How safe is our Z4?

[buzyg]

The trick is not to crash or be crashed into.

[raymond.harper]

The 2004 Z4 did get four stars


Comments The Z4 is a very strong scoring four-star car. It suffered very little damage to its cabin, the driver’s door remaining straight and substantially undamaged after the impact. The car was tested in the frontal crash with its roof down to give ‘worst-case’ results. Similarly, for the side impact, the top was left up to check for any adverse interaction with the driver’s head. Because the car has only two seats, it was tested without child restraints. However, it is possible to fit a restraint to the passenger’s seat so, the fitting and labelling requirements were checked. Protection for pedestrians proved to be fair.

Front impact The restraint system is based on a dual stage non-tethered airbag for the driver and for the passenger. Each has a belt pre-tensioner that, combined with load limiters worked well at keeping forces on occupants’ chests low. Late in the impact, the driver’s head moved towards the outside of the airbag, making a glancing contact with the screen pillar. The car’s body proved itself to be very strong, showing minimal deformation of the body structure around the sill and screen pillar and suffering only minor intrusion into the footwell. However, the knee impact areas for the driver were unforgiving, with hard structures abounding. Side impact The protection system is very impressive and includes a thorax airbag that worked well. The driver’s head contacted the roof rail, but not hard enough to cause concern. Child occupant As two adult dummies were fitted no room remained for a child restraint. It is possible to fit one to the passenger’s seat. However, the only warning of the dangers associated with doing so was a text label on the windscreen, which was non-permanent and poorly worded. Pedestrian Levels of protection were fair. The bonnet’s leading edge did not require testing as its shape and low height meant that it would not be aggressive. Some areas of its top gave protection. But its sides, wings and the bumper, proved particularly unfriendly

[firebobby]

After attending many RTA's over the years, I would say the Z4 is pretty capable in a crash, the doors appear to hold up well and the windscreen didn't appear to crack.

[Artful-Bodger]

Oooooooh I feel faint watching that, that poor car!

[WLH]

Thanks for this one too - looks like it performed well

I have always believed that on balance the E-85 Z4 is pretty safe as it did seem to do well in the crash test. When you also take into consideration the ability of the Z4's performance, handling and breaking to avoid an accident it seems to me to be a pretty safe place to be. Also to the best of my knowledge not one member of ZSCCA which currently has over 1,000 USA members has never lost a member due to a fatal accident in a Z4. I know of only one real serious injury and that individual is as far as I know still in a wheelchair.

[GuidoK]

Here is the crash test video of the prefacelift E-85 Z4.
While the video does not show the rating I am pretty sure it was rated 4 stars.

Yes, e85 is 4 stars, e89 is 3 stars.
Not that the e89 is less safe; its a relative measurement, they set the bar higher and higher each year. It's a comparison to other cars in the same class in a certain era (roadster sport in this case)

So a 2017 roadster sport with 5 stars is a very safe 2017 roadster but still not as safe as a 2017 SUV with the same 5 stars.

[Mr Tidy]

Yes, e85 is 4 stars, e89 is 3 stars.
Not that the e89 is less safe; its a relative measurement, they set the bar higher and higher each year. It's a comparison to other cars in the same class in a certain era (roadster sport in this case)

So a 2017 roadster sport with 5 stars is a very safe 2017 roadster but still not as safe as a 2017 SUV with the same 5 stars.

Yes, but that is the whole problem with this stuff!

People may think an E85 is a better option than an E89 based on that, unless they know the bar got raised between their tests.

Keep the bar in the same place, or detail the criteria in place at the time of the test compared with current criteria - or it all becomes meaningless!

[sp3ctre]

Anyone remember the guy who drove his Z4 (M I think) off a cliff, landed upside down and walked away unscathed? Was in the early days of the forum, 2007-2008 I think.

[sp3ctre]

Here you go... all the cars fault, of course

http://www.zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3778005

[GuidoK]

People may think an E85 is a better option than an E89 based on that, unless they know the bar got raised between their tests.

I think thats common knowledge. I mean I think everyone knows that a 90's car is generally less safe than a 2017 car but still in the 90's cars also got 5 stars.
It has been on most carshows.
I think its less common knowledge that different classes of cars are differently rated (so a 5 star hatchback is still less safe than a 5 star SUV)

In the end its a general safety quality rating. A relative comparison to similar cars of similar age and similar type.

Here you go... all the cars fault, of course

lol you see a rwd sportscar demolished beyond recognition with a 20 year old next to it and its of course the cars fault

One sided accidents resulting in cars looking like that are 99,9999% of the time drivers fault.