Crash. Old car versus...old car...

[Falconunbelievable]

Originally Posted by xe351

was everyone ok?

Yes everyone walked away from our crash thankgod. Although how my husband didnt get concussion from hitting his head and bending the car was beyone me... he phoned me up straight after it happened but wouldnt really say anything other than the cars f#@!ed and hung up... he didnt say where he was but I knew he was not far as had only just left... I raced down the road (pregnant with a 3 year old in tow lol) and found the crash... all were taken by ambulance to hospital but all released straight away. As you can see if she had hit a bit further forward on the door of the ute it could have all ended a lot differently... We still have the ute, salvage rights, motor and interior were all ok obviously so we were very lucky.

[mike_nofx]

That's not a 100km/h crash, he must have slowed well down from that speed before collision??

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

That's not a 100km/h crash, he must have slowed well down from that speed before collision??

Whats your expertise to make that assessment?

The accident investigation squad wouldn't attempt to make that assessment on one photo!

[Whitey-AMG]

Sad to see pics of those classics wrecked like that...........

Being in a major accident myself with my old XE ESP - I can honestly say that NO CAR IS SAFE in an accident..........some cars are SAFER than others - yes......and your injuries are lessened with better design and sacrificial componentry.

I was lucky and the car bore the brunt quite well - I was rear ended by a VL commodore at high speed. I was not injured - but the commodore driver needed to be removed from the vehicle........was not a nice sight regardless of fault.

My car sustained extensive rear end damage but was luckily repairable...........and it is this that worries me more. Repaired cars and their ability to withstand another collision ? Old or new - I'd be betting that their inegrity would be compromised in the 1st incident - and the quality of repair from an engineering perspective may mean the difference between life and death in a subsequent accident.

There are a lot of older cars out there that look nice and pretty on the outside after a fresh coat of paint...........but under the skin - metal fatigue and rust are the silent killers. I was horrified to see some of the rust that had accumulated in certain hidden areas on my XE when it was in for repairs. On the outside it looked brand new..................

There are just too many variables in any accident for absolute statements to be made about safety............lots of people have died in old cars and in new 5 star ANCAP rated cars.........the law of averages seems to suggest that newer cars will minimise life threatening injuries in the same situation as compared to an older car. That can't be a bad thing.

Another underrated thing to consider is the weight of new cars..........although they look plasticky - damned they weigh a lot. My BFGT at 1890Kg made the XE at 1650 kg look like a featherweight. The mass difference alone in an accident between those 2 would push the XE back into the 80's after an impact.........lol
Ithink XY / XA and XB platform cars were all in the 1600 - 1700 Kg area ( someone will correct me if i am wrong here ) - so having an additional 150 kg mass ( car alone ) can't be good on the receiving end.

Drive safe everyone !

[mike_nofx]

Originally Posted by noflac52

Whats your expertise to make that assessment?

The accident investigation squad wouldn't attempt to make that assessment on one photo!

That thing still looks driveable. No car would drive away from a 100kmh t boning.

[LeadFoot81]

Originally Posted by ESP

Sad to see pics of those classics wrecked like that...........

Being in a major accident myself with my old XE ESP - I can honestly say that NO CAR IS SAFE in an accident..........some cars are SAFER than others - yes......and your injuries are lessened with better design and sacrificial componentry.

I was lucky and the car bore the brunt quite well - I was rear ended by a VL commodore at high speed. I was not injured - but the commodore driver needed to be removed from the vehicle........was not a nice sight regardless of fault.

My car sustained extensive rear end damage but was luckily repairable...........and it is this that worries me more. Repaired cars and their ability to withstand another collision ? Old or new - I'd be betting that their inegrity would be compromised in the 1st incident - and the quality of repair from an engineering perspective may mean the difference between life and death in a subsequent accident.

There are a lot of older cars out there that look nice and pretty on the outside after a fresh coat of paint...........but under the skin - metal fatigue and rust are the silent killers. I was horrified to see some of the rust that had accumulated in certain hidden areas on my XE when it was in for repairs. On the outside it looked brand new..................

