gone from our roads, as seen on tv3 news. They didn't say how they are going to do this but at a guess very dear rego's and tougher wof's for them.
gypsypom,
Sep 1, 4:38am
yea just heard, I see some of the early 2000 subaru's are low stars 1 and 2 this is because they base the rating on accidents each model has been involved in
gammelvind,
Sep 1, 4:41am
They also said that approximately 60% of all fatalities on our roads are in these cars. Assuming that is correct then maybe they have a point.
edangus,
Sep 1, 4:43am
Coming for our Classics next. all so we can send more money offshore.
curlcrown,
Sep 1, 4:43am
The greenies should not support this, but they will. All that wasted energy and extra resources and pollution to replace products that are already in existence and functioning well, not to mention what happens to the cars that are scrapped prematurely.
marmar1,
Sep 1, 4:49am
My old 99 Subaru had a 5 star rating.
atom.ant,
Sep 1, 4:49am
so 60% V's 40% doesn't really make sense. I could undertand if it was something like 80% V's 20%. So what they are saying just over 50% of people die in 1+2 star cars.
gammelvind,
Sep 1, 5:02am
Essentially yes. With the average age of our fleet being about 14 years they are likely to try and encourage us to get into post 2000 vehicles. The wof system is a start, but I fully expect to see other methods of encouragement to appear.
gunhand,
Sep 1, 5:04am
I just re watched 3 news and they said it was 66% that were killed in cars with low ratings and those cars make up a bit over half the fleet. But as said above they didn't say how they would rid the roads of these so called death machines, just if they (owners) can afford it.
thejazzpianoma,
Sep 1, 5:09am
Communist Jacinda doesn't seem to understand that all her problems are coming from over taxation and over regulation. if people had the money they would upgrade their vehicles.
Same issue with the housing crises, 51% of the build cost goes to local and national government. Then a whole lot more to over the top health and safety etc.
They try to solve every problem with even more tax and regulation, just like trying to put out a fire with petrol.
The sooner we get rid of her and her idiot gender selected virtue signalling moron brigade the better.
thejazzpianoma,
Sep 1, 5:10am
Also same stupid government that pulled funding for the SH2 upgrade, which is seeing people killed regularly. But we apparently have money to enter Pike River again. Why not use that money to actually save some lives?
atom.ant,
Sep 1, 5:16am
good point and very well said
poppy62,
Sep 1, 5:36am
It appears that Jac & Co seem to think that Cars with more safety stars will improve the driving standards of Mr/Mrs/Ms Public.
tweake,
Sep 1, 5:46am
and our 4wd's. there is loads of 90's utes and 4wd on the road.
martinistar,
Sep 1, 5:46am
They Can't do that, for many classic cars and events for them are a religion, would they close down all mosques and ban Islam.
curlcrown,
Sep 1, 5:51am
No, there'll be extra funding for that.
gammelvind,
Sep 1, 5:55am
Not a chance but when they do crash maybe those they hit have a better chance of survival. Improving the Publics driving is a whole different package, much of which is related to our aggressive and entitled attitude on the road.
esky-tastic,
Sep 1, 5:59am
And motorbikes, how are they going to get THEM up to five star rating?
mack77,
Sep 1, 6:04am
No they don't; they are just are very well of the fact that there is a much lower chance of being killed or severely injured in a vehicle that has a high safety rating(crash-worthiness rating). I think that it's a good idea, since the results of these crashes are costing us millions of dollars each year as a result of the ongoing ACC payments to people injured in crashes.
mack77,
Sep 1, 6:19am
Subaru's generally have quite good safety ratings and my check reveals that the only Subaru made on or after 2000 that has a one or two star "used car safety rating" is the Impreza made between 1993 and 2000. The "used car safety rating" is based on the results of car crashes and is a measure of how well that brand and model of car protects its occupants from serious injury or death. The more crashes that any particular car has results in more data and thus a more statistically correct rating.
thejazzpianoma,
Sep 1, 6:20am
Maybe they should investigate the magical safety bubble that surrounds cyclists given they promote and fund cycling as a mainstream transport option ad nausium
mrfxit,
Sep 1, 6:39am
Sadly, most "incentives" to upgrade our vehicles, also involves paying out a nice big pile of cash more then the older cars would cost to keep going for many more years.
Vehicles don't cause accidents, drivers do.
gunhand,
Sep 1, 6:46am
You my kind sir are totaley wrong wrong wrong. Have you not been to your local Bunnings, Mitre 10, Countdown or Warehouse car park and seen all those unmanned cars having a go at each other? Or maybe it was that prescription mediation that didn't agree with me that day? Hmmmm.
meow_mix,
Sep 1, 6:46am
The first generation Impreza was made from 1992-2000, originally it had no airbags, but two were added to the mid-90s facelift model. It was quite a small car and wasn't very safe in a crash. My '93 Legacy won't be popular with this govt, again it has no airbags.
thejazzpianoma,
Sep 1, 6:50am
True, but the outcome of that accident depends to a great deal on how safe the vehicle is. Not to mention that increasingly cars are becoming so forgiving that many accidents don't even happen in the first place.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.