# Phaeton Crash Test Photos (from Europe)



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

About a month ago, there was a little animated GIF image floating around here showing a crash test. I have two pictures showing the results of the European crash testing of the Phaeton, I thought everyone might be interested in seeing them.
Below the two pictures of the crash test is an illustration that shows the extent of the steel frame on the Phaeton. This helps explain why there is so little deformation of the passenger cabin during the crash tests. The ribs that you see in the roof of the illustration are on the inside (lower) surface of the roof, they provide additional rigidity for rollover protection. They also carry over the 'frame' from one middle door post to the other - you can see there was very little side deformation in the side impact test (look at the skid marks, the car started out at the white line) - this is because the two B pillars and the ribs in the roof form sort of a 'roll bar' that goes all the way around the Phaeton.
Michael
*European Crash Test Photos*


*Extent of Steel Frame on the Phaeton*


_Modified by PanEuropean at 1:35 AM 2-12-2005_


_Modified by PanEuropean at 8:02 PM 7-13-2008_


----------



## PhaetonChix (Dec 16, 2004)

Michael,
Thank you for posting these pictures. There is no US crash test info out on the Phaeton yet and your photos confirm my thoughts on the Phaeton....not only does it sound like a bank vault when you close the door, but it is built like one too.


----------



## Jack Orr (Mar 15, 2000)

*Re: (PhaetonChix)*

Michael, do you have any idea about repair of the plastic front fenders? I mean, I have no experience with plastic, never having owned a Saturn, and would think they have to be replaced en toto. It that any harder compared to steel?


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (Jack Orr)*

Hello Jack:
I don't have a lot of knowledge about repair of the plastic front fenders (NB: only the front fenders are plastic, the rear quarter panels are steel), but my guess is that minor paint scratches are repaired the same way they would be repaired on a conventional surface, but any physical damage - buckling, tears, etc. - would probably require replacement of the panel.
This is based on my experience with my Honda ST1100 motorcycle, which uses a similar plastic material for some of the body panels.
Michael
*Other plastic body panels...*











_Modified by PanEuropean at 8:04 PM 7-13-2008_


----------



## MoreA4 (Mar 15, 2002)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_










On the lighter side, looks like an upscale checker cab in NYC


----------



## shadowblue (Dec 22, 2004)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*

Holds up very nicely, indeed.
Solid. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Paldi (Sep 4, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*

Here's the one I found on a Google images search...


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (Paldi)*

Wow, from the pics it looks like the Phaeton really handles accidents quite well. Almost like the over-engineered Benz's from the 80's. 
Ok quick question, and I don't mean to ruffle and feathers here, but I immediately thought of this when I saw the pics. How do these pics (or crash results) compare to a similarly sized aluminum space frace A8 (or the new Jag XJ)? Does the steel frame have any visible/measurable safety advantages to the aluminum frame cars?


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (6cylVWguy)*

I don't have any comparable photos of an aluminum car, but you can conduct your own research pretty easily: Find an aluminum can, such as a empty pop or beer can, then squeeze it with your hand. Now go get a steel can, such as an empty soup can or similar, and try the same thing.







It's your choice, light weight or phenomenal occupant protection - you can't really have both at the same time.
On the same topic - here's a photo that shows all 8 Phaeton airbags inflated at the same time.
*Phaeton Airbags*



_Modified by PanEuropean at 8:05 PM 7-13-2008_


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_I don't have any comparable photos of an aluminum car, but you can conduct your own research pretty easily: Find an aluminum can, such as a empty pop or beer can, then squeeze it with your hand. Now go get a steel can, such as an empty soup can or similar, and try the same thing.







It's your choice, light weight or phenomenal occupant protection - you can't really have both at the same time.


According to the following link, everything you wrote above is completely false. 
http://www.autoaluminum.org/sp1.htm
And of course they use the A8 (likely the first gen spaceframe platform) as the benchmark example. 
So the arguement continues I suppose.


----------



## bobm (Mar 2, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (6cylVWguy)*

Here's another Phaeton crash test:


----------



## Jack Orr (Mar 15, 2000)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (6cylVWguy)*

Far be it from myownself to enter an argument, if one ensues, but I would observe that a steel frame, such as is in the Phaeton, is equally as protective as aluminum. I think it's the 'design' that counts.
However, there is no question about which is easier to repair after damage. The Phaeton doesn't have to be flatbedded to a distant spot to find a shop that can 'fix' aluminum.


----------



## 6cylVWguy (Jun 14, 2000)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (Jack Orr)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Jack Orr* »_Far be it from myownself to enter an argument, if one ensues, but I would observe that a steel frame, such as is in the Phaeton, is equally as protective as aluminum. I think it's the 'design' that counts.
However, there is no question about which is easier to repair after damage. The Phaeton doesn't have to be flatbedded to a distant spot to find a shop that can 'fix' aluminum.

