My massive impact - A real life tale of small car vs large car safety.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

Actually I think your argument is a fair debate! What about the fact that I would assume that a lot if not most accidents are non avoidable(considering the difference between the more manoeuvrable small car and a large one).
Head ons,falling asleep,tbones,driving too fast for the cars ability( same for both big of small as the edge of traction is the edge) I'm sure there's more eg's but deffinately the very nature of an "accident" large enough to be injured or killed would surely be enough explanation to believe the majority of those situation are unavoidable no matter what your in. Does that make sense?

Ask the op....I'm sure his accident was not avoidable simply because he was in a smaller car. It's the nature of a bad accident.

No doubt!
Nobody I have found collects data on near misses!

and the analysis of crashes cannot be complete and 100% accurate because no two crashes are the same. Analytical variance needs to be accounted for and a base line assumptions made to spread across all analised instances.
A 'homogonised, pasturised' data set results are much like ANCAP et al.
Its not perfect but given manufacturers and purchases don't want to test every possible crash scenario in their prospective purchase before forking out their cash its a good base to compare new vehicles in crashworthiness against the criteria and assumptions of the test.

If I have to have a standard crash I think Id like to be in a big tall modern car. But to live with for hopefully 100% of my driving (ie all the driving without a crash) I feel, based on my own anecdotal research, ie my memory, Id be less likely to crash in my small AWD hatch than in my Falcon Ute.

JP

JP

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Not surprised, the improvement of safety features is moving along at a remarkable rate, 10 years ago half the cars on the market hardly had side impact bags, now just about every car (even cheap hyundais) have side curtain airbags....

What do you mean 10 years ago, my 2010 February built FG XR6 Ute only had drivers & passenger front airbags.....

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by trublu

What do you mean 10 years ago, my 2010 February built FG XR6 Ute only had drivers & passenger front airbags.....

But bigger car, longer bonnet, etc...safer!

[MAD]

Ford ute is actually very strong on side impact due to B and C pillar being so close in the passenger cell.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by MAD

Ford ute is actually very strong on side impact due to B and C pillar being so close in the passenger cell.

Strong maybe maybe not its just folded sheet Metal.
Heres inside one


But strong doesn't cut it when it comes to crashes, Impact absorption (crumple zones) are where its at and strong transfers load into the softer occupants rather then crumple leaving our organs as the crumple zone.

JP

[Nikked]

I doubt the ute would have any significant change in side impact strength, as the majority of the protection is still from the A and B pillars, and internal door structure.




Actually seen a Fiesta get T-boned buy a Focus...

Focus was a total loss...Fiesta got a new door, pillar/sill sections and away she went!

[1TUFFUTE]

So from the facts gleaned so far....

No light car was found to be safe in the mentioned study.

The FG falcon was found to be the safest of all cars in the study.

5 small cars were deemed 'safe picks' in the study.

Ancap admits star ratings are designed against cars in their SAME class.

A 5star small car isn't as safe as a large 5star car due to weight and so on...

85% of cars on sale now have curtain airbags as standard

And that there are people who think their one off accident sets a national trend or safety benchmark.

Be safe.....by a falcon

[Danny]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

And that there are people who think their one off accident sets a national trend or safety benchmark.

Jesus tap dancing Christ! This man is an idiot! There must be something in the water in Ipswich that provides you with such wisdom.

Please then, go ahead and tell me what magical entity it was who miraculously held my small car interior completely intact when it hit a Navara near head on at 70km/h or so?

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by Danny

Jesus tap dancing Christ! This man is an idiot! There must be something in the water in Ipswich that provides you with such wisdom.

Please then, go ahead and tell me what magical entity it was who miraculously held my small car interior completely intact when it hit a Navara near head on at 70km/h or so?

But those real world experiences dont count, because only Monash university's collection of data from rear enders (amongst others) indicates that a 1996 Dihatsu is very bad. Hence why their 5 star system should only be used, and it tells you that even though they found small cars worthy of 5 stars only a Falcon should be bought, because the law if physics makes all things equal so larger cars with bigger bonnets are safer.


Hope that clears it up.

[Wretched]

Not to mention the facts he so much likes to quote were posted here which indicates that the Falcon among the safest cars assessed by Monash Uni within their study of a range of car accidents. It is an achievement for sure but one has to wonder how many times a Falcon FG was in an accident compared to other makes. It wasn't the ONLY safe car, it was among a group of them. But you know don't let the facts in the way of a misinterpretation.
Then there was the unfortunate and saddening accident where an i30 T-boned and killed the occupants of the FG G6E last year in Oakleigh. It shows that there is a limitation, where and the severity of the impact a vehicle can take.

