 33 7 223 4 636 85 90 24 6 166 142 369 4 17 235 16 113 29 1 1 319 24 43 117 250 387 44865

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 3 2 7 1 . 4 . 41 2 98 16 15 12 . 28 32 68 . 3 41 4 12 4 . . 108 1 7 21 54 66 11164




0 0 1 0 . 0 . 15 1 23 5 7 2 . 7 3 12 . 0 5 0 0 3 . . 30 2 5 11 17 15 2663

3 2 8 1 . 4 . 56 3 121 21 22 14 . 35 35 80 . 3 46 4 12 7 . . 138 3 12 32 71 81 13827

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1

MARKET GROUP

4WD - Medium

4WD - Compact Commercial - Ute

Light

4WD - Medium 4WD - Medium Small

MAKE/MODEL

Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Ford / Mazda Mazda Mazda Ford / Mazda Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Ford / Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda Mazda

323 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 323 / Familia / Lantis Laser / 323 323 Others 626/MX6 / Telstar Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella 626/MX6 / Telstar Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos 626 626/MX6 Others 929 / Luce 929 929 / Sentia / Efini MS-9 929 Others Festiva WA / 121 121 / Autozam Review 121 Metro / Demio 121 Others RX7 RX7 RX7 RX7 Others MX5 / Eunos Roadster MX5 / Eunos Roadster MX5 Others Commercials MPV MPV MPV Others

MODEL CODE

89 90-93 94 95-98 99-02 82 83-86 87 88-91 92-97 98-02 82-90 91 92-96 87-90 94-96 97-02 82-85 86-91 92-98 89-97 98-02

94-99 00-02

M01 B M01 C M01 D M01 E M01 F M01 Z M02 A M02 B M02 C M02 D M02 E M02 F M02 Z M03 A M03 B M03 C M03 Z M09 A M09 B M09 C M09 Z M10 A M10 B M10 C M10 Z M11 A M11 B M11 Z M14 Z M15 A M15 B M15 Z


390 2423 647 2210 876 341 10561 7192 1592 3021 3227 357 528 2624 134 118 86 5910 1724 873 197 463 230 49 5 397 101 6 3875 175 27 1

112 539 145 519 257 176 2231 1386 240 606 519 76 233 491 16 24 40 1761 527 251 112 80 25 8 0 80 30 3 850 22 3 0

502 2962 792 2729 1133 517 12792 8578 1832 3627 3746 433 761 3115 150 142 126 7671 2251 1124 309 543 255 57 5 477 131 9 4725 197 30 1

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 156 1071 121 419 194 128 2083 2217 218 1113 759 83 164 566 16 28 29 1472 389 201 80 93 74 17 . 77 20 1 663 19 4 .




43 236 30 107 36 44 623 539 49 260 197 25 59 153 5 3 11 361 81 44 27 32 21 5 . 16 4 1 239 1 0 .

199 1307 151 526 230 172 2706 2756 267 1373 956 108 223 719 21 31 40 1833 470 245 107 125 95 22 . 93 24 2 902 20 4 .

0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0

MARKET GROUP

Small Small Small

Medium Medium Medium Medium Prestige Prestige Light Light Light Sports Sports

Sports Sports

People Mover

MAKE/MODEL

Mazda Mazda Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Mazda Maserati Mercedes Mercedes Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Mercedes Benz

MODEL CODE

Eunos 30X / Presso / MX-3 / Autozam 90-97 AZ-3 Eunos 500 93-99 Eunos 800 94-00 Escape / Tribute 01-02 Courier / B-Series 98-02 Courier / Bravo 03-03 Others 100 Series C180 C-Class W201 C-Class W202 CLK C208 E-Class W123 E-Class W124 E-Class W210 S-CLASS W107 S-Class W126 S-Class R129 200 Series S-Class C140 SLK R170 A-Class W168 MB100 / MB140 S-Class W220 Vito M-Class W163 CL500/600 C215 C-Class W203 300 Series Sprinter

87-93 95-00 97-02 82-85 86-94 96-02 82-92 93-02 93-98 97-02 98-02 99-02 99-02 99-02 98-02 98-02 00-02 98-02


M16 Z

209

50

259

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 44

M17 Z M18 Z M21 Z M22 A M22 B M99 Z MASRZ ME1 Z ME10Z ME11Z ME12Z ME13Z ME14Z ME15Z ME16Z ME17Z ME18Z ME19Z ME2 Z ME20Z ME21Z ME22Z ME24Z ME25Z ME26Z ME27Z ME28Z ME29Z ME3 Z ME30Z

102 35 23 289 1 5821 2 221 63 354 590 76 252 692 307 21 537 56 352 116 64 55 52 16 134 43 3 13 463 84

29 5 4 57 0 1062 0 34 10 74 96 11 39 108 42 4 68 7 27 5 16 18 6 3 17 9 0 2 40 17

131 40 27 346 1 6883 2 255 73 428 686 87 291 800 349 25 605 63 379 121 80 73 58 19 151 52 3 15 503 101

26 7 8 43 . 1976 1 39 9 71 76 10 23 96 37 4 56 5 40 6 8 10 6 1 6 13 . 1 44 18




MARKET GROUP

5

49

1

Sports

4 1 4 17 . 444 0 7 1 23 17 1 8 20 6 0 16 1 17 1 2 5 0 0 3 1 . 0 11 1

30 8 12 60 . 2420 1 46 10 94 93 11 31 116 43 4 72 6 57 7 10 15 6 1 9 14 . 1 55 19

1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Prestige

Commercial - Ute

Luxury Luxury Luxury Luxury Luxury Luxury

MAKE/MODEL

Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Mercedes Mercedes Holden / Nissan Nissan Holden / Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan / Ford Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan

G-Class CLK C209 400 Series 500 Series Others Astra / Pulsar / Langley Pulsar/Vector Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar/Vector Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Others Pintara Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Bluebird Skyline 180B/200B 300ZX / Fairlady Z Stanza 280C / Laurel Gazelle / Silvia 280ZX Prairie Maxima Maxima / Cefiro Maxima Maxima Others Exa Exa Exa Others NX/NX-R 300C / Laurel

MODEL CODE

83-88 02-02

84-86 87 88-90 91 92-95 96-99 86-88 89-92 82-86 83-88 90-95 82-83 82-84 84-86 82-84 84-86 90-94 95-99 00-02 83-86 87-91 91-96 85-87

ME31Z ME32Z ME4 Z ME5 Z ME99Z N01 A N01 B N01 C N01 D N01 E N01 F N01 Z N02 A N02 B N03 Z N04 Z N05 Z N09 Z N10 Z N11 Z N12 Z N13 Z N14 Z N15 A N15 B N15 C N15 Z N16 A N16 B N16 Z N17 Z N20 Z


1 1 71 38 981 8455 1274 9523 2208 3842 3285 410 3774 6326 11275 3963 52 333 482 56 342 75 329 502 471 85 37 382 220 2 394 79

0 0 12 5 139 2086 264 2170 477 812 919 201 713 1269 2299 685 7 55 99 9 61 13 75 84 96 15 13 102 32 0 114 16

1 1 83 43 1120 10541 1538 11693 2685 4654 4204 611 4487 7595 13574 4648 59 388 581 65 403 88 404 586 567 100 50 484 252 2 508 95

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) . . 11 4 195 2416 270 2132 395 991 667 142 656 1254 2293 820 6 61 87 8 312 16 86 170 126 20 47 101 50 1 72 12




. . 5 1 42 609 53 536 100 219 180 51 176 341 684 233 1 20 21 3 121 6 22 40 26 2 13 29 14 0 34 4

. . 16 5 237 3025 323 2668 495 1210 847 193 832 1595 2977 1053 7 81 108 11 433 22 108 210 152 22 60 130 64 1 106 16

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0

MARKET GROUP

Small Small Small Small Medium Medium Medium Large Sports Small Sports People Mover Prestige Prestige Prestige Sports Sports Sports

MAKE/MODEL

Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan / Ford Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan FSM Lada Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda

MODEL CODE

720 Ute 82-85 B120 H40 Navara 86-91 Navara 92-96 Navara 97-02 Navara Others Vans(Nomad/Urvan/C22/E24/Vanette) Patrol 82-87 Patrol / Maverick 88-97 Patrol 98-02 Patrol Others Pathfinder / Terrano 88-94 Serena 92-95 Infiniti 93-97 Bluebird 93-97 200SX / Silvia 94-02 Micra 95-97 Pathfinder / Terrano 95-02 Terrano II 97-00 Pulsar 00-02 X-Trail 01-02 Others Niva Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic Civic Others CRX

84-99 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00 87-91

N21 Z N22 Z N23 Z N24 A N24 B N24 C N24 Z N25 Z N26 A N26 B N26 C N26 Z N27 Z N30 Z N31 Z N32 Z N33 Z N34 Z N36 Z N38 Z N39 Z N40 Z N99 Z NIKIZ NIVAZ O1 A O1 B O1 C O1 D O1 E O1 Z O10 A


1320 95 16 2934 1018 284 277 2730 1194 4533 616 211 318 78 3 881 389 427 177 3 717 11 6050 15 268 631 2232 3023 2916 2170 215 263

243 24 3 457 168 41 73 643 152 623 101 39 53 13 1 128 67 141 31 2 205 5 1217 12 58 143 481 631 584 450 84 53

1563 119 19 3391 1186 325 350 3373 1346 5156 717 250 371 91 4 1009 456 568 208 5 922 16 7267 27 326 774 2713 3654 3500 2620 299 316





60 8 1 151 49 8 15 165 46 174 29 15 43 3 0 62 15 33 10 0 29 2 923 6 19 98 265 250 155 73 19 74

253 23 3 598 225 60 74 694 204 777 139 39 185 30 1 312 55 129 51 2 144 8 4144 18 82 516 1273 1257 912 420 115 313

1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1

MARKET GROUP

Commercial - Ute

Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute

4WD - Large 4WD - Large 4WD - Large 4WD - Medium

Medium Sports Light 4WD - Medium Small

4WD - Compact Small Small Small Small Small Sports

MAKE/MODEL

Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda

CRX CRX Others Odyssey Odyssey Odyssey Others CR-V CR-V HR-V Legend Legend Legend Legend Others S2000 Civic Jazz Accord Accord Accord Accord Accord Accord Others Prelude Prelude Prelude Prelude Prelude Others Integra Integra Integra Integra Integra Integra

MODEL CODE

92-98 95-00 00-02 97-01 02-02 99-02 86-95 96-98 99-02 99-02 01-02 01-02 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 99-02 82-82 83-91 92-96 97-02 86-88 89 90-92 93 93-01 02-02

O10 B O10 Z O17 A O17 B O17 Z O18 A O18 B O19 Z O2 B O2 C O2 D O2 Z O20 Z O21 Z O22 Z O3 A O3 B O3 C O3 D O3 E O3 Z O4 A O4 B O4 C O4 D O4 Z O5 A O5 B O5 C O5 D O5 E O5 F


126 7 288 30 1 410 20 147 576 32 17 12 39 103 1 1739 1586 871 1523 166 126 194 2508 849 243 57 512 252 421 124 487 4

21 3 37 7 0 69 3 25 69 4 3 8 2 17 0 383 256 116 221 33 47 34 410 131 51 25 86 62 72 26 76 1

147 10 325 37 1 479 23 172 645 36 20 20 41 120 1 2122 1842 987 1744 199 173 228 2918 980 294 82 598 314 493 150 563 5

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 36 9 19 4 . 123 4 20 108 5 3 23 2 21 . 943 762 222 270 32 41 29 1054 156 40 21 319 95 150 18 104 1




15 5 5 1 . 16 2 7 23 0 1 7 0 1 . 235 154 52 65 2 5 6 248 53 3 3 72 25 26 6 19 0

51 14 24 5 . 139 6 27 131 5 4 30 2 22 . 1178 916 274 335 34 46 35 1302 209 43 24 391 120 176 24 123 1

1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

MARKET GROUP

Sports People Mover

4WD - Compact 4WD - Compact Luxury

Small Prestige Prestige Prestige Prestige Prestige Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports

MAKE/MODEL

Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Peugoet Peugeot Peugeot Peugeot Peugeot Peugeot Peugeot Peugeot Peugeot Porsche Porsche Porsche Porsche Proton Proton Proton Renault Renault Renault Renault Renault Renault Renault Renault Renault Renault

Integra Others Concerto NSX Acty City Others 205 405 505 306 605 406 206 307 Others 944 911 968 Others Wira Satria Others 20 Megane Cabriolet Clio Feugo 21 25 19 Laguna Scenic Others

MODEL CODE

89-93 91-02 83-86 83-86 87-94 89-97 82-93 94-01 94-96 96-02 99-02 01-02 82-91 82-02 92-95 95-96 97-02 82-83 01-02 02-02 82-87 87-91 85-91 91-96 95-96 01-02

O5 Z O6 Z O7 Z O8 Z O9 Z O99 Z PE1 Z PE2 Z PE3 Z PE4 Z PE5 Z PE7 Z PE8 Z PE9 Z PE99Z PO1 Z PO2 Z PO4 Z PO99Z PRO1Z PRO2Z PROTZ RE1 Z RE10Z RE11Z RE2 Z RE3 Z RE4 Z RE5 Z RE7 Z RE9 Z RE99Z


36 336 9 273 280 1337 167 330 565 551 35 97 65 17 223 81 18 1 255 357 41 41 13 7 6 300 14 33 134 24 13 207

19 72 0 59 109 336 28 65 67 96 4 8 16 0 31 10 1 0 28 145 17 11 4 0 2 43 3 8 36 5 5 33

55 408 9 332 389 1673 195 395 632 647 39 105 81 17 254 91 19 1 283 502 58 52 17 7 8 343 17 41 170 29 18 240

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 16 130 1 43 504 772 37 105 82 107 5 12 12 . 67 12 6 . 31 87 6 9 7 . 2 61 5 14 32 2 3 40




3 37 1 16 104 204 10 28 29 13 2 3 5 . 18 4 3 . 20 31 2 4 4 . 0 13 1 4 6 3 1 6

19 167 2 59 608 976 47 133 111 120 7 15 17 . 85 16 9 . 51 118 8 13 11 . 2 74 6 18 38 5 4 46

0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

MARKET GROUP

Small Commercial - Van Light Light Prestige Prestige Small

Small

Sports

Small

MAKE/MODEL

Rover Rover Rover Rover Rover Landrover Rover Rover Rover Rolls Royce Land Rover Land Rover Land Rover Saab Saab Saab Saab Saab Saab Saab Lada Seat Seat Seat Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru

3500 416i/827 Quintet 825 MGF / MG TF Freelander MG ZT 75 Others Range Rover Range Rover Range Rover Others Others 900 Series 900/9-3 900 Others 9000 9-5 900/9000 Samara Ibiza Cordoba Other 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Liberty / Legacy Liberty / Legacy Liberty / Legacy Liberty Others Vortex Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex SVX / Alcyone

MODEL CODE

82-87 82-86 87-88 99-02 98-02 02-02 01-02

82-94 95-02

82-92 94-02 86-97 98-02 88-90 95-99 95-99 82-93 89-93 94-98 99-02 85-89 89-92 92-95

RO Z RO1 Z RO2 Z RO3 Z RO4 Z RO5 Z RO6 Z RO7 Z RO99Z ROLLZ RROV1 RROV2 RROVZ SA00Z SA1 A SA1 B SA1 Z SA2 Z SA3 Z SA99Z SAMAZ SE01Z SE02Z SEATZ SU1 Z SU2 A SU2 B SU2 C SU2 Z SU3 Z SU4 Z SU5 Z


131 221 190 27 82 9 1 5 283 22 726 39 12 540 701 549 1 606 68 155 2 5 3 145 4758 2875 1120 538 91 50 532 16

27 34 50 4 15 0 0 0 54 4 80 11 8 94 118 78 1 93 21 22 5 2 3 29 1193 541 238 103 33 13 275 3

158 255 240 31 97 9 1 5 337 26 806 50 20 634 819 627 2 699 89 177 7 7 6 174 5951 3416 1358 641 124 63 807 19

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 34 29 57 8 9 2 . . 106 2 118 22 6 106 119 56 . 91 16 21 6 4 3 15 1056 812 216 73 24 15 259 1




3 8 17 1 2 1 . . 25 2 35 3 2 24 35 13 . 10 2 3 2 1 1 3 359 213 63 13 11 5 65 0

37 37 74 9 11 3 . . 131 4 153 25 8 130 154 69 . 101 18 24 8 5 4 18 1415 1025 279 86 35 20 324 1

1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0

MARKET GROUP

Luxury Small

4WD - Large

Prestige Prestige Luxury

Medium Medium Medium Medium

Light

MAKE/MODEL

Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru Subaru Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Suzuki Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden

Brumby Impreza Impreza Impreza Others Forester Forester Others Swift Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina / Swift / Cultus Swift Others Vitara / Escudo Grand Vitara Vitara Others Hatch / Alto Scurry / Carry Alto Mighty Boy Drover / Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 Baleno / Cultus Crescent Carry Ignis Jimny Liana Others Corolla Corolla Corolla Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova

MODEL CODE

82-92 93-00 01-02 97-02 02-02 82-85 86-88 89-99 88-98 99-02 82-84 82-00 85-00 85-88 82-99 95-02 99-02 00-02 98-02 01-02 82-84 85 86-88 89 89-93 94-97


SU6 Z SU7 A SU7 B SU7 Z SU8 Z SU9 Z SU99Z SZ01A SZ01B SZ01C SZ01Z SZ02A SZ02B SZ02Z SZ03Z SZ04Z SZ05Z SZ06Z SZ07Z

1213 1936 112 1 320 4 2318 171 3035 9917 156 1288 809 6 706 373 104 385 3051

389 422 17 0 61 0 497 58 998 2839 59 350 152 4 345 158 60 167 942

1602 2358 129 1 381 4 2815 229 4033 12756 215 1638 961 10 1051 531 164 552 3993

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 239 302 13 18 78 2 665 44 1055 2216 41 349 145 . 250 127 129 121 713

SZ08Z SZ09Z SZ10Z SZ11Z SZ12Z SZ99Z T01 A T01 B T01 C T01 D T01 E T01 F

668 25 38 19 4 1441 8670 3196 13019 2345 15706 8987

185 8 7 11 3 526 2086 757 3126 458 3802 2162

853 33 45 30 7 1967 10756 3953 16145 2803 19508 11149

131 9 7 15 2 565 2600 762 2993 416 3551 1819




136 90 3 5 13 0 175 15 277 533 16 97 22 . 76 41 39 35 195

375 392 16 23 91 2 840 59 1332 2749 57 446 167 . 326 168 168 156 908

1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1

21 1 2 2 1 175 584 194 738 114 960 439

152 10 9 17 3 740 3184 956 3731 530 4511 2258

1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1

MARKET GROUP

Commercial - Ute Small

4WD - Compact

Light Light Light 4WD - Compact 4WD - Compact Light Commercial - Van Light Commercial - Ute 4WD – Compact Small

Small Small Small Small

MAKE/MODEL

Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Holden / Toyota Holden / Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota TOYOTA Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Corolla Corolla Corolla Others Corona Camry Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor Camry Celica Celica Celica Celica Celica Celica Others Crown / Cressida / Mark II Crown / Cressida / Mark II Cressida / Mark II Crown/Cressida Others Tercel Supra MR2 MR2 MR2 Others Paseo / Cynos BUNDERA Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Others 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux

MODEL CODE

98-01 02-02 82-88 83-86 88-92 93-97 98-02 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 82-85 86-88 89-93 83-88 82-90 87-90 91-00 91-99 82-86 87-89 90-95 96-02 82-85 86-88

T01 G T01 H T01 Z T03 Z T04 Z T05 A T05 B T05 C T06 A T06 B T06 C T06 D T06 E T06 Z T07 A T07 B T07 C T07 Z T09 Z T11 Z T12 A T12 B T12 Z T13 Z T14 Z T15 A T15 B T15 C T15 D T15 Z T16 A T16 B


1852 145 47 15698 3744 21363 14927 4894 1646 1462 1171 449 1289 59 1804 826 1622 42 390 355 142 111 11 779 10 3874 1951 3313 1640 200 4270 3411

461 45 10 3191 662 4160 2958 997 289 252 195 98 246 24 322 105 233 7 79 70 38 20 2 196 4 720 328 533 266 54 856 624

2313 190 57 18889 4406 25523 17885 5891 1935 1714 1366 547 1535 83 2126 931 1855 49 469 425 180 131 13 975 14 4594 2279 3846 1906 254 5126 4035





59 9 1 683 147 932 551 150 83 70 64 24 25 7 110 31 53 2 24 21 32 11 0 43 1 239 116 172 44 8 258 224

433 38 17 3388 715 4377 2721 820 484 323 294 111 237 21 487 114 241 12 102 80 121 63 5 228 5 1068 590 761 215 48 887 919

1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1

MARKET GROUP

Small Small Medium Medium Medium Large Large Sports Sports Sports Sports Sports Prestige Prestige Prestige Small Sports Sports Sports Sports Commercial - Van Commercial - Van Commercial - Van Commercial - Van Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute

MAKE/MODEL

Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Lexus Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Lexus Lexus Toyota Lexus Toyota Toyota Lexus Toyota Toyota Toyota Lexus Lexus Toyota Toyota

4Runner/Hilux Hilux Hilux 4 Runner/Hilux Others ES300 / Windom Tarago Tarago Tarago / Previa / Estima Tarago / Previa / Estima Tarago Others Commercials Landcruiser Landcruiser Landcruiser Landcruiser Others RAV4 RAV4 Starlet LS400 / Celsior IS200 / IS300 Echo GS300 Avalon MR2 LS430 Corolla 4WD Wagon Spacia Spacia ES300 SC430 Camry Prius

MODEL CODE

89-97 98-02 03-03 92-01 83-89 90 91-99 00-02

82-89 90-97 98-02 94-00 01-02 96-99 90-00 99-02 99-02 97-02 00-02 00-02 00-02 92-96 93-00 01-02 01-02 01-02 02-02 01-02

T16 C T16 D T16 E T16 Z T17 Z T18 A T18 B T18 C T18 D T18 Z T19 Z T20 A T20 B T20 C T20 Z T21 A T21 B T22 Z T25 Z T26 Z T27 Z T28 Z T29 Z T30 Z T31 Z T32 Z T33 A T33 B T34 Z T35 Z T36 Z T37 Z


10698 1470 1 817 289 3911 200 1795 63 117 3038 5761 5929 1174 605 789 56 1926 75 91 614 44 344 14 4 119 54 3 2 1 1 1

2030 326 0 290 40 957 29 267 15 31 494 931 865 211 194 144 16 528 16 12 199 4 65 7 0 31 16 1 0 0 0 0

12728 1796 1 1107 329 4868 229 2062 78 148 3532 6692 6794 1385 799 933 72 2454 91 103 813 48 409 21 4 150 70 4 2 1 1 1

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) 1900 247 . 196 42 666 26 205 5 23 324 730 744 231 128 193 20 368 12 5 139 6 44 1 . 16 10 1 . . . .




