Prefer Modern 5 star small or Old Large Safe Car?
- Thread starter rjundi
- Start date
- Status
Frankly, I'm not surprised.
Good posting BTW. Cheers.
Q.
Good posting BTW. Cheers.
Q.
Can't watch the video now (my dialup is way too slow) but I would figure the old large car does not fare very well in an accident. Newer large cars are much better as they are better designed to deal with accidents.
Kestas
Staff member
I've already made my choice driving a fully-framed '91 Grand Marquis. Have the federal crash standards been increased since 1991?
Originally Posted By: Quest
Frankly, I'm not surprised.
Good posting BTW. Cheers.
Q.
Im not sure what it proves. The valvo is not very old and really not very large. 2.3L and 3000lbs? Im guessing its uni-body also...
It would be a more informative video if they used a real full size car like a 1980's Caprice or Crown vic.
Frankly, I'm not surprised.
Good posting BTW. Cheers.
Q.
Im not sure what it proves. The valvo is not very old and really not very large. 2.3L and 3000lbs? Im guessing its uni-body also...
It would be a more informative video if they used a real full size car like a 1980's Caprice or Crown vic.
I usually don't rely on Fifth Gear to be a source for scientific testing. It is a great program to show off fancy cars and I like Johnny's contribution on buy used and old cars to drive around. However, I feel they usually have a point to make and will conduct tests to prove that point.
I have the episode in question. The Volvo is not that big; longer but not that still relatively a small vehicle. The crumble zone is what save the compact but when dealing with a real heavy cars typically found in the U.S. it will not survive.
I have the episode in question. The Volvo is not that big; longer but not that still relatively a small vehicle. The crumble zone is what save the compact but when dealing with a real heavy cars typically found in the U.S. it will not survive.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I've already made my choice driving a fully-framed '91 Grand Marquis. Have the federal crash standards been increased since 1991?
From a few NHTSA test vids on YouTube, the feds use the Honda Accord as the "victim" for their head-on tests. If you can smash one without the passenger cabin collapsing, you're fine.
I've already made my choice driving a fully-framed '91 Grand Marquis. Have the federal crash standards been increased since 1991?
From a few NHTSA test vids on YouTube, the feds use the Honda Accord as the "victim" for their head-on tests. If you can smash one without the passenger cabin collapsing, you're fine.
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I've already made my choice driving a fully-framed '91 Grand Marquis. Have the federal crash standards been increased since 1991?
A fellow I know now retired from owning an auto salvage//towing business said he'd been called to more than a few accidents where the body separated completely from the frame.
I've already made my choice driving a fully-framed '91 Grand Marquis. Have the federal crash standards been increased since 1991?
A fellow I know now retired from owning an auto salvage//towing business said he'd been called to more than a few accidents where the body separated completely from the frame.
Modern 5 star for sure. I am a pretty safe driver myself but horrible fixer upper.
Originally Posted By: Ed_T
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I've already made my choice driving a fully-framed '91 Grand Marquis. Have the federal crash standards been increased since 1991?
A fellow I know now retired from owning an auto salvage//towing business said he'd been called to more than a few accidents where the body separated completely from the frame.
That could be a good thing if that resulted in the impact going to the frame and the body getting off (pun) with less impact, thereby improving chances for the passenger. OTOH it could be a bad thing.
Originally Posted By: Kestas
I've already made my choice driving a fully-framed '91 Grand Marquis. Have the federal crash standards been increased since 1991?
A fellow I know now retired from owning an auto salvage//towing business said he'd been called to more than a few accidents where the body separated completely from the frame.
That could be a good thing if that resulted in the impact going to the frame and the body getting off (pun) with less impact, thereby improving chances for the passenger. OTOH it could be a bad thing.
The Volvo is only 800 lbs heavier and that size advantage clearly is not enough to compensate for its dated safety technology. However, crash that little car against an early 90s Chevy Suburban (5500 lbs) and I don't care if the little car is rated 10 stars out of 5, it will not come out ahead.
