|
YAMAHA RHINO ATV ROLLOVERS
By Gordon Gibb
The mounting criticism over the Yamaha Rhino 660 ATV does not represent the first time a manufacturer has produced a product found to be lacking and, according to critics, sorely in need of re-design.
However, it remains curious that even after five years of marketing a product that is allegedly flawed in several areas, a total safety recall has not happened—and while add-on improvements will finally lessen the chance for injury, it has been reported that the 2008 model has been released without any significant design modifications.
With the possible exception of the Argo all-terrain amphibian, a unique land-and-water hybrid used primarily for hunting, ATVs have usually been single-seater units in a motorcycle-seating configuration, with perhaps extended cushioning for a passenger behind.
Enter Yamaha in 2003 with the Rhino, which offered an ATV that looked a bit more like a small pick-up. A two-seater with a side-by-side configuration, a roll cage with a roof to block the sun or rain, and a utility box in back.
However, critics say, the Rhino was flawed from the start, given the absence of factory-installed doors. The lack of a footwell, combined with complete occupant exposure due to the lack of doors, would leave limbs susceptible to impact with the ground in the event of a rollover.
This has proven to be the case, with a host of reports revealing horrid injuries involving crushed limbs, broken arms and legs, even amputations when a limb, at the mercy of trajectory and gravitational pull during a rollover event and without anything to hold it back, comes between the terrain and the vehicle weight of 1049 pounds. In a moving vehicle, out-of-control due to the forces and physics of a tip-over, this exposure is amplified.
And now, some statistics:
The estimated number of deaths associated with ATVs has risen nearly 180 percent from 276 deaths in 1995, to 767 in 2004, the most recent year that fatality data was available from the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Estimated non-fatal injuries requiring a trip to the emergency room rose more than 150 percent from 53,600 visits in 1996 to 136,700 visits in 2005.
Children under 16 years of age accounted for about one-quarter of the deaths and one-third of the injuries.
ATVs are not toys, and parents and caregivers have a responsibility to ensure that children who frequent ATVs are properly trained, supervised and equipped with safety devices such as helmets. Yamaha does, indeed advocate the use of helmets for the Rhino, and equips the unit with seat belts.
However, while children are more prone to be injured or killed in an ATV, there have been a sufficient number of adult injuries to warrant caution with regard to the Yamaha Rhino.
Beyond the lack of factory-installed doors on any Rhino model manufactured prior to the 2008 model year, critics cite other flaws in the Rhino’s design. A high center of gravity, combined with a relatively narrow frame for its design and relatively narrow tires, contributes to the alleged tendency for the Rhino to be tip-over prone.
While any vehicle could potentially become up-ended at high rates of speed over extremely uneven terrain, a design offering a wider stance and a lower center of gravity would mitigate, if not fully prevent the rollover factor. A Hummer, for example, with its extremely wide stance and low profile, would be much more difficult to roll then a comparable 4x4 that is more narrow, and taller—thus providing a higher center of gravity.
Many victims of Rhino rollovers, including parents of children who have been killed, report that incidents occurred at relatively low speeds, and on even terrain.
If, indeed the Rhino is ever proven to be lacking in its initial design within the context of potential rollovers, this could have—and perhaps already has—serious and significant consequences for anyone using a Rhino in rugged terrain, alone. While the unit seats two, it is not uncommon for farmers and ranchers to venture out solo. With so many inherent risks at play—the propensity for rollover, the lack of doors and a footwell, it would not fall beyond the realm of possibility that a rollover could occur, or a serious injury to a limb could happen in a remote location, far from help. In some instances, occupants who have not used their seat belts have been ejected in a rollover, and wind up with the 1049-pound Rhino on top of them.
However even with seat belt use, the lack of a door could cause a driver or occupant to be partially ejected, would could possibly exacerbate, and worsen an injury. Were an injured user remain conscious and have the foresight to have a communication device such as a cell phone, depending upon the terrain the difficulty factor in reaching a severely injured individual, in time, is substantial.
Last year, after dozens of injuries and several deaths, Yamaha offered to retrofit all existing Rhinos with doors, and a grab handle. It has been reported that for 2008 Rhinos will be shipped with factory doors, and grab handles installed as standard equipment.
However, it has been reported that the manufacturer does not agree with any claim that the Rhino is flawed in its basic design. Even with doors and a grab handle, the upgrades do not address the frame dimensions, the tires, and the alleged high center of gravity, which makes the unit prone to instability, especially when turning.
While Yamaha appears to have rejected any notion for a recall, it is curious that the US Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC), which regulates ATVs, has been largely silent on the issue.
It should be noted here that it is a widely held belief that the CPSC is under-staffed and under-funded, and has been under interim leadership for some time, pending an appointment by President Bush. Acting CPSC director Nancy Nord, also a Bush appointee, has been long criticized for deferring to manufacturers, to the potential detriment of public safety. It has also been reported that the acting CPSC director has resisted congressional offers of additional resources.
If recent statements are any indication, the CPSC has signaled that an industry that largely regulates itself will continue. The Consumer Federation of America, meanwhile, maintains that the current industry standard is unsupported by safety studies.
In May of last year, the US Senate Commerce Subcommittee held a hearing to consider ATV regulation, and continues to wrestling with the issue.
In the meantime, amidst four years of adverse incident and accident reports, the CPSC has yet to mandate a recall of the Yamaha Rhino, and the manufacturer appears to have little intent to conduct a recall on its own. While it is reportedly equipping 2008 models with doors, and has offered retrofit doors to all existing models at no cost to the consumer, Yamaha has yet to decree that its product is unsafe.
Ironically, in 2005 the CPSC supported a recall by Yamaha of its four-wheel Yamaha Bruin 250, Bruin 350 4WD and 2WD, Big Bear 400, Kodiak 400, Kodiak 450, and Wolverine 450 ATVs due to a potential steering problem. At the time of the recall, there were no injuries, or deaths reported.
Cut to the Rhino: Dozens of injuries, many of them serious, together with several deaths.
No recall.
[MORE ARTICLES]
|
 |
|
