351mach11647545510 Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 I don't see that as completely valid. Car is a rusty hunk plus the stresses of time. Not saying it wasn't a valid to a degree, just feel like it was exaggerated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KennyFKINPowerz Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 I would never have though the Bel Air would have crumpled like that. It was cool to see the difference but what a shame to destroy such a car though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Apex Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 The first few cars the dummy essentially bypassed the air bag and looks like they hit the dash, that Lincoln was appaling. The Benz and Volvo clearly held up quite well. I agree with this being a legit test, most accidents are not likely 2 cars going perectly head on, that probably almost never happens and from what I've seen on the road for 8 years now most accidents the cars are not perfectly head on or perpendicular to each other, usually in between. I do like the comment on being better drivers, that alone could reduce the accident/fatality rate considerably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted August 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 The regular offset was a 50/50 offset, meaning they put a line down the middle of the hood of one car to line the driver side of the other car up with. The new one is just less contact, basically around the headlight area, so the impact is much worse. I'd like to see the vids on all the "regular" cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallard Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 The regular offset was a 50/50 offset, meaning they put a line down the middle of the hood of one car to line the driver side of the other car up with. The new one is just less contact, basically around the headlight area, so the impact is much worse. I'd like to see the vids on all the "regular" cars. Yeah, basically with the new test none of the impact is absorbed through the engine block, but must be dissapated through the fender and shock tower area. It looks like concentrating that much force down the side of the vehicle causes the A pillar to buckle pretty easily too. You guys can claim we need better drivers all you want, but accidents like this will still happen. You can be a pretty damn good driver and still have this type of accident, and would probably be much more likely to have an accident of this nature than any of the other frontal impact tests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KennyFKINPowerz Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Yeah, basically with the new test none of the impact is absorbed through the engine block, but must be dissapated through the fender and shock tower area. It looks like concentrating that much force down the side of the vehicle causes the A pillar to buckle pretty easily too. You guys can claim we need better drivers all you want, but accidents like this will still happen. You can be a pretty damn good driver and still have this type of accident, and would probably be much more likely to have an accident of this nature than any of the other frontal impact tests. AWWWWWWWW Horse shit. I blame the Somalians. :gabe::gabe::gabe::gabe::gabe::gabe::gabe::gabe: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.