But what that video made me reconsider is the idea of crumple zones. Car manufacturers are always advertising how safe their cars are because of the front energy dissipation area but look what happened to that Volvo's soft crumple zone against a tiny car. Imagine if it hit something its own size or larger. Maybe crumple zones are not a good thing
But what that video made me reconsider is the idea of crumple zones. Car manufacturers are always advertising how safe their cars are because of the front energy dissipation area but look what happened to that Volvo's soft crumple zone against a tiny car. Imagine if it hit something its own size or larger. Maybe crumple zones are not a good thing
Originally Posted By: tonycarguy
Car manufacturers are always advertising how safe their cars are because of the front energy dissipation area but look what happened to that Volvo's soft crumple zone against a tiny car. Imagine if it hit something its own size or larger. Maybe crumple zones are not a good thing
You miss the point. The small car dissappates the energy into the (small) engine compartment mainly in front of the support brace(modern design). The Volvo used the hood area to transfer load into the passenger compartment dangerously in this case. Modern cars typically do not do this with modern design/crumple zones. If they do they make the news with the dummy crash video's and are shortly addressed within one design year.
On A Suburban yes the vehicle may come out ahead. But really the important thing is how the energy is absorbed. A 1991 Suburban little design was placed into where energy was going (likely passenger compartment) which likely turns out to the passengers.
The take away of this is it better to drive an older larger car with the equivalent of brick in front of you, or safe as possible small car with a pillow around you. Obviously a larger car with pillow is better but this video only demonstrates the extreme to make the point.
Car manufacturers are always advertising how safe their cars are because of the front energy dissipation area but look what happened to that Volvo's soft crumple zone against a tiny car. Imagine if it hit something its own size or larger. Maybe crumple zones are not a good thing
You miss the point. The small car dissappates the energy into the (small) engine compartment mainly in front of the support brace(modern design). The Volvo used the hood area to transfer load into the passenger compartment dangerously in this case. Modern cars typically do not do this with modern design/crumple zones. If they do they make the news with the dummy crash video's and are shortly addressed within one design year.
On A Suburban yes the vehicle may come out ahead. But really the important thing is how the energy is absorbed. A 1991 Suburban little design was placed into where energy was going (likely passenger compartment) which likely turns out to the passengers.
The take away of this is it better to drive an older larger car with the equivalent of brick in front of you, or safe as possible small car with a pillow around you. Obviously a larger car with pillow is better but this video only demonstrates the extreme to make the point.
Last edited:
Kestas
Staff member
Back in the early 80s, when I worked at Chrysler in Highland Park, I always saw lots of cars lined up outside in the parking lot that had unndergone crash testing. They all had crumpled engine compartments and trunks, and all had intact cabins. This included the lowly Omni, a model I was driving.
Back in the lab I would see subframe pieces that crumpled perfectly like an accordion.
The sight of these crumpled cars left me with a feeling of reassurance that the car will do what it's supposed to, to help protect me in an accident. And these are models that are now 25 years old.
Back in the lab I would see subframe pieces that crumpled perfectly like an accordion.
The sight of these crumpled cars left me with a feeling of reassurance that the car will do what it's supposed to, to help protect me in an accident. And these are models that are now 25 years old.
My dad had a 1986 Buick Regal Limited that had an unfortunate run-in with a deer on the highway. Hit the deer going almost full speed, spread it all over the highway, the car spun around and into a ditch. There was a small dent in the rear quarter, but he drove the car out of the ditch and it was fine, no repairs necessary, alignment wasn't even out.
Try that with a modern small car, it would be totaled instantly, or at best it would require $6,000 worth of repairs. What a joke.
Try that with a modern small car, it would be totaled instantly, or at best it would require $6,000 worth of repairs. What a joke.
Don't worry: so long as the general public's mentality RE: safety is tied to "mo bigger car is betta", there's never gonna change the statistics where landyahts rollover or 7000lbs+ cars with shetty gas mileage and soccer moms or bad drivers in it.
My aunt crashed her Buick (mid 70s, urban landyaht in stationwagon form) in Seattle during an accident and suffered from serious whiplash and broken collarbones even though the frontal damage to the car was fairly minor...car still runs ok but she's been suffering ever since....
Q.
ultimately, if you want to sacrifice human life for the sake of saving a car, by all means, get a landyaht/AsYouVees; but if you perceive human life more important than that of sacrificing a machine (e.g. a car), then I would go for car with proper safety built in and crumple zones.
My aunt crashed her Buick (mid 70s, urban landyaht in stationwagon form) in Seattle during an accident and suffered from serious whiplash and broken collarbones even though the frontal damage to the car was fairly minor...car still runs ok but she's been suffering ever since....
Q.
ultimately, if you want to sacrifice human life for the sake of saving a car, by all means, get a landyaht/AsYouVees; but if you perceive human life more important than that of sacrificing a machine (e.g. a car), then I would go for car with proper safety built in and crumple zones.
