[bradleyland]

Some of the responses here crack me up.

ZOMG THE BMW DIDN'T COME OUT ON TOP SO THERE'S SOME KIND OF VAST CONSPIRACY AT BMW TO PUT COSTS FIRST AND SAFETY SECOND!! ACURA MUST HAVE GOTTEN LUCKY BECAUSE THEY SUCK, AND OH YEAH... VOLVOS ARE UGLY, SO NAAAAAAAH!

Get some perspective, folks. This is a new test. Auto-makers (with a few exceptions) design for the tests. Kudos to Volvo and Acura (TL) for their strong performance. This isn't a contest. It's a crash test. You don't need to cry yourself to sleep because a Volvo "beat" your BMW in some test. Get a grip!

The IIHS added this test because:

1) They've seen an increase in this type of accident.

2) They know that auto-makers will prioritize designs that pass tests.

Neither of these are bad things. The fact remains that just about any car you buy today is safer than the car you could buy 10 years ago. The IIHS is doing the right thing by adapting their tests to insurance claim data. Outside of accident reports, that's the most direct method of assessing accident trends. If this test stays in, expect BMW to make adjustments. It's as simple as that.

The car you bought doesn't have to be "the best" in every category imaginable. Take a deep breath. Go outside. Take a drive in your car. Everything is going to be OK.