There are just too many variables in any accident for absolute statements to be made about safety............lots of people have died in old cars and in new 5 star ANCAP rated cars.........the law of averages seems to suggest that newer cars will minimise life threatening injuries in the same situation as compared to an older car. That can't be a bad thing.

Another underrated thing to consider is the weight of new cars..........although they look plasticky - damned they weigh a lot. My BFGT at 1890Kg made the XE at 1650 kg look like a featherweight. The mass difference alone in an accident between those 2 would push the XE back into the 80's after an impact.........lol
Ithink XY / XA and XB platform cars were all in the 1600 - 1700 Kg area ( someone will correct me if i am wrong here ) - so having an additional 150 kg mass ( car alone ) can't be good on the receiving end.

Drive safe everyone !

As far as I'm aware XY-XC ranged in weight from 1360 to 1450 kgs (XD-E-F dropped back into the 1300's)

I'm shocked that the XE ESP weighed so much! Are you sure that's what it weighs?

I've always been under the impression that it wasn't until BA that Falcon has weighed at least 1600 kgs

[Whitey-AMG]

Originally Posted by LeadFoot81

As far as I'm aware XY-XC ranged in weight from 1360 to 1450 kgs (XD-E-F dropped back into the 1300's)

I'm shocked that the XE ESP weighed so much! Are you sure that's what it weighs?

I've always been under the impression that it wasn't until BA that Falcon has weighed at least 1600 kgs

Mine was V8 Clevo with all the fruit + C10 trans - not to mention that BIG FAT Yellow Top Optima battery i fitted as well..................17kg just there !

[Falconunbelievable]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

That thing still looks driveable. No car would drive away from a 100kmh t boning.

Yeh well, we have had a couple of people, including panel beaters, say 'hey we can rebuild it'... until they get under and have a good look... believe me if my hubby thought it could be rebuilt he would have. Anyway, I couldnt be bothered getting into semantics, think what you like.... its a free world.

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by ESP

I can honestly say that NO CAR IS SAFE in an accident..........some cars are SAFER than others - yes......and your injuries are lessened with better design and sacrificial componentry.



Drive safe everyone !

Most safety rated crashes are in controlled situations ,and we all know the world isnt as cut and dry as that
Ive hit a power pole head on in an old bluebird,just of centre , the complete drivers side was totalled, the roof 3 big kinks and walked away, hit livestock head on at 100Ks in a 4x4 and walked away, neither were rated by any means on a safety rating like the new stuff
The livestock , well in anything lower than a 4x4, youd be dead as no air bag will stop a 1 tonne or more beast comin thru the screen
Each crash is different to the next,even hitting a pothole could cause a blowout and loss of control,bet they dont test that in controlled situations, yet the roads are terrible

[Whitey-AMG]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

Most safety rated crashes are in controlled situations ,and we all know the world isnt as cut and dry as that

Yes - that's my point........newer cars are all about risk mitigation. Curtain airbags / ESP / ABS / Driver and passenger Airbags and stronger materials as well as the extensive use of crumple zones that are integrated into the design of the car. The car might look like a complete mess on the outside - but the integrity of the passenger cell is retained and you get less intrusion of steering column and engine into the compartment in a front on or front offset collision. It doesn't mean you don't get injured - its just the severity of the injury is lessened. I think people confuse this sometimes thinking that newer cars means infallibility.

I'm sure there are plenty of sad examples of people dying or getting permamnenty mamed in brand new top spec safe cars like top shelf MERCS and BEEMERS - a sober reminder that new cars are SAFER than their older counterparts - but still not foolproof........


Difficult topic this one - and maybe no cut and dry answer - but from what we know about crash testing and ANCAP results.....At the end of the day - if a family member was in an accident - you'd be wishing they were in a newer car an not an older XD - XE -XF etc...... No ?

