Metro/Swift/Firefly Crash Test Videos!
 

For a long while I've been looking for crash test footage of these cars and I finally found them on YouTube:

Full frontal impact of the late 80s/early 90s model at 35-mph:

YouTube - 1993 Geo Metro Crash Test

Transport Canada's full frontal test of the last generation model at 35-mph:

YouTube - 1998 Geo Metro Crash Test

A real fun offset crash test of the last generation model at around 60-mph!

YouTube - Geo Metro Offset Crash Test

wow, I'll let that be a reminder to me to not buy a 1993 metro.
Probably a good thing I haven't seen CRX crash test vids.
Ignorance is bliss :D

Peakster! Nice find.

Now I'm glad the ForkenSwift can barely get up to 35 mph! (So it's just those speeding walls I have to watch out for.)

Mental note: "remember... leave legs at home next time there's going to be a 60 mph offset crash in the Flea..."

Did you notice that the impact sled in the offset test seemed to have all 4 wheels in the air at one point after impact?

Yeah, I never want to see CRX crash tests, :)

Nice find.

I saw three of them leave the ground for sure.

Considering the high speed, I would've thought the 60-mph offset crash would've been a much worse for the last generation model. Search the offset crash for a Dodge Neon on YouTube (pretty much same class of car) and it looks like it does a lot worse at the much slower speed of 35-mph.

I have to say it was even more unsettling that the 89-94 model crashed is the same colour as the ForkenSwift. Too easy to project!

I thought they were in the habit of painting the cars weird flat colours for the tests...

Neon @ 35 mph offset: indeed.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/v/N13KOM1OpFY[/youtube]

In the first video, it looks like the seat belts didn't even lock up. Not only does the dummy face plant the steering wheel HARD, the wheel even jumps out and meets him halfway.

You're right. So much for collapsable steering columns. Also, notice the passenger seat back fails & flops into the back seat after the crash.

Wow, that passenger seat collapse IS scary! Now the only thing left to see is how the 1985-1988 Firefly/Forska/Sprint fares in a collision ;) (I've always liked those tiny boxy ones):

Attachment 177Attachment 178

Wow, what an impression!

But...what we must remember
 

But, what we have to remember is that an offset impact at 35-mph is going to be serious in any vehicle -- yes, some more than others, but consider the following...

How often is this going to happen in a collision? That's 2 vehicles, each traveling 17.5 mph, in an offset collision, or one traveling slowly and hitting a stationary object.

Two vehicles hitting offset at 35 mph = 70 mph combined force. The odds of surviving a collision of this magnitude, in any vehicle, is slim.

I know these videos are a reference, but I don't want people to equate small cars to "unsafe", so people justify the purchase of a land-yacht for "safety". The F-150 of the same generation was equally as unsafe due to the jack-knifing effect as the cabin collapses.

Having been an EMT/Firefighter with extrication experience ("jaws-of-life"), I can attest that a bad accident is just that -- a bad accident. It doesn't really matter what you drive. Belts and bags do help, but only as much as Physics can allow.

Accident prevention and avoidance is crucial: Stability Control, ABS / good braking, etc. -- mostly for making sure the "other guy" doesn't hit you. Side airbags can make a big difference in a side-impact.

We do have an advantage here -- most of us have slowed-down in our driving. I'd like to think that hypermilers are more aware of the road and conditions as well -- anticipating traffic for optimum FE. That translates to better awareness, IMO.

RH77

Good points. To bad it does not equate to lower insurance rates/:(

Collisions like those occur relatively often and you'd be surpised how people can be left unharmed. Look at this collision with a fleeing suspect in one car, a mother, and her child in another car:

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/v/Ugpbbrco03s[/YOUTUBE]

Remember, when there's 2 vehicles involved, there are two crumple zones. A vehicle hitting a rigid barier at "X" speed is the same as two identical vehicles colliding head on at "X" speed, times two.

yes all four wheels are off the ground at one point after the collision.

That must be why my mom always said I was flying in my cars.
(duh grampa)
S.

Interesting collision -- it looks like a BMW 3 series and perhaps a Dodge Stratus? This is an interesting case, with the "wedge" action (resulting in an offset-type collision). The crumple zones did their job and it looks like both vehicles took the impact well -- all parties were OK. The speed of both vehicles had to be at least 45 by the looks of it.

RH77

WOW!

All those videos are pretty frightening.

Maybe everyone SHOULD be limited to 25mph!!!

There was an accident right outside my house last year Thanksgiving when I was shoveling the snow off my driveway.

It just sounded like a soda can being crushed. The one car ended up about 15 feet from where I was standing and stopped just before hitting a telephone pole. I think the airbag really helped the driver. Front end of the car wasn't messed up to bad and the driver was ok.

