Look How Good Our Cars Are Getting!

[ekpolk]

I ran across this on one of the Prius discussion boards yesterday. Bad Wreck -- Good Outcome!

The views aren't the best and you have to click on each little thumbnail to see the pics, but it's worth it.

This result is, of course, not "Prius specific" at all. It's just reflective of how good the engineering has become in our modern vehicles. I'm pretty sure that this car was rear-ended, at considerable speed, by a truck or other large vehicle, and then propelled violently into the vehicle in front of it. If any of you see another scenario, let's hear it!

What's notable here, in my opinion, is how well the shape and volume, the "survival space" as it's called, have been maintained. I don't know what happened to the occupant(s) of this vehicle, but it looks like they had a very good chance of walking away with absolutely minimal harm. This would not have likely been the case in a similar-sized vehicle from just a few years ago.

There's another site I like where they tear down new cars (among other things) and analyze them as they go. It can be painful (I know, call 1-800-WAA-AAAH) to watch, but here's where they do (undo) a 2016 Prius. The part on body structure is cool, when you see how the engineers planned for absorption of major impact from all directions.

I really enjoy driving this car, even more so now knowing how robust the structure around me really is!

 

[gman2304]

It does look like a larger vehicle over rode the rear bumper. Some rear safety features were most likely not utilized and damage was worse being it was most likely hit by a taller much larger vehicle. Having said that, I began buying larger vehicles about 15 years ago and sacrificing some mpg's for added safety. Even with side curtain air bags, if a F250 T bones a small car in the drivers door it's going to be bad if not fatal, due to physics and all.

 

[Danno]

I heard somewhere, can'recall where, that if you are wearing a seat belt in a newer vehicle, and get in any crash, chances of death are basically zero.
Cars have become very good at preserving life.

 

[Kestas]

When I worked at Chrysler in the early 80s, I remember seeing all the crash tested cars lined up at one building. I liked what I saw -- crumpled front and rear ends, but no intrusion into the cabin.

Of course, not all crashes are simple. You have rollovers, offset crashes, and I'm sure many other types. Quite a challenge to design for all scenarios.

 

[gman2304]

Originally Posted by Danno
I heard somewhere, can'recall where, that if you are wearing a seat belt in a newer vehicle, and get in any crash, chances of death are basically zero.
Cars have become very good at preserving life.

Cars are safer than ever but any crash? Basically zero? BS!

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Danno
I heard somewhere, can'recall where, that if you are wearing a seat belt in a newer vehicle, and get in any crash, chances of death are basically zero.
Cars have become very good at preserving life.

That is absolutely ridiculous statement.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by Danno
I heard somewhere, can'recall where, that if you are wearing a seat belt in a newer vehicle, and get in any crash, chances of death are basically zero.
Cars have become very good at preserving life.

You might question the source where you heard that. For 2017, just over 37,000 people died in automobile accidents. Some of that number may be attributed to not wearing seat belts and some were in old cars not equipped with airbags. Yet, deaths do occur. Statistics can be presented in many ways.

If you are going 6 0mph and hit a immovable object head on like a tree , I would not bet on the chance you will be okay.

Finally, people do survive a lot of horrific accidents today due to engineering and safety equipment in cars and also to quick medical attention. Surviving doesn't necessarily mean the same life you had before if you are in a wheelchair or suffer a head injury or a multitude of possibilities.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted by gman2304
It does look like a larger vehicle over rode the rear bumper. Some rear safety features were most likely not utilized and damage was worse being it was most likely hit by a taller much larger vehicle. Having said that, I began buying larger vehicles about 15 years ago and sacrificing some mpg's for added safety. Even with side curtain air bags, if a F250 T bones a small car in the drivers door it's going to be bad if not fatal, due to physics and all.

Funny that you mention that possibility. In 2002, I bought a bare-bones I-4, 5-spd manual Camry, close to the lowest end of the price spectrum LE version. I knew I'd be driving huge miles for a couple years, and that car I felt was best for me under the circumstances. I wanted the "gold" color, and they had two. One had the side-curtain air bags; they were still optional then, and cost $650 IIRC. Just on a feeling, like the "little voice talking to me," I took the one with the curtains.

I'm glad I listened, because about six months later, I got T-boned, driver's side, by a full-size SUV (actually a Tahoe that a hood rat had gussied up as a faux Caddy...). He was doing, by his admission, documented in the accident report, about 40 mph, and I believe that. The last thing I saw was his grille about 12 inches from my side window, coming fast. Then the huge impact. The side curtains worked as advertised. The come out much harder and faster than frontal bags, and they don't deflate. They are this way since they have so little time to do "their thing," compared to frontals, and remaining inflated supposedly helps if you're rolling over. Imagine a large gorilla winding up and slapping you "upside the head" as hard as he can.