[irish2]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

That's not a 100km/h crash, he must have slowed well down from that speed before collision??

Being a ute it is light in the rear. The ute would have been spun around in a circle which would make the damage less, but doesn't mean it wasn't a big impact.

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

That thing still looks driveable. No car would drive away from a 100kmh t boning.

Thats not expertise thats just an opinion. Which you are quite entitled to but it means very little unless its backed up with facts.

[Vormund]

Highly doubt that that car connected at 100km/h.

It may have been a 100km/h zone, but by the time you've braked the speed at which the 2 cars connect is lower.

This is what hitting something at literally 100km/h looks like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TNFDeK6GLE

and yes I know that's an immovable wall and not a ute but it should give you an idea.

edit: found a pinto crash at the same time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgOxW...feature=relmfu

[79raven]

Old or new a cars a death trap. I have had serious accidents in both old and new cars, now even though the new car took the punishment better it still has its limits. The day we see the Demolition man car foam might not be far away but what ever you drive you need to understand the physics involved in even small accidents and that nobody in a car is safe. The government has been drumming in stop distances and crash tests for years, but until someone experiences the violence involved in a serious crash its hard to fully understand.

What gets me though about all this new car safety technology is all these dicks who drive the new cars with A+ safety ratings, but then cant afford to buy decent tyres so they go for Kenda's or something alike. Quality bolt on components ( i.e tyres, brakes, cheap chinese mags etc) in my mind are as important as side intrusion bars and safety cells. People need to be made more aware of these cheap tyres and other stuff or the Government needs to ban them.

[mike_nofx]

Why is it that cars from the 70's are just as safe as today's cars...
AND (according to some) "young people these days have no idea how to drive"...
AND there are much, MUCH more cars on the roads these days,
That there was a near 3 times higher road toll in the 70s than today?

[Auslandau]

...... can we leave the opinions on how fast an unseen car was doing based on a photo of a car? Keyboard analysis of Falconunbelievable's incident is bordering on stupid. So many variables involved and unless anyone was driving the other car ...... no need to comment really.

I have seen pics of cars demolished at 60k's and some look not to bad at 100 plus ..... I was hit up the bum by a Volvo, I was in a Discovery ..... I drove away and had literally one scratch on the bumper. Hers was $12,000 damage. Hit at approx 60k's .... looked like I had nudged someone doing 3k's, hers looked like it hit a wall at 120k's. My tow ball ripped the radiator out just for a final touch.

PS: I know how much her car was to fix as I took mine for assessment at the same place and saw it there ...... I wanted it checked underneath just in case. Found nothing wrong.

As said ..... NO ONE can determine the speed by a photo of a damaged car ...... so please don't try to?

[SPArKy_Dave]

Originally Posted by Vormund

edit: found a pinto crash at the same time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgOxW...feature=relmfu

Ooohh, that Impala took the impact well.
I want one of those.

[GREGL]

Originally Posted by SPArKy_Dave

Ooohh, that Impala took the impact well.
I want one of those.

That test was most likely performed as an example of how bad the pinto was, it was lethal in a rear ender. Fuel tank ruptured on impact hence the inferno engulfing the chev, which if you notice ends up in the fallout zone.
Sometimes it pays to have the facts before making a statement about things you know nothing about.

[Ford_The_Win]

Originally Posted by GREGL

That test was most likely performed as an example of how bad the pinto was, it was lethal in a rear ender. Fuel tank ruptured on impact hence the inferno engulfing the chev, which if you notice ends up in the fallout zone.

Yep... $75 million dollars in settlement for burn victims from firey Pinto crashes, versus $130 million dollars to repair all the Pintos sold. They went with the $75 million option and chose to let people burn to death, and the courts made them pay the price for it.

[SPArKy_Dave]

Originally Posted by GREGL

That test was most likely performed as an example of how bad the pinto was, it was lethal in a rear ender. Fuel tank ruptured on impact hence the inferno engulfing the chev, which if you notice ends up in the fallout zone.
Sometimes it pays to have the facts before making a statement about things you know nothing about.