I definitely agree with the second part of your statement. The comparative ease of repairing the phaeton v A8 I would imagine is also reflected in the insurance cost for each vehicle.


----------



## dcowan699 (Nov 22, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (6cylVWguy)*

I agree about the repair issue. I was a victim of a major Honda Goldwing recall where my bike had to be completely disassembled in order to have the frame rewelded underneath the gas tank area. Major PITA as aluminum welders were scarce. 
David


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (6cylVWguy)*


_Quote, originally posted by *6cylVWguy* »_
According to the following link, everything you wrote above is completely false. http://www.autoaluminum.org/sp1.htm 

Thanks for providing that link, it is interesting reading. Naturally, I wouldn't expect anything less that a totally impartial assessment from *The Aluminum Association*, who are the folks who sponsor that website.








Michael


----------



## viscount (Jan 2, 2005)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*

Hello, i have direct experience in this subject








My insurance has actually fallen $200/yr with the w12 from the S8...I can say that the aluminium is very strong and does absorb impact very well- but unless you are near a special body shop, its a real problem to fix properly. As it turns out there's only 1 certified audi aluminium specialist shop in Chicago and they were absolutely top notch perfectionists who have spent time in germany training with Audi for aluminium work and have a factory jig here which is the same as used in the car's construction. So i was fortunate in that aspect, but there's the cost







....in a relatively minor front end collision where I broadsided some guy who illegally turned against me at a very modest speed, there was minimal body damage however the frame rail was bent and had to be replaced...2 months and $20k later I had my car back in perfect condition. I never had any feeling whatsoever of not feeling anything but very safe in the car...having said that I never want to see how the Phaeton holds up








Ed.


----------



## av_audi (Apr 5, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (viscount)*


_Quote, originally posted by *viscount* »_My insurance has actually fallen $200/yr with the w12 from the S8...I 

I am willin to bet your insurance would have fallen just as much, if not more, if you had moved on to an A8. The same applies for M3 to 330, S4 to A4, etc.


----------



## av_audi (Apr 5, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_I don't have any comparable photos of an aluminum car, but you can conduct your own research pretty easily: Find an aluminum can, such as a empty pop or beer can, then squeeze it with your hand. Now go get a steel can, such as an empty soup can or similar, and try the same thing.









If you can find me an aluminum can with walls as thick as those of a soup can, I'll try the test








But just to play the game, notice how hard you have to press to crush the soda can in the vertical direction, despite the paper thin walls. Also notice how it somewhat maintains its integrity while getting crushed progressively.
In any case, talking about generic steel and generic aluminum doesn't help much. There are all sorts of steels with very different properties and strengths, and I am willing to bet a lot that the aluminum we are talking about for cars are aluminum alloys, not just plane aluminum. There are again so many different types of aluminum alloys with various different properties.



_Modified by av_audi at 3:31 PM 2-17-2005_


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (av_audi)*


_Quote, originally posted by *av_audi* »_Also notice how it somewhat maintains its integrity while getting crushed progressively.

That is very encouraging. I assume the bodies of the people inside aluminum structures also somewhat retain their integrity as they get crushed progressively?


----------



## av_audi (Apr 5, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_That is very encouraging. I assume the bodies of the people inside aluminum structures also somewhat retain their integrity as they get crushed progressively?

Ok, you are being sarastic, but good controlled deformation implies efficient energy absorption. Your steel crumple zone will also deform, until the occupant cafe is reached. Structural performance is to a high degree a function of the design, not just material properties (within reason).


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*

Here is an interesting accident photo that was posted to a German language forum I participate in. The smaller car (Renault Twingo) drove in front of the path of the Phaeton. The damage to the Twingo is obvious from the photo. The Phaeton suffered a cracked fog-light, a paint-scratch to the left headlight washer jet cover, and the front licence plate fell off.
Michael
*Phaeton vs. Twingo*



_Modified by PanEuropean at 8:06 PM 7-13-2008_


----------



## enriquejcu (Sep 16, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*

Any idea what the speeds where in the initial photos? That car certainly held up very well http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## iluvmcr (Jan 14, 2005)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*

The last post on this topic was 3/29/05. I must have missed this topic and maybe at this point I'm the only one who cares, but ...
*Much to my suprise, I can't find crash test ratings on the Phaeton. A web search today yeilded nothing.*

I don't think you can say aluminum makes a superior body material in terms of safety. Neither can you say steel is superior. What makes safety the amount of material, design and manufacture quality.
What you can say is that, per unit volume, steel is stonger and per pound, aluminum is stronger. Per pound and per unit volume, steel is also cheaper and easier to repair. Ductility, malleability, and many other properties of these materials are so different that the number of variables to consider and compair are enormous when considering conplex unibodies. One can design an ultra-safe all aluminum vehicle or an ultra-safe all steel vehicle.
It truely does come down to relative amount material, design, and manufacturing quality. I bought a 1990 Dodge Omni new and within 2 weeks it literally split apart at the front passenger strut housing seams! On investigation, there were no welds on the passenger side strut housing seams compared to the same structure on the driver side - an example of poor manufacture.
I hope that both the Audi A8 and the Phaeton have superb safety crash test ratings, given their cost.
Does anyone know of existing crash test ratings for the Phaeton?


