Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brazen
Hitting an immovable object is the equivalent of hitting a car with the same mass at the same speed from the opposite direction, how many cars on the road are the same mass as a 1000kg Fiesta?
The point I was making is that a Fiesta gets the 5 star rating in a test which is the equivalent of hitting another Fiesta head on (ie same mass), the Fiesta isnt tested against hitting an object of greater mass (ie against a Falcon or a Landcruiser) - This has been demonstrated is numerous tests including a 4 star Audi SUV (greater mass) hitting a 5 star Smart car (smaller mass), the results were minor injuries to the Audi driver with life-threatening injuries to the Smart driver. The Smart gets its 5 star rating hitting the equivalent of another Smart at the same speed, not against hitting the average vehicle on the road.
The Ancap tests are good for comparing cars which are hitting trees or solid walls, they are not good seeing what the results would be hitting other cars where differences in mass come into play.
|
You have missed my point.
Quote:
ANCAP uses 4 internationally recognized crash tests; offset frontal, side impact, pedestrian and pole impact test.
Crash tests are undertaken by independent specialist crash test laboratories.In all tests crash test dummies are used to facilitate the scientific measurement of the various forces in the crash test. The data gathered is then assessed, using internationally recognized protocols, and scores are determined for various parts of the crash test. Additionally, ANCAP awards bonus points for other safety features such as seat belt reminders.
The overall score is then translated into a star rating, between 1 to 5 stars. The higher scores are awarded more stars
The offset frontal crash test simulates colliding with another vehicle.
Frontal impact takes place at 64kph and the car strikes deformable barrier. The vehicle has 2 adult dummies in the front seats. The rear seats have an 18 month old and 3 year old child dummies in appropriate child restraints
|
So both vehicles have hit the same barrier, at the same speed and along the same vector. The testing measures the forces applied to the dummies at key know injury points. This data is scored and subsequently a rating is allocated, the higher the rating, the lower the chance of injury. That is the only fair way to compared different makes and types of vehicles.
By your logic all large cars would automatically score higher than small cars because your theory is a small car will sustain more damage and cause more injury if hit by a large car. That is an incorrect assumption as many small cars have demonstrated similar injury causing force loads on occupants as many larger cars when hitting the same barrier. You can not say that this testing is flawed because if the small car hits a 4wd it will cause more injury, if the large car hits a B double it will cause injury too. The point is, within the scope of the test (which closely mimics a offset frontal crash with another car at with an impact speed of 64 km/h) both cars perform the same.
Your theory is flawed when you look at the results. Out of the 4wd vehicle (I picked these because of the common belief they are safe), very few achieve a 5 star rating, it seems the larger they are the worse they do with landcruiser and patrol only get 4 and 3. It is not until you get to smaller models such as santa fe and X5 that you get 5's. Looking at current models, this class has an average of 4.3 stars.
Large car such as falcon, aurion and commodore get 4 or 5 depending on year. Looking at current models, this class has an average of 4.75 stars. Small have an interesting fact that a lot of the cheaper cars score poorly but the europeans and more expensive options such as fiesta and focus score well. Looking at current models, this class has an average of 4.4 stars.
For ancap to provide a rating that satisfies your doubts, it would involve too many crash tests to be economically viable for manufacturers and end in results that are too complex and time consuming as a car is smashed in many different vectors, at different speeds, against smaller, same size and larger cars (or barriers to replicate this). Then this would all end up as information that is lost on the car buying public as they are not interested in trying to decipher it and will probably by the one with more creature comforts, goes faster, looks prettier etc rather than the one that is genuinely safer.
Really, what is the point of all this discussion? The end result is in both instances the forces involved are far outside the scope of any safety system in any car on the road and both impacts are highly likely to result in fatalities and/or serious injury no matter what you drive. Trust me, I scrape the results out of the wrecks for a living. I am not just talking seeing pictures, I am talking in the car with the casualties and treating their wounds. The results would be virtually no different, once you have exceeded the limit of the human body to withstand human force, you get injury. I can tell you in both instances the injuries are most likely to be fatal, at least all the ones I have been to involving these forces have been.