I was strongly dazed, but conscious. I had some neck issues, but they've essentially passed with the years. I consider myself watched-over, blessed and lucky. And even if they weren't almost universal now, I wouldn't EVER have another car without side curtains!

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted by Danno
I heard somewhere, can'recall where, that if you are wearing a seat belt in a newer vehicle, and get in any crash, chances of death are basically zero.
Cars have become very good at preserving life.


They're good, but not THAT good. We still lose over 30k per year in the US alone. Decades ago, that peaked well over 50k, so some changes are clearly helping (not just on the cars themselves). We've got a lot of work left to do, most of it between the ears of those in the drivers' seats.

 

[maxdustington]

Originally Posted by ekpolk
We've got a lot of work left to do, most of it between the ears of those in the drivers' seats.
It's not whats between their ears, it's whats in their hands other than the steering wheel while driving.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted by maxdustington
Originally Posted by ekpolk
We've got a lot of work left to do, most of it between the ears of those in the drivers' seats.
It's not whats between their ears, it's whats in their hands other than the steering wheel while driving.

Point well-taken. That said, I'll go with "both." Recently I saw one with some sort of burger or sandwich in one hand and a phone in the other. But hey, he had both wrists firmly on the wheel! I still chose to make space. . . This questionable "driving configuration," of course, has it's origin in a distinct deficiency in the processes taking place between the ears (assuming any were taking place...).

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Looks like it got backed into by a road construction front end loader. Civil Engineers car

 

[maxdustington]

.

 

[doitmyself]

Sorry for the ginormous pic. These stats uphold your hypothesis EKpolk.

 

[Alfred_B]

No blood or pee stains on the interior so all has ended well in that Prius

 

[Danno]

Originally Posted by ekpolk
Originally Posted by Danno
I heard somewhere, can'recall where, that if you are wearing a seat belt in a newer vehicle, and get in any crash, chances of death are basically zero.
Cars have become very good at preserving life.


They're good, but not THAT good. We still lose over 30k per year in the US alone. Decades ago, that peaked well over 50k, so some changes are clearly helping (not just on the cars themselves). We've got a lot of work left to do, most of it between the ears of those in the drivers' seats.


They are getting that good.

"The list of models with the lowest death rates illustrates just how much vehicles have improved. Eight years ago, there were no models with driver death rates of zero (see Status Report special issue: driver death rates, April 19, 2007). Now there are nine. These vehicles — which include several luxury models but also some less expensive ones such as the Kia Sorento midsize SUV and the Subaru Legacy sedan — had no driver deaths during the calendar years studied."

https://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/50/1/1

 

[ekpolk]

I won't quibble with individual good statistics, those are nice to see. It's also still a fact that we're losing ~30k per year. That's an entire Viet Nam war's worth every two years or so. Still, we've come down from a high around 57k per year to 30k or so. That's great, and baked into that latter figure is the presence of super safe models like you're pointing out. Let's not also forget that even though a car may have zero dead for a certain period of time, no car, no matter good, is death proof. Even the safest car, aircraft, or whatever contraption you choose, is just one bad decision away from killing someone. 30k is way better than 57k, but it's still many, many thousands more than anyone should deem "acceptable." We've come a long way -- but still have a long way to go.

 

[CR94]

Originally Posted by ekpolk
... Recently I saw one with some sort of burger or sandwich in one hand and a phone in the other. But hey, he had both wrists firmly on the wheel! I still chose to make space. . . This questionable "driving configuration," of course, has it's origin in a distinct deficiency in the processes taking place between the ears (assuming any were taking place. ..:
Yep. Funny you should mention that. Near where I live, I saw the same thing, plus by the sound of it, the kid also had just shifted gears (manual transmission) after making a sharp left turn at an intersection. Impressive dexterity, at least.

 

[gman2304]

Insurance institute for highway safety. Never heard of it but did scan the link a little. They list the Chrysler Sebring and a Mitsubishi Galant as a couple examples of cars that were the most unsafe from a 2005 study. The Sebring hasn't been built in over a decade. The NTSB has a more current study. I find it hard to believe that in the numbers of the Sorento and Legacy vehicles built, they had no reported fatalities. The study was from 2007 but still, these cars are everywhere!

 

[MCompact]

I've never bought a car based on a rating from the safety geeks at IIHS, and I'm not about to start now.