SeattleEVA Forums
February 07, 2012, 10:17:52 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Seattle EVA Forums! Not to be confused with the Wiki or the Maillist which both remains active.
 
    SEVA wiki     RSS All   SEVA Forums Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What vehicles are actually safer?  (Read 9147 times)
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
StorminN
Full Member
***

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #472: August 04, 2008, 05:03:53 pm »

You just answered the question. Crumple zones are stopping distance. Greater stopping distance lower the G forces on the occupants. The Suburbans will look a lot better after the accident (with that solid bumper bolted to a rigid frame.) Crumple zones and more strict safety requirements for passenger cars, compared to Trucks (including most SUVs), favor the drivers in the Camrys.

Paul, I think you're confusing crumpling with survivability... these do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. To bring this to the extreme, build a car out of aluminum foil. Now run this car into a Suburban, with both vehicles traveling 50mph... yes, the aluminum foil car will have crumpled, but not enough energy will have been absorbed... the person in the foil car will still be dead. I view subcompact cars as not much more protection than this hypothetical situation, and the numbers of deaths for those cars... Neons, Prisms, Metros, etc. substantiate my view.

-Norm.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.6 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.06 seconds with 20 queries.