|
Smart Fortwo crash test at... 70... mph... (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Stingray |
| quote: | Originally posted by Euphorica
so I guess all those race cars with roll cages and 6 point harness' are unsafe.....
its hardly a 60's muscle car. |
Uh, no. Race cars are built with rolling over at very high speeds in mind. A Smart car (and a 60's muscle car) dont have roll cages and 6-point harnesses. |
|
|
| Euphorica |
rolling over has nothing to do with what we are talking about right now.
head on/ typical crashes which race cars are involved in all the time.
The smarts design is bacially like a roll cage.
the only crumple zone on (say an f1 or indy car) is the nose cone. and thats not always hit. |
|
|
| Stingray |
| quote: | Originally posted by Euphorica
rolling over has nothing to do with what we are talking about right now.
|
So why did you bring up roll cages? |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Euphorica
so I guess all those race cars with roll cages and 6 point harness' are unsafe.....
its hardly a 60's muscle car. |
Dude, I handle automobile injury claims for a living. I assure you that I understand the physics and mechanics of a motor vehicle collision and the resulting injuries. The more force transfered to the driver/passengers the worse the injuries will be.
If the Smart car had a 6 point harness I may not be as down on it but a 3 point harness and no crumple zone is going to result in serious injury. The whole point of a 6 point harness is to disburse the force of a collision more evenly and to the strongest areas of your body, a 3 point harness does not do that nearly as well. Additionally, I don't see too many people in Smart Cars wearing helmets and neck restraints. |
|
|
| Euphorica |
| because thats what the design of the smart basically is. a roll cage not only protects you while rolling over. It stiffens up the body of the car big time. It helps protect from other crashes. |
|
|
| Stingray |
| quote: | Originally posted by Euphorica
because thats what the design of the smart basically is. a roll cage not only protects you while rolling over. It stiffens up the body of the car big time. It helps protect from other crashes. |
It protects the car. Not you. You tell me what happens when all of a sudden you suddenly go from 100kph to 0kph. You get hurt very badly. That what crumple zones prevent. Instead of stopping on a dime, you decellerate.
Put a hampster in a cage and throw it off a balcony. The cage will be fine, but the hampster wont be.
Listen to Moral Hazard, he knows what hes talking about. |
|
|
| Euphorica |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
The more force transfered to the driver/passengers the worse the injuries will be.
|
agreed
| quote: |
If the Smart car had a 6 point harness I may not be as down on it but a 3 point harness and no crumple zone is going to result in serious injury. The whole point of a 6 point harness is to disburse the force of a collision more evenly and to the strongest areas of your body, a 3 point harness does not do that nearly as well. Additionally, I don't see too many people in Smart Cars wearing helmets and neck restraints. |
I agree a 6 point harness is better. However the smart does have a small crumple zone. It also doesnt just sit there and not absorb anything(like a 60's car). it is designed to take some of the impact.
Helmets and neck restrants is a different topic aswell. I dont see any smart drivers flying around an oval at 200 mph ..and then hitting head on ...risking their spine snapping/bone ripping off the back of their head.
Point is, the car is safe. If it wasnt it wouldnt be allowed on the road. We miss out on certain cars for stupid like 5 mph bumper laws etc. If it was found the smart offered no protection they wouldnt have brought it here.
Id rather crash in a smart then in an SUV. |
|
|
| Euphorica |
| quote: | Originally posted by Stingray
It protects the car. Not you. You tell me what happens when all of a sudden you suddenly go from 100kph to 0kph. You get hurt very badly. That what crumple zones prevent. Instead of stopping on a dime, you decellerate.
Put a hampster in a cage and throw it off a balcony. The cage will be fine, but the hampster wont be.
Listen to Moral Hazard, he knows what hes talking about. |
crumple zones help to elliminate some of the forces. the smart does have a small one.. its like the cage itself comes out perfect and didnt absorb anything. Of course it does.
not to mention you are wearing a proper seatbelt where mr hamster isnt . The smarts cage is designed to deal with accidents where a cage for a hamster isnt. bad example imo. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Euphorica
agreed
I agree a 6 point harness is better. However the smart does have a small crumple zone. It also doesnt just sit there and not absorb anything(like a 60's car). it is designed to take some of the impact.
Helmets and neck restrants is a different topic aswell. I dont see any smart drivers flying around an oval at 200 mph ..and then hitting head on ...risking their spine snapping/bone ripping off the back of their head.
Point is, the car is safe. If it wasnt it wouldnt be allowed on the road. We miss out on certain cars for stupid like 5 mph bumper laws etc. If it was found the smart offered no protection they wouldnt have brought it here.
Id rather crash in a smart then in an SUV. |
Safe is a relative term. Does it meet standards.... yes. Is it a Volvo.... no. My point is that this vehicle is not safe in comparison to other vehicles and that crash test video only supports this point.
With regard to the SUV comment.... depending on what you hit I agree with you. SUVs tend to have full frames which also do not crumple very well. They transfer a lot of force to the occupents and due to their weight tend to carry more force while in motion. If we're looking at hitting a brick wall, I'd probably choose the smart car as well..... if we're talking about getting smoked by a transport I'll go with the SUV.... if we're talking about a head on between a Hummer and a Smart Car then SUV all the way. |
|
|
| AwakenedAddict |
What are the chances of actually getting the For-two up to 70mph anyhow?
40hp, booyah! |
|
|
| djeso |
| quote: | Originally posted by AwakenedAddict
What are the chances of actually getting the For-two up to 70mph anyhow?
40hp, booyah! |
You'd be surprised how quickly these things actually drive |
|
|
| AwakenedAddict |
| quote: | Originally posted by djeso
You'd be surprised how quickly these things actually drive |
0 - 62 mph (100 kph) 15.5 seconds
I've actually driven a manual Echo before :p |
|
|
|
|
