A (Real World) Volvo Small Overlap Head On Collision Result

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
598
Location
Tennessee
I just got finished looking at a YouTube video. In it, an older Volvo XC70 driver crossed over the yellow line on a two lane road and collided with an approximate 40 ton tractor trailer (or Lorry as they call them) in Norway. Google: "Volvo head on Collision" and it should be the first video to come up. Or, someone else can post it.

The video doesn't say if the driver fell asleep or had a medical condition. The XC70 collision speed was estimated to be around 60 kilometers/hour (looked faster than that). The collision mimics the small overlap head on collision test that all new vehicles are tested. My understanding is that this is significantly more difficult to pass than a straight on, head on collision.

Although the Volvo bounced back like a ping pong ball, I came away impressed that: 1) The drivers "A" frame did not appear bent and 2) The driver was conscious enough to appear to be trying to exit the drivers door. I would expect the driver to have some internal injuries at least, but reading further, I understand the driver lived.

Question to the Volvo experts:

1) What year Volvo does this appear to be? Any Boron steel in this year Volvo?

2) Are all new cars of this size constructed this robustly to withstand a hit like this - with these results? If not, has anyone seen a particular automobile take a hit from a tractor trailer like this and the passengers walked away? This almost makes me want an XC70 to replace my 2016 Colorado pickup.
 
Workmate witnessed a Colorado driver swap to the wrong side of the road and roll a couple of times.

Driver walked out.
 
He's lucky, he pretty much hit right at the wheel of the truck and bounced off, which you can see if you pause the video at 0:28.
 
Most likely the alertness of the truck driver saved the Volvo driver. The truck started moving to the right just before the impact, so it wasn't a square on collision, but instead the SUV bounced off of that truck.

No question though that the SUV also did a good job of protecting the driver.
 
Yeah, that's a hard hit. Driver was lucky, and props to the truck driver. Probably saved a lot of damage/injury.

The Volvo appears to have done a good job of absorbing a lot of the remaining energy.
 
Could have been much worse.

78229e2f-7284-440f-9101-9f7374391b5a.JPG

1469740-630x354.jpg

2003-Volvo-Xc70-front-right-18711567.jpg

8202db96-74c2-44db-bc89-228dbe236ce2.JPG

Man_dies_in_head_on_collision_with_semi__9_1353505_ver1.0_640_360.jpg
 
No, not all cars are built like Volvos.

They make safety a priority right from the initial design stage to completion. Every aspect is examined and a solution crafted. For example, all new car seats meet FMVSS, which has not been revised for passenger cars since 1968 (included light truck seats around '75 or so, the last revision).

But, if you look at the crash test results, the strongest seat, the one least likely to come free from it's mounts, the one retractable seat (the weakest construction) that resembles a one-piece seat's results, is the Volvo seat for whatever year vehicle you want to compare it to. They do everything that way.

I'd have to look it up, but I believe that not one person driving a Volvo vehicle in the last two years has died in an auto accident. Volvo's goal is zero fatalities every model year going forward as well.
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad

I'd have to look it up, but I believe that not one person driving a Volvo vehicle in the last two years has died in an auto accident.

And I'd bet the research was "funded by Volvo" as well
lol.gif


An interview with a Volvo accident survivor.

Volvo Researcher: Did anyone die in the accident?

Survivor: Well, no. But I can't walk anymore and suffer severe migraine headaches. I also lost the baby I was carrying
and I'll probably never work again due to my inability to hold concentration for durations over 2-3 hours.

Volvo Researcher:....interesting....*checks the "O fatalities" box*

The great? thing about these cars is the abundance of passive safety features.
They are loaded to the gills with features and systems that basically instill a sense of "numbness" in the driver.
Literally, they make you feel like your inputs are futile and the car can do everything without you.
This falsely leads drivers into feeling invincible so they can take their attention and concentration away from the
road and other drivers.

Isn't technology wonderful?!
 
Last edited:
The XC Volvo in the video is a 2008 or newer. The still photos are 2001-2007 XC70. Different photos, different years as evidenced by the wheels although all the same chassis 2001-2007
 
I am not going to search for THE perfect word but Lolvoguy's tearing into a single survivor's testimony seemed odd.

If 99 people out of 100 die in a bad plane crash and the survivor is a vegetable it's still 99 people dead. 100 casualties to be sure but statistics are like that.
You didn't break any ground Lolvoguy. Don't be too pleased with yourself.

I drive an '07 V70; my 3rd. The drive is comfortable. Last time I read a car magazine, comfort was a desirable attribute.
The steering wheel is attached to steering gear so I get road feel.
They tell me the headrest is ready to "move on impact" to ameliorate whiplash. It's just there.
The airbags are just there too. I don't see anything lulling me into a false sense of security.

Lane departure warnings and forward collision avoidance systems are industry wide today. I do feel their safety contribution will be real. Driver's sloppiness or inattention has been increasing for decades.

Perhaps all this gadgetry is piling on too fast for the "time & motion" scientists to keep up.

I would love to go through those wrecked V70s for parts.
 
Never been hit in any of the 3 s60s I've owned, thank God, but they have all had remarkably tight chassis. The dash, seats, floor, all feel like one solid unit with no discernable vibrations independent of the others. Can't say that for any other car I've owned, except possibly an old 97 legacy which was as surprisingly rigid car.

-m
 
lol.gif
don't worry yourself Kira, just like Volvo, I too am not attempting to "break any ground".
I apologize that my creatively written "testimony" left you at a loss for words. Usually you have an entertaining rebuttal...shame.

My point is that Volvo isn't doing anything different than anyone else...it's all in the marketing.
Even Ford can build a Taurus that performs similar, maybe even better than a Volvo, in crashworthiness too.
 
There was a few automakers that only strengthened the driver's side for the small overlap.



Sure Volvo has marketing just like everyone else, but the idea that all the manufacturers are doing the same improvements to cars I don't buy.
 
I went to the Volvo saved my life website. Some of the photos of those wrecked Volvo V70's and Volvo XC70's are as extreme as these that you posted. However the occupants lived to drive another day. One V70 driver rear ended and went under a tractor trailer at highway speeds ( had to be extracted out his vehicle). Another XC70 driver was rear ended in traffic by a car going an estimated 70 mph. Both drivers lived to write about it.

I wouldn't care how bad the external of the Volvo looked, if it is going to sacrifice itself for my well being. By the way, what were the status of the occupants in that last photo?
 
My wife's cousin had a 1996/ 960 Volvo and got rear ended by a cement mixer with 9 yards of concrete

and walk away with just a minor headache. The rear bumper ended just behind the back seat. Dump truck driver

slid on black ice. Car was total.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top