View Single Post
Old 09-01-2008, 11:57 PM   #47 (permalink)
ConnClark
DieselMiser
 
ConnClark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richland,WA
Posts: 985

Das Schlepper Frog - '85 Mercedes Benz 300SD
90 day: 23.23 mpg (US)

Gentoo320 - '04 Mercedes C320 4Matic
90 day: 22.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 46
Thanked 232 Times in 160 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bennelson View Post
I guess another place to look for information on size and weight vs safety is the race car industry.

Indy cars are VERY small and light! Of course the biggest part of that is so they have great acceleration, but it is also a HUGE concern for safety.

It is amazing the speeds at which these cars can hit a wall, and still have the driver walk away alive. (You bet they wear their seatbelts!)

The cars are light and also DESIGNED to break into smaller pieces, thus quickly loosing mass, thus momentum. IE-they break into little pieces to slow down really fast.

I'm not saying that Ford or GM is going to design cars that almost explode on impact like that, but why not take a cue from the racing industry about how light weight is safe.
I guess this post of yours shows you can't read through a thread to see what has already been posted. If not re-read post #17 in this thread.

Indy cars are not small as they have almost the same dimensions as a formula one car.

Having parts fly off cars is not a good idea when your car wrecks near pedestrians.

As for your previous post it looks like you got an F in physics. Its not the fall that kills you its the sudden stop at the end. It takes a lot more force to stop something(or someone) quickly. large cars have larger crumple zones that allow the passenger to be stopped over a longer period of time. The larger mass keeps this deceleration more consistent for the duration of the crash.

If these concepts are not obvious to you, please keep your inventions in the back yard and off the streets.

Also refer to post #22 in this thread. Read the quoted link and see the how facts stack up.
__________________