CRASH: Say goodbye to the Jeep Commander

Unfortunately, I think it's gonna be a while before I experience anything more than rideability in any car.

Glad everyone is OK. That crash looks horrific!

Oh my; glad everyone's all right, Kelly.

Hope you guys heal fast and that they catch the perp soon!

Wow this is a really sad day. First off, glad you guys were ok, and that crash is pretty bad, it's the kind I see quite often in Kuwait.
 
Even more sad is the fact that the Commander got destroyed beyond repair after all the times its been used for road trips.
 
I hope that idiot who caused the accident is caught and sentenced heavily.
 
It's a good thing you were in a Commander when this happened. Everyone is touting the benefits of small cars, but they forget all those subcompacts (Fit, Versa, Caliber) dont do so well in crashes compared to larger vehicles.

Don't have the police report yet, but word on the street is that the police have pulled footage from the shopping mall parking lot cameras near where the accident took place. Some witnesses reported a car doing donuts in the parking lot there earlier, so perhaps we have a suspect.

Holy cow! I'm sure glad to hear everyone is "mostly" okay.
 
Two breakdowns with the Jeep and now a really broken Jeep. Boy, someone must have angered the Edmunds God.
 
I sure hope they catch the creep who caused it!

Wow. Glad you are ok, for the most part.
 
You commented you were glad for the protection the Commander offered. In your explanation, though, you indicated that it was swerving to avoid another vehicle that lead to the car hitting the tree. Do you think that if you had been in a more nimble vehicle, or perhaps in the new Benz S-class will all the attendant electronic nannies, that you could have actually avoided the accident entirely? The Commander's slalom results were not impressive....

First things first, I'm glad everyone survived, especially your daughter - and glad to hear that her booster seat performed well, as my own sons are just now graduating from baby seats into boosters.
 
But we would also really appreciate your thoughts on how the Jeep performed in the accident versus other (i.e., smaller) cars, in terms of both active and passive safety.

Glad everyone is relatively ok. Sad thing is you would have been in better shape if you just ran into the lousy bum. But your husband, as a decent human being, was trying to minimise injury.
get well soon.

Assuming your husband was braking after you guys swerved....if the Jeep had a shorter braking distance, do you think you guys could have missed the tree or was it just impossible to miss the tree? I'm asking because it seems that with a shorter braking distance you guys could have at least missed the tree. And did the curtain airbags deploy? Because in some cars, they deploy even in a frontal collision. It seems from the pictures that it didnt.
 
Glad you guys are ok!! God bless!

Oh man... I'm glad the results weren't worse. I'm kinda concerned about that engine coming back through the firewall... I've seen cars where the engine has fallen under the car, and that's probably what should've happened in this case too.
 
Being in an accident like that is bad luck. Don't let anyone tell you differently.

Thank God you and your family made it out alive! Looks like the Jeep performed well in the severe crash.
 
You never read about the engine punching through the firewall on government and insurance crash tests, because they ram it into a flat barrier that either makes contact with the entire front or half of the front of the car. In this case, a tree hit smack dead on the middle of the beast and pushed the engine back.
 
Again, happy it wasn't more serious.

I think the speed limit on the road which we were traveling is 40 mph, which is probably where we were when we saw the offender hit the Forester. Barry hit the brakes immediately, then swerved to the right, but the distance to the median and the subsequent tree was pretty short. If we could've just gone over the narrow median and onto the neighborhood access road on the other side, we might have been in better shape, but the grass felt like ice and the tree was just right there.
 
I keep replaying the events over and over in my mind, trying to think of how we might have avoided the final result, or at least minimized the accident, but all that's doing is making me crazy.
 
 I saw the Forester get hit. I saw the car (believe it was a silver Ford Explorer, but that hasn't been confirmed) coming directly at us through the driver's window, and then I saw the tree in my face. The windshield shattered and the air bags (front only) popped while my daughter screamed, "What's happening, what's happening?"
 
Freaks me out just to type that paragraph.

Swift healing to you and Barry! As awful as the photos look, it does seem the Commander did a commendable job in the accident. I can't imagine too many other vehicles that could have done as well in the circumstance.

It's a great relief to know that you & yours suffered only minor injuries. (It would've been an even greater relief if you hadn't suffered any injuries, but...)
  
Was Barry wearing that flipflop? If so, did it affect his ability to apply and maintain full force on the brake pedal?
  
Did the Commander feel as if it were tipping over when Barry swerved?
  
desmolicious wrote,"Sad thing is you would have been in better shape if you just ran into the lousy bum. But your husband, as a decent human being, was trying to minimise injury."
  
Barry swerved to avoid not the vehicle that caused the accident, but the innocent vehicle that the perp hit. Furthermore, I think he instinctively swerved to avoid getting hit by the innocent vehicle. Even if he had had time to consider whether or not he and his family would've been better off if he were to allow the innocent vehicle to broadside their vehicle, he might've decided to take a chance that by swerving, he'd avoid a collision altogether (which, it turns out, he didn't).
  
eric_l wrote, "You never read about the engine punching through the firewall on government and insurance crash tests, because they ram it into a flat barrier that either makes contact with the entire front or half of the front of the car. In this case, a tree hit smack dead on the middle of the beast and pushed the engine back."
  