724 73 . 95 11 195 3 52 3 8 95 296 296 74 67 40 7 101 2 0 33 0 8 0 . 9 1 0 . . . .

2624 320 . 291 53 861 29 257 8 31 419 1026 1040 305 195 233 27 469 14 5 172 6 52 1 . 25 11 1 . . . .

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

MARKET GROUP

Commercial - Ute Commercial - Ute

Luxury People Mover People Mover

4WD - Large 4WD - Large 4WD - Large 4WD - Compact Light

Light Large

Small

MAKE/MODEL

Toyota Toyota Volvo Volvo Volvo Volvo Volvo Volvo Volvo Volvo Volvo Volkswagon Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagen Volkswagon Unknown

Avensis Others 850/S70/V70/C70 200 Series 300 Series 700/900 Series 960/S90/V90 S80 S60 S40/V40 Others Caravelle / Transporter Caravelle / Transporter Caravelle / Transporter Others Golf Golf Golf / Bora Golf Others Kombi Passat Passat Passat Others 70E Pick Up Polo Polo Polo Others New Beetle Others

MODEL CODE

01-02 92-02 82-93 84-88 84-92 90-98 98-02 01-02 97-02

88-94 95-02 82-94 95-98 99-02

95-97 98-02

96-00 01-02 00-02

T38 Z T99 Z V877Z VO02Z VO03Z VO07Z VO10Z VO11Z VO12Z VO40Z VO99Z VOLKZ VS01A VS01B VS01Z VS02A VS02B VS02C VS02Z VS03Z VS04A VS04B VS04Z VS07Z VS08A VS08B VS08Z VS10Z VS99Z Z Total


7 8428 926 2630 155 1498 54 20 16 240 1505 9 246 467 100 120 581 312 6 6 24 80 2 24 224 14 2 10 226 106063 1120633

0 1699 149 345 23 220 14 1 5 39 257 2 29 62 17 23 93 64 2 4 6 11 1 1 64 3 0 0 34 36694 247084

7 10127 1075 2975 178 1718 68 21 21 279 1762 11 275 529 117 143 674 376 8 10 30 91 3 25 288 17 2 10 260 142757 1367717

No. of injured (but not severely) drivers in NSW and Victoria (87-2002) and QLD,WA, NZ (91-2002) . 4761 123 273 29 200 13 1 3 31 331 19 19 43 10 42 51 40 4 3 5 16 1 5 41 3 1 5 29 16864 233439




. 1416 24 73 9 33 2 0 1 6 73 5 4 7 3 12 12 9 0 1 1 0 0 1 8 0 0 0 10 7429 66193

. 6177 147 346 38 233 15 1 4 37 404 24 23 50 13 54 63 49 4 4 6 16 1 6 49 3 1 5 39 24293 299632

0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 297

MARKET GROUP

Luxury Prestige Prestige Luxury

Prestige

Commercial - Van Commercial - Van Small Small Small

Light

APPENDIX 2

LOGISTIC REGRESSION ESTIMATES OF INJURY RISK BY MODEL AND MARKET GROUP

CRASHWORTHINESS INJURY RISK RATINGS NSW Data (1987-2002), Queensland and Western Australia Data (1991-2002)

Make

Model of Car

Years of Pr(Risk) Manufacture %

Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval

ALL VEHICLE AVERAGE

17.20

Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles

20.16

19.42

20.93

1.51

89-97 85-98 97-02 82-99

18.29 22.40 20.79 25.48

15.59 18.94 16.01 24.04

21.35 26.29 26.55 26.98

5.75 7.35 10.54 2.94

97-01 99-02 84-99 97-02 99-02 88-98 94-00

12.23 12.52 17.97 12.20 17.49 20.79 13.18

9.70 8.50 14.03 9.48 15.08 18.82 11.22

15.32 18.06 22.72 15.57 20.20 22.91 15.41

5.62 9.56 8.69 6.10 5.12 4.09 4.19

14.46

13.62

15.34

1.72

19.06 15.70 11.92 11.71 11.60 17.70 12.37 15.50 13.14

15.41 11.28 9.62 7.75 8.71 15.81 10.98 11.97 9.27

23.34 21.43 14.69 17.30 15.28 19.76 13.90 19.84 18.30

7.93 10.16 5.07 9.55 6.57 3.95 2.92 7.87 9.02

13.05

12.62

13.49

0.87

11.65 13.61 11.96 11.63 15.43 12.29 11.56

9.43 11.71 11.07 9.57 14.51 11.51 10.09

14.30 15.77 12.91 14.05 16.40 13.12 13.21

4.87 4.06 1.84 4.48 1.89 1.61 3.12

19.20

18.62

19.79

1.17

34.04 16.19 14.70 33.42 23.53 15.28 21.95

30.49 14.88 11.82 29.23 19.75 11.91 20.56

37.78 17.59 18.13 37.88 27.79 19.39 23.40

7.29 2.70 6.32 8.65 8.04 7.47 2.84

Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Holden / Suzuki Honda Honda Lada Subaru Suzuki Suzuki Toyota

Feroza / Rocky Rocky / Rugger Terios Drover / Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 CR-V HR-V Niva Forester Grand Vitara Vitara / Escudo RAV4

Medium Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Jeep Land Rover Land Rover Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan Nissan

Jackaroo / Bighorn Jackaroo / Bighorn Cherokee XJ Defender Discovery Pajero Pajero Pathfinder / Terrano Pathfinder / Terrano

82-91 92-97 96-00 92-02 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02

Large Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Land Rover Nissan Nissan / Ford Nissan Toyota Toyota Toyota

Range Rover Patrol Patrol / Maverick Patrol Landcruiser Landcruiser Landcruiser

82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97 98-02

Commercial Vehicles- Vans Daihatsu Ford Ford Holden / Suzuki Holden Honda Toyota

Handivan Falcon Panel Van Transit Scurry / Carry Shuttle / WFR Van Acty Hiace/Liteace

82-90 82-95 95-00 82-00 82-87 83-86 82-86

Make

Model of Car



Toyota Toyota Toyota

Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace

87-89 90-95 96-02

20.33 18.00 15.79

18.45 16.65 14.10

22.34 19.44 17.64

3.89 2.79 3.54

16.40

16.07

16.72

0.65

13.06 15.74 14.75 12.00 15.15 16.06 13.96 13.86 20.11 16.38 15.16 18.39 16.68 18.62 18.81 16.18 14.48 13.36 21.44 35.29 18.95 17.37 15.90 15.13

10.08 14.94 12.92 9.53 12.60 14.16 12.96 10.63 16.83 15.14 13.23 15.74 14.79 15.09 16.74 14.84 12.51 9.94 19.49 31.10 17.79 16.13 15.23 13.59

16.76 16.57 16.79 15.01 18.11 18.16 15.03 17.87 23.83 17.70 17.33 21.37 18.76 22.77 21.06 17.61 16.69 17.73 23.53 39.72 20.17 18.69 16.60 16.82

6.68 1.63 3.87 5.48 5.52 3.99 2.06 7.23 7.00 2.55 4.10 5.63 3.97 7.68 4.32 2.77 4.17 7.80 4.04 8.62 2.38 2.57 1.37 3.22

15.94

15.76

16.12

0.35

82-88 88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 94-98 98-02 96-98 82-88 89-93 93-97 97-02 89-97 98-01 85-90

16.49 15.57 14.46 14.46 14.49 13.57 17.76 16.11 15.10 14.73 17.04 14.13 17.29

16.12 15.15 13.87 14.02 13.69 10.14 17.34 15.72 14.67 14.14 15.60 11.12 16.76

16.87 16.00 15.07 14.92 15.32 17.92 18.18 16.52 15.54 15.34 18.57 17.79 17.83

0.76 0.86 1.20 0.90 1.64 7.78 0.84 0.80 0.87 1.21 2.96 6.66 1.07

91-96

15.47

14.89

16.06

1.17

96-02

14.54

13.72

15.40

1.68

83-88 93-97 98-02 00-02

17.05 16.04 14.68 12.06

15.90 15.47 13.81 9.46

18.28 16.62 15.60 15.25

2.38 1.16 1.79 5.80

Commercial Vehicles- Utes Ford / Mazda Ford / Nissan Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden Holden Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden Holden Holden Kia Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Courier / B-Series Falcon Ute / XFN Ute Falcon Ute Falcon Ute AU Ford F-Series Commodore Ute VG/VP Commodore Ute VR/VS Commodore VU Ute Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo Rodeo WB Series Ceres 720 Ute Navara Navara Navara Brumby Mighty Boy 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux Hilux

98-02 82-95 96-99 00-02 82-92 90-93 94-00 00-02 82-85 89-95 96-98 99-02 82-85 92-00 82-85 86-91 92-96 97-02 82-92 85-88 82-85 86-88 89-97 98-02

Large Cars Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden / Toyota Holden / Toyota Holden Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi

Falcon XE/XF Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EF/EL Falcon AU Taurus Commodore VB-VL Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore VT/VX Sonata Sonata Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Nissan Skyline Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor Toyota Camry Toyota Avalon

Make

Model of Car


Luxury Cars BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Jaguar Lexus Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Saab Volvo Volvo

3 Series E30 3 Series E36 5 Series E28 5 Series E34 Legend XJ6 ES300 / Windom C-Class W201 C-Class W202 E-Class W123 E-Class W124 S-Class W126 9000 700/900 Series 850/S70/V70/C70

14.06

13.52

14.61

1.08

15.77 14.83 13.15 14.30 11.81 13.95 12.63 16.14 12.83 12.54 13.65 12.20 14.49 13.97 13.29

14.30 13.42 10.72 11.43 9.41 9.98 9.37 12.95 10.55 9.22 11.39 9.71 11.94 12.32 11.38

17.35 16.37 16.02 17.76 14.74 19.18 16.82 19.93 15.51 16.84 16.28 15.23 17.47 15.80 15.47

3.05 2.95 5.30 6.34 5.33 9.21 7.45 6.98 4.95 7.62 4.89 5.52 5.53 3.48 4.09

14.95

14.57

15.34

0.76

11.38 16.19 12.44 13.74 14.09 13.53 14.48 20.79 16.01 12.62 13.35 18.85 15.48 15.93 14.90 11.44 16.12 11.99 17.68 13.53 13.41 12.68 15.07

7.63 15.16 11.44 11.59 9.60 11.24 12.93 18.97 14.28 10.59 11.77 17.38 12.63 13.12 11.74 9.08 13.60 9.66 15.97 11.29 11.85 11.46 10.21

16.65 17.28 13.51 16.22 20.20 16.20 16.18 22.74 17.91 14.96 15.10 20.43 18.84 19.20 18.73 14.33 19.01 14.79 19.52 16.14 15.13 14.01 21.69

9.02 2.12 2.07 4.62 10.59 4.96 3.25 3.77 3.63 4.37 3.34 3.05 6.20 6.07 6.99 5.25 5.40 5.12 3.55 4.85 3.28 2.55 11.49

18.15

17.90

18.40

0.50

95-97 97-02 95-01 83-86 88-91 92-97

19.28 17.42 14.15 18.48 17.09 13.91

16.06 13.54 12.25 17.59 15.84 12.81

22.97 22.12 16.29 19.41 18.41 15.10

6.90 8.58 4.03 1.82 2.57 2.29

98-02

13.23

10.56

16.45

5.89

82-91 92-98 82-88 89-95 86-95 82-86 92-01 87-93 95-00 82-85 86-94 82-92 86-97 84-92 92-02

Prestige Cars Audi Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Mazda Nissan Nissan Peugeot Peugeot Saab Saab Toyota Toyota Toyota Volvo Volvo

A4 Fairlane Z & LTD F Fairlane N & LTD D Fairlane N & LTD D Statesman/Caprice WB Stateman/Caprice VQ Stateman/Caprice VR/VS Accord Accord Accord Accord 929 / Luce Maxima Maxima / Cefiro 405 505 900 Series 900/9-3 Crown / Cressida / Mark II Crown / Cressida / Mark II Cressida / Mark II 200 Series 300 Series

95-01 82-87 88-94 95-98 82-85 90-93 94-98 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 82-93 82-92 94-02 82-85 86-88 89-93 82-93 84-88

Medium Cars Daewoo Daewoo Ford Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Mazda

Espero Leganza Mondeo Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos 626


Make

Model of Car

Holden Holden Mitsubishi

Camira Vectra Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista Toyota Corona



82-89 97-02 82-84

22.13 15.31 19.32

21.43 13.47 18.56

22.86 17.35 20.12

1.43 3.88 1.56

95-96 82-86 93-97 86-88 89-92 82-93

18.25 19.75 12.32 17.52 17.86 19.55

15.69 18.99 10.41 16.35 16.95 18.51

21.13 20.52 14.52 18.75 18.80 20.63

5.44 1.53 4.11 2.41 1.86 2.12

89-93 94-98 99-02 83-86 88-92 82-88

15.83 15.29 12.97 17.63 16.99 19.43

14.60 13.51 10.72 16.42 16.48 18.79

17.14 17.26 15.60 18.91 17.52 20.09

2.54 3.75 4.88 2.48 1.04 1.30

19.69

19.10

20.30

1.20

20.22 16.33 24.96 21.71 16.98 16.57 21.02 21.56 12.44

16.99 13.31 23.31 20.35 14.75 12.72 17.06 20.34 11.07

23.88 19.88 26.68 23.13 19.48 21.29 25.62 22.84 13.94

6.89 6.57 3.38 2.77 4.72 8.57 8.55 2.50 2.87

22.53

22.23

22.84

0.61

23.60 20.63 18.30 26.64 22.77 21.80 31.78 21.62 22.63 22.10 27.40 22.49 21.32 30.43 23.28 21.68 21.49 17.65 21.04 18.40 23.05 21.57 16.79

19.43 18.97 16.68 24.69 21.70 20.63 28.22 18.57 21.66 21.02 25.93 21.71 20.07 25.78 21.76 20.79 20.82 15.58 19.40 16.33 22.26 18.39 11.82

28.35 22.40 20.04 28.68 23.88 23.02 35.57 25.01 23.63 23.22 28.91 23.29 22.62 35.51 24.88 22.60 22.18 19.92 22.77 20.67 23.86 25.12 23.31

8.92 3.43 3.37 3.99 2.18 2.40 7.34 6.44 1.98 2.20 2.98 1.58 2.55 9.73 3.12 1.81 1.37 4.33 3.37 4.35 1.61 6.72 11.50

People Movers Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan Toyota Toyota

Nimbus / Chariot / Spacewagon Nimbus / Chariot Starwagon / L300 Starwagon / Delica Starwagon Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Prairie Tarago Tarago / Previa / Estima

85-91 92-98 83-86 87-93 95-98 98-02 84-86 83-89 91-99

Light Cars Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford Holden / Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Holden Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mazda Mazda Mitsubishi Nissan Peugoet

1.5i Cielo Lanos Charade Charade Charade Mira Sirion Festiva WA / 121 Festiva WD/WH/WF Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina SB City Excel Excel Excel / Accent Accent 121 / Autozam Review 121 Metro / Demio Mirage / Colt Micra 205

94-95 95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 90-96 98-02 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 83-86 86-90 90-94 95-00 00-02 94-96 97-02 82-88 95-97 87-94

Make

Model of Car



Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Volkswagen

Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex Hatch / Alto Echo Starlet Polo

89-92 82-84 99-02 96-99 96-00

36.30 35.46 19.00 18.87 19.08

32.87 32.44 16.59 17.39 15.06

39.88 38.59 21.67 20.45 23.87

7.01 6.15 5.08 3.06 8.81

19.69

19.46

19.92

0.46

18.87 15.99 19.69 14.76 22.34 17.36 18.72 18.94 18.13 18.23 22.51 20.03 15.69 16.20 17.21 18.92 17.05 21.72 25.81 20.78 21.11 18.69 17.86 16.66 16.76 21.82 19.72 17.08 21.47 18.81 18.73 17.79 18.75 20.50 13.75 19.72 21.37 16.73 19.24 21.66 20.37 18.53 17.72 15.50 18.14 14.84 19.18

15.58 14.00 18.14 10.50 21.86 15.40 17.95 17.42 16.74 16.80 21.62 19.25 13.01 14.41 16.11 17.77 14.89 20.67 22.83 17.87 19.47 17.38 16.55 15.25 13.43 19.26 17.90 15.66 19.39 17.57 16.85 16.67 17.88 17.12 11.32 16.75 16.46 15.26 16.76 20.80 19.69 17.95 17.00 14.16 13.59 10.36 15.63

22.65 18.20 21.34 20.35 22.83 19.51 19.52 20.56 19.61 19.75 23.41 20.84 18.80 18.17 18.36 20.12 19.45 22.81 29.03 24.02 22.85 20.08 19.25 18.16 20.74 24.61 21.69 18.59 23.70 20.12 20.78 18.97 19.65 24.35 16.62 23.07 27.27 18.31 21.99 22.54 21.07 19.12 18.47 16.93 23.80 20.79 23.31

7.07 4.20 3.21 9.85 0.97 4.11 1.57 3.14 2.87 2.95 1.79 1.60 5.79 3.75 2.25 2.35 4.56 2.14 6.20 6.14 3.38 2.70 2.70 2.91 7.31 5.36 3.79 2.93 4.32 2.56 3.93 2.31 1.77 7.23 5.30 6.32 10.81 3.05 5.23 1.74 1.38 1.18 1.46 2.77 10.21 10.43 7.68

Small Cars Alfa Romeo Daewoo Daihatsu Fiat Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden / Nissan Holden / Nissan Holden Holden Nissan Nissan Nissan Holden Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan Peugeot Proton Rover Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

33 Nubira Applause Regata Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323 Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra / Pulsar / Langley Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Astra TR Astra TS Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Gemini Gemini RB Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic Concerto S Coupe Lantra Lantra Cordia Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE Stanza 306 Wira Quintet Impreza Baleno / Cultus Crescent Corolla Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova Corolla Corolla Corolla 4WD Wagon Tercel

83-92 97-02 89-99 84-88 82-88 99-02 91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 84-86 88-90 96-98 98-02 92-95 96-99 00-02 82-84 86-87 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00 89-93 90-96 91-95 96-00 83-87 89-90 91-92 93-95 96-02 82-83 94-01 95-96 82-86 93-00 95-02 82-84 86-88 89-93 94-97 98-01 02-02 92-96 83-88

Make

Model of Car



Volkswagen Volkswagen

Golf Golf / Bora

95-98 99-02

14.04 14.16

11.56 11.15

16.95 17.83

5.39 6.68

17.60

17.10

18.11

1.01

22.51 14.07 21.53 16.32 18.08 16.55 13.98 17.23 15.48 18.00 18.92 18.90 12.51 27.14 16.49 18.92 13.25 16.95 23.68 16.28 18.43 17.43 15.65 17.09 18.85 26.71 18.95 20.21 20.78

20.13 10.00 16.84 10.85 14.88 13.31 11.26 15.76 13.18 14.79 15.43 15.45 8.60 22.91 11.94 14.99 10.46 13.22 20.01 12.31 16.57 15.54 13.70 14.15 16.80 20.15 12.58 17.73 16.79

25.09 19.43 27.11 23.82 21.78 20.39 17.22 18.82 18.11 21.72 22.99 22.91 17.85 31.84 22.34 23.59 16.64 21.46 27.78 21.22 20.45 19.49 17.81 20.50 21.07 34.50 27.54 22.93 25.42

4.96 9.43 10.27 12.97 6.90 7.09 5.95 3.07 4.93 6.93 7.56 7.46 9.25 8.92 10.41 8.60 6.18 8.23 7.77 8.91 3.88 3.96 4.11 6.35 4.27 14.35 14.96 5.20 8.63

Sports Cars Ford Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Hyundai Mazda Mazda Mazda Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Renault Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Capri Calibra CRX CRX Integra Integra Integra Prelude Prelude Coupe MX5 / Eunos Roadster RX7 RX7 Exa Exa Gazelle / Silvia 200SX / Silvia 300ZX / Fairlady Z NX/NX-R Feugo Celica Celica Celica Celica Celica MR2 MR2 Paseo / Cynos Supra

89-94 94-97 87-91 92-98 86-88 90-92 93-01 83-91 92-96 96-00 89-97 82-85 86-91 83-86 87-91 84-86 94-02 90-95 91-96 82-87 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 87-90 91-00 91-99 82-90

APPENDIX 3

LOGISTIC REGRESSION ESTIMATES OF INJURY SEVERITY BY MODEL AND MARKET GROUP

CRASHWORTHINESS INJURY SEVERITY RATINGS Victoria and NSW Data (1987-2002), Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand Data (1991-2002) Make

Model of Car

Years of Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Manufacture % Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval

ALL VEHICLE AVERAGE

21.01

Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles

19.83

18.31

21.43

3.12

89-97 85-98 97-02 82-99

22.92 28.95 24.88 20.69

16.90 21.94 16.31 18.07

30.31 37.13 36.02 23.57

13.41 15.20 19.71 5.50

97-01 99-02 84-99 97-02 99-02 88-98 94-00

16.21 32.37 24.61 16.02 19.71 21.59 20.55

10.18 16.17 15.98 9.44 13.31 17.91 15.37

24.81 54.29 35.90 25.89 28.20 25.80 26.92

14.62 38.12 19.92 16.45 14.89 7.89 11.56

19.77

17.92

21.77

3.85

12.90 15.57 20.34 24.09 19.02 24.16 21.16 21.91 21.13

8.78 9.43 13.70 13.07 11.81 20.19 17.04 16.51 11.59

18.56 24.63 29.10 40.11 29.19 28.63 25.98 28.48 35.37

9.78 15.20 15.40 27.04 17.38 8.44 8.94 11.97 23.78

21.38

20.17

22.63

2.46

18.50 21.22 20.11 19.79 24.52 23.88 20.80

13.27 16.09 17.40 13.88 21.93 21.33 16.63

25.18 27.46 23.13 27.41 27.29 26.62 25.69

11.91 11.38 5.73 13.54 5.36 5.28 9.06

21.38

20.12

22.70

2.58

23.66 19.67 21.83 25.85 27.28 22.42 23.87

18.34 16.20 13.76 17.95 20.64 13.76 21.22

29.95 23.66 32.84 35.72 35.10 34.35 26.74

11.61 7.46 19.08 17.77 14.46 20.59 5.52

Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Holden / Suzuki Honda Honda Lada Subaru Suzuki Suzuki Toyota




82-91 92-97 96-00 92-02 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02



82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97 98-02

Commercial Vehicles- Vans Daihatsu Ford Ford Holden Holden / Suzuki Honda Toyota

Handivan Falcon Panel Van Transit Shuttle / WFR Van Scurry / Carry Acty Hiace/Liteace