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (iluvmcr)*

I don't believe that any North American crash tests were conducted with the Phaeton. I think that the US regulatory authority that conducts these tests does not have the capacity to test every vehicle offered for sale in America. For this reason, they tend to focus their efforts on domestic vehicles, and imports that might be of concern. In the case of the Phaeton, I think they probably just reviewed the European data, took one look at a photo of a Phaeton and a dimensional diagram, and then figured "We've got better things to do than worry about that one."
Michael


----------



## dcowan699 (Nov 22, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*

Did you try looking up crash tests for the Phaeton under "Diesel locomotives"?. You may find it there.
D.C.


----------



## riccone (Nov 11, 2004)

My 6 month Collision insurance premiums:
99 A8- $126
04 A8L- $179
04 Phaeton- $114
Collision premium is a reflection of what the respective costs of repairing your car are; has nothing to do with safety. 
To prove this- check out what Collision coverage costs for a Kia. 


_Modified by riccone at 7:46 PM 4-16-2005_


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (riccone)*

Good point. My total insurance premium for my 2004 Phaeton W12 is less than the total insurance premium for my 2002 Golf TDI was. Go figure - the insurance companies must be on to something.
Michael


----------



## Steve Covington (Feb 17, 2005)

*PHAETON side impact test*

Our local morning news station (ktla) on 4-25, did a report stating the PHAETON was the strongest car tested for the side impact crash test . I did not see this, but 3 of my auto/tech. students told me about it. Will try to get more info. from the station. Also my students say that another station (chanel 7) voted the PHAETON as the best car to drive in the U.S. 
THANKS Steve


----------



## rmg2 (Jan 23, 2004)

*Re: PHAETON side impact test (Steve Covington)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Steve Covington* »_Our local morning news station (ktla) on 4-25, did a report stating the PHAETON was the strongest car tested for the side impact crash test . I did not see this, but 3 of my auto/tech. students told me about it. Will try to get more info. from the station. Also my students say that another station (chanel 7) voted the PHAETON as the best car to drive in the U.S. 
THANKS Steve 

Hi Steve,
Welcome to the forum. This is the first time I've seen your post.
I'm in HB just up the road.
We're starting to get a number of Phaeton owners in the area.


----------



## PhaetonChix (Dec 16, 2004)

Rick, you should start a West Coast or So. Cal Phaeton club. I'm sure Peter will help.


----------



## sirAQUAMAN64 (Oct 25, 2004)

*Re: (PhaetonChix)*

Yes, post.
This would be excellent info for potential buyers of this calibre car.
However, I think because of the weight the car would do better in real-world crashes than the IIHS.org's where it hits a wall (because it's own weight would crush itself, if you follow me)


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: PHAETON side impact test (Steve Covington)*

Thanks very much for posting this, Steve. I have merged (appended) your post onto an existing thread that we have about the same topic - this thread contains photos of Phaeton side impact tests that were conducted in Germany.
AFIK, the Phaeton is the only large sedan that uses ultra high strength steel in the cabin frame and B pillars. That probably has a lot to do with the crash test results.
Michael


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: PHAETON side impact test (PanEuropean)*

I did a little searching for news about Phaeton crash tests, and could not find anything. But, I did find a news release (dated today) telling the world that the new *Jetta* just became the first vehicle ever to score the highest possible ratings in every single side impact crash test category.
I can understand the students' confusion: Jettas, Phaetons - they all look the same, a big VW logo on each end, 4 doors, and both are fast moving...
NEW CRASH TEST RESULTS: VOLKSWAGEN NEW JETTA ACES SIDE IMPACT TEST; ALSO EARNS GOOD RATING IN FRONTAL TEST
Michael


----------



## 8secondquarters (Apr 7, 2005)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*

ouch


----------



## dzier (Jun 19, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (8secondquarters)*

Looks like it went through the compactor at the junk yard, but then why is the front grill still intact? Something could have fallen on it that did not get the front end. The grill is still in tact. I hope no one was in it!!


----------



## dcowan699 (Nov 22, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (8secondquarters)*

If you sold every single part of a Phaeton at retail, how much would you make?


----------



## dzier (Jun 19, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (dcowan699)*

What are you suggesting...that we sell our cars one piece at a time?