Remember they did make a Gene Hackman movie about that..........
Spark from broken light globe filament, and fuel vapours= fire.

As long as the drivers window wasn't down on the Impala......

[OCTANEBOSS]

Shame to see 2 old bangers come to blows. I Hit a VC commodore once in my XT falcon in the 80's.. No one hurt, killed the passenger door and front 1/4 panel on the holden.. XT..dimple in left front panel and mark where bumber pushed on guard.. Old girl was pretty tough but my mates reckoned it sucked because it didnt have rear seat belts LOL... Sort of glad they dont build them like this now days... would be sliding all over the bench seat....have anyone ever seen what the intenal chrome work and fittings used to do to people in serious crashes in the 60's!. Nasty stuff but any car accident is

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

Why is it that cars from the 70's are just as safe as today's cars...
AND (according to some) "young people these days have no idea how to drive"...
AND there are much, MUCH more cars on the roads these days,
That there was a near 3 times higher road toll in the 70s than today?

Back in the day roads had no speed limits
Yep buy a new ol FC holden and drive as fast as you want,or how about pulling 140 odd MPH in an XY ....
I remember the oldies winding the P5 LTD of the clock ....
Darwin had roads only a few years ago that had no speed limit either
The cars today are perhaps safer , but too many rely on the mechanicals and safety of the cars rather than the ability or inability of the driver

[mike_nofx]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

Back in the day roads had no speed limits
Yep buy a new ol FC holden and drive as fast as you want,or how about pulling 140 odd MPH in an XY ....
I remember the oldies winding the P5 LTD of the clock ....
Darwin had roads only a few years ago that had no speed limit either
The cars today are perhaps safer , but too many rely on the mechanicals and safety of the cars rather than the ability or inability of the driver

I talk about cars and crash data of the 70's and you bring up a car from the 50's? Accidents per capita would have been even worse in the 50's than the 70's.

Most roads had speed limits in the 70's.

Talking about your oldies winding a P5 off the clock shows people werent better drivers back then. Would you wind ANY car new or old off the clock these days with your child in the back seat, even on an open speed limit road?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

Why is it that cars from the 70's are just as safe as today's cars...
AND (according to some) "young people these days have no idea how to drive"...
AND there are much, MUCH more cars on the roads these days,
That there was a near 3 times higher road toll in the 70s than today?

Originally Posted by 302 XC

Back in the day roads had no speed limits
Yep buy a new ol FC holden and drive as fast as you want,or how about pulling 140 odd MPH in an XY ....
I remember the oldies winding the P5 LTD of the clock ....
Darwin had roads only a few years ago that had no speed limit either
The cars today are perhaps safer , but too many rely on the mechanicals and safety of the cars rather than the ability or inability of the driver

Well my recollection of driving in the 70s as I actually DID drive in most states of Austraila in the 70s:

Prior to 1971 there were no absolute speed limits. Victoria was first in 1971 with NSW last in 1979 (other than NT which was 2007).

Drink driving was socially acceptable and very common (as was smoking and "hooning").

Only a very small number of cars could even get to 160km/h with most running out of puff between 130 and 140. Even the GT Falcons and Monaros of the era struggled at 200km/h (note GT is not GTHO).

Tyre technology was very limited with crossplies being common and radials not workeing very well at all in the wet. Dunlop "Aquaslip" (Aquajet) was the hero brand although its nickname was well earned.

Sections of Highway 1 were dirt or single lane with narrow wooden bridges and almost all dual lane tar roads were narrow with rough edges.

There were almost no speed advisary signs at sharp corners.

Seatbelts were often only fitted to the front seats and travelling with people including children in the back of utes, panelvans, trucks and wagons with the seats folded was legal, common and socially acceptable.

Cars were not full of distractions like music, climate control, phones and satnavs and required a fair amount of concentration to operate the non power steering, non or partial syncro manual transmission, non power drum brakes so your mind was always on the job of driving.