82-90 82-95 95-00 82-87 82-00 83-86 82-86

Make

Model of Car


Toyota Toyota Toyota

Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace

87-89 90-95 96-02

21.58 23.42 22.23

18.22 20.38 16.86

25.36 26.76 28.71

7.14 6.38 11.86

21.52

20.75

22.31

1.56

27.19 22.95 19.33 20.00 19.09 23.93 24.26 39.72 21.09 25.10 16.30 18.78 32.18 21.76 20.28 23.22 19.20 14.31 28.97 24.96 23.59 21.05 22.98 19.16

17.25 20.63 14.50 12.13 12.55 18.75 21.06 27.46 14.75 21.72 12.02 13.03 26.29 12.77 15.86 19.95 14.63 7.22 24.65 18.41 20.95 18.55 21.35 15.28

40.08 25.44 25.29 31.16 27.96 30.01 27.78 53.41 29.23 28.81 21.75 26.30 38.68 34.58 25.55 26.86 24.79 26.39 33.70 32.89 26.46 23.80 24.69 23.76

22.83 4.82 10.79 19.02 15.41 11.25 6.72 25.95 14.48 7.09 9.73 13.27 12.39 21.81 9.68 6.91 10.15 19.17 9.05 14.48 5.51 5.25 3.34 8.48

20.28

19.85

20.71

0.86

82-88 88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 94-98 98-02 96-98 82-88 89-93 93-97 97-02 89-97 98-01 85-90

22.81 20.45 21.74 20.46 16.70 16.45 23.88 22.64 19.97 18.65 20.17 27.30 22.83

21.82 19.32 20.03 19.16 14.48 8.14 22.82 21.58 18.77 16.95 16.58 16.69 21.49

23.83 21.63 23.54 21.83 19.19 30.44 24.96 23.74 21.22 20.47 24.32 41.30 24.23

2.02 2.30 3.51 2.67 4.72 22.31 2.14 2.16 2.45 3.53 7.74 24.61 2.73

91-96

19.44

17.92

21.05

3.13

96-02

18.95

16.70

21.43

4.73

83-88 93-97 98-02 00-02

22.62 20.75 20.75 17.01

20.04 19.12 17.85 8.60

25.44 22.48 23.98 30.85

5.40 3.37 6.14 22.25



98-02 82-95 96-99 00-02 82-92 90-93 94-00 00-02 82-85 89-95 96-98 99-02 82-85 92-00 82-85 86-91 92-96 97-02 82-92 85-88 82-85 86-88 89-97 98-02

Large Cars Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden / Toyota Holden / Toyota Holden Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi

Falcon XE/XF Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EF/EL Falcon AU Taurus Commodore VB-VL Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore VT/VX Sonata Sonata Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Nissan Skyline Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor Toyota Camry Toyota Avalon

Make

Model of Car


Luxury Cars BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Jaguar Lexus Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Saab Volvo Volvo


18.22

16.85

19.68

2.83

19.47 19.33 21.24 22.43 18.33 33.03 18.60 25.00 19.54 21.65 17.19 23.81 10.60 14.69 19.02

16.04 15.33 14.13 14.80 12.39 19.43 10.34 17.04 12.37 10.84 11.22 14.93 5.77 10.57 13.01

23.43 24.07 30.66 32.49 26.27 50.23 31.15 35.11 29.49 38.58 25.44 35.75 18.68 20.06 26.95

7.40 8.74 16.54 17.69 13.88 30.80 20.80 18.07 17.12 27.75 14.22 20.82 12.91 9.50 13.94

20.78

19.80

21.80

2.00

24.48 23.11 21.58 21.94 40.37 27.34 22.33 23.41 19.89 21.87 22.35 22.63 19.59 17.01 20.69 22.21 22.48 20.13 22.57 27.45 19.17 21.34 26.71

13.41 20.50 18.54 16.19 26.98 20.38 17.81 20.81 17.17 16.98 17.84 19.52 14.59 11.70 14.49 15.53 16.39 11.99 18.92 19.74 14.72 17.17 14.42

40.42 25.95 24.97 29.03 55.36 35.61 27.61 26.22 22.93 27.70 27.62 26.08 25.80 24.07 28.65 30.71 30.02 31.80 26.70 36.80 24.58 26.19 44.07

27.01 5.45 6.43 12.84 28.38 15.23 9.80 5.41 5.76 10.72 9.78 6.56 11.21 12.36 14.16 15.18 13.64 19.82 7.77 17.06 9.86 9.03 29.64

20.85

20.31

21.41

1.10

95-97 97-02 95-01 83-86 88-91 92-97

28.77 25.07 15.12 21.11 20.40 22.18

19.94 14.36 10.86 19.45 18.18 19.47

39.58 40.04 20.65 22.87 22.81 25.16

19.63 25.69 9.79 3.41 4.63 5.69

98-02

25.15

17.39

34.91

17.52

82-91 92-98 82-88 89-95 86-95 82-86 92-01 87-93 95-00 82-85 86-94 82-92 86-97 84-92 92-02



95-01 82-87 88-94 95-98 82-85 90-93 94-98 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 82-93 82-92 94-02 82-85 86-88 89-93 82-93 84-88

Medium Cars Daewoo Daewoo Ford Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Mazda

Espero Leganza Mondeo Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos 626

Make

Model of Car

Holden Holden Mitsubishi

Camira Vectra Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista Toyota Corona

Years of Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Manufacture % Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 82-89 97-02 82-84

22.01 14.40 21.84

20.60 10.31 20.27

23.48 19.74 23.50

2.89 9.42 3.23

95-96 82-86 93-97 86-88 89-92 82-93

22.52 23.94 22.51 21.97 22.79 22.76

17.78 22.26 17.88 19.11 20.60 20.59

28.09 25.70 27.92 25.12 25.13 25.09

10.31 3.44 10.04 6.01 4.53 4.50

89-93 94-98 99-02 83-86 88-92 82-88

20.99 22.81 15.23 22.94 22.01 21.81

18.48 18.07 8.91 19.75 20.63 20.26

23.76 28.36 24.80 26.49 23.45 23.44

5.28 10.29 15.89 6.74 2.82 3.18

22.03

20.67

23.44

2.77

19.52 14.67 27.04 22.23 20.14 29.02 23.06 23.97 22.08

14.50 9.04 23.72 19.51 14.32 18.43 15.65 21.03 17.12

25.75 22.93 30.63 25.21 27.56 42.53 32.63 27.18 27.99

11.24 13.89 6.91 5.70 13.24 24.10 16.99 6.15 10.88

22.39

21.77

23.03

1.25

16.61 18.22 25.56 26.98 25.65 26.13 28.85 18.04 25.19 24.74 25.17 23.16 21.69 21.44 24.81 22.77 22.30 29.16 18.55 20.89 23.68 28.40 21.63

8.25 14.85 21.01 23.67 23.15 23.03 23.08 11.71 22.91 22.33 22.61 21.37 18.76 17.97 21.89 20.76 20.70 22.07 15.09 15.84 22.03 20.77 11.90

30.62 22.14 30.72 30.57 28.32 29.49 35.39 26.74 27.62 27.32 27.91 25.04 24.94 25.37 27.98 24.92 23.98 37.44 22.61 27.05 25.42 37.51 36.07

22.37 7.28 9.71 6.90 5.16 6.46 12.32 15.03 4.70 4.99 5.31 3.68 6.18 7.39 6.09 4.16 3.28 15.37 7.52 11.22 3.39 16.75 24.17



85-91 92-98 83-86 87-93 95-98 98-02 84-86 83-89 91-99

Light Cars Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford Holden / Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Holden Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mazda Mazda Mitsubishi Nissan Peugoet

1.5i Cielo Lanos Charade Charade Charade Mira Sirion Festiva WA / 121 Festiva WD/WH/WF Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina SB City Excel Excel Excel / Accent Accent 121 / Autozam Review 121 Metro / Demio Mirage / Colt Micra 205

94-95 95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 90-96 98-02 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 83-86 86-90 90-94 95-00 00-02 94-96 97-02 82-88 95-97 87-94

Make

Model of Car


Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Volkswagen

Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex Hatch / Alto Echo Starlet Polo

89-92 82-84 99-02 96-99 96-00

Small Cars Alfa Romeo Daewoo Daihatsu Fiat Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden / Nissan Holden / Nissan Holden Holden Nissan Nissan Nissan Holden Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan Peugeot Proton Rover Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

33 Nubira Applause Regata Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323 Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra / Pulsar / Langley Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Astra TR Astra TS Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Gemini Gemini RB Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic Concerto S Coupe Lantra Lantra Cordia Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE Stanza 306 Wira Quintet Impreza Baleno / Cultus Crescent Corolla Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova Corolla Corolla Corolla 4WD Wagon Tercel

83-92 97-02 89-99 84-88 82-88 99-02 91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 84-86 88-90 96-98 98-02 92-95 96-99 00-02 82-84 86-87 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00 89-93 90-96 91-95 96-00 83-87 89-90 91-92 93-95 96-02 82-83 94-01 95-96 82-86 93-00 95-02 82-84 86-88 89-93 94-97 98-01 02-02 92-96 83-88

23.49 24.08 22.74 24.71 18.65

18.80 19.56 16.57 20.66 9.55

28.93 29.28 30.37 29.26 33.23

10.13 9.72 13.80 8.60 23.68

21.09

20.62

21.57

0.95

23.82 22.43 21.65 28.33 22.50 18.40 21.02 23.64 21.13 23.94 23.90 23.18 14.60 21.33 19.80 24.75 24.45 22.63 21.00 22.39 25.47 22.75 20.22 21.06 22.76 21.45 21.95 23.04 24.20 21.93 21.49 21.87 21.69 19.74 10.46 25.99 22.94 24.36 16.39 21.83 22.22 22.46 21.18 16.68 27.21 31.87 25.71

16.74 16.81 17.92 14.25 21.55 13.52 19.31 19.96 18.76 20.14 22.16 21.39 9.46 15.83 17.47 21.64 17.42 20.51 16.21 18.68 22.84 20.29 17.47 17.03 16.79 16.16 17.61 19.02 20.79 19.47 17.00 19.32 19.38 13.10 6.09 18.70 14.53 20.12 10.88 20.20 20.71 21.08 19.36 13.09 14.69 16.51 17.70

32.71 29.26 25.91 48.46 23.47 24.55 22.84 27.77 23.71 28.21 25.73 25.07 21.87 28.11 22.37 28.13 33.18 24.91 26.75 26.59 28.29 25.42 23.29 25.74 30.07 27.89 27.01 27.63 27.98 24.60 26.80 24.64 24.20 28.64 17.38 34.88 34.27 29.17 23.95 23.56 23.80 23.89 23.11 21.01 44.80 52.52 35.78

15.98 12.45 7.98 34.21 1.92 11.03 3.53 7.81 4.95 8.07 3.57 3.68 12.41 12.28 4.90 6.49 15.75 4.41 10.55 7.91 5.45 5.13 5.82 8.71 13.28 11.73 9.40 8.61 7.19 5.13 9.80 5.32 4.82 15.53 11.30 16.18 19.74 9.05 13.08 3.36 3.10 2.81 3.76 7.92 30.11 36.01 18.08

Make

Model of Car


Volkswagen Volkswagen

Golf Golf / Bora

95-98 99-02



89-94 94-97 87-91 92-98 86-88 90-92 93-01 83-91 92-96 96-00 89-97 82-85 86-91 83-86 87-91 84-86 94-02 90-95 91-96 82-87 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 87-90 91-00 91-99 82-90

20.78 25.59

11.99 14.08

33.56 41.94

21.58 27.86

22.13

20.98

23.33

2.35

22.13 16.27 26.27 29.26 22.26 16.65 18.28 22.56 27.38 32.47 20.38 26.44 23.14 25.39 28.81 27.29 25.67 22.31 32.97 18.08 17.27 23.42 23.43 23.55 19.54 28.03 17.27 20.85 28.51

17.35 9.11 21.39 18.23 18.02 11.53 11.94 20.11 21.41 22.88 12.84 19.16 15.48 18.18 17.84 23.09 15.83 14.57 24.34 10.68 14.06 18.85 18.67 16.28 13.65 20.48 9.71 15.75 19.20

27.78 27.35 31.83 43.43 27.16 23.43 26.96 25.21 34.29 43.81 30.79 35.27 33.11 34.25 43.01 31.93 38.82 32.60 42.93 28.95 21.03 28.70 28.96 32.79 27.18 37.08 28.85 27.06 40.09

10.44 18.23 10.44 25.20 9.15 11.90 15.02 5.10 12.88 20.94 17.95 16.11 17.63 16.07 25.17 8.84 22.99 18.03 18.59 18.27 6.97 9.85 10.29 16.51 13.54 16.59 19.14 11.31 20.89

APPENDIX 4

CRASHWORTHINESS RATINGS OF 1982-2002 MODELS OF CARS INVOLVED IN CRASHES DURING 1987-2002 with (1) 95 % CONFIDENCE LIMITS (2) 90 % CONFIDENCE LIMITS

CRASHWORTHINESS RATINGS (WITH 95% CONFIDENCE LIMITS) Victoria and NSW Data (1987-2002), Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand Data (1991-2002) Make

Model of Car

ALL MODEL AVERAGE

Years of Serious Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Manufacture injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved 3.98

Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Holden / Suzuki Honda Honda Lada Subaru Suzuki Suzuki Toyota


4.00

3.66

4.36

0.70

89-97 85-98 97-02 82-99

4.19 6.48 5.17 5.27

3.01 4.75 3.23 4.56

5.85 8.85 8.30 6.09

2.84 4.10 5.07 1.53

97-01 99-02 84-99 97-02 99-02 88-98 94-00

1.98 4.05 4.42 1.96 3.45 4.49 2.71

1.20 1.97 2.75 1.11 2.30 3.65 1.96

3.28 8.34 7.10 3.44 5.17 5.52 3.74

2.08 6.37 4.34 2.33 2.87 1.88 1.78

2.86

2.55

3.20

0.65

2.46 2.44 2.42 2.82 2.21 4.28 2.62 3.40 2.78

1.60 1.37 1.57 1.41 1.29 3.48 2.05 2.34 1.44

3.78 4.37 3.74 5.65 3.77 5.26 3.33 4.93 5.36

2.17 3.00 2.17 4.25 2.48 1.79 1.28 2.59 3.93

2.79

2.61

2.98

0.37

2.15 2.89 2.41 2.30 3.78 2.93 2.40

1.47 2.13 2.05 1.55 3.34 2.58 1.86

3.16 3.93 2.83 3.40 4.29 3.34 3.11

1.69 1.80 0.78 1.85 0.95 0.76 1.25

4.11

3.84

4.39

0.56

8.05 3.18 3.21 6.08 9.12

6.16 2.59 1.97 4.14 6.78

10.53 3.92 5.22 8.95 12.26

4.37 1.33 3.25 4.81 5.48



82-91 92-97 96-00 92-02 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02



82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97 98-02

Commercial Vehicles- Vans Daihatsu Ford Ford Holden Holden / Suzuki

Handivan Falcon Panel Van Transit Shuttle / WFR Van Scurry / Carry

82-90 82-95 95-00 82-87 82-00

Make

Model of Car

Honda Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Acty Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace

Years of Serious Manufacture injury rate per 100 drivers involved 83-86 3.42 82-86 5.24 87-89 4.39 90-95 4.22 96-02 3.51

2.03 4.59 3.62 3.60 2.63

5.77 5.98 5.31 4.93 4.69

3.73 1.39 1.69 1.33 2.06

3.53

3.39

3.68

0.29

3.55 3.61 2.85 2.40 2.89 3.84 3.39 5.50 4.24 4.11 2.47 3.45 5.37 4.05 3.81 3.76 2.78 1.91 6.21 8.81 4.47 3.66 3.65 2.90

2.16 3.21 2.10 1.42 1.86 2.94 2.90 3.61 2.89 3.50 1.78 2.35 4.28 2.35 2.93 3.16 2.06 0.93 5.17 6.42 3.92 3.16 3.36 2.27

5.82 4.06 3.88 4.06 4.50 5.02 3.96 8.40 6.23 4.83 3.43 5.07 6.73 6.98 4.97 4.46 3.76 3.91 7.46 12.08 5.10 4.23 3.98 3.71

3.66 0.85 1.78 2.65 2.64 2.07 1.07 4.80 3.35 1.33 1.64 2.72 2.46 4.62 2.04 1.30 1.70 2.98 2.28 5.65 1.19 1.06 0.62 1.44

3.23

3.16

3.31

0.15

82-88 88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 94-98 98-02 96-98 82-88 89-93 93-97 97-02 89-97 98-01 85-90

3.76 3.18 3.14 2.96 2.42 2.23 4.24 3.65 3.02 2.75 3.44 3.86 3.95

3.58 2.99 2.87 2.75 2.08 1.08 4.03 3.46 2.82 2.48 2.78 2.31 3.69

3.95 3.39 3.44 3.18 2.82 4.61 4.46 3.85 3.23 3.04 4.24 6.45 4.22

0.37 0.40 0.57 0.43 0.74 3.53 0.43 0.39 0.41 0.57 1.46 4.14 0.53

91-96

3.01

2.75

3.29

0.54

96-02

2.76

2.40

3.16

0.76

83-88

3.86

3.36

4.43

1.07



98-02 82-95 96-99 00-02 82-92 90-93 94-00 00-02 82-85 89-95 96-98 99-02 82-85 92-00 82-85 86-91 92-96 97-02 82-92 85-88 82-85 86-88 89-97 98-02

Large Cars Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden / Toyota Holden / Toyota Holden Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan

Falcon XE/XF Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EF/EL Falcon AU Taurus Commodore VB-VL Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore VT/VX Sonata Sonata Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Skyline


Make

Model of Car

Years of Serious Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Manufacture injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved

Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor 93-97 Toyota Camry 98-02 Toyota Avalon 00-02

3.33 3.05 2.05

3.05 2.60 1.03

3.64 3.57 4.08

0.59 0.98 3.05

Luxury Cars

2.56

2.35

2.79

0.45

3.07 2.87 2.79 3.21 2.17 4.61 2.35 4.04 2.51 2.71 2.35 2.90 1.54 2.05 2.53

2.48 2.24 1.80 2.04 1.40 2.58 1.25 2.65 1.56 1.33 1.50 1.77 0.83 1.45 1.70

3.80 3.67 4.33 5.05 3.36 8.24 4.41 6.16 4.04 5.53 3.68 4.76 2.86 2.90 3.76

1.32 1.43 2.53 3.01 1.96 5.66 3.15 3.51 2.49 4.19 2.18 2.99 2.03 1.44 2.06

3.11

2.94

3.28

0.34

2.79 3.74 2.68 3.02 5.69 3.70 3.23 4.87 3.19 2.76 2.98 4.27 3.03 2.71 3.08 2.54 3.62 2.41 3.99 3.71 2.57 2.70 4.03

1.41 3.27 2.26 2.15 3.38 2.65 2.53 4.20 2.65 2.04 2.32 3.61 2.14 1.80 2.04 1.68 2.56 1.41 3.27 2.59 1.93 2.14 2.04

5.51 4.28 3.18 4.23 9.56 5.17 4.14 5.64 3.83 3.72 3.84 5.04 4.30 4.08 4.67 3.84 5.13 4.12 4.87 5.33 3.42 3.42 7.95

4.10 1.01 0.92 2.07 6.17 2.52 1.61 1.44 1.18 1.68 1.52 1.42 2.16 2.28 2.63 2.15 2.56 2.71 1.60 2.73 1.48 1.28 5.91

3.78

3.67

3.90

0.23

5.55 4.37 2.14

3.76 2.46 1.50

8.18 7.75 3.04

4.41 5.29 1.54

BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Jaguar Lexus Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Saab Volvo Volvo


82-91 92-98 82-88 89-95 86-95 82-86 92-01 87-93 95-00 82-85 86-94 82-92 86-97 84-92 92-02



95-01 82-87 88-94 95-98 82-85 90-93 94-98 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 82-93 82-92 94-02 82-85 86-88 89-93 82-93 84-88

Medium Cars Daewoo Daewoo Ford

Espero Leganza Mondeo

95-97 97-02 95-01

Make

Model of Car

Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda

Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos Mazda 626 Holden Camira Holden Vectra Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista Toyota Corona

Years of Serious Manufacture injury rate per 100 drivers involved 83-86 3.90 88-91 3.49 92-97 3.09

Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 3.55 3.04 2.65

4.29 3.99 3.59

0.74 0.95 0.94

98-02 82-89 97-02 82-84

3.33 4.87 2.20 4.22

2.20 4.53 1.55 3.88

5.04 5.24 3.12 4.59

2.84 0.71 1.57 0.71

95-96 82-86 93-97 86-88 89-92 82-93

4.11 4.73 2.77 3.85 4.07 4.45

3.13 4.36 2.10 3.30 3.64 3.97

5.40 5.13 3.66 4.48 4.55 4.98

2.27 0.77 1.56 1.18 0.92 1.01

89-93 94-98 99-02 83-86 88-92 82-88

3.32 3.49 1.97 4.05 3.74 4.24

2.86 2.70 1.14 3.44 3.48 3.91

3.86 4.51 3.42 4.76 4.01 4.59

0.99 1.81 2.28 1.32 0.53 0.68

4.34

4.04

4.65

0.61

3.95 2.40 6.75 4.83 3.42 4.81 4.85 5.17 2.75

2.82 1.44 5.84 4.18 2.39 2.93 3.18 4.49 2.09

5.51 3.99 7.80 5.57 4.89 7.88 7.39 5.95 3.60

2.69 2.55 1.96 1.39 2.49 4.94 4.21 1.46 1.51

5.05

4.89

5.20

0.31

3.92 3.76 4.68 7.19 5.84 5.70 9.17 3.90 5.70 5.47 6.89 5.21 4.62 6.52 5.78 4.94 4.79

1.97 3.03 3.79 6.20 5.22 4.97 7.19 2.51 5.14 4.89 6.12 4.77 3.96 5.16 5.02 4.46 4.42

7.82 4.67 5.78 8.34 6.53 6.52 11.70 6.06 6.32 6.12 7.76 5.68 5.40 8.26 6.64 5.46 5.19

5.85 1.64 1.99 2.14 1.30 1.55 4.51 3.55 1.18 1.23 1.64 0.90 1.43 3.10 1.62 0.99 0.77



85-91 92-98 83-86 87-93 95-98 98-02 84-86 83-89 91-99

Light Cars Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford Holden / Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Holden Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai

1.5i Cielo Lanos Charade Charade Charade Mira Sirion Festiva WA / 121 Festiva WD/WH/WF Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina SB City Excel Excel Excel / Accent

94-95 95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 90-96 98-02 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 83-86 86-90 90-94 95-00

Make

Model of Car

Hyundai Mazda Mazda Mitsubishi Nissan Peugoet Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Volkswagen

Accent 121 / Autozam Review 121 Metro / Demio Mirage / Colt Micra 205 Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex Hatch / Alto Echo Starlet Polo

