I guess they only LOOK tough!

[Defender]

Kerb,

Have you ever seen what a passenger car looks like when a sports car doing 25 over the limit slams into them.. ?

Just as bad, if not worse than a 4wd..

PS - that H2, looks like it just needs some bog, a new light assembly and she will be set

[DaiOni]

"Have you ever seen what a passenger car looks like when a sports car doing 25 over the limit slams into them.. ? "

you think? I'd imagine that several tonnes of pseudo-truck would be more menacing at that sort of speed.

[macquered]

Originally posted by Secoh
it amuses me how some people think that their favorite modern small car with all the frontal crash protection of a pair of floaties is going to be safer in a head-on than an older car with a 6ft bonnet :D

Oh, how I laugh :D

I'll just assume that you are taking the piss, and not being an idiot, because I know you're smarter than that.

[Captiva Fan]

Originally posted by Defender
Have you ever seen what a passenger car looks like when a sports car doing 25 over the limit slams into them.. ?

Just as bad, if not worse than a 4wd..

Of course the "passenger car" looks worse(*) than the 4WD does when it slams into the sports car, it's designed to fall apart when it hits something. However, the injuries sustained to both parties are going to be smaller (generalising & averaging).





* - Of course, with most 4WD's, a smashed car will still look better.

[edo]

Id rather hit that Dodge Ram with a H2 Hummer than just about anything other than a kenworth/mack etc.

Seriously, while your 306 might be a safe small car its not going to stop the sump/bumper/front diff of the Ram hitting you in the bonce...neither will the bonnet of the kinga...

If you drive a 4wd youre not planning on needing a crumple zone...you just use the crumple zone of the thing you hit...unless you hit a like minded individual as above

[Captiva Fan]

Originally posted by edo
Id rather hit that Dodge Ram with a H2 Hummer than just about anything other than a kenworth/mack etc.

I'd rather hit a Reliant Robin with an H2 Hummer, but maybe I'm just not addicted to pain? :D

[gti6]

Brenno, I did pretty well in an older VW (late 60s) in a head on with a Nissan Patrol... that being said there would have been only about another 20kph in it for cabin damage to start occuring. I had the brakes slammed from about 70kph (when I was a car length away from the Patrol) and it was rushing to make an orange light, around a corner, probably around 30-40kph.

The older cars do crumple, they are not the solid bricks people think they are.... and there is the fact that the more material out front you have, the more material there is to bend and absorb energy. I can appreciate the crash testing and simulation in newer cars though. That's why many people think a big Merc etc is a good, safe car to own.

I think advances in safety cells and seatbelts are very big contributors to safety - looking at old and new. So are collapsible steering columns (started coming out in 'dubs in the mid 60s).

[macquered]

Oh for sure, I'm not debating that. If you are hurtling towards a Dodge Ram then, you're close as close to being ****ed anyway.

What if you hit something that has no crumple zone at all? What would you rather be in?

[edo]

An S class merc.

[macquered]

I understand that Adrian, but there is a frightening amount of people that think there have been no advances in vehicle safety in the last 25 years, and that the wave of plastic bodied cars being introduced is a step in the wrong direction.

[gti6]

Originally posted by macquered
Oh for sure, I'm not debating that. If you are hurtling towards a Dodge Ram then, you're close as close to being ****ed anyway.

What if you hit something that has no crumple zone at all? What would you rather be in?

In the back seat of something really long, with an extensive crumple area!

[gti6]

I'd take something like a Toyota Echo in a crash over an equivalent sized, all metal econo-car from the early 80s, for sure... but personally I can't speak for the differences between the HQ and 307 examples given... one's so much bigger with a massive frontal area, and the other is so much more advanced only much smaller - in which way either of them excel in different types of crashes I have no idea.

I'd say the 307 has much better in cabin protection and restraints in any scenario.

[edo]

If its a choice between the kinga & a 307 Id go the 307 purely on the basis that Id have more chance of avoiding the prang altogether & if it did hit it would be at a lower speed.

[biteme]

Originally posted by macquered
It amuses me how people relate tried and tested crumple zones to an unsafe vehicle.

Once upon a time, I had someone tried to tell me that a Kingswood would have more crash safety than a Peugeot 307, primarily because the front guards on a 307 were plastic and not tough like the trusty old Kinga.

Oh, how I laughed.

I knew the ones on a Laguna were, are you sure about the 307????

B

[macquered]

I'd put money on a 307 or any other modern vehicle of that size comprehensively owning a Kingswood in any impact in any direction.

An interesting crash test involving a real person - I think it was a Top Gear stunt or something.

http://www.crashtest.renault.co.uk/crashtest.zip