Well yeah, oldjeep. That's basically the same rig as my '97 and I always felt pretty confident in it to take care of me in a crash. The fact is, you have to give those Jeeps a pretty major whack in the rear to set them on fire. In one article one of Chrysler's objections to the "data" was that there was no way to tell if the occupant(s) of the Jeep had survived the initial impact to die in the fire. I mean these were BIG hits.
I spent 22 years of my life as an automotive engineer and as a result have a few strong opinions on matters like this, one being that NHTSA standards have a tendency to become moving targets. Saw one item where NHTSA said, "Well, you should try to exceed the minimum standards rather than just meet them." I say, "Great! If the minimum standard is not deemed sufficient, THEN CHANGE IT! You're changing stuff all the time anyway."
Sorry folks, this kind of stuff just sets me off. I have a B.S. in mathematics with a fair amount of work in statistics. I know you've all heard the saying "there are lies, damn lies and statistics." Kids, if you want statistical data manipulated, I know how and I guarantee you, this data was manipulated. The organization that filed this complaint was founded by Ralph Nader, 'nuf said. They clearly sifted data until they found a statistic that made Jeep look bad by comparison to the competition. I'm pretty sure they weren't necessarily targeting Jeep, they just wanted to make somebody look bad. If you look at fatalities for ALL rear end collisions without regard to fire, Jeep is actually better than the competition.
Sorry for the rant, but this just annoys me.