Originally Posted By: Quest
Don't worry: so long as the general public's mentality RE: safety is tied to "mo bigger car is betta", there's never gonna change the statistics where landyahts rollover or 7000lbs+ cars with shetty gas mileage and soccer moms or bad drivers in it.
Exactly why I think a Prius fares better in a collision than a Hummer/Suburban/Escalade due to "intelligent" design. Soccer moms have an illusion that bigger=safer, but most truck-based SUVs have poor management of collision energy. At least Ford woke up and smelled the coffee with the last 2 generations of the F150.
But then again, there are some cars that plain suck in a crash. I saw a Neon ram a Mercury Villager today, the Neon had major intrusion into the cabin while the Villager was largely intact. The driver was trapped, and both the police and county sheriff were waiting for the Jaws of Life.
Don't worry: so long as the general public's mentality RE: safety is tied to "mo bigger car is betta", there's never gonna change the statistics where landyahts rollover or 7000lbs+ cars with shetty gas mileage and soccer moms or bad drivers in it.
Exactly why I think a Prius fares better in a collision than a Hummer/Suburban/Escalade due to "intelligent" design. Soccer moms have an illusion that bigger=safer, but most truck-based SUVs have poor management of collision energy. At least Ford woke up and smelled the coffee with the last 2 generations of the F150.
But then again, there are some cars that plain suck in a crash. I saw a Neon ram a Mercury Villager today, the Neon had major intrusion into the cabin while the Villager was largely intact. The driver was trapped, and both the police and county sheriff were waiting for the Jaws of Life.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: nthach
Originally Posted By: Quest
Don't worry: so long as the general public's mentality RE: safety is tied to "mo bigger car is betta", there's never gonna change the statistics where landyahts rollover or 7000lbs+ cars with shetty gas mileage and soccer moms or bad drivers in it.
Exactly why I think a Prius fares better in a collision than a Hummer/Suburban/Escalade due to "intelligent" design.
Against another Prius maybe? Not against a Hummer/Suburban/Escalade.....
*cue Super Duty vs car pictures from previous thread*
Originally Posted By: Quest
Don't worry: so long as the general public's mentality RE: safety is tied to "mo bigger car is betta", there's never gonna change the statistics where landyahts rollover or 7000lbs+ cars with shetty gas mileage and soccer moms or bad drivers in it.
Exactly why I think a Prius fares better in a collision than a Hummer/Suburban/Escalade due to "intelligent" design.
Against another Prius maybe? Not against a Hummer/Suburban/Escalade.....
*cue Super Duty vs car pictures from previous thread*
Originally Posted By: mstrjon32
My dad had a 1986 Buick Regal Limited that had an unfortunate run-in with a deer on the highway. Hit the deer going almost full speed, spread it all over the highway, the car spun around and into a ditch. There was a small dent in the rear quarter, but he drove the car out of the ditch and it was fine, no repairs necessary, alignment wasn't even out.
Try that with a modern small car, it would be totaled instantly, or at best it would require $6,000 worth of repairs. What a joke.
My highschool mate in the early 90s was killed when his car (some mid-80s regular sized sedan, a chev caprice if I could recall properly) ran into a deer or something during spring break on route back to twin-cities, MN and the deer literally rolled over his windshield, collapsed into it and crushed him in the driver's seat.
The rather gruesome task for the highway petrolman to show up in our dorm with pics in his hand questioning us the next day...
Safety? It all depends on how you perceive safety. Drive anything you want but when you are a lousy driver, nothing on this earth can save you from accident, period.
Q.
My dad had a 1986 Buick Regal Limited that had an unfortunate run-in with a deer on the highway. Hit the deer going almost full speed, spread it all over the highway, the car spun around and into a ditch. There was a small dent in the rear quarter, but he drove the car out of the ditch and it was fine, no repairs necessary, alignment wasn't even out.
Try that with a modern small car, it would be totaled instantly, or at best it would require $6,000 worth of repairs. What a joke.
My highschool mate in the early 90s was killed when his car (some mid-80s regular sized sedan, a chev caprice if I could recall properly) ran into a deer or something during spring break on route back to twin-cities, MN and the deer literally rolled over his windshield, collapsed into it and crushed him in the driver's seat.
The rather gruesome task for the highway petrolman to show up in our dorm with pics in his hand questioning us the next day...
Safety? It all depends on how you perceive safety. Drive anything you want but when you are a lousy driver, nothing on this earth can save you from accident, period.
Q.
- Status
