Ok here is the deal. I am in the middle of a debate with a friend of mine. He says older cars are safer... they stand up to more. I think that newer cars are safer due to air bags and crumple zones. Opinions?
Plain and simple.
Old car will stand better to an impact but (you) wont.
New cars will not stand up to an impact but (you) will.
Thanks to crumple zones as it absorbs the impact and not you. But keep in mind and very important the cabin HAS to be intact.
Today's auto manufacture theory is:
What is worth more, you or the car?
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
you
cuz then you can buy another car after
everything was pretty much said by goodwrench
i know i would rather get in an accident with my Cav than my 68 mustang
just because of airbags and shoulder belts, even tho the cav is rated poorly for crashes
a lap belt just doesnt do it for me in an accident lol
Quote:
What is worth more, you or the car?
That is true right there.
The miss conception too many people have is that if the car is heavily damaged then it isn't/wasn't safe. Keep in mind that like Mr Goodwrench said as long as the cabin is intact the rest of the damage was used to absorb the crash. There is a Fifth gear or Top gear clip that they crash a smart car into a concrete barrier. The car looks like it blew up since most of the body panels are plastic but the passenger cabin only had a small ripple on the a pillar and the doors still opened. I think the only draw back the the crumple zone versus the solid steel of years ago is in a small crash where the chance of injury is minimal the newer car will be allot more expensive to fix, but if it makes the car safer I can live with it.
Jabbles
my 68 elcamino has crumple zones , granted they arent as extreme as any new car , but they are there
Yeah.....I would hate to have the steering wheel/column cave in my chest if I got into an accident with my Camaro.
I feel WAY safer in our newer car/van!
i think im going to agree with every on the post
old cars could hold up to alot more but newer cars are designed to keep you safe, screw what the car comes out looking like
New cars are infinetly safer then old.... crumple zones, air bags, seat belt tensioners (snaps the belt tight at moment of impact to keep you in the seat) ABS, traction control, stability control, electronic brake control, radial tires, disc brakes, power brakes, breakaway engine mounts (to dump your engine on the street and not through the firewall into your lap) crash sensors that kill the motor instantly cut off fuel and spark unlock the doors and put the hazzards on (all at the speed that an air bag pops out), every crash related cotrol will still work even if the battery cable gets cut, safety glass (fside windows will shater into non jagged cubes of glass, ftornt wiend shields will shatter stretch and for the most part stay together (back in the day if you hit a windshiled it was liek a 40 mph headput to a machette, when they attempted saftery glass spot where your head hit poped out stretched while your head was pushing on then when the momentum pulls you back the glass would contract with part of your head through the little whole which lead to poping the top right off your skull) steering columns colapse, dashes are padded, the lower dash has its own little crumple zone for your knees so you aren't smashing them into a solid surface, onstar equipt cars where your car calls the police in an accident, the front end designs are ment to be more forgiving if you hit a pedestrian, kinda scoops them onto the hood instead just a big blunt object leveling them, tire pressure monitouring systems, plastic gas tanks that can't rust out.....
I could probobally go on and on, its like comparing Hitler to the Pope, there is absolutely no logical way anyone could think an old school car is safer, they are just plain ignorant.
An old car will take will hold up to an accident better but if you crash in an old car at 40 MPH, you might as well have been shot out of a cannon at a wall cause that car will do absolutely nothing to make sure you walk away safe, and even less to make sure the accidnet was avoided.
Darkstars wrote:New cars are infinetly safer then old.... crumple zones, air bags, seat belt tensioners (snaps the belt tight at moment of impact to keep you in the seat) ABS, traction control, stability control, electronic brake control, radial tires, disc brakes, power brakes, breakaway engine mounts (to dump your engine on the street and not through the firewall into your lap) crash sensors that kill the motor instantly cut off fuel and spark unlock the doors and put the hazzards on (all at the speed that an air bag pops out), every crash related cotrol will still work even if the battery cable gets cut, safety glass (fside windows will shater into non jagged cubes of glass, ftornt wiend shields will shatter stretch and for the most part stay together (back in the day if you hit a windshiled it was liek a 40 mph headput to a machette, when they attempted saftery glass spot where your head hit poped out stretched while your head was pushing on then when the momentum pulls you back the glass would contract with part of your head through the little whole which lead to poping the top right off your skull) steering columns colapse, dashes are padded, the lower dash has its own little crumple zone for your knees so you aren't smashing them into a solid surface, onstar equipt cars where your car calls the police in an accident, the front end designs are ment to be more forgiving if you hit a pedestrian, kinda scoops them onto the hood instead just a big blunt object leveling them, tire pressure monitouring systems, plastic gas tanks that can't rust out.....
I could probobally go on and on, its like comparing Hitler to the Pope, there is absolutely no logical way anyone could think an old school car is safer, they are just plain ignorant.
An old car will take will hold up to an accident better but if you crash in an old car at 40 MPH, you might as well have been shot out of a cannon at a wall cause that car will do absolutely nothing to make sure you walk away safe, and even less to make sure the accidnet was avoided.
BTW cars is what I do for a living so I knwo what I'm tlaking about
Darkstars wrote:breakaway engine mounts (to dump your engine on the street and not through the firewall into your lap) crash sensors that kill the motor instantly cut off fuel and spark unlock the doors and put the hazzards on (all at the speed that an air bag pops out), every crash related cotrol will still work even if the battery cable gets cut
So Jbodies have all of these features?
If we have solid mounts, then the engine wouldn' be dumped? Basically, our solid mounts make our cars less safe in an accident?
I don't think j-bodys have that feature, alot of newer cars do, if the front gets hit the engine drops out to the ground so if can't be pushed through into the passenger compartment
95-05 J-bodies has that features that the engine drops.
And it is not that mounts "breaks-away" and the engine collapse. Its that the brace/support supporting the engine has indentations inwhich it deforms in a matter that when it is in a frontal collision the engine sinks down instead of moving back.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
This might not be the most scientific test but it gives you and idea of the old and solid against modern "crashworthyness"
you tube link
Jabbles
RIP CPL Brian St.Germain (SAINT), Semper Fidelis