By 1980 I had driven over 500,000km on many of the crappiest roads in the country and in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne. I have done 160km/h on the Hume, got bogged up to my axels on the Bruce and been pulled over for speeding on the New England with 11 people in a panelvan (4 in front 7 in back going to a wedding) and let off with a warning.

There are far more accidents today than there were in the 1970s. It is just that now they are more survivable despite most people travelling faster and for longer distances at a time.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

Talking about your oldies winding a P5 off the clock shows people werent better drivers back then. Would you wind ANY car new or old off the clock these days with your child in the back seat, even on an open speed limit road?

If the conditions suit, and it's an open limit, then why not?

On another note today I saw a BA or BF wagon have its front end destroyed this morning on the highway. The culprit was a tire failure. Looked like it had hit the armco hard for the amount of damage it had done.

[BluXR6T]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Thanks, that's good to know seeing as how we have an FG. I hope the production ones are like that. I was commenting on that point because I've seen way too many other types of new and near-new cars that get a pronounced crease across the roof in a good frontal impact, sometimes jamming the doors shut on one side or the other.

Pulling off the side of the road to turn right...as a motorcyclist, I shudder when I see people do that. If you do it all the time, I'd trust you somewhat more, but if you tried to make it a general rule, I've seen way too many people up ahead pull off with their right indicator going, and concentrate too much on the oncoming traffic and forget what is coming behind them...possibly as a psychological thing that when you stop to turn right across oncoming traffic, you "normally" don't have to worry about what is coming behind you as it will pass to your left if it goes by you where you sit. My biggest fright was a car and van out near Longreach...approaching on my GSX1400, he pulls off and indicates to do a u-turn just outside town..."that's courteous of him", I thought. Then once the traffic coming the other way cleared, he started to turn. I swerved to the right where there was thankfully no oncoming cars and missed his bullbar by a whisker.

Yeah, I also seen this happen were I live. A 4WD towing a horse cart decided to pull to the left to do a U turn. When the oncoming traffic was clear he started to turn and collected a motorcyclist coming from the same direction he was traveling and collected him. Unfortunate for the motorcyclist as the result was not good. The silly thing was there was a roundabout only about 300 metres up the road, just to lazy to drive up to there. I know not an intersection turn but a similar situation.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

Talking about your oldies winding a P5 off the clock shows people werent better drivers back then. Would you wind ANY car new or old off the clock these days with your child in the back seat, even on an open speed limit road?

Yeah I would .... great trip to Alice a few years back. Got in just before the change. The AU wagon hit the wall at 175k's ...... and still got overtaken

At least some of us 'oldies' are still around to remember the times when they could go off the clock! Many of us survived believe it or not. We all didn't crash and burn!

[SSD-85]

I think its well established that older vehicles dont fare well in a crash, let alone the occupants.

But hey, IMO Id rather die looking cool in a classic than walk away from a safety washing machine. Everyone suffers the same fate in the end, and my take is enjoying what you like, cool classic or modern kelvinator.

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

Would you wind ANY car new or old off the clock these days with your child in the back seat, even on an open speed limit road?

If new cars are as safe as manufacturers claim why wouldnt anyone ???

The main fact is we have come along way in safety in cars no doubt, there are still idiots on the road,maybe more noticeable due to population growth,the death toll has gone down per population,is that more due to resticted speeds,or safer cars,the rising cost and punishments of being a speedster,the dury is out if its better drivers
My nephew under the P plate rules can drive cars with near twice the power of anything i learned to drive in,sure it has more safety features, but the power at his disposale is frightning,even in a n/a 6
ABS,air bags,high crash rating doesnt mean they get to 100K,or well beyond any slower in fact most new cars will out accelorate most from years gone by even the fabled factory muscle cars of the past
Id be really interested in the actuall facts from every accident why they happened rather than the blanket "Speed was a factor"

[LTDHO]

IMO, cars are that oversafe now that people put in less effort to be careful.