Years of Serious Manufacture injury rate per 100 drivers involved 00-02 5.15 94-96 3.90 97-02 3.84 82-88 5.46 95-97 6.13 87-94 3.63 89-92 8.53 82-84 8.54 99-02 4.32 96-99 4.66 96-00 3.56

Small Cars Alfa Romeo Daewoo Daihatsu Fiat Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden / Nissan Holden / Nissan Holden Holden Nissan Nissan Nissan Holden Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan Peugeot Proton Rover Subaru Suzuki Toyota

33 Nubira Applause Regata Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323 Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra / Pulsar / Langley Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Astra TR Astra TS Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Gemini Gemini RB Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic Concerto S Coupe Lantra Lantra Cordia Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE Stanza 306 Wira Quintet Impreza Baleno / Cultus Crescent Corolla

83-92 97-02 89-99 84-88 82-88 99-02 91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 84-86 88-90 96-98 98-02 92-95 96-99 00-02 82-84 86-87 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00 89-93 90-96 91-95 96-00 83-87 89-90 91-92 93-95 96-02 82-83 94-01 95-96 82-86 93-00 95-02 82-84

Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 3.84 3.14 2.87 5.04 4.38 1.89 6.73 6.85 3.10 3.85 1.82

6.89 4.85 5.15 5.91 8.56 7.00 10.80 10.64 6.02 5.65 6.96

3.05 1.71 2.29 0.87 4.18 5.11 4.07 3.79 2.92 1.80 5.15

4.15

4.05

4.26

0.21

4.49 3.59 4.26 4.18 5.03 3.19 3.94 4.48 3.83 4.36 5.38 4.64 2.29 3.46 3.41 4.68 4.17 4.92 5.42 4.65 5.38 4.25 3.61 3.51 3.82 4.68 4.33 3.93 5.20 4.13 4.03 3.89 4.07 4.05 1.44 5.12 4.90 4.08 3.15 4.73

3.06 2.64 3.48 2.07 4.79 2.32 3.58 3.72 3.33 3.62 4.94 4.25 1.45 2.53 2.96 4.05 2.94 4.41 4.10 3.69 4.70 3.72 3.07 2.80 2.65 3.47 3.42 3.20 4.34 3.60 3.13 3.39 3.60 2.63 0.82 3.61 2.97 3.31 2.07 4.34

6.60 4.87 5.22 8.45 5.27 4.41 4.32 5.39 4.41 5.26 5.85 5.08 3.63 4.71 3.92 5.41 5.91 5.48 7.16 5.86 6.14 4.86 4.25 4.39 5.49 6.31 5.48 4.83 6.22 4.72 5.17 4.46 4.59 6.23 2.52 7.28 8.09 5.01 4.79 5.16

3.55 2.24 1.73 6.39 0.48 2.09 0.74 1.67 1.09 1.64 0.91 0.83 2.18 2.18 0.96 1.36 2.98 1.07 3.06 2.16 1.44 1.14 1.18 1.59 2.84 2.85 2.05 1.63 1.88 1.12 2.04 1.08 0.98 3.59 1.70 3.68 5.12 1.70 2.72 0.82

Make

Model of Car

Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Volkswagen Volkswagen

Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova Corolla Corolla Corolla 4WD Wagon Tercel Golf Golf / Bora

Years of Serious Manufacture injury rate per 100 drivers involved 86-88 4.53 89-93 4.16 94-97 3.75 98-01 2.58 02-02 4.94 92-96 4.73 83-88 4.93 95-98 2.92 99-02 3.62



89-94 94-97 87-91 92-98 86-88 90-92 93-01 83-91 92-96 96-00 89-97 82-85 86-91 83-86 87-91 84-86 94-02 90-95 91-96 82-87 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 87-90 91-00 91-99 82-90

Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 4.19 3.88 3.40 2.01 2.63 2.39 3.29 1.68 1.99

4.89 4.46 4.14 3.33 9.27 9.36 7.40 5.08 6.60

0.70 0.58 0.74 1.32 6.64 6.97 4.12 3.40 4.61

4.00

3.77

4.25

0.49

4.98 2.29 5.66 4.78 4.02 2.75 2.56 3.89 4.24 5.84 3.86 5.00 2.90 6.89 4.75 5.16 3.40 3.78 7.81 2.94 3.18 4.08 3.67 4.03 3.68 7.49 3.27 4.21 5.92

3.84 1.20 4.15 2.65 3.04 1.82 1.61 3.37 3.19 4.00 2.38 3.47 1.71 4.82 2.76 3.91 2.05 2.36 5.62 1.66 2.54 3.21 2.84 2.71 2.56 5.01 1.67 3.12 3.87

6.46 4.37 7.72 8.61 5.33 4.17 4.05 4.49 5.63 8.54 6.25 7.19 4.92 9.86 8.18 6.82 5.65 6.06 10.84 5.21 3.99 5.18 4.73 5.99 5.30 11.19 6.43 5.69 9.06

2.62 3.17 3.57 5.96 2.29 2.35 2.44 1.12 2.45 4.53 3.87 3.72 3.21 5.04 5.42 2.92 3.61 3.70 5.22 3.55 1.46 1.97 1.90 3.29 2.74 6.18 4.77 2.57 5.18

CRASHWORTHINESS RATINGS (WITH 90% CONFIDENCE LIMITS) Victoria and NSW Data (1987-2002), Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand Data (1991-2002) Make

Model of Car

ALL MODEL AVERAGE

Years of Serious Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of Manufacture injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved 3.98



4.00

3.72

4.30

0.58

89-97 85-98 97-02 82-99

4.19 6.48 5.17 5.27

3.18 5.00 3.48 4.67

5.54 8.41 7.68 5.95

2.36 3.41 4.20 1.28

97-01 99-02 84-99 97-02 99-02 88-98 94-00

1.98 4.05 4.42 1.96 3.45 4.49 2.71

1.30 2.22 2.98 1.22 2.46 3.77 2.07

3.02 7.41 6.57 3.14 4.84 5.34 3.55

1.72 5.20 3.59 1.92 2.38 1.57 1.48

2.86

2.60

3.14

0.55

2.46 2.44 2.42 2.82 2.21 4.28 2.62 3.40 2.78

1.72 1.50 1.69 1.58 1.41 3.60 2.14 2.49 1.60

3.52 3.97 3.49 5.05 3.45 5.09 3.20 4.64 4.82

1.80 2.47 1.80 3.47 2.04 1.49 1.07 2.15 3.22

2.79

2.64

2.95

0.31

2.15 2.89 2.41 2.30 3.78 2.93 2.40

1.56 2.24 2.10 1.66 3.41 2.63 1.94

2.97 3.73 2.75 3.19 4.20 3.27 2.98

1.40 1.50 0.65 1.54 0.80 0.63 1.04

4.11

3.88

4.34

0.46

8.05 3.18 3.21 6.08 9.12

6.43 2.68 2.13 4.41 7.12

10.08 3.79 4.82 8.40 11.68

3.64 1.11 2.69 3.99 4.56



82-91 92-97 96-00 92-02 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02



82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97 98-02

Commercial Vehicles- Vans Daihatsu Ford Ford Holden Holden / Suzuki

Handivan Falcon Panel Van Transit Shuttle / WFR Van Scurry / Carry

82-90 82-95 95-00 82-87 82-00

Make

Model of Car

Honda Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Acty Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace

Years of Serious Manufacture injury rate per 100 drivers involved 83-86 3.42 82-86 5.24 87-89 4.39 90-95 4.22 96-02 3.51

2.21 4.69 3.74 3.70 2.75

5.30 5.85 5.15 4.81 4.47

3.08 1.16 1.41 1.11 1.72

3.53

3.41

3.65

0.24

3.55 3.61 2.85 2.40 2.89 3.84 3.39 5.50 4.24 4.11 2.47 3.45 5.37 4.05 3.81 3.76 2.78 1.91 6.21 8.81 4.47 3.66 3.65 2.90

2.35 3.27 2.20 1.55 2.00 3.08 2.97 3.86 3.07 3.59 1.88 2.50 4.44 2.57 3.06 3.25 2.16 1.05 5.33 6.76 4.00 3.24 3.40 2.36

5.37 3.98 3.69 3.73 4.19 4.80 3.86 7.84 5.85 4.71 3.25 4.76 6.49 6.38 4.76 4.34 3.58 3.48 7.24 11.47 4.99 4.13 3.92 3.56

3.03 0.71 1.49 2.18 2.19 1.73 0.89 3.98 2.78 1.11 1.37 2.26 2.05 3.81 1.70 1.08 1.41 2.43 1.91 4.71 0.99 0.89 0.52 1.20

3.23

3.17

3.30

0.13

82-88 88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 94-98 98-02 96-98 82-88 89-93 93-97 97-02 89-97 98-01 85-90

3.76 3.18 3.14 2.96 2.42 2.23 4.24 3.65 3.02 2.75 3.44 3.86 3.95

3.61 3.02 2.91 2.79 2.13 1.22 4.06 3.49 2.85 2.52 2.88 2.51 3.73

3.92 3.36 3.39 3.14 2.75 4.10 4.42 3.82 3.19 2.99 4.10 5.93 4.18

0.31 0.33 0.48 0.36 0.62 2.88 0.36 0.33 0.34 0.47 1.22 3.42 0.45

91-96

3.01

2.79

3.24

0.45

96-02

2.76

2.46

3.09

0.64

83-88

3.86

3.44

4.33

0.89



98-02 82-95 96-99 00-02 82-92 90-93 94-00 00-02 82-85 89-95 96-98 99-02 82-85 92-00 82-85 86-91 92-96 97-02 82-92 85-88 82-85 86-88 89-97 98-02

Large Cars Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden / Toyota Holden / Toyota Holden Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan

Falcon XE/XF Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EF/EL Falcon AU Taurus Commodore VB-VL Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore VT/VX Sonata Sonata Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Skyline


Make

Model of Car

Years of Serious Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of Manufacture injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved

Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor 93-97 Toyota Camry 98-02 Toyota Avalon 00-02

3.33 3.05 2.05

3.09 2.66 1.15

3.58 3.48 3.65

0.49 0.82 2.50

Luxury Cars

2.56

2.38

2.75

0.37

3.07 2.87 2.79 3.21 2.17 4.61 2.35 4.04 2.51 2.71 2.35 2.90 1.54 2.05 2.53

2.57 2.33 1.94 2.20 1.50 2.84 1.39 2.83 1.68 1.50 1.61 1.92 0.91 1.54 1.81

3.67 3.52 4.03 4.69 3.13 7.49 3.98 5.75 3.74 4.92 3.42 4.39 2.58 2.74 3.52

1.10 1.19 2.09 2.49 1.63 4.66 2.59 2.91 2.06 3.42 1.80 2.47 1.67 1.20 1.71

3.11

2.97

3.25

0.28

2.79 3.74 2.68 3.02 5.69 3.70 3.23 4.87 3.19 2.76 2.98 4.27 3.03 2.71 3.08 2.54 3.62 2.41 3.99 3.71 2.57 2.70 4.03

1.58 3.34 2.33 2.27 3.68 2.80 2.63 4.30 2.73 2.15 2.42 3.71 2.27 1.92 2.18 1.80 2.71 1.54 3.38 2.75 2.03 2.22 2.28

4.93 4.19 3.10 4.00 8.78 4.89 3.97 5.50 3.72 3.55 3.68 4.90 4.06 3.81 4.36 3.59 4.84 3.78 4.72 5.02 3.26 3.29 7.11

3.35 0.85 0.77 1.73 5.10 2.10 1.34 1.20 0.98 1.40 1.27 1.19 1.80 1.89 2.18 1.79 2.13 2.24 1.34 2.27 1.24 1.07 4.83

3.78

3.69

3.88

0.19

5.55 4.37 2.14

4.01 2.70 1.59

7.67 7.06 2.87

3.67 4.35 1.28

BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Jaguar Lexus Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Saab Volvo Volvo


82-91 92-98 82-88 89-95 86-95 82-86 92-01 87-93 95-00 82-85 86-94 82-92 86-97 84-92 92-02



95-01 82-87 88-94 95-98 82-85 90-93 94-98 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 82-93 82-92 94-02 82-85 86-88 89-93 82-93 84-88

Medium Cars Daewoo Daewoo Ford

Espero Leganza Mondeo

95-97 97-02 95-01

Make

Model of Car

Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda

Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos Mazda 626 Holden Camira Holden Vectra Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista Toyota Corona

Years of Serious Manufacture injury rate per 100 drivers involved 83-86 3.90 88-91 3.49 92-97 3.09

Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 3.60 3.11 2.72

4.22 3.91 3.51

0.62 0.80 0.79

98-02 82-89 97-02 82-84

3.33 4.87 2.20 4.22

2.35 4.58 1.65 3.93

4.71 5.18 2.95 4.53

2.35 0.60 1.31 0.59

95-96 82-86 93-97 86-88 89-92 82-93

4.11 4.73 2.77 3.85 4.07 4.45

3.27 4.42 2.20 3.39 3.70 4.05

5.17 5.06 3.50 4.37 4.47 4.89

1.90 0.65 1.30 0.99 0.77 0.84

89-93 94-98 99-02 83-86 88-92 82-88

3.32 3.49 1.97 4.05 3.74 4.24

2.93 2.81 1.25 3.53 3.52 3.96

3.76 4.32 3.12 4.64 3.97 4.53

0.83 1.51 1.88 1.11 0.44 0.57

4.34

4.09

4.60

0.51

3.95 2.40 6.75 4.83 3.42 4.81 4.85 5.17 2.75

2.98 1.56 5.98 4.28 2.54 3.18 3.41 4.59 2.19

5.22 3.67 7.62 5.44 4.61 7.27 6.90 5.81 3.45

2.24 2.10 1.64 1.16 2.07 4.09 3.49 1.22 1.26

5.05

4.92

5.18

0.26

3.92 3.76 4.68 7.19 5.84 5.70 9.17 3.90 5.70 5.47 6.89 5.21 4.62 6.52 5.78 4.94 4.79

2.20 3.14 3.92 6.35 5.32 5.09 7.48 2.70 5.23 4.98 6.24 4.84 4.06 5.36 5.14 4.54 4.48

6.98 4.50 5.58 8.14 6.41 6.38 11.24 5.64 6.21 6.01 7.61 5.60 5.26 7.94 6.49 5.37 5.12

4.78 1.37 1.66 1.79 1.09 1.29 3.76 2.94 0.98 1.03 1.37 0.76 1.20 2.59 1.36 0.83 0.64



85-91 92-98 83-86 87-93 95-98 98-02 84-86 83-89 91-99

Light Cars Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford Holden / Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Holden Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai

1.5i Cielo Lanos Charade Charade Charade Mira Sirion Festiva WA / 121 Festiva WD/WH/WF Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina SB City Excel Excel Excel / Accent

94-95 95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 90-96 98-02 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 83-86 86-90 90-94 95-00

Make

Model of Car

Hyundai Mazda Mazda Mitsubishi Nissan Peugoet Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Volkswagen

Accent 121 / Autozam Review 121 Metro / Demio Mirage / Colt Micra 205 Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex Hatch / Alto Echo Starlet Polo

Years of Serious Manufacture injury rate per 100 drivers involved 00-02 5.15 94-96 3.90 97-02 3.84 82-88 5.46 95-97 6.13 87-94 3.63 89-92 8.53 82-84 8.54 99-02 4.32 96-99 4.66 96-00 3.56

Small Cars Alfa Romeo Daewoo Daihatsu Fiat Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden / Nissan Holden / Nissan Holden Holden Nissan Nissan Nissan Holden Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan Peugeot Proton Rover Subaru Suzuki Toyota

33 Nubira Applause Regata Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323 Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra / Pulsar / Langley Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Astra TR Astra TS Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Gemini Gemini RB Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic Concerto S Coupe Lantra Lantra Cordia Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE Stanza 306 Wira Quintet Impreza Baleno / Cultus Crescent Corolla

83-92 97-02 89-99 84-88 82-88 99-02 91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 84-86 88-90 96-98 98-02 92-95 96-99 00-02 82-84 86-87 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00 89-93 90-96 91-95 96-00 83-87 89-90 91-92 93-95 96-02 82-83 94-01 95-96 82-86 93-00 95-02 82-84

Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 4.03 3.25 3.01 5.11 4.63 2.10 7.00 7.10 3.27 3.97 2.03

6.57 4.68 4.91 5.83 8.11 6.29 10.39 10.26 5.70 5.48 6.24

2.54 1.43 1.91 0.73 3.48 4.19 3.40 3.16 2.43 1.51 4.21

4.15

4.07

4.24

0.18

4.49 3.59 4.26 4.18 5.03 3.19 3.94 4.48 3.83 4.36 5.38 4.64 2.29 3.46 3.41 4.68 4.17 4.92 5.42 4.65 5.38 4.25 3.61 3.51 3.82 4.68 4.33 3.93 5.20 4.13 4.03 3.89 4.07 4.05 1.44 5.12 4.90 4.08 3.15 4.73

3.26 2.77 3.60 2.32 4.83 2.44 3.64 3.84 3.40 3.73 5.01 4.31 1.56 2.67 3.03 4.15 3.11 4.49 4.29 3.84 4.81 3.80 3.15 2.91 2.81 3.64 3.56 3.31 4.47 3.68 3.26 3.47 3.68 2.82 0.90 3.82 3.23 3.43 2.22 4.40

6.20 4.64 5.05 7.53 5.23 4.18 4.26 5.23 4.31 5.10 5.77 5.00 3.37 4.48 3.83 5.29 5.59 5.39 6.84 5.64 6.01 4.76 4.14 4.23 5.18 6.01 5.27 4.67 6.04 4.62 4.97 4.37 4.50 5.80 2.30 6.88 7.45 4.85 4.48 5.09

2.95 1.86 1.45 5.22 0.40 1.74 0.62 1.39 0.91 1.37 0.76 0.69 1.81 1.81 0.80 1.14 2.48 0.90 2.55 1.80 1.21 0.96 0.99 1.33 2.36 2.37 1.71 1.36 1.57 0.94 1.70 0.90 0.82 2.98 1.40 3.06 4.23 1.42 2.26 0.69

Make

Model of Car

Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Volkswagen Volkswagen

Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova Corolla Corolla Corolla 4WD Wagon Tercel Golf Golf / Bora

Years of Serious Manufacture injury rate per 100 drivers involved 86-88 4.53 89-93 4.16 94-97 3.75 98-01 2.58 02-02 4.94 92-96 4.73 83-88 4.93 95-98 2.92 99-02 3.62



89-94 94-97 87-91 92-98 86-88 90-92 93-01 83-91 92-96 96-00 89-97 82-85 86-91 83-86 87-91 84-86 94-02 90-95 91-96 82-87 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 87-90 91-00 91-99 82-90

Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 4.24 3.92 3.46 2.09 2.91 2.67 3.51 1.84 2.19

4.83 4.41 4.07 3.19 8.36 8.37 6.93 4.64 5.99

0.59 0.49 0.62 1.10 5.45 5.70 3.42 2.80 3.79

4.00

3.80

4.21

0.41

4.98 2.29 5.66 4.78 4.02 2.75 2.56 3.89 4.24 5.84 3.86 5.00 2.90 6.89 4.75 5.16 3.40 3.78 7.81 2.94 3.18 4.08 3.67 4.03 3.68 7.49 3.27 4.21 5.92

4.01 1.33 4.36 2.92 3.18 1.95 1.74 3.45 3.34 4.26 2.57 3.68 1.86 5.11 3.02 4.09 2.22 2.55 5.93 1.83 2.63 3.34 2.96 2.89 2.72 5.35 1.86 3.28 4.15

6.19 3.93 7.34 7.82 5.09 3.90 3.76 4.39 5.38 8.02 5.78 6.78 4.51 9.30 7.49 6.52 5.20 5.61 10.28 4.75 3.85 4.98 4.54 5.61 4.99 10.48 5.76 5.42 8.45

2.19 2.60 2.98 4.90 1.91 1.95 2.02 0.94 2.04 3.77 3.20 3.09 2.65 4.19 4.47 2.43 2.98 3.06 4.35 2.92 1.22 1.64 1.58 2.73 2.28 5.13 3.90 2.14 4.30

APPENDIX 5

AGGRESSIVITY INJURY RISK AGGRESSIVITY INJURY SEVERITY AND RATINGS OF VEHICLE AGGRESSIVITY (with 95% and 90% CONFIDENCE LIMITS), TOWARDS OTHER VEHICLE DRIVERS

AGGRESSIVITY INJURY RISK RATINGS NSW Data (1987-2002), Queensland and Western Australia Data (1991-2002) Make

Model of Car


ALL VEHICLE AVERAGE Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Daihatsu Feroza / Rocky Daihatsu Rocky / Rugger Holden / Suzuki Drover / Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 Honda CR-V Lada Niva Suzuki Vitara / Escudo Suzuki Grand Vitara Toyota RAV4

15.83 89-97 85-98 82-99

14.92 18.81 19.68 15.65

13.96 14.91 14.36 13.83

15.93 23.45 26.36 17.66

1.97 8.54 12.00 3.82

97-01 84-99 88-98 99-02 94-00

15.69 16.51 18.15 15.11 15.56

11.98 12.01 15.08 12.35 12.80

20.28 22.28 21.68 18.36 18.79

8.30 10.28 6.60 6.01 5.99

18.37

17.06

19.76

2.70

21.58 18.10 23.90 20.54 19.01 24.72 13.33

15.27 14.55 17.18 17.63 16.76 18.47 8.29

29.58 22.29 32.24 23.79 21.49 32.25 20.75

14.32 7.74 15.06 6.17 4.73 13.78 12.45

20.28

19.57

21.00

1.43

22.94 21.46 19.95 22.09 22.45 22.35 21.23

18.76 18.32 18.45 18.31 20.95 20.97 18.34

27.74 24.99 21.54 26.40 24.03 23.79 24.44

8.98 6.67 3.09 8.08 3.08 2.82 6.10

19.42

18.60

20.27

1.67

17.33 15.40 22.17 22.25 20.97 24.51 23.45 21.40

15.52 11.22 17.75 20.09 18.24 22.41 20.74 16.54

19.31 20.77 27.32 24.56 23.98 26.74 26.39 27.21

3.79 9.54 9.57 4.47 5.74 4.33 5.66 10.67

17.89

17.40

18.39

1.00

19.12 19.69

13.87 18.39

25.75 21.06

11.88 2.68

Medium Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Holden / Isuzu Jeep Land Rover Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan Nissan

Jackaroo / Bighorn Cherokee XJ Discovery Pajero Pajero Pathfinder / Terrano Pathfinder / Terrano

82-91 96-00 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02



82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97 98-02

Commercial Vehicles - Vans Ford Ford Ford Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Volkswagen

Falcon Panel Van Falcon Panel Van Transit Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Caravelle / Transporter

