Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadeTreeMech
I suppose there are 3 schools of thought. Make a vehicle light enough to avoid an accident, make it strong enough to "win" the accident, or build it assuming it will be involved in a bad accident and the passengers must survive.
I propose filling all cars with a lightweight metallic foam or metallic bubblewrap, and have carbon dioxide be the gas contained therein, or some other fire retardant chemical that is lightweight. The crumple zones would have to be engineered for a crash at survivable at much higher speeds than are currently enforced. And research into making carbon fiber much cheaper would be a gov't mandate, to the end that all cars would use it to make the vehicles lighter. Yes, a light car is better, but it should also make sure the passengers will survive a horrific accident.
|
I think your taking it too far, (I'm guessing your being sarcastic though)
All things considered building cars is an exercise in compromise. Small and light in many ways improves safety, it makes it easier to make it have good performance and agility. Larger and heavier while not as able to avoid an accident has more room to crumple while still keeping its occupants safe. Heavy unyeilding tanks are a loose loose type of construction, they don't crumple, so if they hit something of equal or greater mass the occupants feel the full instatainious impact, and if what they hit is smaller, that one looses.
Building cars is an exercise in compromise, keep it light pushes toward smaller cars with thinner materials, while safety pushes for larger thicker materials. More modern materials can make the same safety but at a higher cost.
All that and Automobile manufacturers still have to keep an eye on what the majority are wanting and willing to pay for that year.