In the end all I can say is I would rather be driving any 5 star rated car from 2014 than those form the 70's in the context of accident survivability.
Just look at the road toll comparing the decade 2004 - 2014 to that of 1974 - 1984. There are more drivers now but the toll is a fraction of what it was.
Car safety technology has advanced hand over fist and the manufacturers are to be congratulated (in addition to crash barriers).

[Danny]

Well all I know when I get my insurance payout is that I'm going to get myself one of those big yellow Caterpillar mining trucks.

I hear that they have a 6 star safety rating from Ford Forums. YEEEEEEEEEEHAWWWWWWW!

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

So from the facts gleaned so far....

No light car was found to be safe in the mentioned study.

The FG falcon was found to be the safest of all cars in the study.

5 small cars were deemed 'safe picks' in the study.

Ancap admits star ratings are designed against cars in their SAME class.

A 5star small car isn't as safe as a large 5star car due to weight and so on...

85% of cars on sale now have curtain airbags as standard

And that there are people who think their one off accident sets a national trend or safety benchmark.

Be safe.....by a falcon

Well DANNY how about you disprove these facts above,rather then abuse me for quoting the facts. Start from the top and work your way down....I'll await your informed factually reply!
And you certainly fit in the final criteria I added for good measure as you think just because your one off random accident resulting in good safe circumstances for you....now allows you to say small cars are safer then equivalent safe large cars!

I've proved with an extensive monash university research..along with other facts people have mentioned, that at the time large cars took the gong after compiling over 1 million incidents which take damage,injuries and other things like pedestrian safety into account...amoung other things.

Now CUT the BULLSHIT and provide PROOF that smaller cars are safer then larger cars or shut up....you and your campaign stooges. And your very lucky one off incident doesn't stack up to results from over 1million crashes info.....just incase that didn't SINK IN

Patiently waiting

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

Now CUT the BULLSHIT and provide PROOF that smaller cars are safer then larger cars or shut up....you and your campaign stooges. And your very lucky one off incident doesn't stack up to results from over 1million crashes info.....just incase that didn't SINK IN

Patiently waiting

I think he did with his 1st post!!!.

[Danny]

LOL^^

That's all the "factually reply" needed. Now 1FORDUTE take a grammar lesson and a chill pill.

Oh and I never said small cars were safer as such. I offered a real life account of proof (what more proof can I offer?), showing WITHOUT QUESTION (therefore no bullshit - to use your eloquent expression), that my modern small car was at the very least AS safe as a large car. I PROVED that this small car was safe in the most painful and accurate way possible - I strapped myself in and hurtled myself at 70km/h plus at a 4WD with a bullbar front on, walked away, and then offered the good people of the Ford Forums to interpret this as they wished.

You my good sir, have taken it like a bee to the vagina.

[BHDOGS]

Its not AS safe as a large car tho

[Danny]

Wrong, I 110% believe that it was. I cannot see how hard it is to comprehend, these companies spend billions on engineering small cars to hold up well where they fall short in sheer size. After what I went through I feel some of you "scientific" masterminds are just trolling. Most of you couldn't grammatically structure a cohesive argument anyway, so take off and post somewhere else if you want to just mindlessly discount the experience I gained ever so unfortunately.

[2011G6E]

Sorry, but "head on" means directly head on...front to front, not offset, not a glancing blow...

If a bull bar equipped Navara had indeed been doing 70kph and hit "head on", you wouldn't be writing this thread...

[1TUFFUTE]

Fair enough don't reply to me....you got nothing anyway. I just hope your as lucky next time being so cocky about small car safety. It's quite ignorant actually. At least get a 5star small car again so you stand a chance.
Parting fact....small car deaths have dropped 45%...large car deaths over 50%

[Danny]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Sorry, but "head on" means directly head on...front to front, not offset, not a glancing blow...

If a bull bar equipped Navara had indeed been doing 70kph and hit "head on", you wouldn't be writing this thread...

That's why I've been saying near head on bro, near head on bro.. Because it was. It was NOT a glancing blow, wanna sit in with me next time?

1tuffute thanks for your input mate. If you think "I got nothing" then there must be something amazing you know that I couldn't have learnt myself from being a human crash dummy. Nonetheless, your enviable expertise in this field has been duly noted.

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Sorry, but "head on" means directly head on...front to front, not offset, not a glancing blow...

If a bull bar equipped Navara had indeed been doing 70kph and hit "head on", you wouldn't be writing this thread...

Rubbish !

"Head on" means when the front ends of two opposing vehicles impact each other, whether they are perfectly aligned or off set makes no difference to the terminology. They are still head on collisions.

[Nikked]

You best go crash you're car into a navara a few more times, must make sure you have a uni present to collect statistical data, because obviously you hitting a car twice the size of your own and walking away isn't enough to prove that a small car offers remarkable protection.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Sorry, but "head on" means directly head on...front to front, not offset, not a glancing blow...

If a bull bar equipped Navara had indeed been doing 70kph and hit "head on", you wouldn't be writing this thread...

