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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA
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
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA
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:
4 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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).
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 7
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 (<1100kg), medium cars (1100-1400kg), large
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
10 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 13
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, >=80km/h)
Number of vehicles involved (1, more than 1)
Level of urbanisation of crash location (urban, rural)
Driver age (<=25 years, 26-59 years, >=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,
16 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 17
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.
18 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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
20 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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
22 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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:
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 23
•
•
•
•
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 25
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.
26 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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)
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 27
•
•
•
•
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.
28 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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
30 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 31
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.
32 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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
Severe
Injury
Rate
(%)
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
Killed or
Seriously
Injured
New Zealand
QLD
WA
Killed or
Seriously
Injured
Injured
Severe
Injury
Rate
(%)
Killed or
Seriously
Injured
Injured
Severe
Injury
Rate
(%)
Killed or
Seriously
Injured
Injured
Severe
Injury
Rate
(%)
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
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 33
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 ( <80km/h, >= 80 km/h)
• agefcd :
age of driver of subject car (<=25 years, 26-59 years, >=60 years)
• sexfcd :
sex of driver of subject car
• ageoo :
other car driver age (<=25 years, 26-59 years, >=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)
34 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 35
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%).
36 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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.
38 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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)
40 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
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)
42 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
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
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 43
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
44 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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)
46 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
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.
48 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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.
50 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
•
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 51
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 53
54 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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
56 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
(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.
58 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 59
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
Four Wheel Drive Large
Four Wheel Drive Medium
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 61
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
Four Wheel Drive Large
Four Wheel Drive Medium
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
Four Wheel Drive Large
Four Wheel Drive Medium
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.
64 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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).
66 MONASH UNIVERSITY ACCIDENT RESEARCH CENTRE
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 67
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.
VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS AND AGGRESSIVITY RATINGS: 1987 TO 2002 DATA 69
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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 &LTD 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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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)
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
.
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
.
.
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
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)
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
No. of
injured
(but not
severely)
drivers in
NSW and
Victoria
(87-2002)
and
QLD,WA, NZ
(91-2002)
193
15
2
447
176
52
59
529
158
603
110
24
142
27
1
250
40
96
41
2
115
6
3221
12
63
418
1008
1007
757
347
96
239
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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)
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
No. of
injured
(but not
severely)
drivers in
NSW and
Victoria
(87-2002)
and
QLD,WA, NZ
(91-2002)
374
29
16
2705
568
3445
2170
670
401
253
230
87
212
14
377
83
188
10
78
59
89
52
5
185
4
829
474
589
171
40
629
695
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
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
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)
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
.
.
.
.
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
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
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)
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
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
.
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
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
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
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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(Risk)
Manufacture %
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
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
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
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
Volkswagen
Volkswagen
Golf
Golf / Bora
95-98
99-02
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
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
Feroza / Rocky
Rocky / Rugger
Terios
Drover / Sierra / Samurai / SJ410
/ SJ413
CR-V
HR-V
Niva
Forester
Grand Vitara
Vitara / Escudo
RAV4
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
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
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
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
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
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles
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
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
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
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
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
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
Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
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
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
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
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
98-02
82-95
Make
Model of Car
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
Years of
Pr(Risk)
Manufacture %
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
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
Courier / B-Series
98-02
Make
Model of Car
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
Mitsubishi
Toyota
Toyota
Starwagon / Delica Spacegear
Tarago
Tarago / Previa / Estima
95-98
83-89
91-99
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
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
Years of
Pr(Severity) Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Manufacture %
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
3 Series E30
3 Series E36
3 Series E46
5 Series E34
Legend
ES300 / Windom
C-Class W202
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
Lower 95% Upper 95% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
3 Series E30
3 Series E36
3 Series E46
5 Series E34
Legend
ES300 / Windom
C-Class W202
Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
Lower 90% Upper 90% Width of
Confidence Confidence Confidence
Limit
Limit
Interval
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
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
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
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
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 =
+
Compact Four Wheel Drive Vehicles
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
89-97
85-98
97-02
82-99
97-01
99-02
84-99
97-02
99-02
88-98
94-00
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
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
Medium Four Wheel Drive Vehicles
Holden / Isuzu
Holden / Isuzu
Jeep
Land Rover
Land Rover
Mitsubishi
Mitsubishi
Nissan
Nissan
o
xx
82-94
82-87
88-97
98-02
82-89
90-97
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
xx
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 =
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
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
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
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 =
+
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
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 =
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
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
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
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 =
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
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 =
++
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
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 =
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
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 =
Toyota
Toyota
Volkswagen
Volkswagen
Corolla 4WD Wagon
Tercel
Golf
Golf / Bora
92-96
83-88
95-98
99-02
+
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
o
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
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
Crashworthiness Rating
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
Crashworthiness Rating
Toyota
Landcruiser
98-02
Toyota
Landcruiser
90-97
Toyota
Landcruiser
82-89
Nissan / Ford
Patrol /
Maverick 88-97
Nissan Patrol
82-87
Nissan Patrol
98-02
Land Rover
Range Rover
82-94
Crashworthiness Rating
5.00%
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
Toyota
Hiace/Liteace
87-89
Toyota
Hiace/Liteace
82-86
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
Crashworthiness Rating
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
Crashworthiness Rating
14.00%
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
Crashworthiness Rating
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
Daihatsu Charade 88-92
Daihatsu Charade 82-86
Daewoo Lanos 97-02
Daewoo Cielo 95-97
Daewoo 1.5i 94-95
Crashworthiness Rating
12.00%
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
Crashworthiness Rating
Toyota Corona 82-88
Toyota Camry 83-86
Subaru Liberty / Legacy 99-02
Subaru Liberty / Legacy 94-98
Subaru Liberty / Legacy 89-93
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
Crashworthiness Rating
9.00%
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
BMW 5 Series
E28 82-88
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%
BMW 3 Series
E36 92-98
BMW 3 Series
E30 82-91
Crashworthiness Rating
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
Crashworthiness Rating
12.00%
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