82-95 96-99 95-00 82-86 87-89 90-95 96-02 95-02

Commercial Vehicles- Utes Ford / Mazda Ford / Nissan

Courier / B-Series Falcon Ute / XFN Ute


98-02 82-95

Make

Model of Car



Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden Holden Holden Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Subaru Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Falcon Ute Falcon Ute AU Ford F-Series Commodore Ute VG/VP Commodore Ute VR/VS Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo Rodeo WB Series 720 Ute Navara Navara Navara Brumby 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux Hilux

96-99 00-02 82-92 90-93 94-00 82-85 89-95 96-98 99-02 82-85 82-85 86-91 92-96 97-02 82-92 82-85 86-88 89-97 98-02

18.85 20.46 27.07 16.57 17.38 19.68 20.33 20.97 21.28 20.91 19.84 17.83 19.54 23.69 15.41 19.95 19.45 18.73 19.20

16.02 15.77 22.57 13.55 15.75 14.24 18.24 17.60 16.89 17.79 16.38 15.87 16.57 18.20 12.34 17.98 17.44 17.67 16.75

22.05 26.10 32.09 20.12 19.13 26.55 22.59 24.79 26.46 24.42 23.83 19.97 22.91 30.22 19.09 22.07 21.63 19.84 21.91

6.02 10.33 9.52 6.57 3.38 12.31 4.35 7.19 9.57 6.63 7.45 4.10 6.35 12.02 6.75 4.09 4.20 2.17 5.16

15.70

15.45

15.95

0.50

82-88 88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 94-98 98-02 82-88 89-93 93-97 97-02 89-97 85-90

17.50 17.27 17.52 17.75 18.00 16.56 15.85 15.77 18.96 15.99 15.98

16.92 16.64 16.60 17.05 16.71 15.96 15.27 15.12 17.96 14.03 15.23

18.09 17.92 18.47 18.47 19.37 17.17 16.45 16.44 20.01 18.16 16.75

1.17 1.29 1.87 1.42 2.67 1.21 1.18 1.32 2.05 4.13 1.52

96-02

17.39

16.12

18.74

2.62

91-96

16.79

15.95

17.66

1.71

83-88 93-97 98-02 00-02

17.54 16.27 17.02 19.79

15.81 15.46 15.70 14.91

19.42 17.12 18.42 25.79

3.61 1.66 2.72 10.88

14.83

14.01

15.70

1.69

15.76 13.10 18.28 14.11 22.22 18.49 10.92 16.57 16.19 16.07

13.44 11.07 13.40 10.15 17.62 12.97 8.06 13.00 12.03 13.37

18.38 15.42 24.44 19.27 27.62 25.67 14.62 20.88 21.44 19.19

4.94 4.35 11.03 9.11 10.00 12.71 6.56 7.87 9.41 5.81

Large Cars Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden / Toyota Holden / Toyota Holden Hyundai Mitsubishi

Falcon XE/XF Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EF/EL Falcon AU Commodore VB-VL Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore VT/VX Sonata Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Nissan Skyline Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor Toyota Camry Toyota Avalon Luxury Cars BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Lexus Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Volvo

3 Series E30 3 Series E36 3 Series E46 5 Series E34 Legend ES300 / Windom C-Class W202 E-Class W124 S-Class W126 700/900 Series

82-91 92-98 99-02 89-95 86-95 92-01 95-00 86-94 82-92 84-92

Make

Model of Car



Volvo

850/S70/V70/C70

92-02

18.01

14.74

21.82

7.08

14.92

14.37

15.49

1.12

18.21 14.86 19.48 15.91 16.18 13.48 14.61 13.41 17.69 17.40 18.23 15.64 12.61 16.13 16.17 13.81

16.58 13.27 15.73 12.24 13.81 11.16 12.27 10.62 15.24 15.25 13.76 11.90 8.29 12.25 13.70 10.46

19.96 16.59 23.88 20.41 18.88 16.19 17.30 16.80 20.45 19.78 23.76 20.30 18.71 20.95 18.98 18.01

3.39 3.32 8.15 8.17 5.07 5.03 5.03 6.17 5.21 4.53 10.01 8.40 10.42 8.70 5.28 7.55

14.52

14.22

14.84

0.62

82-82 95-01 83-86 88-91 92-97

16.49 14.81 14.92 15.53 13.69

14.73 12.09 13.68 13.80 12.10

18.42 18.02 16.26 17.43 15.45

3.69 5.93 2.58 3.64 3.35

98-02 82-89 97-02 82-84

12.56 16.75 16.32 15.01

9.02 15.81 13.57 14.13

17.24 17.75 19.51 15.93

8.22 1.94 5.94 1.81

95-96 86-88 89-92 82-86 93-97 82-93

14.83 16.29 15.93 14.87 14.97 14.57

11.30 14.60 14.67 13.83 12.04 13.03

19.23 18.13 17.28 15.97 18.46 16.25

7.92 3.53 2.61 2.14 6.42 3.22

89-93 94-98 99-02 82-88 83-86 88-92

15.44 15.12 15.63 14.73 15.90 16.92

13.65 12.51 11.83 13.98 14.22 16.18

17.42 18.16 20.37 15.52 17.74 17.69

3.76 5.65 8.54 1.55 3.52 1.51

17.66

16.80

18.54

1.74

12.92 15.66 22.10 20.20

8.84 11.52 19.46 18.17

18.52 20.93 24.98 22.39

9.68 9.41 5.53 4.21

Prestige Cars Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Mazda Nissan Nissan Peugeot Saab Toyota Toyota

Fairlane Z & LTD F Fairlane N & LTD D Fairlane N & LTD D Stateman/Caprice VQ Stateman/Caprice VR/VS Accord Accord Accord Accord 929 / Luce Maxima Maxima / Cefiro 405 900/9-3 Crown / Cressida / Mark II Crown / Cressida / Mark II

82-87 88-94 95-98 90-93 94-98 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 94-02 82-85 86-88

Medium Cars Ford Ford Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda

Cortina Mondeo Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos Mazda 626 Holden Camira Holden Vectra Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Corona Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista People Movers Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi

Nimbus / Chariot / Spacewagon Nimbus / Chariot Starwagon / L300 Starwagon / Delica Starwagon

85-91 92-98 83-86 87-93

Make

Model of Car



Mitsubishi Toyota Toyota

Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Tarago Tarago / Previa / Estima

95-98 83-89 91-99

22.12 16.94 16.97

18.75 15.16 14.64

25.90 18.89 19.58

7.15 3.73 4.94

12.00

11.70

12.31

0.61

12.18 14.18 12.47 11.15 13.22 9.41 14.15 11.76 12.99 11.84 12.94 15.79 13.63 13.46 13.41 10.70 11.60 13.51 10.47 13.04

10.37 12.12 10.24 9.99 11.84 6.60 13.02 10.58 11.34 10.99 11.50 13.94 12.62 12.68 10.84 8.97 9.37 12.56 7.89 11.27

14.26 16.54 15.10 12.43 14.74 13.25 15.37 13.06 14.84 12.75 14.53 17.85 14.72 14.28 16.48 12.72 14.28 14.52 13.76 15.06

3.89 4.43 4.86 2.43 2.89 6.64 2.34 2.48 3.49 1.76 3.02 3.91 2.11 1.60 5.65 3.75 4.92 1.96 5.86 3.79

12.60

12.35

12.85

0.50

14.34 14.65 13.89 12.98 13.40 12.88 13.26 12.22 16.13 12.65 12.54 12.28 12.93 14.04 14.40 15.19 16.00 8.55 14.06 14.26 13.40 15.51 11.01 12.28 16.41 14.30

11.64 12.67 13.32 10.58 12.42 11.05 11.46 10.55 12.48 10.34 11.28 9.24 11.87 13.07 12.92 13.70 13.03 5.63 11.94 12.56 11.74 13.63 7.16 9.49 13.93 12.46

17.54 16.88 14.48 15.83 14.44 14.96 15.29 14.12 20.60 15.40 13.92 16.13 14.06 15.08 16.01 16.81 19.49 12.76 16.50 16.15 15.25 17.61 16.56 15.76 19.23 16.36

5.89 4.21 1.16 5.24 2.02 3.90 3.83 3.56 8.13 5.06 2.65 6.89 2.18 2.02 3.09 3.11 6.46 7.13 4.56 3.59 3.50 3.99 9.40 6.27 5.30 3.91

Light Cars Daewoo Daewoo Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford Holden / Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Holden Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mazda Mazda Mitsubishi Toyota Toyota

Cielo Lanos Charade Charade Charade Mira Festiva WA / 121 Festiva WD/WH/WF Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina SB Excel Excel Excel / Accent Accent 121 / Autozam Review 121 Metro / Demio Mirage / Colt Echo Starlet

95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 90-96 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 86-90 90-94 95-00 00-02 94-96 97-02 82-88 99-02 96-99

Small Cars Daewoo Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden / Nissan Holden / Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai

Nubira Applause Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323 Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra TR Astra TS Gemini Gemini RB Astra / Pulsar / Langley Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic Concerto S Coupe Lantra Lantra

97-02 89-99 82-88 99-02 91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 96-98 98-02 82-84 86-87 84-86 88-90 92-95 96-99 00-02 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00 89-93 90-96 91-95 96-00

Make

Model of Car



Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Peugeot Proton Subaru Toyota Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden Toyota Volkswagen

Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE Cordia 306 Wira Impreza Corolla Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova Corolla Golf

89-90 91-92 93-95 96-02 83-87 94-01 95-96 93-00 82-84 86-88 89-93 94-97 98-01 95-98

12.67 12.91 12.65 13.03 16.26 12.08 15.10 14.61 12.69 13.33 13.90 13.25 13.71 12.81

11.12 10.92 11.25 12.00 13.49 8.71 11.45 12.58 11.73 12.48 13.15 12.33 11.86 9.46

14.39 15.21 14.19 14.13 19.48 16.53 19.66 16.90 13.71 14.23 14.69 14.22 15.80 17.12

3.26 4.30 2.94 2.13 5.99 7.83 8.21 4.33 1.98 1.75 1.54 1.89 3.94 7.67

14.55

13.85

15.27

1.42

14.39 18.79 16.25 14.28 14.69 11.56 14.37 13.68 14.80 13.93 16.73 18.29 17.69 16.80 21.47 16.05 11.81

11.65 12.45 10.21 12.27 11.48 8.03 10.07 9.83 10.64 8.97 12.24 15.27 14.73 13.75 16.44 14.26 9.16

17.63 27.35 24.88 16.57 18.61 16.37 20.10 18.73 20.21 21.00 22.45 21.74 21.10 20.37 27.52 18.01 15.10

5.98 14.90 14.67 4.30 7.13 8.34 10.03 8.90 9.57 12.03 10.21 6.47 6.37 6.62 11.07 3.75 5.94

Sports Cars Ford Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Hyundai Nissan Nissan Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Capri Calibra CRX Prelude Prelude Integra Integra Integra Coupe Gazelle / Silvia NX/NX-R Celica Celica Celica Celica Celica Paseo / Cynos

89-94 94-97 87-91 83-91 92-96 86-88 90-92 93-01 96-00 84-86 91-96 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 91-99

AGGRESSIVITY INJURY SEVERITY RATINGS NSW and Victoria Data (1987-2002), Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand Data (1991-2002) Make

Model of Car


ALL VEHICLE AVERAGE Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Daihatsu Feroza / Rocky Daihatsu Rocky / Rugger Holden / Suzuki Drover / Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 Honda CR-V Lada Niva Suzuki Vitara / Escudo Suzuki Grand Vitara Toyota RAV4

16.12 89-97 85-98 82-99

14.06 20.46 27.01 10.52

12.05 12.19 15.72 6.92

16.35 32.27 42.34 15.66

4.31 20.08 26.63 8.74

97-01 84-99 88-98 99-02 94-00

10.87 18.88 12.80 15.23 17.21

6.10 10.00 8.32 8.45 11.90

18.64 32.77 19.17 25.92 24.22

12.54 22.77 10.84 17.47 12.32

16.89

14.86

19.12

4.26

11.48 17.40 14.60 20.55 17.65 16.07 20.15

6.52 11.19 8.81 15.96 13.59 11.25 11.37

19.43 26.03 23.24 26.06 22.60 22.43 33.17

12.90 14.84 14.43 10.10 9.00 11.18 21.80

20.09

18.74

21.50

2.76

21.04 20.44 19.93 23.28 20.89 21.09 18.60

13.82 14.98 17.08 17.44 18.00 18.57 14.51

30.70 27.25 23.12 30.37 24.11 23.86 23.54

16.88 12.28 6.04 12.93 6.12 5.30 9.03

16.74

15.30

18.29

2.99

17.50 19.43 18.00 15.70 18.66 16.64 17.44 25.44

13.41 9.98 11.35 12.62 14.79 13.77 13.13 15.52

22.51 34.41 27.34 19.37 23.27 19.96 22.80 38.80

9.10 24.44 15.98 6.75 8.48 6.19 9.68 23.27

17.65

16.69

18.66

1.97

18.90

10.33

32.03

21.69



82-91 96-00 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02



82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97 98-02

Commercial Vehicles- Vans Ford Ford Ford Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota Volkswagen


82-95 96-99 95-00 82-86 87-89 90-95 96-02 95-02

Commercial Vehicles- Utes Ford / Mazda

Courier / B-Series

98-02

Make

Model of Car


Ford / Nissan Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden Holden Holden Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Subaru Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Falcon Ute / XFN Ute Falcon Ute Falcon Ute AU Ford F-Series Commodore Ute VG/VP Commodore Ute VR/VS Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo Rodeo WB Series 720 Ute Navara Navara Navara Brumby 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux Hilux

82-95 96-99 00-02 82-92 90-93 94-00 82-85 89-95 96-98 99-02 82-85 82-85 86-91 92-96 97-02 82-92 82-85 86-88 89-97 98-02

16.90 18.09 13.48 25.71 20.05 20.34 23.49 22.70 13.71 17.66 16.20 13.11 16.01 15.92 14.71 18.03 18.54 17.17 18.79 17.66

14.26 12.66 7.49 17.76 13.09 16.61 14.01 18.68 9.30 11.49 10.69 8.28 12.64 11.51 8.76 10.93 14.78 13.91 16.85 13.36

19.93 25.19 23.07 35.67 29.44 24.67 36.64 27.30 19.75 26.18 23.81 20.14 20.07 21.60 23.65 28.27 23.00 20.99 20.90 22.99

5.67 12.53 15.58 17.91 16.35 8.06 22.63 8.62 10.45 14.70 13.12 11.86 7.43 10.10 14.88 17.33 8.22 7.08 4.04 9.63

16.69

16.13

17.26

1.12

82-88 88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 94-98 98-02 82-88 89-93 93-97 97-02 89-97 85-90

16.98 18.00 18.06 18.19 16.36 16.95 16.65 17.46 18.61 16.22 16.22

15.71 16.58 16.05 16.69 14.03 15.58 15.32 15.95 16.62 11.91 14.50

18.32 19.52 20.28 19.80 19.00 18.41 18.06 19.08 20.78 21.70 18.09

2.61 2.94 4.23 3.12 4.97 2.83 2.75 3.13 4.16 9.79 3.59

96-02

16.30

13.86

19.07

5.21

91-96

15.98

14.24

17.87

3.63

83-88 93-97 98-02 00-02

15.28 16.49 17.48 31.94

12.07 14.56 14.64 20.26

19.15 18.61 20.74 46.44

7.08 4.06 6.11 26.19

17.68

15.80

19.74

3.94

16.44 22.33 18.74 17.75 14.61 20.94 17.47 24.01 21.56

11.82 16.77 9.55 10.62 8.78 10.67 9.52 15.97 11.44

22.42 29.09 33.51 28.16 23.33 36.99 29.86 34.44 36.89

10.60 12.33 23.96 17.54 14.55 26.32 20.33 18.46 25.45


Falcon XE/XF Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EF/EL Falcon AU Commodore VB-VL Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore VT/VX Sonata Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Nissan Skyline Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor Toyota Camry Toyota Avalon Luxury Cars BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Lexus Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz

3 Series E30 3 Series E36 3 Series E46 5 Series E34 Legend ES300 / Windom C-Class W202 E-Class W124 S-Class W126

82-91 92-98 99-02 89-95 86-95 92-01 95-00 86-94 82-92

Make

Model of Car


Volvo Volvo

700/900 Series 850/S70/V70/C70

84-92 92-02

18.11 22.24

12.10 15.05

26.22 31.60

14.12 16.55

15.73

14.62

16.90

2.29

17.16 17.06 20.40 18.37 20.73 12.42 18.54 14.00 13.23 12.85 16.77 9.46 14.17 15.90 22.18 17.63

13.74 13.45 14.07 9.97 15.48 9.60 15.19 9.49 9.35 9.47 11.14 5.10 7.62 8.36 16.60 9.31

21.22 21.40 28.63 31.41 27.19 15.94 22.44 20.18 18.38 17.20 24.47 16.90 24.83 28.17 28.98 30.85

7.48 7.95 14.56 21.44 11.71 6.34 7.25 10.69 9.02 7.73 13.33 11.80 17.21 19.81 12.38 21.54

15.12

14.44

15.83

1.39

82-82 95-01 83-86 88-91 92-97

13.38 15.99 13.90 17.92 16.50

10.15 10.99 11.87 15.12 13.54

17.44 22.67 16.22 21.10 19.96

7.29 11.68 4.35 5.97 6.42

98-02 82-89 97-02 82-84

25.37 14.17 14.31 14.80

16.35 12.22 9.74 12.76

37.15 16.37 20.54 17.11

20.79 4.15 10.80 4.34

95-96 86-88 89-92 82-86 93-97 82-93

18.40 18.20 15.80 14.71 13.26 11.84

12.53 14.28 13.14 12.49 9.25 9.02

26.18 22.91 18.89 17.25 18.65 15.39

13.65 8.63 5.75 4.75 9.40 6.37

89-93 94-98 99-02 82-88 83-86 88-92

17.89 21.78 15.96 15.47 17.33 15.45

14.75 16.05 8.60 13.41 13.12 13.84

21.53 28.84 27.70 17.77 22.55 17.22

6.78 12.79 19.11 4.36 9.43 3.38

15.45

13.77

17.29

3.53

16.86 15.24 16.44 15.16

9.91 8.07 12.23 11.92

27.21 26.90 21.73 19.08

17.30 18.83 9.50 7.15



82-87 88-94 95-98 90-93 94-98 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 94-02 82-85 86-88


Cortina Mondeo Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos Mazda 626 Holden Camira Holden Vectra Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Corona Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista People Movers Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi

Nimbus / Chariot / Spacewagon Nimbus / Chariot Starwagon / L300 Starwagon / Delica Starwagon

85-91 92-98 83-86 87-93

Make

Model of Car


Mitsubishi Toyota Toyota

Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Tarago Tarago / Previa / Estima

95-98 83-89 91-99



95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 90-96 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 86-90 90-94 95-00 00-02 94-96 97-02 82-88 99-02 96-99

Small Cars Daewoo Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden / Nissan Holden / Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai

Nubira Applause Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323 Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra TR Astra TS Gemini Gemini RB Astra / Pulsar / Langley Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic Concerto S Coupe Lantra Lantra

97-02 89-99 82-88 99-02 91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 96-98 98-02 82-84 86-87 84-86 88-90 92-95 96-99 00-02 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00 89-93 90-96 91-95 96-00

13.87 19.58 13.47

8.75 14.84 9.25

21.29 25.39 19.21

12.53 10.54 9.95

13.73

12.89

14.61

1.72

9.89 14.02 15.01 10.38 12.48 20.30 13.01 14.64 11.56 13.71 16.55 11.94 14.17 16.58 14.78 13.71 9.68 15.13 14.23 14.58

6.09 9.42 9.77 7.27 8.64 10.31 10.06 11.53 8.09 11.15 12.37 8.42 11.36 14.35 8.69 8.22 5.05 12.60 7.49 9.95

15.67 20.37 22.35 14.61 17.69 36.09 16.67 18.42 16.26 16.73 21.79 16.66 17.53 19.08 24.01 21.97 17.76 18.07 25.39 20.86

9.58 10.94 12.58 7.34 9.05 25.79 6.61 6.89 8.17 5.58 9.41 8.24 6.18 4.73 15.32 13.75 12.70 5.48 17.90 10.91

14.26

13.67

14.86

1.19

19.05 13.45 13.55 16.63 15.05 22.58 11.60 14.98 17.84 15.12 13.88 16.60 13.89 16.63 14.99 16.94 22.10 13.98 14.74 13.80 16.87 7.98 21.74 16.29 16.10 14.36

12.32 8.91 12.36 10.48 12.74 17.48 9.06 10.71 10.55 9.95 10.57 9.51 11.29 14.12 12.06 13.52 13.84 8.99 11.44 10.75 13.37 5.18 13.08 8.62 10.18 10.15

28.28 19.79 14.83 25.36 17.69 28.66 14.72 20.57 28.57 22.32 18.02 27.37 16.98 19.48 18.49 21.02 33.39 21.08 18.80 17.54 21.06 12.09 33.91 28.62 24.51 19.94

15.96 10.87 2.46 14.88 4.95 11.18 5.66 9.85 18.02 12.37 7.44 17.86 5.69 5.36 6.44 7.50 19.56 12.09 7.36 6.79 7.70 6.91 20.83 20.00 14.33 9.79

Make

Model of Car


Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Peugeot Proton Subaru Toyota Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden Toyota Volkswagen

Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE Cordia 306 Wira Impreza Corolla Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova Corolla Golf

89-90 91-92 93-95 96-02 83-87 94-01 95-96 93-00 82-84 86-88 89-93 94-97 98-01 95-98



89-94 94-97 87-91 83-91 92-96 86-88 90-92 93-01 96-00 84-86 91-96 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 91-99

14.11 14.20 11.61 16.65 19.67 21.38 21.28 18.94 11.41 14.62 14.98 14.89 16.54 21.01

10.98 9.34 8.75 13.82 14.97 11.73 11.31 14.02 9.40 12.47 13.24 12.61 11.91 10.73

17.96 21.01 15.26 19.93 25.41 35.75 36.44 25.08 13.79 17.07 16.91 17.50 22.51 37.03

6.98 11.68 6.51 6.11 10.43 24.02 25.13 11.07 4.38 4.60 3.67 4.89 10.60 26.30

16.46

15.06

17.95

2.90

12.37 21.36 15.30 15.97 18.32 13.48 19.00 14.46 18.56 14.98 33.48 18.91 19.86 21.94 14.40 11.75 15.55

7.35 11.72 9.45 13.06 12.16 8.94 11.73 7.89 9.42 8.41 20.16 13.68 13.83 15.97 7.78 7.57 7.91

20.06 35.70 23.81 19.38 26.65 19.81 29.26 25.02 33.32 25.26 50.07 25.54 27.67 29.35 25.12 17.79 28.32

12.71 23.98 14.36 6.32 14.49 10.86 17.53 17.13 23.90 16.85 29.91 11.86 13.84 13.37 17.33 10.21 20.41

AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS (WITH 95% CONFIDENCE LIMITS) NSW and Victoria Data (1987-2002), Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand Data (1991-2002) Make

Model of Car

ALL MODEL AVERAGE Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Daihatsu Feroza / Rocky Daihatsu Rocky / Rugger Holden / Suzuki Drover / Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 Honda CR-V Lada Niva Suzuki Vitara / Escudo Suzuki Grand Vitara Toyota RAV4

Years of Serious injury Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Manufacture rate per 100 Confidence Confidence Confidence drivers Limit Limit Interval involved 2.77 89-97 85-98 82-99

2.10 3.85 5.31 1.65

1.78 2.24 2.96 1.07

2.48 6.60 9.55 2.52

0.70 4.36 6.59 1.45

97-01 84-99 88-98 99-02 94-00

1.71 3.12 2.32 2.30 2.68

0.92 1.59 1.47 1.27 1.79

3.17 6.12 3.66 4.19 4.01

2.25 4.54 2.19 2.92 2.23

3.10

2.68

3.59

0.91

2.48 3.15 3.49 4.22 3.36 3.97 2.69

1.30 1.96 1.95 3.17 2.53 2.55 1.32

4.70 5.06 6.24 5.63 4.46 6.20 5.46

3.40 3.10 4.29 2.46 1.93 3.65 4.14

4.07

3.77

4.40

0.63

4.83 4.39 3.98 5.14 4.69 4.71 3.95

3.09 3.13 3.35 3.69 3.99 4.10 2.98

7.54 6.15 4.71 7.17 5.51 5.43 5.24

4.45 3.02 1.36 3.49 1.52 1.33 2.26

3.25

2.95

3.59

0.65

3.03 2.99 3.99 3.49 3.91 4.08 4.09 5.44

2.29 1.49 2.44 2.76 3.00 3.32 3.02 3.22

4.02 6.01 6.52 4.43 5.10 5.01 5.53 9.20

1.73 4.53 4.08 1.67 2.10 1.69 2.51 5.98

3.16

2.97

3.36

0.39



82-91 96-00 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02



82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97 98-02



Commercial Vehicles- Utes

82-95 96-99 95-00 82-86 87-89 90-95 96-02 95-02

Make

Model of Car

Ford / Mazda Ford / Nissan Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden Holden Holden Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Subaru Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Courier / B-Series Falcon Ute / XFN Ute Falcon Ute Falcon Ute AU Ford F-Series Commodore Ute VG/VP Commodore Ute VR/VS Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo Rodeo WB Series 720 Ute Navara Navara Navara Brumby 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux Hilux

Years of Serious injury Manufacture rate per 100 drivers involved 98-02 3.61 82-95 3.33 96-99 3.41 00-02 2.76 82-92 6.96 90-93 3.32 94-00 3.54 82-85 4.62 89-95 4.62 96-98 2.88 99-02 3.76 82-85 3.39 82-85 2.60 86-91 2.85 92-96 3.11 97-02 3.48 82-92 2.78 82-85 3.70 86-88 3.34 89-97 3.52 98-02 3.39

1.89 2.78 2.33 1.48 4.70 2.11 2.84 2.60 3.71 1.90 2.35 2.20 1.60 2.20 2.18 1.99 1.64 2.90 2.65 3.11 2.50

6.92 3.99 4.99 5.13 10.30 5.22 4.41 8.23 5.74 4.35 6.02 5.22 4.22 3.70 4.44 6.10 4.70 4.72 4.21 3.98 4.59

5.03 1.21 2.66 3.64 5.60 3.11 1.57 5.63 2.03 2.45 3.67 3.02 2.62 1.49 2.26 4.11 3.06 1.82 1.57 0.86 2.09

2.62

2.52

2.72

0.19

82-88 88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 94-98 98-02 82-88 89-93 93-97 97-02 89-97 85-90

2.97 3.11 3.16 3.23 2.95 2.81 2.64 2.75 3.53 2.59 2.59

2.73 2.84 2.78 2.94 2.49 2.56 2.41 2.49 3.12 1.87 2.30

3.23 3.40 3.60 3.55 3.49 3.07 2.89 3.04 4.00 3.60 2.92

0.50 0.56 0.82 0.61 1.00 0.51 0.48 0.55 0.88 1.73 0.63

96-02

2.83

2.38

3.38

1.01

91-96

2.68

2.37

3.04

0.67

83-88 93-97 98-02 00-02

2.68 2.68 2.98 6.32

2.08 2.35 2.46 3.83

3.45 3.06 3.60 10.42

1.37 0.72 1.15 6.59

2.62

2.31

2.97

0.66

2.59 2.92 3.43 2.50 3.25 3.87 1.91

1.81 2.12 1.70 1.39 1.89 1.89 1.00

3.70 4.04 6.92 4.50 5.58 7.93 3.65

1.89 1.92 5.22 3.11 3.68 6.04 2.65


Falcon XE/XF Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EF/EL Falcon AU Commodore VB-VL Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore VT/VX Sonata Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Nissan Skyline Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor Toyota Camry Toyota Avalon Luxury Cars BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Lexus Mercedes Benz

3 Series E30 3 Series E36 3 Series E46 5 Series E34 Legend ES300 / Windom C-Class W202


82-91 92-98 99-02 89-95 86-95 92-01 95-00

Make

Model of Car

Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Volvo Volvo

E-Class W124 S-Class W126 700/900 Series 850/S70/V70/C70

Years of Serious injury Manufacture rate per 100 drivers involved 86-94 3.98 82-92 3.49 84-92 2.91 92-02 4.00

2.53 1.81 1.90 2.63

6.26 6.75 4.47 6.10

3.73 4.94 2.57 3.48

2.35

2.16

2.55

0.38

3.12 2.53 3.98 2.92 3.35 1.67 2.71 1.88 2.34 2.24 3.06 1.48 1.79 2.57 3.59 2.43

2.47 1.96 2.63 1.55 2.43 1.22 2.09 1.21 1.62 1.61 1.89 0.77 0.87 1.31 2.60 1.25

3.96 3.28 6.01 5.51 4.63 2.29 3.51 2.92 3.38 3.10 4.94 2.86 3.68 5.01 4.96 4.73

1.49 1.32 3.38 3.96 2.20 1.07 1.42 1.72 1.77 1.48 3.05 2.10 2.81 3.70 2.36 3.47

2.20

2.09

2.31

0.22

82-82 95-01 83-86 88-91 92-97

2.21 2.37 2.07 2.78 2.26

1.65 1.56 1.74 2.27 1.80

2.96 3.58 2.48 3.41 2.84

1.31 2.02 0.74 1.14 1.05

98-02 82-89 97-02 82-84

3.19 2.37 2.34 2.22

1.89 2.03 1.54 1.90

5.39 2.78 3.54 2.60

3.50 0.75 2.00 0.71

95-96 86-88 89-92 82-86 93-97 82-93

2.73 2.97 2.52 2.19 1.99 1.72

1.73 2.29 2.06 1.83 1.32 1.29

4.30 3.85 3.07 2.61 3.00 2.30

2.57 1.56 1.01 0.78 1.68 1.01

89-93 94-98 99-02 82-88 83-86 88-92

2.76 3.29 2.49 2.28 2.76 2.62

2.21 2.32 1.30 1.96 2.06 2.32

3.46 4.66 4.78 2.65 3.69 2.94

1.25 2.34 3.48 0.69 1.64 0.62

2.73

2.41

3.09

0.68

2.18

1.16

4.09

2.93



82-87 88-94 95-98 90-93 94-98 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 94-02 82-85 86-88


Cortina Mondeo Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos Mazda 626 Holden Camira Holden Vectra Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Corona Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista People Movers Mitsubishi


Nimbus / Chariot / Spacewagon 85-91

Make

Model of Car

Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Toyota Toyota

Nimbus / Chariot Starwagon / L300 Starwagon / Delica Starwagon Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Tarago Tarago / Previa / Estima

Years of Serious injury Manufacture rate per 100 drivers involved 92-98 2.39 83-86 3.63 87-93 3.06 95-98 3.07 83-89 3.32 91-99 2.29



95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 90-96 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 86-90 90-94 95-00 00-02 94-96 97-02 82-88 99-02 96-99

Small Cars Daewoo Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden / Nissan Holden / Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda

Nubira Applause Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323 Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra TR Astra TS Gemini Gemini RB Astra / Pulsar / Langley Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic

97-02 89-99 82-88 99-02 91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 96-98 98-02 82-84 86-87 84-86 88-90 92-95 96-99 00-02 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00

Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 1.21 2.65 2.37 1.91 2.48 1.54

4.70 4.97 3.96 4.93 4.44 3.39

3.48 2.32 1.59 3.02 1.95 1.85

1.65

1.54

1.76

0.22

1.20 1.99 1.87 1.16 1.65 1.91 1.84 1.72 1.50 1.62 2.14 1.89 1.93 2.23 1.98 1.47 1.12 2.04 1.49 1.90

0.73 1.31 1.18 0.80 1.13 0.93 1.41 1.33 1.03 1.31 1.58 1.31 1.53 1.91 1.14 0.87 0.58 1.68 0.76 1.28

1.99 3.02 2.96 1.67 2.40 3.94 2.40 2.23 2.18 2.01 2.91 2.71 2.43 2.60 3.44 2.48 2.19 2.48 2.93 2.83

1.26 1.71 1.78 0.87 1.27 3.02 0.99 0.90 1.15 0.71 1.33 1.40 0.90 0.69 2.30 1.61 1.61 0.80 2.17 1.56

1.80

1.72

1.88

0.17

2.73 1.97 1.88 2.16 2.02 2.91 1.54 1.83 2.88 1.91 1.74 2.04 1.80 2.33 2.16 2.57 3.54 1.19 2.07 1.97 2.26 1.24

1.72 1.29 1.70 1.33 1.68 2.18 1.16 1.28 1.64 1.22 1.31 1.12 1.44 1.96 1.70 2.02 2.17 0.66 1.54 1.49 1.74 0.79

4.35 3.01 2.08 3.52 2.42 3.89 2.04 2.62 5.04 3.01 2.32 3.72 2.24 2.79 2.74 3.28 5.76 2.16 2.79 2.59 2.94 1.93

2.63 1.73 0.38 2.19 0.73 1.71 0.88 1.34 3.40 1.79 1.01 2.60 0.80 0.83 1.04 1.27 3.58 1.50 1.25 1.10 1.20 1.13

Make

Model of Car

Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Peugeot Proton Subaru Toyota Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden Toyota Volkswagen

Concerto S Coupe Lantra Lantra Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE Cordia 306 Wira Impreza Corolla Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova Corolla Golf

Years of Serious injury Manufacture rate per 100 drivers involved 89-93 2.39 90-96 2.00 91-95 2.64 96-00 2.05 89-90 1.79 91-92 1.83 93-95 1.47 96-02 2.17 83-87 3.20 94-01 2.58 95-96 3.21 93-00 2.77 82-84 1.45 86-88 1.95 89-93 2.08 94-97 1.97 98-01 2.27 95-98 2.69



89-94 94-97 87-91 83-91 92-96 86-88 90-92 93-01 96-00 84-86 91-96 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 91-99

Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 1.26 1.04 1.65 1.43 1.35 1.18 1.09 1.77 2.32 1.35 1.68 1.99 1.18 1.64 1.82 1.65 1.60 1.34

4.53 3.86 4.23 2.96 2.36 2.85 1.99 2.65 4.42 4.94 6.16 3.84 1.78 2.31 2.38 2.36 3.22 5.39

3.27 2.82 2.57 1.53 1.01 1.67 0.90 0.88 2.10 3.59 4.48 1.84 0.60 0.67 0.56 0.71 1.62 4.04

2.39

2.16

2.65

0.48

1.78 4.01 2.49 2.28 2.69 1.56 2.73 1.98 2.75 2.09 5.60 3.46 3.51 3.69 3.09 1.89 1.84

1.03 2.02 1.30 1.78 1.70 0.91 1.53 1.02 1.34 1.04 3.23 2.41 2.37 2.56 1.62 1.21 0.92

3.07 7.98 4.74 2.92 4.27 2.66 4.86 3.85 5.62 4.20 9.71 4.95 5.20 5.30 5.89 2.94 3.67

2.04 5.96 3.43 1.14 2.58 1.75 3.32 2.83 4.27 3.16 6.48 2.54 2.82 2.73 4.27 1.73 2.75

AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS (WITH 90% CONFIDENCE LIMITS) NSW and Victoria Data (1987-2002), Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand Data (1991-2002) Make

Model of Car

ALL MODEL AVERAGE Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Daihatsu Feroza / Rocky Daihatsu Rocky / Rugger Holden / Suzuki Drover / Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 Honda CR-V Lada Niva Suzuki Vitara / Escudo Suzuki Grand Vitara Toyota RAV4

Years of Serious injury Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of Manufacture rate per 100 Confidence Confidence Confidence drivers Limit Limit Interval involved 2.77 89-97 85-98 82-99

2.10 3.85 5.31 1.65

1.82 2.45 3.26 1.15

2.41 6.05 8.68 2.35

0.59 3.60 5.42 1.20

97-01 84-99 88-98 99-02 94-00

1.71 3.12 2.32 2.30 2.68

1.02 1.77 1.58 1.40 1.91

2.87 5.48 3.40 3.80 3.76

1.85 3.71 1.82 2.40 1.85

3.10

2.75

3.51

0.76

2.48 3.15 3.49 4.22 3.36 3.97 2.69

1.45 2.12 2.15 3.32 2.65 2.74 1.48

4.24 4.68 5.68 5.37 4.25 5.76 4.87

2.79 2.57 3.53 2.05 1.61 3.03 3.38

4.07

3.82

4.34

0.53

4.83 4.39 3.98 5.14 4.69 4.71 3.95

3.32 3.31 3.45 3.89 4.10 4.19 3.12

7.01 5.82 4.59 6.80 5.37 5.30 5.00

3.69 2.51 1.14 2.90 1.27 1.11 1.88

3.25

2.99

3.53

0.54

3.03 2.99 3.99 3.49 3.91 4.08 4.09 5.44

2.40 1.67 2.64 2.86 3.13 3.43 3.18 3.51

3.84 5.37 6.02 4.26 4.88 4.84 5.26 8.44

1.44 3.70 3.38 1.39 1.75 1.41 2.09 4.93

3.16

3.00

3.33

0.33



82-91 96-00 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02



82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97 98-02



Commercial Vehicles- Utes

82-95 96-99 95-00 82-86 87-89 90-95 96-02 95-02

Make

Model of Car

Ford / Mazda Ford / Nissan Ford Ford Ford Holden Holden Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden Holden Holden Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Subaru Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Courier / B-Series Falcon Ute / XFN Ute Falcon Ute Falcon Ute AU Ford F-Series Commodore Ute VG/VP Commodore Ute VR/VS Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo / Pickup Rodeo Rodeo WB Series 720 Ute Navara Navara Navara Brumby 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux 4Runner/Hilux Hilux

Years of Serious injury Manufacture rate per 100 drivers involved 98-02 3.61 82-95 3.33 96-99 3.41 00-02 2.76 82-92 6.96 90-93 3.32 94-00 3.54 82-85 4.62 89-95 4.62 96-98 2.88 99-02 3.76 82-85 3.39 82-85 2.60 86-91 2.85 92-96 3.11 97-02 3.48 82-92 2.78 82-85 3.70 86-88 3.34 89-97 3.52 98-02 3.39

2.10 2.86 2.48 1.64 5.01 2.27 2.94 2.85 3.85 2.03 2.53 2.36 1.74 2.30 2.31 2.18 1.79 3.02 2.75 3.18 2.63

6.22 3.87 4.69 4.63 9.66 4.85 4.25 7.49 5.54 4.07 5.58 4.86 3.90 3.54 4.19 5.57 4.31 4.54 4.06 3.90 4.37

4.13 1.01 2.21 2.99 4.65 2.58 1.31 4.63 1.69 2.04 3.04 2.50 2.17 1.24 1.88 3.39 2.52 1.52 1.31 0.72 1.74

2.62

2.54

2.70

0.16

82-88 88-Mar 92 Apr 92-94 94-98 98-02 82-88 89-93 93-97 97-02 89-97 85-90

2.97 3.11 3.16 3.23 2.95 2.81 2.64 2.75 3.53 2.59 2.59

2.77 2.88 2.84 2.98 2.56 2.60 2.45 2.53 3.18 1.97 2.34

3.19 3.35 3.52 3.49 3.39 3.03 2.85 2.99 3.92 3.41 2.87

0.42 0.47 0.68 0.51 0.84 0.43 0.40 0.46 0.73 1.44 0.52

96-02

2.83

2.45

3.29

0.84

91-96

2.68

2.42

2.98

0.56

83-88 93-97 98-02 00-02

2.68 2.68 2.98 6.32

2.17 2.40 2.53 4.16

3.31 3.00 3.49 9.61

1.14 0.60 0.96 5.45

2.62

2.36

2.91

0.55

2.59 2.92 3.43 2.50 3.25 3.87 1.91

1.92 2.23 1.90 1.53 2.07 2.13 1.11

3.49 3.83 6.17 4.09 5.10 7.05 3.28

1.57 1.60 4.27 2.56 3.04 4.93 2.18


Falcon XE/XF Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Falcon EF/EL Falcon AU Commodore VB-VL Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen Commodore VT/VX Sonata Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Nissan Skyline Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor Toyota Camry Toyota Avalon Luxury Cars BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Lexus Mercedes Benz

3 Series E30 3 Series E36 3 Series E46 5 Series E34 Legend ES300 / Windom C-Class W202


82-91 92-98 99-02 89-95 86-95 92-01 95-00

Make

Model of Car

Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Volvo Volvo

E-Class W124 S-Class W126 700/900 Series 850/S70/V70/C70

Years of Serious injury Manufacture rate per 100 drivers involved 86-94 3.98 82-92 3.49 84-92 2.91 92-02 4.00

2.72 2.01 2.03 2.81

5.81 6.06 4.16 5.70

3.09 4.05 2.13 2.88

2.35

2.19

2.51

0.32

3.12 2.53 3.98 2.92 3.35 1.67 2.71 1.88 2.34 2.24 3.06 1.48 1.79 2.57 3.59 2.43

2.56 2.04 2.81 1.72 2.56 1.29 2.18 1.30 1.72 1.70 2.04 0.85 0.98 1.46 2.74 1.40

3.81 3.15 5.62 4.97 4.40 2.18 3.37 2.72 3.19 2.94 4.57 2.57 3.27 4.49 4.70 4.24

1.25 1.10 2.80 3.25 1.83 0.89 1.19 1.42 1.47 1.24 2.53 1.72 2.29 3.03 1.96 2.84

2.20

2.11

2.29

0.19

82-82 95-01 83-86 88-91 92-97

2.21 2.37 2.07 2.78 2.26

1.73 1.67 1.79 2.35 1.86

2.82 3.35 2.41 3.30 2.74

1.09 1.68 0.62 0.95 0.87

98-02 82-89 97-02 82-84

3.19 2.37 2.34 2.22

2.05 2.08 1.65 1.95

4.95 2.71 3.31 2.54

2.89 0.63 1.66 0.59

95-96 86-88 89-92 82-86 93-97 82-93

2.73 2.97 2.52 2.19 1.99 1.72

1.86 2.39 2.13 1.89 1.41 1.35

3.99 3.69 2.98 2.54 2.80 2.20

2.13 1.30 0.84 0.65 1.39 0.84

89-93 94-98 99-02 82-88 83-86 88-92

2.76 3.29 2.49 2.28 2.76 2.62

2.29 2.46 1.45 2.01 2.16 2.37

3.33 4.41 4.30 2.58 3.52 2.89

1.05 1.95 2.85 0.57 1.37 0.52

2.73

2.46

3.03

0.57

2.18

1.29

3.69

2.40



82-87 88-94 95-98 90-93 94-98 82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 94-02 82-85 86-88


Cortina Mondeo Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos Mazda 626 Holden Camira Holden Vectra Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Corona Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista People Movers Mitsubishi


Nimbus / Chariot / Spacewagon 85-91

Make

Model of Car

Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Toyota Toyota

Nimbus / Chariot Starwagon / L300 Starwagon / Delica Starwagon Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Tarago Tarago / Previa / Estima

Years of Serious injury Manufacture rate per 100 drivers involved 92-98 2.39 83-86 3.63 87-93 3.06 95-98 3.07 83-89 3.32 91-99 2.29



95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 90-96 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 86-90 90-94 95-00 00-02 94-96 97-02 82-88 99-02 96-99

Small Cars Daewoo Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden Holden Holden Holden Holden / Nissan Holden / Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Honda Honda Honda Honda Honda

Nubira Applause Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323 Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra TR Astra TS Gemini Gemini RB Astra / Pulsar / Langley Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Pulsar Civic Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Civic / Shuttle Civic Civic

97-02 89-99 82-88 99-02 91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 96-98 98-02 82-84 86-87 84-86 88-90 92-95 96-99 00-02 82-83 84-87 88-91 92-95 96-00

Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 1.35 2.79 2.47 2.06 2.60 1.64

4.20 4.72 3.80 4.56 4.23 3.18

2.85 1.93 1.33 2.50 1.63 1.53

1.65

1.56

1.74

0.19

1.20 1.99 1.87 1.16 1.65 1.91 1.84 1.72 1.50 1.62 2.14 1.89 1.93 2.23 1.98 1.47 1.12 2.04 1.49 1.90

0.79 1.40 1.27 0.85 1.20 1.04 1.47 1.39 1.10 1.35 1.66 1.39 1.59 1.96 1.25 0.95 0.64 1.74 0.85 1.36

1.83 2.82 2.75 1.57 2.26 3.50 2.30 2.14 2.05 1.94 2.77 2.56 2.34 2.54 3.15 2.27 1.96 2.41 2.62 2.65

1.04 1.42 1.47 0.72 1.05 2.46 0.83 0.75 0.96 0.59 1.11 1.17 0.75 0.58 1.90 1.33 1.32 0.67 1.78 1.29

1.80

1.73

1.87

0.14

2.73 1.97 1.88 2.16 2.02 2.91 1.54 1.83 2.88 1.91 1.74 2.04 1.80 2.33 2.16 2.57 3.54 1.19 2.07 1.97 2.26 1.24

1.85 1.38 1.73 1.44 1.73 2.28 1.21 1.36 1.80 1.31 1.37 1.23 1.49 2.01 1.77 2.10 2.35 0.73 1.62 1.56 1.81 0.85

4.03 2.81 2.05 3.25 2.34 3.71 1.95 2.47 4.60 2.79 2.21 3.37 2.16 2.71 2.64 3.15 5.32 1.96 2.66 2.48 2.82 1.79

2.18 1.43 0.32 1.81 0.61 1.43 0.73 1.11 2.80 1.48 0.84 2.14 0.67 0.69 0.87 1.06 2.96 1.23 1.04 0.92 1.00 0.94