The IIHS test reports note whether or not there is, and how much, intrusion into the footwell. NHTSA test reports indicate only the size of the forces on the dummies' legs and feet.

Also glad that you all were (mostly) okay, although broken ankles and feet are not exactly something I'd wish on anyone!
 
Just a followup about the IIHS frontal crash tests -- generally, because they are offset tests, the engine doesn't take the brunt of the impact (at least in cars with transverse-mounted engines where the much smaller transmission is on the driver's side). What causes the floorpan intrusion on the driver's side are suspension or frame members, or the tire/wheel being shoved back against the occupant compartment.
 
And against a rigid, unmoving object like the tree, you're not necessarily better off being in a larger vehicle. OTOH, if you had hit the Explorer (or vice versa), it would definitely have been better to be in the huge Commander.

I get the feeling we're looking for car review on the Jeep's crash-worthiness while wishing the family well... The Jeep kept them safe. That's the main thing!

Do you know what speed you were travelling at when you struck the tree?
 
BTW..here is the link to the NHSTA test results for the Commander.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/3863.html

I think the speed limit there is 40 mph, maybe even 45. We were probably around 30-35 mph at impact, but that's just my guess.
 
Barry has been reading the blog, and may address some questions from his point of view as the driver. If he does, he'll identify himself in his posts.
 
Many thanks for the well wishes.

I, too, want to thank everyone for the well wishes. I'm the Barry who was driving the Commander at the time of the accident.
 
When I swerved to the right, tipping over entered briefly into mind, particularly since Emma would be on the bottom side. But, I don't remember ever having the sensation of tipping. We jumped the curb so quickly.
 
As for the flipflop in the picture, no I wasn't wearing it. Driving while wearing flipflops isn't safe in my opinion. The driver can't properly feel the foot pedals.
 
Do you know that VW Jetta commercial where the airbags deploy on the two guys while driving? That image flashed before me as my airbag blew up into my face and chest. It happens that fast and with such force. Thankfully, they were invented.

Best wishes for a speedy recovery to both of you.
 
Damage to the Jeep shows a considerable impact, yet the safety features and design standards that, over the years, the government has encouraged or mandated, and countless engineers have invented and developed, did their jobs as intended.
 
Thank goodness they DON'T make 'em like they used to.
 
Get well soon.

Get well to everybody!
Question-
Is this the first accident either of you were in that the airbags deployed?
It seems dissapointing that the curtian airbags didn't deploy. If the airbags were to deploy, dosen't that mean the vehicle has enough damage to be written off? So if the airbags were to deploy, I would want all of them to deploy, wouldn't you?
Also, did you think if the Commander had knee airbags, (I think the RX350 has the) it would have made a difference?
Again, hope everybody heals and a quick recovery.

Judging by the damage, I would assume the insurance company will write it off as a "total loss." If by chance it's not, that would be very interesting to know...

I'll be sure to post the final result as far as the insurance company payoff for anyone who's interested in knowing the financial ramifications of ramming a tree.

Wow. Glad to hear everbody's OK. How did the Forester that was hit hold up?

Darmok-
I have a relative that, while driving in the winter in Montana, had her Forester slide off the road into the guard rail. She said the car held up remakably well, and even though the airbags didn't go off, it was considered totalled. You can see the Forester's IIHS scores @
 
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=330

So has Edmunds ever had a long term test vehicle meet with such a horrible end as this? Not to discount the terrible scare and injuries sustained of course - so very glad to see everyone is going to be ok!

jpr18 - The side curtain air bags didn't deploy because it wasn't a side impact or rollover. You don't want all of the airbags going off, only those related to the direction of impact. As Kelly and Barry can probably tell you, an airbag deployment is a violent event. Only those that can oppose crash forces and restrain your body's direction of travel should go off.

I stand corrected. I now realize that Barry swerved to avoid the knucklehead's vehicle, not the Forester. (I found out about this accident from Jalopnik [ http://www.jalopnik.com/cars/news/edmunds-crashtests-the-jeep-commander-199465.php ], where it says, "In an attempt to avoid a spinning Forester smacked by an alleged hoon...") But the remainder of my response to desmolicious still applies.
  
A thought about whether or not the insurance company will declare it a total loss: If they do, whoever buys the Commander from them may try to rebuild it, or even graft the front end of another Commander onto it, and resell it as a used car.

I've worked for Edmunds for almost five years, and in that time there have been numerous minor accidents with our long-term cars.
 
With 15-20 cars in the fleet at a time, there's always something going on, but this is the first time that a vehicle has been towed to the impound lot and left for dead.

