# Bailey crash tests



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Has anyone seen this.

Apparently the Alko chassis is not as safe as it might be.


----------



## EJB (Aug 25, 2007)

Yes!!! 8O


----------



## GEMMY (Jun 19, 2006)

Not inspiring, is it. :? 

tony


----------



## Philippft (Feb 16, 2008)

And.......only at 30 m.p.h.


----------



## GEMMY (Jun 19, 2006)

All that comes after the engine breaks the driver/passengers legs. :wink: 

tony


----------



## coppo (May 27, 2009)

This feature is in the latest caravan club magazine.

It does seem that Bailey have taken steps to address this and they have made the design much safer as a result, strengthening the bulkhead design with steel which is the weak point.

Others need to now follow suit as they will be like bits of paper in a crash.

I think all credit to Bailey for their work so far although much more needs to be done.

Paul.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I should think the payload is affected, unless they've found a new way of building strength in without adding weight, I thought when they first came out that their design for the hab construction was interesting.


----------



## davesport (Nov 12, 2006)

Blimey  Makes me glad I bought one of these

D.


----------



## GEMMY (Jun 19, 2006)

I downloaded that earlier, didn't want to upset British van owners, so kept quiet. :wink: 

tony


----------



## Camdoon (Sep 21, 2012)

No indication of passenger testing for the Hymer.


----------



## apxc15 (Dec 1, 2007)

I imagine that the cab safety on a Brit wagon is no different to the Hymer tests after all it's pretty much the same cab configuration on a Hymer as it is on all other Motorhomes.

Show me a crash test like the Bailey one for rear seated passengers and that shows the Hymer is safer and then you can boast. Until then you know no more than we do.

So in my book the Bailey is potentially safer than the Hymer as they are at least making an effort to improve rear passenger safety.


Pete 8)


----------



## organplayer (Jan 1, 2012)

*organplayer*

Well said Apxc15.


----------



## coppo (May 27, 2009)

apxc15 said:


> I imagine that the cab safety on a Brit wagon is no different to the Hymer tests after all it's pretty much the same cab configuration on a Hymer as it is on all other Motorhomes.
> 
> Show me a crash test like the Bailey one for rear seated passengers and that shows the Hymer is safer and then you can boast. Until then you know no more than we do.
> 
> ...


I think you have a good point here Pete.

The first test that Bailey did the rear of the motorhome virtually fell apart and as I said earlier all credit to Bailey for doing something about it.

The reason I would never have a coachbuilt is that they didn't look very robust should there be a crash, some of the chaussons etc I looked at looked very weak and I can imagine them falling to pieces in an impact.

I havn't seen any tests for A class vans rear passengers either.

Paul.


----------



## GEMMY (Jun 19, 2006)

Why didn't Bailey use vans off the assembly line and fully load them to test them the way Hymer do.

tony


----------



## GerryD (Sep 20, 2007)

As all motorhomes are now subject to type approval, this would include crash testing. Could therefore be that Bailey started from such a weak point that they could gain PRO on their attempts to come into line with other manufacturers.
There is certainly no evidence to suggest that Hymer perform any better other than some misguided owners.
Gerry


----------



## GerryD (Sep 20, 2007)

GEMMY said:


> Why didn't Bailey use vans off the assembly line and fully load them to test them the way Hymer do.
> 
> tony


Where is the evidence that Hymer test in this way, and where are the results?
Gerry


----------



## pomme1 (May 19, 2005)

Paul,

Surely an 'A' class is exactly the same construction as a coachbuilt aft of the cab. I accept that Hymer have crash tested their cabs, and all credit to them, but I've seen some fairly flimsy non-Hymer 'A' class cabs - just slam the driver's door on one for an illustration.

In that situation, I'd rather have a crash tested base vehicle cab in front of me that something fabricated using caravan technology!

Roger


----------



## apxc15 (Dec 1, 2007)

GEMMY said:


> Why didn't Bailey use vans off the assembly line and fully load them to test them the way Hymer do.
> 
> tony


Why don't Hymer show what happens to rear seated passengers in the Event of a head on impact?

As I said before cab safety is pretty much down to the cab builders such as Sevel, Ford, Mercedes, etc.

Movement of the internal fittings and passengers isn't shown on the Hymer tests but it is on the Bailey test.

When Hymer show what is happening in the rear of the vehicle I will listen to your arguments about Hymer being safer than other brands.

I've owned a couple of S class Hymers but fortunately never had the experience of crashing in one of them.

Pete 8)


----------



## GEMMY (Jun 19, 2006)

High resolution picture (/Crash_Exsis_i.JPG)
Download document (/Crash_Test_Hymer_Exsis_i_en.doc)
Download document (/Crash_Test_Hymer_Exsis_i_en_II.pdf)

tony


----------



## coppo (May 27, 2009)

pomme1 said:


> Paul,
> 
> Surely an 'A' class is exactly the same construction as a coachbuilt aft of the cab. I accept that Hymer have crash tested their cabs, and all credit to them, but I've seen some fairly flimsy non-Hymer 'A' class cabs - just slam the driver's door on one for an illustration.
> 
> ...


A class do look more robust. (Or certainly Hymers do which I have experience of)The construction looks more one piece if you know what I mean although looking more robust doesn't mean they are. Some of the coachbuilts look like a bit of laminate just fixed to the back of the cab.

As I have tried to explain I,m not saying that Hymers, or any other A class are safer because I havn't seen any tests for rear passengers in an A class

Its a serious subject and a bit daft to say my van is better than yours etc.

I hope lots of testing is encouraged(Or even insisted on) for all types of motorhomes.