Make

Model of Car

Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Peugeot Proton Subaru Toyota Toyota Toyota / Holden Toyota / Holden Toyota Volkswagen

Concerto S Coupe Lantra Lantra Lancer / Mirage CA Lancer / Mirage CB Lancer / Mirage CC Lancer / Mirage CE Cordia 306 Wira Impreza Corolla Corolla Corolla / Nova Corolla / Nova Corolla Golf

Years of Serious injury Manufacture rate per 100 drivers involved 89-93 2.39 90-96 2.00 91-95 2.64 96-00 2.05 89-90 1.79 91-92 1.83 93-95 1.47 96-02 2.17 83-87 3.20 94-01 2.58 95-96 3.21 93-00 2.77 82-84 1.45 86-88 1.95 89-93 2.08 94-97 1.97 98-01 2.27 95-98 2.69



89-94 94-97 87-91 83-91 92-96 86-88 90-92 93-01 96-00 84-86 91-96 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 91-99

Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of Confidence Confidence Confidence Limit Limit Interval 1.40 1.15 1.78 1.51 1.42 1.27 1.14 1.83 2.44 1.50 1.86 2.10 1.22 1.69 1.86 1.70 1.69 1.51

4.08 3.47 3.91 2.79 2.26 2.65 1.89 2.56 4.19 4.44 5.54 3.64 1.72 2.25 2.33 2.29 3.04 4.81

2.68 2.31 2.13 1.27 0.84 1.38 0.75 0.73 1.75 2.94 3.68 1.53 0.50 0.56 0.47 0.59 1.35 3.30

2.39

2.20

2.60

0.40

1.78 4.01 2.49 2.28 2.69 1.56 2.73 1.98 2.75 2.09 5.60 3.46 3.51 3.69 3.09 1.89 1.84

1.13 2.26 1.45 1.85 1.83 1.00 1.69 1.13 1.51 1.16 3.53 2.56 2.53 2.72 1.80 1.30 1.03

2.81 7.13 4.26 2.81 3.96 2.44 4.42 3.45 5.00 3.74 8.88 4.67 4.88 4.99 5.30 2.73 3.28

1.68 4.88 2.82 0.95 2.13 1.44 2.73 2.32 3.49 2.58 5.34 2.11 2.34 2.27 3.50 1.43 2.25

APPENDIX 6

PRESENTATION OF CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS FOR CONSUMER INFORMATION

CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS Victoria and NSW Data (1987-2002), Queensland, Western Australia and New Zealand Data (1991-2002)

CRASHWORTHINESS Make

Model of Car

Years of Significantly Significantly Not Significantly Significantly Manufacture less than better than significantly worse than greater than 15% better average but different average but 15% worse than not from not than average significantly average significantly average less than greater than 15% better 15% worse than than average average

AGGRESSIVITY ++ = Much better than average + = Better than average Average Worse than o = average Much worse than average x=

xx =

+



89-97 85-98 97-02 82-99 97-01 99-02 84-99 97-02 99-02 88-98 94-00


82-91 92-97 96-00 92-02 91-02 82-90 92-99 88-94 95-02

Range Rover Patrol Patrol / Maverick Patrol Landcruiser Landcruiser

o o o o o

o o o xx o o o xx

Large Four Wheel Drive Vehicles Land Rover Nissan Nissan / Ford Nissan Toyota Toyota

++

o


o xx

82-94 82-87 88-97 98-02 82-89 90-97

xx xx xx xx xx xx


Model of Car



xx =

Toyota

Landcruiser

98-02

x

Commercial Vehicles- Vans Daihatsu Ford Ford Holden / Suzuki Holden Honda Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota

Handivan Falcon Panel Van Transit Scurry / Carry Shuttle / WFR Van Acty Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace Hiace/Liteace

82-90 82-95 95-00 82-00 82-87 83-86 82-86 87-89 90-95 96-02

Holden Holden Holden / Isuzu Holden / Isuzu Holden Holden Holden Kia Nissan Nissan Nissan Nissan Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Toyota Toyota


o o

x x xx x x

Commercial Vehicles- Utes Ford / Mazda Ford / Nissan Ford Ford Ford Holden

x

98-02 82-95 96-99 00-02 82-92 90-93

o x o o xx o

94-00

x

00-02 82-85 89-95 96-98 99-02 82-85 92-00 82-85 86-91 92-96 97-02 82-92 85-88 82-85 86-88 89-97 98-02

x xx o o o o o o o o x o x o


Model of Car



xx =

+ Large Cars Ford Ford

Falcon XE/XF 82-88 Falcon EA / Falcon 88-Mar 92 EB Series I Ford Falcon EB Series II / Apr 92-94 Falcon ED Ford Falcon EF/EL 94-98 Ford Falcon AU 98-02 Ford Taurus 96-98 Holden Commodore VB-VL 82-88 Commodore VN/VP / Holden / Toyota Lexcen 89-93 Holden / Toyota Commodore VR/VS / 93-97 Lexcen Holden Commodore VT/VX 97-02 Hyundai Sonata 98-01 Hyundai Sonata 89-97 Mitsubishi Magna TM/TN/TP / 85-90 Sigma / V3000 Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / 91-96 Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / 96-02 Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante Nissan Skyline 83-88 Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry 93-97 / Sceptor Toyota Camry 98-02 Toyota Avalon 00-02

x x o o o o x o o o o o o o xx o

Luxury Cars BMW BMW BMW BMW Honda Jaguar

o x

3 Series E30 3 Series E36 5 Series E28 5 Series E34 Legend XJ6

82-91 92-98 82-88 89-95 86-95 82-86

o o o o


Model of Car



xx =

Lexus Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Mercedes Benz Saab Volvo Volvo

ES300 / Windom C-Class W201 C-Class W202 E-Class W123 E-Class W124 S-Class W126 9000 700/900 Series 850/S70/V70/C70

92-01 87-93 95-00 82-85 86-94 82-92 86-97 84-92 92-02

Holden Holden Honda Honda Honda Honda Mazda Nissan Nissan Peugeot Peugeot Saab Saab Toyota Toyota Toyota Volvo Volvo


o o o x

95-01 82-87 88-94 95-98 82-85

o o x

90-93 94-98

o o

82-85 86-90 91-93 94-98 82-90 90-94 95-99 89-97 82-93 82-92 94-02 82-85

++ o + o o o + o

86-88

o

89-93 82-93 84-88

o o

Espero

o o

++

Medium Cars Daewoo

o

+

Prestige Cars Audi Ford Ford Ford Holden

o

95-97


Model of Car



xx =

Daewoo Ford Ford / Mazda

Leganza Mondeo Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Ford / Mazda Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella Ford / Mazda Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos Mazda 626 Holden Camira Holden Vectra Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda Mitsubishi Galant Nissan Bluebird Nissan Bluebird Nissan Pintara Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Subaru Liberty / Legacy Toyota Camry Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista Toyota Corona

97-02 95-01 83-86

o +

88-91

o

92-97

+

98-02 82-89 97-02 82-84

o + o +

95-96 82-86 93-97 86-88 89-92

o + o o o

82-93

++

89-93 94-98 99-02 83-86 88-92

o o o o o

82-88

+

People Movers Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Nissan Toyota

Nimbus / Chariot / Spacewagon Nimbus / Chariot Starwagon / L300 Starwagon / Delica Starwagon Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Starwagon / Delica Spacegear Prairie Tarago

o 85-91

o

92-98 83-86 87-93

o x o

95-98

o

98-02 84-86 83-89

o


Model of Car



xx =

++ Light Cars Daewoo Daewoo Daewoo Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Daihatsu Ford / Mazda Ford Holden / Suzuki Holden / Suzuki Holden Honda Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Hyundai Mazda Mazda Mitsubishi Nissan Peugoet Subaru Suzuki Toyota Toyota Volkswagen

1.5i Cielo Lanos Charade Charade Charade Sirion Mira Festiva WA / 121 Festiva WD/WH/WF Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina / Swift / Cultus Barina SB City Excel Excel Excel / Accent Accent 121 / Autozam Review 121 Metro / Demio Mirage / Colt Micra 205 Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex Hatch / Alto Echo Starlet Polo

94-95 95-97 97-02 82-86 88-92 93-00 98-02 90-96 87-90 94-01 86-88 89-99 95-00 83-86 86-90 90-94 95-00 00-02 94-96 97-02 82-88 95-97 87-94 89-92 82-84 99-02 96-99 96-00

++ o + ++ ++ o ++ ++ ++ ++ + + ++ + o ++ ++ +

+ +

++ Small Cars Alfa Romeo Daewoo Daihatsu Fiat Ford / Mazda Ford / Mazda

33 Nubira Applause Regata Laser / 323 / Familia Laser / 323

83-92 97-02 89-99 84-88 82-88 99-02

o o ++ o


Model of Car



xx =

Ford Ford Mazda Mazda Holden / Nissan

Laser Laser 323 / Familia / Lantis 323 / Familia / Lantis Astra / Pulsar / Langley Holden / Nissan Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Holden Astra TR Holden Astra TS Pulsar / Vector / Nissan Sentra Pulsar / Vector / Nissan Sentra Nissan Pulsar Holden Gemini Holden Gemini RB Honda Civic Honda Civic / Ballade / Shuttle Honda Civic / Shuttle Honda Civic Honda Civic Honda Concerto Hyundai S Coupe Hyundai Lantra Hyundai Lantra Mitsubishi Cordia Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CA Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CB Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CC Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CE Nissan Stanza Peugeot 306 Proton Wira Rover Quintet Subaru Impreza Suzuki Baleno / Cultus Crescent Toyota Corolla Toyota Corolla Toyota / Holden Corolla / Nova Toyota / Holden Corolla / Nova Toyota Corolla Toyota Corolla

91-94 95-97 90-93 95-98 84-86

++ o ++ + ++

88-90

+

96-98 98-02

o o

92-95

+

96-99 00-02 82-84 86-87 82-83 84-87

o o ++ o ++ +

88-91 92-95 96-00 89-93 90-96 91-95 96-00 83-87 89-90 91-92 93-95 96-02 82-83 94-01 95-96 82-86 93-00 95-02

+ o ++ o o o o o ++ + ++ +

82-84 86-88 89-93 94-97 98-01 02-02

++ ++ ++ ++ o

o o o


Model of Car



xx =

Toyota Toyota Volkswagen Volkswagen

Corolla 4WD Wagon Tercel Golf Golf / Bora

92-96 83-88 95-98 99-02

+


o


89-94 94-97 87-91 92-98 86-88 90-92 93-01 83-91 92-96 96-00 89-97 82-85 86-91 83-86 87-91 84-86 94-02 90-95 91-96 82-87 81-85 86-89 90-93 94-99 00-02 87-90 91-00 91-99 82-90

o o o + o o o o o

o xx o o o o + o

Make and Model

4 Wheel Drive - Medium Nissan Pathfinder / Terrano 88-94

Nissan Pathfinder / Terrano 95-02

Mitsubishi Pajero 92-99

Mitsubishi Pajero 82-90

Land Rover Discovery 9102

Land Rover Defender 92-02

Jeep Cherokee XJ 96-00

Holden / Isuzu Jackaroo / Bighorn 92-97

Holden / Isuzu Jackaroo / Bighorn 82-91


Toyota RAV4 94-00

Suzuki Vitara / Escudo 88-98

Suzuki Grand Vitara 99-02

Subaru Forester 97-02

Lada Niva 84-99

Honda HR-V 99-02

Honda CR-V 97-01

Holden / Suzuki Drover / Sierra / Samurai / SJ410 / SJ413 82-99

Daihatsu Terios 97-02

Daihatsu Rocky / Rugger 85-98

Daihatsu Feroza / Rocky 89-97

Crashworthiness Rating 9.00%

8.00%

7.00%

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

0.00%

4 Wheel Drive - Compact

Make and Model

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

0.00%

Make and Model People Mover Toyota Tarago / Previa / Estima 91-99

Toyota Tarago 83-89

Nissan Prairie 84-86

Mitsubishi Starwagon / L300 83-86

Mitsubishi Starwagon / Delica Starwagon 8793

Mitsubishi Starwagon / Delica Spacegear 9802

Mitsubishi Starwagon / Delica Spacegear 9598

Mitsubishi Nimbus / Chariot / Spacewagon 85-91

Mitsubishi Nimbus / Chariot 92-98


Toyota Landcruiser 98-02



Nissan / Ford Patrol / Maverick 88-97

Nissan Patrol 82-87

Nissan Patrol 98-02

Land Rover Range Rover 82-94


4.50%

4.00%

3.50%

3.00%

2.50%

2.00%

1.50%

1.00%

0.50%

0.00%

4 Wheel Drive - Large

Make and Model

8.00%

7.00%

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

0.00%

Make and Model

Commercial - Van Toyota Hiace/Liteace 96-02

Toyota Hiace/Liteace 90-95



Honda Acty 83-86

Holden / Suzuki Scurry / Carry 82-00

Holden Shuttle / WFR Van 82-87

Ford Transit 95-00

Ford Falcon Panel Van 8295

Daihatsu Handivan 8290


Ford Falcon Ute 96-99 Ford Falcon Ute AU 00-02 Ford Ford FSeries 82-92 Ford / Mazda Courier / BFord / Nissan Falcon Ute / Holden Commodore Holden Commodore Holden Commodore Holden Rodeo 96-98 Holden Rodeo 99-02 Holden WB Series 82-85 Holden / Isuzu Rodeo / Holden / Isuzu Rodeo / Kia Ceres 9200 Nissan Navara 92-96 Nissan Navara 97-02 Nissan 720 Ute 82-85 Nissan Navara 86-91 Subaru Brumby 82-92 Suzuki Mighty Boy 85-88 Toyota 4Runner/Hilux Toyota 4Runner/Hilux Toyota 4Runner/Hilux Toyota Hilux 98-02


12.00%

10.00%

8.00%

6.00%

4.00%

2.00%

0.00%

Make and Model

Commercial - Ute

14.00%

12.00%

10.00%

8.00%

6.00%

4.00%

2.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Alfa Romeo 33 83-92 Daewoo Nubira 97-02 Daihatsu Applause 89-99 Fiat Regata 84-88 Ford Laser 91-94 Ford Laser 95-97 Ford / Mazda Laser / 323 99-02 Ford / Mazda Laser / 323 / Familia 82-88 Holden Astra TR 96-98 Holden Astra TS 98-02 Holden Gemini 82-84 Holden Gemini RB 86-87 Holden / Nissan Astra / Pulsar / Langley 84-86 Holden / Nissan Astra / Pulsar / Vector / Sentra Honda Civic 92-95 Honda Civic 96-00 Honda Civic 82-83 Honda Civic / Ballade / Shuttle 84-87 Honda Civic / Shuttle 88-91 Honda Concerto 89-93 Hyundai Lantra 91-95 Hyundai Lantra 96-00 Hyundai S Coupe 90-96 Mazda 323 / Familia / Lantis 90-93 Mazda 323 / Familia / Lantis 95-98 Mitsubishi Cordia 83-87 Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CA 89-90 Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CB 91-92 Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CC 93-95 Mitsubishi Lancer / Mirage CE 96-02 Nissan Pulsar 00-02 Nissan Pulsar / Vector / Sentra 92-95 Nissan Pulsar / Vector / Sentra 96-99 Nissan Stanza 82-83 Peugeot 306 94-01 Proton Wira 95-96 Rover Quintet 82-86 Subaru Impreza 93-00 Suzuki Baleno / Cultus Crescent 95-02 Toyota Corolla 02-02 Toyota Corolla 82-84 Toyota Corolla 86-88 Toyota Corolla 98-01 Toyota Corolla 4WD Wagon 92-96 Toyota Tercel 83-88 Toyota / Holden Corolla / Nova 89-93 Toyota / Holden Corolla / Nova 94-97 Volkswagen Golf 95-98 Volkswagen Golf / Bora 99-02


Make and Model

Small

Volkswagen Polo 96-00

Toyota Starlet 96-99

Toyota Echo 99-02

Suzuki Hatch / Alto 82-84

Subaru Sherpa / Fiori / 700 / Rex 89-92

Peugoet 205 87-94

Nissan Micra 95-97

Mitsubishi Mirage / Colt 82-88

Mazda 121 Metro / Demio 97-02

Mazda 121 / Autozam Review 94-96

Hyundai Excel / Accent 95-00

Hyundai Excel 90-94

Hyundai Excel 86-90

Hyundai Accent 00-02

Honda City 83-86

Holden / Suzuki Barina / Swift / Cultus 8688 Holden / Suzuki Barina / Swift / Cultus 8999

Holden Barina SB 95-00

Ford / Mazda Festiva WA / 121 87-90

Ford Festiva WD/WH/WF 94-01

Daihatsu Sirion 98-02

Daihatsu Mira 90-96

Daihatsu Charade 93-00



Daewoo Lanos 97-02

Daewoo Cielo 95-97

Daewoo 1.5i 94-95


10.00% 8.00%

6.00%

4.00%

2.00%

0.00%

Make and Model

Light

9.00%

8.00%

7.00%

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

Make and Model

Large

0.00%

Toyota Camry 98-02

Toyota Avalon 00-02

Nissan Skyline 83-88

Mitsubishi Magna TR/TS / Verada KR/KS / V3000 / Diamante 91-96

Mitsubishi Magna TM/TN/TP / Sigma / V3000 85-90

Mitsubishi Magna TE/TF/TH/TJ / Verada KE/KF/KH/KJ / Diamante 96-02

Hyundai Sonata 98-01

Hyundai Sonata 89-97

Holden / Toyota Commodore VR/VS / Lexcen 93-97

Holden / Toyota Commodore VN/VP / Lexcen 89-93

Holden / Toyota Apollo JM/JP / Camry / Sceptor 93-97

Holden Commodore VB-VL 82-88

Holden Commodore VT/VX 97-02

Ford Falcon XE/XF 82-88

Ford Falcon EF/EL 94-98

Ford Taurus 96-98

Ford Falcon EB Series II / Falcon ED Apr 92-94

Ford Falcon EA / Falcon EB Series I 88Mar 92

Ford Falcon AU 98-02


Toyota Corona 82-88

Toyota Camry 83-86

Subaru Liberty / Legacy 99-02



Nissan / Ford Pintara / Corsair / Bluebird 8992 Subaru 1800 / Leone / Omega / 4WD Wagon 82-93

Nissan Pintara 86-88

Nissan Bluebird 93-97

Nissan Bluebird 82-86

Mitsubishi Sigma / Galant / Sapporo / Lambda 82-84

Mitsubishi Galant 95-96

Mazda 626 98-02

Holden / Toyota Apollo JK/JL / Camry / Vista 88-92

Holden Camira 82-89

Holden Vectra 97-02

Ford / Mazda Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella 8386 Ford / Mazda Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella 8891 Ford / Mazda Telstar / 626 / MX6 / Capella / Cronos 92-97

Ford Mondeo 95-01

Daewoo Leganza 97-02

Daewoo Espero 95-97


8.00%

7.00%

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

0.00%

Make and Model Medium

7.00%

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

Make and Model

Luxury

Volvo 850/S70/V70/C70 92-02

Volvo 700/900 Series 84-92

Saab 9000 86-97

Mercedes Benz S-Class W126 8292

Mercedes Benz E-Class W124 8694

Mercedes Benz C-Class W202 9500 Mercedes Benz E-Class W123 8285

Mercedes Benz C-Class W201 8793

Lexus ES300 / Windom 92-01

Jaguar XJ6 82-86

Honda Legend 8695

BMW 5 Series E34 89-95


Volvo 300 Series 84-88

Volvo 200 Series 82-93

Toyota Crown / Cressida / Mark II 86-88

Toyota Crown / Cressida / Mark II 82-85

Toyota Cressida / Mark II 89-93

Saab 900/9-3 94-02

Saab 900 Series 82-92

Peugeot 505 82-93

Peugeot 405 89-97

Nissan Maxima / Cefiro 95-99

Nissan Maxima 90-94

Mazda 929 / Luce 82-90

Honda Accord 94-98

Honda Accord 91-93

Honda Accord 86-90

Honda Accord 82-85

Holden Stateman/Caprice VR/VS 94-98

Holden Stateman/Caprice VQ 90-93

Holden Statesman/Caprice WB 82-85

Ford Fairlane Z & LTD F 82-87

Ford Fairlane N & LTD D 95-98

Ford Fairlane N & LTD D 88-94

Audi A4 95-01

0.00%




Crashworthiness Rating 10.00% 9.00%

8.00%

7.00%

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

Make and Model

Prestige

8.00%

7.00%

6.00%

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00%

1.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Make and Model Sports

Toyota Supra 82-90

Toyota Paseo / Cynos 91-99

Toyota MR2 91-00

Toyota MR2 87-90

Toyota Celica 94-99

Toyota Celica 90-93

Toyota Celica 86-89

Toyota Celica 81-85

Toyota Celica 00-02

Renault Feugo 82-87

Nissan NX/NX-R 91-96

Nissan Gazelle / Silvia 84-86

Nissan Exa 83-86

Nissan 300ZX / Fairlady Z 90-95

Nissan Exa 87-91

Nissan 200SX / Silvia 94-02

Mazda RX7 86-91

Mazda RX7 82-85

Mazda MX5 / Eunos Roadster 89-97

Hyundai Coupe 96-00

Honda Prelude 92-96

Honda Prelude 83-91

Honda Integra 93-01

Honda Integra 90-92

Honda Integra 86-88

Honda CRX 92-98

Honda CRX 87-91

Holden Calibra 94-97

Ford Capri 89-94


10.00%

8.00%

6.00%

4.00%

2.00%

APPENDIX 7

CRASHWORTHINESS, INJURY RISK AND INJURY SEVERITY ESTIMATES BY YEAR OF VEHICLE MANUFACTURE FOR THE AUSTRALIAN VEHICLE FLEET

INJURY RISK BY YEAR OF VEHICLE MANUFACTURE

Year of Manufacture

Coefficient of Car Year

AVERAGE CAR

-1.5650

1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.3521 0.4116 0.2528 0.3250 0.2768 0.2983 0.2926 0.2280 0.2593 0.2605 0.2281 0.1251 0.1169 0.0683 0.0564 -0.0162 0.0282 0.0059 -0.0025 0.0142 -0.0520 -0.0252 -0.0908 -0.1184 -0.1258 -0.1654 -0.1544 -0.1762 -0.1926 -0.2271 -0.2138 -0.2600 -0.1929 -0.2305 -0.2113 -0.2173 -0.2880 -0.3082 -0.3314

Standard Error of Coefficient

Pr(Risk) %

Lower 95% Confidence Limit

Upper 95% Confidence Limit

Width of Confidence Interval

21.12 21.88 19.48 21.03 20.39 20.88 21.05 20.08 20.62 20.69 20.30 18.67 18.60 17.86 17.74 16.73 17.37 17.07 16.97 17.19 16.29 16.68 15.76 15.38 15.30 14.81 14.94 14.64 14.44 14.01 14.18 13.61 14.40 13.94 14.16 14.05 13.15 12.78 12.11

