Why driving a safe car makes sense
|
|
 Jul 24 2013, 04:43 PM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
 
Staff
5,568 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: the lack of sleep  
|
This is not a fair comparison as cars from the early 90s didn't have to face strict regulations in safetly. Most cars from that era are nothing more than eggshells on wheels. They didn't build bad cars then, it is just that the regulations that they have to follow were bad.
This post has been edited by sleepwalker: Jul 24 2013, 04:44 PM |
|
|
Jul 25 2013, 04:05 PM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
|
Staff
5,568 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: the lack of sleep
|
QUOTE(MeToo @ Jul 25 2013, 02:56 PM) Buy this got 4 airbag and abit safer then sedans when it comes to collisions... You'd be surprised that not all big tanks comes out better than sedans. A collision between a tank and a soft MPV resulted in the MPV having less intrusion into the cabin and test dummies came out in better condition.  |
|
|
Jul 25 2013, 04:18 PM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
|
Staff
5,568 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: the lack of sleep
|
QUOTE(MeToo @ Jul 25 2013, 04:09 PM) Hmm... cant access youtube in office... The video shows a direct head on collision between a Range Rover tank and a soft MPV. Due to the softness of the MPV, the crumple zone absorbs and defects the forces around the driver. However, in the Range Rover, the tough chassis actually pushed the cabin into the driver, crushing the test dummy instead of saving him.I'm sure we can find exceptions in every scenario... However, I do believe that in general driving that vs a B/C-segment sedan.... I would come out in a better condition... |
| Change to: |  0.0142sec
 0.49
 7 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 15th December 2025 - 07:23 AM |
Quote