FYI I was involved with a head on with a 1976 model nissan patrol, I was driving a EJ Holden wagon & collision impact was estimated 60 to 70 kph.
I walked away luckily with lot of bruises so don't assume as every accident is different to each other with different results.

PS: Both cars were written off.

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

Rubbish !

"Head on" means when the front ends of two opposing vehicles impact each other, whether they are perfectly aligned or off set makes no difference to the terminology. They are still head on collisions.

Exatctly, frontal off set is still head on...and a bull bar? Those flimsy alloy things a just blingy junk...might stop a roo from breaking you headlight, but they a soft thin and have collapsible mounts as to not interfere with crumple zone and airbag operation.

[MAGPIE]

I think a few people here have completely lost sight of the original post

Originally Posted by Danny

Guys/Gals,

Thought I might post this here as a bit of real life experience on the large car V small car debate, and offer a little insight into just how fantastic small car safety has come in the last decade or so.

This morning an old guy turned right in front of me on a red arrow in a 70km/h zone (Might have been 80 - can't remember). No warning, and no time to stop.

I hit him in my Megane 250 coming north through the intersection, most likely doing on or a little below the speed limit (hardly any time to brake, he turned no less than 5 or 10 metres before I approached him).

My front drivers side corner hit his passenger side corner at full whack, God I've never felt an impact like that in my life! On impact, the two front airbags deployed (no need for the curtains or side bags so some lucky bugger will be able to salvage themselves a couple of leather Recaro's), the Megane spun 90 degrees to the west, hit a traffic light, bounced off, and then slid across the road toward the south again coming to rest on the side of the road like I had parked it there.

The doors unlocked, the lights turned on, the fuel pump turned off, and the hazard lights activated. I pulled the handbrake, opened the door, and walked away like a boss. No one could beleive I was the driver, the most stressful part was imporing people not to fuss over me (although the ambo's took me away as a precaution, rightly ignoring my arguments to leave me there to walk home), and to look after the old bugger in the other car who looked to be having a panic attack (He was in his 70's).

The other car? A D40 Navara, with a massive aftermarket bullbar, and big wheels and tyres. thats right, my little Renault hit a Navara near head on at 60-70km/h, and I walked away.


To think that I walked away from a 60-70km/h impact with a 4X4 with bullbar without serious injury speaks volumes for not only Renault, but small car safety. My next weekend car will surely be something modern and 5 star NCAP rating.


If I had children of driving age (and one day I will), I'll be happy to have them in a smaller car with great safety credentials. That car saved my life today. I'll miss it terribly, but it can be replaced. I'm just happy that I'll live to see another day.

Stay safe guys.

[BHDOGS]

A small car is not as safe as a large car in the same circumstances of a crash all things replicated perfectly.

[block58]

In a head on collision, a heavier car will always decelerate slower than the lighter car. We can all agree on that.

However that doesn't mean anything in terms of the safety of the occupants, because with the inclusion of safety cells, crumple zones and airbags, which have proven to be a life saver in this situation.

If you combine both those two factors (weight and crumple zones/safety cell/airbags), and have two cars both with the same ANCAP rating, but different weights, the heavier one will come off better because of the fact it has to decelerate less, and absorbs less force because of this.

This video is the simplest way of demonstrating
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBesU12g58I

[zilo]

Pity there is no pic of the Navara.

70km/h head on in any car is way in excess of any NCAP tests and most likely not an accurate depiction.

Bet my left testicle on that little fact....

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by block58

In a head on collision, a heavier car will always decelerate slower than the lighter car. We can all agree on that.

However that doesn't mean anything in terms of the safety of the occupants, because with the inclusion of safety cells, crumple zones and airbags, which have proven to be a life saver in this situation.

If you combine both those two factors (weight and crumple zones/safety cell/airbags), and have two cars both with the same ANCAP rating, but different weights, the heavier one will come off better because of the fact it has to decelerate less, and absorbs less force because of this.

This video is the simplest way of demonstrating
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBesU12g58I

Does not matter which one is decelerating quicker than the other as the speed impact will be same for both cars.

The one comment I will make is that higher speed impact will lessen chances for survival & accident statistics supports this for any car regardless of size.

[zilo]

Originally Posted by trublu

Does not matter which one is decelerating quicker than the other as the speed impact will be same for both cars.

.

Sorry mate, that does not compute..

The greater the deceleration the more internal organ damage.

Ask Diana Spencer about ruptured aorta and internal bleeding...she died cause her hear was ripped off its engine mounts due to deceleration.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by zilo

Sorry mate, that does not compute..

The greater the deceleration the more internal organ damage.

Ask Diana Spencer about ruptured aorta and internal bleeding...she died cause her hear was ripped off its engine mounts due to deceleration.

Sorry, your correct I realised my error in my last post.