Paul.


----------



## DaveAndMichelle (Feb 15, 2013)

GEMMY said:


> Why didn't Bailey use vans off the assembly line and fully load them to test them the way Hymer do.
> 
> tony


These test was carried out on prototypes so that they could get the safety right before main manufacture as is done with cars. Swift I believe is also carrying out test now as a result of bailey doing there's so it has to be good for the industry and users.

Dave


----------



## PaulW2 (May 30, 2010)

I think it's virtually impossible to make motorhomes properly 'safe' in an offset frontal crash sense for rear passengers.

What one could benefit from is momentum. A 5 ton van which collides with a 1 ton car at modest speed won't decelerate that sharply (and more of the fittings should therefore remain in place). The same collision against a lorry and it's an entirely different proposition. And the crash test is at 30. The same collision against a heavier vehicle, or at 50, and it's game over. So in the real world I doubt that all this adds up to very much risk mitigation (though it's probably useful for marketing).

And if you leave the road in a motorhome, and the impact is taken at least partly by the bodywork, physics are just against you. Crash test that!

Motorhomes are fundamentally not safe vehicles, especially for passengers in the back. Other than for forward-facing ones I am also unsold on the benefits of seatbelts. Would you want to be rear-facing and strapped in position while everything disintegrates around you (and into you) or would your rather let your momentum carry you in the same direction as the flying debris? I also personally wouldn't want to be strapped against a caravan bodyshell when it disintegrates and collapses onto me, possibly with the full weight of the vehicle turning me into the spread in the sandwich!

I think it's all about active safety - avoiding accidents, minimising risk and so on. Passive safety is just never going to be that great - just as it isn't on a motorbike.


----------



## davesport (Nov 12, 2006)

> No indication of passenger testing for the Hymer.





> I imagine that the cab safety on a Brit wagon is no different to the Hymer tests after all it's pretty much the same cab configuration on a Hymer as it is on all other Motorhomes.
> 
> Show me a crash test like the Bailey one for rear seated passengers and that shows the Hymer is safer and then you can boast. Until then you know no more than we do.
> 
> So in my book the Bailey is potentially safer than the Hymer as they are at least making an effort to improve rear passenger safety.


Have a read of this then come back & we can discuss this further.

Hymer Exsis Crash Test

Quotation from article.



> The interior, furniture and walls showed no signs of any basic damage. Slight deformation to a cupboard wall and a sliding door in the washroom area will be prevented by reinforced supports in future. Plus: now that the test results have been evaluated it proves to be almost inconceivable that the camping body of Hymer motorhomes could become detached from the chassis during an accident.


"The interior, furniture & walls showed no signs of any basic damage" Have a look at the videos Bailey have posted up. The interiors fell apart like matchwood.

I didn't buy a Hymer vehicle out of any sort of brand loyalty or snobbery. I looked at several makes of British vans. If you can't tell the difference in the build quality, materials & the benefits that this brings then vote with your feet. The interiors of some of the vans I looked at were falling apart & they hadn't been crashed yet. I'm not kidding. Mrs Davesport opened one of the overhead lockers & the hinges fell off. There were signs of shoddy workmanship & poor materials everywhere I looked. Look at any of my other posts on this forum. I'm not prone to slagging off other peoples choices or beliefs. If you can't tell the difference in the quality of the products under discussion, that's up to you.

D


----------



## PaulW2 (May 30, 2010)

In fairness Dave, and while I agree with your basic argument that build quality isn't the same for all manufacturers (my Hobby is, for instance, hewn from rock  ), a 33 km/h (20 mph) crash test isn't necessarily massively confidence-inspiring. 

It may be better than any of the others, but in the real world of real accidents? Their conclusions that this proves that it is 'virtually inconceivable' that chassis/van detachment could occur is also just marketing hyperbole.

And note that they accede that the passengers may have bruising and 'at worst broken ribs'. From a mere 20 mph shunt? 

What if the speed was a more realistic 40 or 50 mph? It would most likely have been a proverbial train smash. In any motorhome.


----------



## delawaredandy (Oct 12, 2012)

Apparently Autotrail carried out similar tests but could never find the crash test dummies due to all the sawdust/*** butts nuts/bolts and screws left over from manufacturing process. :lol: :lol: :lol: 

Mark


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I wonder how my conversion would fair in one of these tests, like them I only have a roof (3mm ply) walls (5mm ply) floor (18mm ply) OK they're fixed to the steel strong points in the van, but once away from the walls it's 12mm lightweight ply which has the structural integrity of a wet wipe against side blows, end on isn't much better, and these are the same boards that the industry uses.


----------



## Camdoon (Sep 21, 2012)

Surely the point to take from this is that Bailey would have looked at other manufacturers and used similar standards. Bailey fixed the issues. It is the manufacturers who have not shown the results which I would be wary about.


----------



## apxc15 (Dec 1, 2007)

davesport said:


> > No indication of passenger testing for the Hymer.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not knocking Hymers, having had 2, I know how well put together they are.
My point is that the tests done by Hymer and Bailey where completely different and at much different speeds Hymer at 21mph and Bailey at 30mph.
Baily with a chassis and body only and Hymer with a completed vehicle.
There was no indication that the Hymer crash involved dummies seated in the rear seats, whilst Bailey had dummies facing forward and rearward. The human body traveling at 30mph is pretty destructive to its self and anything coming into contact with it.
If you had a Bailey and a Hymer crash into an immovable object at 30mph or 21mph, with only the cab seats occupied I don't think the end results would be that much different.

Pete 8)


----------