Oh my! I'm sorry to read that this happened! I JUST now found out about this. :( I'm glad you, Barry and Emma are okay given the circumstances. Get well soon!

That engine coming into the cabin is a bit disturbing though...
 
-Rex

Kelly, you got Emma a new car seat right? NHTSA strongly recommends replacing a car seat after a moderate or severe crash like this. Be sure to mention this if you do manage a wrap up report on the crash.
 
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/childps/ChildRestraints/ReUse/index.htm
 
Sorry for the gnarly URL....

Yes, Emma is now safely ensconced in a new Eddie Bauer high-back booster.
 
You're right about the need to replace car seats, thanks for making the point. I have a friend whose car was stolen a couple of years ago, and although the car was recovered with no exterior damage, the insurance company still replaced her daughter's car seat since there was no way to know for sure what may have happened to it while it was out of her care.

In this type of collision, the idea that a huge Jeep Commander is a safer vehicle than something smaller is a very common misunderstanding of the laws of physics. When a heavy vehicle hits a lighter vehicle it is obvious that the larger vehicle has an advantage. However, when striking an immoveable object, it may well have been all the extra mass that the commander carries that drove the engine back so far. In circumstances like this collision, it is the engineering, safety features, and design of the vehicle that dictates safety no matter what it's size.
 
That said, I am very glad that you and your family endured what appears to be a violent impact with good prospects of a full recovery.

Very true. And although we'll never know in this case, a smaller, more nimble vehicle might have been able to avoid the tree. Active safety counts too.

Just wondering if the tree had been another vehicle that would have spread the force of the collision across the full front of the Commander would have made a big difference? I'd venture to say the foot wells would have not been crumpled.
If a more supportive type of footwear were worn this also may have changed the outcome? Assuming that the sandal in the photo is what was worn at the time of the crash. Sandals offer no safety or support.

I know this is quite after the fact, but I'm just catching up on my reading. I am very glad that you and your family were able to walk away from this relatively unscathed (given the severity). Thank you also for the breadth of information you have provided your readers, a look in to the full gravity of an accident that was no fault of your own (or Barry's), and why it is SO important to properly restrain children AND yourself with child restraint and safety belt usage.
 
Thank you.
~alpha

Great that nobody was seriously injured... I think considering you hit a solid Oak Tree the Jeep held up very well. I'm not sure reading these comments what people think a vehicle is suppose to do when it hits something with force that simply has no give. For every action there is a reaction and in this case only one thing will react and that is the vehicle. Engines can't simply fall below something that doesn't have space for it to fall under and is being pushed into the firewall. I simply think people expect a vehicle to be bullet proof which will never happen. Drive as safely as you can and look out for the other guy. All of the safety ratings and tests in the world can never prepare you for all the scenarios that happen in real life, if they did you would be riding inside a balloon filled tank with a go cart engine. Again Glad everyone walked or limped away from this. No disrespect meant. Just my 2 cents. Check out the attached photo or click on the link for the story.. I doubt they plan for this. http://www.jeepcommander.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1022

As you can see, the Jeep's body peeled back between the frame rails - which did not help the vehicle safety structure absorb the impact - subsequently causing the engine to puncture the passenger compartment. Perhaps if the vehicle had been equipped with a more advanced safety structure, such as the Honda ACE system, crash energy would have been better dispersed AROUND the passenger space.
  
ACE = Advanced Compatibility Engineering.
http://corporate.honda.com/safety/details.aspx?id=passive_safety

Good spam point. But we must remember that this is (was) a body-on-frame vehicle. Any unibody vehicle would have distributed the forces as you describe, not just the Honda.
 
I think that the fact that this car hit a tree dead-center (a point load, not a distributed one) had more to do with the engine movement than anything. This would be the weakest point for a unibody structure too.
 
At some point, the loads are so high that people get hurt no matter what design method you use.

Dubious assertion, at best. However, the Honda ACE body stucture has advanced structure features to minimize engine intrusion that traditional unibody vehicles do not.
http://www.hondanews.com

The Commander is not a body-on-frame design, it is a uniframe, pioneered in the Jeep Cherokee in 1984. There is a normal unibody with an integral fully-boxed continuous subframe.
This design has recently been copied by Honda for their pilot etc. in an attempt to make the accordian-based unibody strong enough for the added weight etc.

The commander/Grand Cherokee uniframe was jointly engineered with Mercedes-Benz and is used with the ML-class SUVs.

The only advantage of the honda might be that the engine is turned sideways in normal fwd fashion, this might provide more area to distribute the force along at the footwells. Conversely it could also result in more intrusion at a greater area.

In reality, the crash tests show that a 2006 Honda Pilot would most likely have done worse. A 2006 pilot has femur loads of Driver304 / 562, Passenger 909 / 823 (obviously the passenger loses big here).

The Commander for 2006 Driver 935 / 685 Passenger 224 / 210. The driver is not as has a real problem with one leg here but the passenger is much, much better than anyone in the pilot.