----------



## BMW Killa (Nov 20, 2003)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (8secondquarters)*


_Quote, originally posted by *8secondquarters* »_ouch 










damn i guess a pheaton already made it all the way to the crusher... i bet there was still some good parts in there


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (Maxt2)*

My guess is as follows: That was a European specification Phaeton that was imported by VW of NA for test and engineering purposes, and it did not comply with North American safety standards.
By law, manufacturers who import such vehicles are obliged to either re-export them, or prove to the government that they have been destroyed and will never be used again in the USA. It was probably less expensive for VW to destroy the car.
Normally, a salvage yard would remove useful components such as headlights, grilles, door panels, stuff like that before crushing the carcass. The fact that none of those parts were removed very strongly suggests that the owner of this vehicle (likely the manufacturer) specified that it be crushed intact. Tires and wheels must be removed before a vehicle is crushed, to minimize explosion hazards.
Michael


----------



## dcowan699 (Nov 22, 2004)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (dzier)*


_Quote, originally posted by *dzier* »_What are you suggesting...that we sell our cars one piece at a time?

NO! NO! NO! Did it ever occur to you how much this car might cost if you had to buy every part individually??? I happen to know that my motorcycle cost $17K off the showroom floor. It was discovered that if the bike was bought piece by piece at retail , all the way down to the rings, and valve stems, this bike would have cost $68K!!!
That picture got me wondering what junkyards could get for parts based on retail. They should have second guessed crushing it as many of those parts could've drawn quite a penny. You would be surprised how much this car would cost if you built it part by part at retail. 
Of course Michael has a neat explanation as to why this particular Phaeton might have been crushed.

_Modified by dcowan699 at 7:20 AM 4-30-2005_


_Modified by dcowan699 at 8:15 AM 4-30-2005_


----------



## PhaetonChix (Dec 16, 2004)

Fred, 
I thought we all agreed to forget we ever saw those pics per VW request.
~PC


----------



## swa5000 (Jun 14, 2004)

*Re: (Ming Blues)*

Take a look at the vids on teh second page.








http://www.sicurauto.it/crasht...o.php


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (PhaetonChix)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PhaetonChix* »_Fred, 
I thought we all agreed to forget we ever saw those pics per VW request.
~PC

Did I miss something here while I was away?








Michael


----------



## iluvmcr (Jan 14, 2005)

*Re: Phaeton Crash Test Photos (PanEuropean)*

http://www.informedforlife.org/863.pdf 
*The Phaeton's weight adds to it's safety.* Fatality risk reduced 37% vs.ave. weight passenger car (21% heavier than average weight passenger car)
*The head protecting side impact airbag is very good.* Fatality risk due to head injury reduced 45% vs. without head airbag
*The electronic stability control reduces rollover risk.* Single vehicle rollover risk reduced 30% vs. without ESC.


----------



## PhaetonChix (Dec 16, 2004)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*

Michael,
Yes, pictures of the Palo Alto SWB Euro spec Phaeton were posted. I thought we all had a gentleman's (and ladies) agreement to forget we ever saw the car.
~PC


----------



## Paldi (Sep 4, 2004)

*Re: (PhaetonChix)*

Michael,
My take on it was the posting of the location, the test and development program information including the names of people on the task force, the photo of the license plate and the face of the driver were offensive.
I agreed and fully supported the deletion of the entire thread. 
I saved one photo of the euro bumper and driver door area. No indication it was even a SWB from that photo - just a black Phaeton parked on a cloudy day. My apologies again P/C.



_Modified by Paldi at 1:01 PM 5-16-2005_


----------



## remrem (Jan 20, 2008)

*Re: (Paldi)*

Rehost photos please, if appropriate. Thanks.


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (remrem)*

Photos (mine) rehosted.


----------



## limboguy (May 26, 2008)

I thought I'd comment on the old "squeezing the aluminum vs. steel can" aspect of this thread. Aluminum is generally lighter and less stiff than steel, but that makes it geometrically more suitable for thin surfaces (like sheet metal). Stiffness of a sheet varies as the cube of the thickness, and strength as the square. A steel can wall can't be much thinner than the aluminum; otherwise it could buckle too easily. That's why steel cans are heavier. Since you've got more overall mass, the effort to crush it is greater (roughly speaking).
Regarding the Phaeton, the aluminum body panels are an excellent design feature. The frame theoretically could be made from either material, but steel is cheaper and easier to weld, and the frame will be thick enough (so as to be like an I-beam) that there's not much downside to using steel. Btw, having a stiff frame around the passengers makes a lot of sense when you consider that much of the collision energy can be absorbed by body panels, the engine, suspension, or whatever gets hit first.
Sorry if that's TMI! Flame me if that's inappropriate! But give me credit for not going into a strength-vs-toughness lecture (the latter is relevant to energy absorption).


----------