In the other car, there was a HUGE crumple in the side - she got T-boned. I believe that car was a Tiburon. The car slid sideways as she hit a patch of ice going through the intersection. She should have been going slower.
As it was, her face got all cut up by window glass. Could have been a lot worse though.

Traffic through there usually goes 45 MPH northbound and 50ish southbound.

The Time I got T-Boned while in my friends escort our car got turned 90 degrees and into a yard. We got hit in a large dent that was already in the side of the car when he bought it and nothing but a bent strut and slight dent at the fender was made, and in the other car (ford Taurus wagon) only got paint on our car (front bumper got dented in and popped back out with only some minor deformation). they were going about 25 when they hit us, and we were going 20 when we got t-boned. I think that hitting a wall and hitting another vehicle with crumple zones is different. your vehicle takes almost all the blow from a wall crash, but if it hits another vehicle some of the energy is taken into your car, the rest into moving theirs in a direction not intended by the other driver. I think that crash tests into a wall look worse than if you actually hit a non-moving vehicle at that speed. Car door is much more forgiving than a concrete wall.

This Is What Happens When You Get Rid Of Soccer Mom's and Moon Pie Getters
 

You get TRUE SUV owners. I guess this is why it's called "Only in a Jeep". For The Truck and SUV owners, It's not so much about comfort and safety factor, it's about FUN FACTOR. But I'm pretty most Jeepers and Wheeler's don't go to these extremes.

Crashing a Jeep Cherokee

Now I know it doesn't much pertain to the rest of the thread, but I thought I'd throw it in there.

I'll always have a special place in my heart for the "XJ"...

I learned to drive on my Mum's '86 Cherokee Pioneer 4-speed manual. That 2.5L AMC engine and 4-speed manual was bulletproof. Although sad to see one be destroyed, the video shows the sheer durability of these vehicles.

She always missed that Jeep after we traded it. Today she drives a 2000 XJ "Sport" with the AMC Straight-6, on and around their farm. It's a solid vehicle for the purpose.

RH77

That's what I thought as well, however this week on car talk a phyisist called in and corrected us both.


if 2 cars of the same mass are traveling together at 35 mph each, each car wil experiance the same crash force as if they hit a SOLID concrete wall at 35 MPH.

Think about it, there is 70 mph worth of momentum, but it is divided equally between the 2 vehicles. Now if you change mass, the heavier car will push the smaller car backwards making its impact worse, but most likely not 70 mph bad.

Sorry to grave digg, but this thread was liked from the current safety thread http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...trap-3507.html

Darn -- Physics got me again. (Biology/Neuroscience Major -- minimal Phys.)

Clarify this, however...

The combined effect of two vehicles at this speed (35 MPH) will absorb the impact, but at what cost? The analogy of 70 mph into a wall may be erroneous, but think of the result of the two vehicles at 35...

I would imagine that kind of situation would result in an offset collision with cabin intrusion, potentially pinnnig both drivers and rendering secondary impact consequences to vital organs.

I can see the impact absorbtion and "springiness" of modern vehicles -- but an identical vehicle rarely impacts the same one. One will generally prevail, and it isn't all about mass (speaking directly to truck and SUV safety fanatics).

With respect to vehicle collision mechanics, I've seen the result of a variety of combinations first hand -- in addition to training videos as a Medic. The worst I've seen (aside from two semis head-on) was a semi-offset collision of a Jeep Wranger vs. a mid-sized sedan. The Jeep driver didn't make it (lack of the aforementioned crumple zones). Mostly I saw single-car idiocracy into trees, rollovers, and mostly DUI nonsense that often resulted in a critical situations followed by death. I don't agree with "scare tactics", but the facts remain.

It's all about odds. I could drive a full-sized truck and have a "Physical advantage", but I choose a compact hatchback for obvious reasons and accident avoidance.

But yeah, I stand corrected on the impact forces I stated earlier...

RH77

I would have liked to see the results if the two vehicles traded places in this test.
The SUV has the entire front end, the frame, as well as the engine which collapses in the crash. The Civic just has the thin door between the SUV and its' passengers as protection.
I think the SUV occupants would have fared much worse had the Civic slammed into the side of their vehicle.
The Civic sits low and might not have made contact with the frame of the SUV. The Civic no doubt would have crushed like a tin can, but I still think the SUV passenger would have died.
Side impacts are bad no matter what you are diving.

Even a semi driver is in a bad position in a side impact ( the fuel tanks are just below the door ! )

What happened to the links on page one ? They are all dead.

fifth gear hired a racoon?