Auto Makers Resist Female-Sized Test Dummies
An effort by federal safety regulators to improve crash tests of new cars by using a dummy of a small woman has run into a roadblock in the Senate because of auto industry objections.
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)--barely 5 feet tall herself--is trying to rescue the proposed new tests, which would be prohibited by a little-noticed provision in the Senate’s Transportation Department funding bill.
“I am concerned that this . . . would prevent the public from learning how new cars would perform in crashes involving occupants of all sizes,” Boxer said.
Each year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration crashes new cars to test their safety performances, using dummies that represent a 5-foot-8, 172-pound “average” man. The results are released to consumers through a rating system that awards up to five stars.
Women, who now buy about half of the new cars sold, pay special attention to those ratings. Marketing surveys have found them to be more safety conscious than male consumers. But the tests on which the ratings are based may not accurately predict what will happen to many women in a crash.
Independent safety experts believe that including a 4-foot-11, 108-pound female dummy would be more representative of the real world and would encourage auto engineers to better protect a broad range of people.
“We all have learned from the recent history with air bags that we can’t assume that just because a particular design is good for the average male, it is good for all occupants,” said Adrian Lund, vice president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Designed to protect an unbelted man in a serious crash, air bags have killed small children, small women and elderly people in minor accidents.
Officials at the federal traffic safety agency said that they are not proposing to change the new car crash tests immediately, but that they merely want to study the feasibility of adding the female dummy. Results from other tests suggest that small women may be more prone to neck injuries than the average man, the agency told Congress.
“We were just going to run the tests as research and see how the small female dummy worked,” a traffic safety agency official said in an interview. “We had planned on 14 tests this next model year using vehicles that are representative of the entire fleet.”
But auto companies--which are quick to advertise the agency’s top five-star rating for their better-performing models--were alarmed.
Lance Roberts, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said the industry questions whether the female dummy is ready for testing and fears that such tests would not produce reliable results. The dummy originally was intended for testing advanced air bags, beginning in 2003.
Independent observers said the auto companies probably are concerned that adding the small dummy could result in lower test ratings for popular models.
“It’s entirely possible that there are vehicles out there that perhaps won’t look as good with the small woman,” Lund said. “It’s probably fear of the unknown. Many of the manufacturers don’t know how it would come out.”
Speaking for the companies, Roberts insisted that the industry is not trying to block advances in safety. “Our people want to put the safest cars possible on the road,” he said.
The dispute illustrates the kind of behind-the-scenes struggle that is regularly waged between regulators and industry in Washington. Corporate lobbyists who fail to convince an agency often turn to Congress for support.
“Our folks have gone to Capitol Hill and told legislators we don’t think it’s appropriate,” Roberts said of the traffic safety agency’s proposal.
The car makers found a powerful ally in Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.), who heads the Senate committee that writes the Transportation Department’s annual funding bill. In an exchange with Boxer on the Senate floor, Shelby said he fully supports the use of smaller test dummies but is concerned that the female dummy is not yet ready.
“I want to underscore how important it is . . . to have accurate and consistent information from NHTSA in order to proceed with expanded [crash] tests,” Shelby said. “The committee has received conflicting information from NHTSA regarding the readiness of small size dummies.” Instead, his bill would provide more funding for development work on the dummy.
Lund, of the insurance institute, said there are some legitimate questions about the design of the female test dummy. For example, he said there is concern that air bag material could snag in a cavity behind the dummy’s chin. But he stressed that that should be a reason for conducting the very crash tests that the safety agency is proposing, not blocking them.
“It’s kind of interesting that a research program is being objected to on the grounds that we don’t know enough. That’s why you do research,” Lund said. “If NHTSA’s tests show they are getting a lot of unbelievable kinds of results, that could be a warning that there is a problem with the dummy. I think doing the research is exactly the right thing.”
Meanwhile, Boxer’s office said she has received assurances from the traffic safety agency that the small female dummy is indeed ready for use. David Sandretti, a spokesman for Boxer, said the senator is pinning her hopes on a conference between Senate and House negotiators to resolve differences in their respective transportation bills. The House bill does not contain the prohibition. No date has been set for negotiators to meet.