24.82 26.23 23.05 23.92 22.89 23.13 22.74 21.54 22.04 22.00 21.32 19.65 19.47 18.73 18.49 17.40 18.03 17.69 17.55 17.80 16.83 17.19 16.31 15.95 15.83 15.30 15.45 15.19 14.99 14.56 14.72 14.16 15.01 14.55 14.79 14.76 13.96 13.87 14.05

3.70 4.34 3.56 2.89 2.50 2.25 1.70 1.47 1.42 1.31 1.02 0.97 0.87 0.86 0.75 0.67 0.66 0.62 0.59 0.61 0.54 0.52 0.55 0.57 0.53 0.50 0.52 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.54 0.55 0.61 0.61 0.63 0.72 0.81 1.09 1.94

17.29 0.0535 0.0608 0.0544 0.0424 0.0377 0.0335 0.0253 0.0227 0.0216 0.0199 0.0158 0.0160 0.0144 0.0147 0.0129 0.0120 0.0116 0.0110 0.0105 0.0108 0.0099 0.0094 0.0105 0.0111 0.0103 0.0099 0.0102 0.0111 0.0112 0.0114 0.0112 0.0118 0.0125 0.0128 0.0130 0.0148 0.0176 0.0240 0.0436

22.92 23.99 21.21 22.44 21.62 21.98 21.88 20.80 21.32 21.34 20.80 19.16 19.03 18.29 18.11 17.06 17.70 17.38 17.26 17.50 16.56 16.93 16.03 15.66 15.57 15.05 15.19 14.92 14.71 14.28 14.44 13.88 14.70 14.24 14.48 14.40 13.55 13.32 13.05

INJURY SEVERITY BY YEAR OF VEHICLE MANUFACTURE

Year of Manufacture

Coefficient of Car Year

AVERAGE CAR

-1.2052

1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0.2267 0.0341 0.1071 0.1174 0.1009 0.3284 0.1982 0.1707 0.1664 0.1753 0.0872 0.1316 0.0373 0.0814 0.0107 0.0452 -0.0175 0.0068 0.0168 -0.0194 -0.0151 -0.0039 -0.0299 -0.0212 -0.0401 -0.0424 -0.0785 -0.0895 -0.0933 -0.0823 -0.1692 -0.1479 -0.1789 -0.1526 -0.1992 -0.1781 -0.2378 -0.1895 -0.0560

Standard Pr(Severity Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of Error of ) Confidence Confidence Confidence Coefficient % Limit Limit Interval 23.05 0.0885 0.1034 0.0869 0.0693 0.0623 0.0525 0.0411 0.0377 0.0358 0.0326 0.0274 0.0270 0.0252 0.0259 0.0231 0.0215 0.0214 0.0205 0.0195 0.0203 0.0187 0.0179 0.0201 0.0213 0.0204 0.0198 0.0206 0.0232 0.0237 0.0243 0.0246 0.0259 0.0282 0.0291 0.0312 0.0360 0.0426 0.0535 0.0967

27.32 23.67 25.01 25.20 24.89 29.38 26.76 26.22 26.14 26.31 24.64 25.47 23.72 24.53 23.25 23.87 22.75 23.17 23.35 22.71 22.79 22.99 22.53 22.68 22.35 22.31 21.69 21.51 21.44 21.63 20.19 20.54 20.03 20.46 19.71 20.05 19.11 19.87 22.08

24.01 20.20 21.95 22.73 22.68 27.29 25.21 24.82 24.81 25.09 23.65 24.48 22.84 23.60 22.45 23.11 22.02 22.47 22.68 22.02 22.15 22.37 21.85 21.96 21.66 21.65 21.01 20.75 20.67 20.83 19.42 19.72 19.16 19.55 18.76 18.94 17.85 18.25 18.99

30.89 27.52 28.34 27.85 27.25 31.56 28.36 27.68 27.51 27.57 25.65 26.49 24.63 25.48 24.06 24.64 23.49 23.90 24.05 23.42 23.44 23.61 23.22 23.42 23.05 22.99 22.39 22.28 22.23 22.45 20.98 21.38 20.93 21.40 20.70 21.20 20.43 21.59 25.51

6.88 7.32 6.38 5.12 4.56 4.27 3.16 2.86 2.71 2.48 1.99 2.01 1.79 1.88 1.62 1.53 1.47 1.43 1.37 1.40 1.29 1.24 1.38 1.46 1.39 1.35 1.37 1.54 1.56 1.61 1.55 1.66 1.77 1.86 1.94 2.26 2.58 3.34 6.52

CRASHWORTHINESS BY YEAR OF VEHICLE MANUFACTURE

Year of Manufacture

Pr(Risk) %

Pr(Severity) Serious Overall Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of % injury rate rank order Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved

AVERAGE CAR

17.29

23.05

3.99

1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

22.92 23.99 21.21 22.44 21.62 21.98 21.88 20.80 21.32 21.34 20.80 19.16 19.03 18.29 18.11 17.06 17.70 17.38 17.26 17.50 16.56 16.93 16.03 15.66 15.57 15.05 15.19 14.92 14.71 14.28 14.44 13.88 14.70 14.24 14.48 14.40 13.55 13.32 13.05

27.32 23.67 25.01 25.20 24.89 29.38 26.76 26.22 26.14 26.31 24.64 25.47 23.72 24.53 23.25 23.87 22.75 23.17 23.35 22.71 22.79 22.99 22.53 22.68 22.35 22.31 21.69 21.51 21.44 21.63 20.19 20.54 20.03 20.46 19.71 20.05 19.11 19.87 22.08

6.26 5.68 5.30 5.66 5.38 6.46 5.86 5.45 5.57 5.61 5.12 4.88 4.51 4.49 4.21 4.07 4.03 4.03 4.03 3.97 3.77 3.89 3.61 3.55 3.48 3.36 3.30 3.21 3.15 3.09 2.92 2.85 2.95 2.91 2.85 2.89 2.59 2.65 2.88

38 36 30 35 31 39 37 32 33 34 29 28 27 26 25 24 21 22 23 20 18 19 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 8 3 9 7 4 6 1 2 5

5.39 4.74 4.55 5.02 4.83 5.91 5.46 5.11 5.24 5.31 4.89 4.66 4.32 4.29 4.04 3.92 3.88 3.89 3.90 3.84 3.65 3.77 3.49 3.42 3.36 3.25 3.18 3.08 3.03 2.96 2.79 2.73 2.81 2.77 2.70 2.71 2.41 2.41 2.44

7.27 6.79 6.18 6.38 6.00 7.06 6.28 5.82 5.93 5.94 5.37 5.11 4.72 4.69 4.38 4.23 4.18 4.17 4.17 4.12 3.90 4.02 3.74 3.69 3.60 3.48 3.42 3.34 3.29 3.22 3.04 2.98 3.09 3.06 3.01 3.07 2.79 2.90 3.40

1.88 2.05 1.63 1.36 1.17 1.15 0.83 0.71 0.69 0.63 0.49 0.46 0.40 0.40 0.34 0.31 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.28 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.38 0.49 0.96

APPENDIX 8

CRASHWORTHINESS, INJURY RISK AND INJURY SEVERITY ESTIMATES BY YEAR OF VEHICLE MANUFACTURE BY MARKET GROUP FOR THE AUSTRALIAN VEHICLE FLEET

CRASHWORTHINESS BY YEAR OF VEHICLE MANUFACTURE BY MARKET GROUP

Year of Manufacture

Pr(Risk) %

Pr(Severity) Serious Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of % injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved

Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

29.33 28.34 26.82 29.93 25.27 26.07 23.30 24.09 20.85 21.46 20.88 21.79 17.95 17.72 16.71 15.29 14.31 11.33 12.00 15.99

12.08 25.97 23.96 17.65 18.24 30.04 16.13 22.49 18.69 21.77 23.11 28.89 18.44 13.98 18.80 16.96 19.06 19.74 18.31 21.01

3.54 7.36 6.43 5.28 4.61 7.83 3.76 5.42 3.90 4.67 4.83 6.29 3.31 2.48 3.14 2.59 2.73 2.24 2.20 3.36

2.75 6.45 5.87 4.97 3.88 7.06 3.28 5.16 3.68 4.39 4.53 5.93 3.02 2.09 2.82 2.33 2.51 2.03 1.89 2.75

4.56 8.40 7.03 5.62 5.47 8.69 4.31 5.68 4.12 4.97 5.14 6.68 3.63 2.93 3.50 2.88 2.96 2.47 2.55 4.10

1.81 1.94 1.16 0.65 1.60 1.63 1.04 0.52 0.44 0.58 0.62 0.75 0.62 0.84 0.67 0.55 0.45 0.44 0.66 1.34

9.58 5.24 2.90 5.66 2.67 3.36 5.23 2.52 2.17 3.95 1.68 2.83 2.44 2.39 2.88 2.82 2.89 3.03

7.86 4.22 2.28 5.23 1.97 2.59 4.64 2.25 1.86 3.24 1.49 2.62 2.18 2.11 2.58 2.58 2.53 2.51

11.68 6.51 3.69 6.14 3.62 4.35 5.89 2.81 2.52 4.81 1.90 3.06 2.73 2.71 3.22 3.08 3.31 3.64

3.81 2.30 1.40 0.91 1.64 1.76 1.25 0.55 0.66 1.57 0.41 0.44 0.55 0.60 0.64 0.50 0.78 1.13

Medium Four Wheel Drive Vehicles 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

26.74 20.44 18.06 20.01 15.95 17.70 15.42 15.68 14.34 19.67 12.44 13.67 11.75 10.17 12.18 11.74 15.08 12.04

35.83 25.63 16.06 28.30 16.73 18.96 33.90 16.04 15.11 20.07 13.53 20.70 20.73 23.51 23.64 24.03 19.19 25.13

Year of Manufacture

Pr(Severity) Serious Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of % injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved Large Four Wheel Drive Vehicles 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Pr(Risk) %

15.96 14.14 13.59 16.36 12.35 15.81 14.30 13.28 13.03 12.06 12.10 11.80 12.16 12.14 11.96 11.89 13.10 11.94 10.71 11.24

21.21 22.70 22.77 27.09 16.95 21.64 26.08 22.52 17.88 21.21 22.13 21.31 18.46 27.09 25.15 24.41 20.25 21.39 19.24 23.25

3.39 3.21 3.09 4.43 2.09 3.42 3.73 2.99 2.33 2.56 2.68 2.51 2.24 3.29 3.01 2.90 2.65 2.55 2.06 2.61

3.20 3.02 2.97 4.32 1.92 3.16 3.60 2.90 2.24 2.44 2.57 2.40 2.14 3.13 2.85 2.75 2.53 2.37 1.78 2.00

3.59 3.41 3.23 4.55 2.29 3.70 3.86 3.09 2.43 2.68 2.79 2.64 2.36 3.46 3.18 3.06 2.78 2.75 2.38 3.42

0.39 0.39 0.26 0.23 0.37 0.54 0.26 0.19 0.19 0.24 0.22 0.24 0.22 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.25 0.39 0.60 1.42

23.63 28.51 22.93 21.76 20.78 17.64 25.34 23.54 22.97 20.92 21.45 23.29 22.18 17.85 18.84 21.92 14.35 19.09 19.81

5.68 7.15 5.34 4.70 4.39 3.68 5.32 4.70 4.28 3.40 3.89 3.90 3.93 3.13 2.98 3.59 2.08 2.71 2.78

5.49 6.96 5.20 4.56 4.27 3.51 5.17 4.53 4.09 3.17 3.63 3.61 3.67 2.89 2.70 3.25 1.81 2.32 2.31

5.88 7.35 5.48 4.84 4.52 3.86 5.47 4.88 4.47 3.66 4.16 4.21 4.22 3.40 3.29 3.97 2.39 3.16 3.36

0.39 0.40 0.28 0.28 0.26 0.35 0.30 0.35 0.38 0.49 0.54 0.61 0.55 0.51 0.59 0.72 0.58 0.84 1.05

24.70 26.70 22.75 24.79 19.89

4.63 4.67 4.01 4.99 3.66

4.54 4.56 3.95 4.93 3.60

4.72 4.77 4.07 5.04 3.72

0.18 0.21 0.11 0.11 0.12

Commercial Vehicles - Vans 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

24.05 25.08 23.30 21.59 21.15 20.85 20.97 19.97 18.62 16.27 18.12 16.74 17.73 17.55 15.79 16.38 14.50 14.17 14.05

Commercial Vehicles - Utes 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986

18.76 17.48 17.62 20.12 18.39

Year of Manufacture

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Pr(Risk) %

17.96 17.31 16.69 16.69 15.23 16.24 15.52 15.09 14.75 15.11 15.20 14.95 15.81 15.02 12.25 13.76

Pr(Severity) Serious Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of % injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved 20.17 3.62 3.55 3.70 0.16 22.89 3.96 3.91 4.01 0.10 21.92 3.66 3.62 3.70 0.08 21.41 3.57 3.53 3.62 0.08 23.68 3.61 3.56 3.66 0.10 22.44 3.64 3.59 3.69 0.10 25.60 3.97 3.92 4.03 0.10 23.14 3.49 3.44 3.54 0.10 22.91 3.38 3.32 3.43 0.11 21.65 3.27 3.21 3.34 0.13 18.52 2.82 2.75 2.88 0.13 20.62 3.08 3.00 3.16 0.16 17.97 2.84 2.74 2.95 0.21 18.61 2.79 2.66 2.94 0.29 33.73 4.13 3.87 4.41 0.54 19.47 2.68 2.02 3.54 1.52

Large Cars 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

17.46 18.25 17.80 17.45 17.24 16.84 16.41 16.09 16.63 15.96 15.68 14.88 14.95 14.67 15.30 14.49 14.93 14.43 14.33 15.11 14.47

24.45 24.36 23.30 22.93 21.67 22.21 21.82 22.42 21.55 20.41 19.85 20.40 19.60 19.16 18.17 19.45 18.33 18.81 16.79 18.11 23.59

4.27 4.44 4.15 4.00 3.74 3.74 3.58 3.61 3.58 3.26 3.11 3.04 2.93 2.81 2.78 2.82 2.74 2.71 2.41 2.74 3.41

4.25 4.43 4.13 3.99 3.73 3.73 3.57 3.60 3.58 3.25 3.10 3.03 2.92 2.80 2.77 2.80 2.72 2.69 2.37 2.67 3.18

4.28 4.46 4.16 4.01 3.75 3.75 3.59 3.62 3.59 3.27 3.12 3.05 2.94 2.82 2.79 2.83 2.75 2.74 2.44 2.80 3.66

0.03 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.14 0.47

14.00 16.45 12.96 15.84 14.10 15.68 13.09 14.95 13.55

24.33 21.47 28.06 19.63 18.74 19.28 21.46 23.81 11.32

3.41 3.53 3.64 3.11 2.64 3.02 2.81 3.56 1.53

3.12 3.29 3.44 2.97 2.47 2.78 2.63 3.42 1.38

3.72 3.79 3.84 3.25 2.83 3.28 3.00 3.70 1.70

0.60 0.51 0.40 0.28 0.36 0.50 0.36 0.27 0.32

Luxury Cars 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990

Year of Manufacture

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Pr(Risk) %

15.97 13.41 14.07 15.05 13.99 11.80 11.87 13.39 14.84 12.06 11.86

Pr(Severity) Serious Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of % injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved 17.02 2.72 2.50 2.95 0.45 19.96 2.68 2.50 2.87 0.37 21.12 2.97 2.79 3.17 0.38 17.86 2.69 2.54 2.85 0.31 16.30 2.28 2.11 2.46 0.35 13.74 1.62 1.42 1.85 0.42 17.89 2.12 1.93 2.34 0.42 18.25 2.44 2.12 2.82 0.70 19.55 2.90 2.53 3.33 0.80 18.31 2.21 1.70 2.86 1.16 12.69 1.50 0.81 2.80 1.99

Prestige Cars 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

18.34 17.91 15.91 16.58 15.63 16.41 14.52 13.87 13.37 14.56 12.62 13.05 13.50 13.40 14.33 14.36 12.56 14.71 11.54 10.76

23.37 22.95 23.95 21.19 22.33 19.90 24.87 21.65 20.58 19.75 22.08 21.47 19.79 22.87 21.82 18.85 16.29 15.18 16.53 27.67

4.29 4.11 3.81 3.51 3.49 3.27 3.61 3.00 2.75 2.88 2.79 2.80 2.67 3.06 3.13 2.71 2.05 2.23 1.91 2.98

4.23 4.05 3.75 3.46 3.42 3.18 3.53 2.95 2.69 2.78 2.69 2.68 2.57 2.97 3.00 2.55 1.87 1.94 1.56 2.26

4.34 4.17 3.86 3.56 3.56 3.35 3.70 3.06 2.81 2.97 2.89 2.93 2.78 3.16 3.27 2.88 2.24 2.57 2.33 3.93

0.10 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.14 0.17 0.17 0.12 0.12 0.19 0.20 0.24 0.21 0.20 0.27 0.33 0.38 0.63 0.77 1.68

20.58 20.04 19.84 20.45 19.45 18.95 18.12 18.51 17.04 17.31 16.26 14.90 14.98 14.48 15.42

23.32 21.36 21.86 21.64 22.51 20.57 22.62 21.35 21.05 21.29 19.71 20.44 22.20 21.66 23.47

4.80 4.28 4.34 4.43 4.38 3.90 4.10 3.95 3.59 3.69 3.21 3.05 3.32 3.14 3.62

4.79 4.27 4.32 4.41 4.35 3.87 4.08 3.93 3.57 3.66 3.18 2.99 3.27 3.07 3.54

4.81 4.29 4.35 4.44 4.40 3.93 4.12 3.97 3.61 3.71 3.23 3.10 3.38 3.21 3.70

0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.17

Medium Cars 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Year of Manufacture

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Pr(Risk) %

15.43 15.09 15.25 13.41 17.42

Pr(Severity) Serious Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of % injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved 15.98 2.47 2.37 2.57 0.20 21.23 3.20 3.03 3.38 0.35 19.18 2.93 2.71 3.15 0.44 14.11 1.89 1.61 2.23 0.62 18.02 3.14 2.60 3.79 1.19

People Movers 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

24.60 23.82 23.71 24.26 23.40 20.18 18.59 21.80 18.06 18.98 17.51 16.08 16.18 13.42 15.15 13.51 12.84 13.33 12.37

29.96 25.39 25.88 20.48 23.89 17.33 19.32 26.05 22.55 24.00 13.09 22.84 21.41 23.94 18.40 18.70 8.37 17.99 22.86

7.37 6.05 6.14 4.97 5.59 3.50 3.59 5.68 4.07 4.56 2.29 3.67 3.47 3.21 2.79 2.53 1.07 2.40 2.83

7.12 5.92 6.03 4.84 5.37 3.16 3.39 5.52 3.85 4.33 2.08 3.42 3.19 2.87 2.41 2.17 0.66 1.88 2.11

7.64 6.18 6.25 5.10 5.82 3.87 3.81 5.84 4.31 4.80 2.53 3.94 3.76 3.60 3.22 2.95 1.75 3.06 3.79

0.52 0.25 0.22 0.26 0.45 0.71 0.42 0.31 0.46 0.48 0.45 0.51 0.57 0.73 0.81 0.78 1.09 1.19 1.68

26.86 28.00 24.89 26.70 24.60 25.32 24.85 22.94 23.61 22.24 22.70 22.28 21.82 20.61 22.00 20.93 20.69 20.84 20.06 18.87 18.86

24.54 20.98 20.94 26.36 25.25 25.28 21.30 23.95 25.82 23.34 25.00 23.69 20.95 22.94 20.99 23.33 21.45 22.16 24.10 20.77 22.40

6.59 5.88 5.21 7.04 6.21 6.40 5.29 5.50 6.10 5.19 5.67 5.28 4.57 4.73 4.62 4.88 4.44 4.62 4.83 3.92 4.22

6.49 5.80 5.16 6.99 6.15 6.34 5.24 5.46 6.05 5.16 5.64 5.25 4.54 4.71 4.59 4.85 4.41 4.56 4.75 3.73 3.62

6.69 5.95 5.27 7.09 6.27 6.46 5.35 5.53 6.14 5.22 5.71 5.31 4.60 4.75 4.65 4.91 4.47 4.67 4.92 4.12 4.94

0.21 0.15 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.17 0.39 1.32

Light Cars 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Year of Manufacture

Pr(Risk) %

Pr(Severity) Serious Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of % injury rate Confidence Confidence Confidence per 100 Limit Limit Interval drivers involved

Small Cars 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

22.56 22.98 21.73 23.02 21.39 20.82 20.79 19.61 18.73 19.12 18.46 18.17 18.90 16.76 18.00 17.72 17.45 17.87 16.56 16.60 16.87

23.61 22.69 21.77 22.41 21.75 22.90 21.67 22.58 22.38 22.62 21.89 20.51 19.11 20.20 20.91 22.03 21.39 19.80 22.73 18.32 26.12

5.33 5.21 4.73 5.16 4.65 4.77 4.51 4.43 4.19 4.32 4.04 3.73 3.61 3.39 3.76 3.90 3.73 3.54 3.76 3.04 4.41

5.31 5.20 4.72 5.14 4.64 4.75 4.49 4.41 4.18 4.31 4.02 3.71 3.59 3.36 3.74 3.88 3.70 3.50 3.72 2.96 4.12

5.34 5.23 4.75 5.18 4.67 4.79 4.52 4.44 4.20 4.34 4.06 3.74 3.63 3.41 3.79 3.93 3.76 3.58 3.81 3.13 4.71

0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.17 0.59

19.60 19.96 20.19 18.36 18.26 17.80 16.98 18.24 18.14 18.64 18.73 18.40 17.31 14.91 15.97 15.85 19.43 14.50 10.19

22.99 22.57 23.03 25.88 21.26 23.65 23.42 22.89 24.55 19.83 24.66 20.19 21.37 19.68 25.74 21.41 19.08 15.33 10.41

4.51 4.50 4.65 4.75 3.88 4.21 3.98 4.18 4.45 3.70 4.62 3.71 3.70 2.93 4.11 3.39 3.71 2.22 1.06

4.40 4.41 4.57 4.66 3.78 4.07 3.87 4.07 4.36 3.57 4.49 3.55 3.51 2.63 3.85 3.13 3.22 1.62 0.55

4.62 4.61 4.73 4.84 3.99 4.36 4.09 4.29 4.54 3.83 4.75 3.89 3.90 3.28 4.39 3.68 4.27 3.05 2.06

0.22 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.21 0.29 0.22 0.22 0.18 0.26 0.25 0.34 0.39 0.65 0.54 0.55 1.04 1.43 1.52

Sports Cars 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Full report in .pdf format

Full report in .pdf format

Suggest Documents