01-23-2014, 08:51 AM
|
#21 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,408
Thanks: 102
Thanked 252 Times in 204 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
The tests in question aren't "government" tests. The one this thread about is performed only by the IIHS.
|
Yes, and the more people they scare the better their job security (and the more likely the government will respond with "demands" for more safety mods at any cost).
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to P-hack For This Useful Post:
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
01-23-2014, 08:52 AM
|
#22 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,024 Times in 1,304 Posts
|
Stupid regulators. Lets see, the manufacturers build cars that pass all safety testing, so lets just create a new test where the impact point is chosen to be right outside the frame rails and directly on the left front suspension.
In high school, senior year, I drove a 59 Austin Healey Sprite, probably one of the most dangerous cars ever sold in the US as far as crash protection. No collapsable steering column, no side guard beams, no front or rear crush zones, etc,etc, with 4000 plus pound behemoths all around me. Don't even mention the 59 Corvette with the exploding gas tank.
regards
Mech
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to user removed For This Useful Post:
|
|
01-23-2014, 10:48 AM
|
#23 (permalink)
|
lurker's apprentice
Join Date: May 2008
Location: the Perimeter
Posts: 942
PlainJane - '12 Toyota Tacoma Base 4WD Access Cab 90 day: 20.98 mpg (US)
Thanks: 504
Thanked 226 Times in 173 Posts
|
My recollection is that offset impact tests were instituted after pretty much everyone admitted the basic flaw in the previous frontal impact test, where the car was driven straight into a wall, meeting it directly head-on with full frontal contact. That test didn't jive with what really happens in accidents. Offset impact tests do.
This is a tough, tough test no doubt, and it represents an extreme situation as regards the frontal area involved and the location of same (directly in front of the driver). But the impact absorbing structures resulting from engineering to pass this test are more likely to save lives out here in the real world. If I'm going to have to pay for cars that are built to safety standards, I want those standards to be as useful and realistic as possible.
|
|
|
01-23-2014, 10:59 AM
|
#24 (permalink)
|
Batman Junior
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1000 Islands, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 22,534
Thanks: 4,082
Thanked 6,979 Times in 3,614 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Tele man
Nope, it's a NHTSA test (from Wiki) ...the IIHS is just the first to publish their results.
|
I don't think so.
The IIHS on its own web site distinguishes between its tests and the federal front crash test requirements: Frontal crash tests .
In the links you provided, there's no direct reference to the 25% offset test as performed by the IIHS. There's no mention of it in the federal NHSTA NCAP Frontal crash test procedures:
http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shop...est+Procedures
Though it's clear NHTSA is studying additional tests to improve safety, including smaller offset crashes, nothing like the IIHS 25% test is currently required.
|
|
|
01-23-2014, 03:01 PM
|
#25 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 811 Times in 594 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdb
But the impact absorbing structures resulting from engineering to pass this test are more likely to save lives out here in the real world.
|
Problem #1 is that it only looks at half the equation, looking at lives saved in crashes, but not lives lost because the the heavier car couldn't avoid the collision. And further up the line, lives lost mining the extra materials, extracting the extra oil needed to run the heavier cars, etc.
|
|
|
01-23-2014, 03:41 PM
|
#26 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,408
Thanks: 102
Thanked 252 Times in 204 Posts
|
It seems all "problems" are solved by making them someone elses problem.
|
|
|
01-23-2014, 05:35 PM
|
#27 (permalink)
|
(:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
|
NHTSA has coerced the States- with boatloads of grant money- into it's draconian vision of Utopia with, among other things, it's patently ridiculous "Towards Zero Deaths" program. While working to improve safety is wonderful, I think that they called it "Towards ZERO Deaths" is revealing in a way they did not intend. We know, they know, everybody knows ZERO deaths is never going to happen, just as zero bathtub and zero stairway and zero sidewalk deaths aren't ever going to happen, but a mission statement like that pretty much guarantees the perpetuation of the organization and program to infinity, and it also gives them carte blanche to dictate pretty much as they see fit.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Frank Lee For This Useful Post:
|
|
01-23-2014, 07:00 PM
|
#28 (permalink)
|
...beats walking...
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,190
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,525 Times in 1,126 Posts
|
What? No more Automotive Darwin Award Winners?
How is mankind (civilization?) gonna "cull" the herd of low-hanging dingleberries?
|
|
|
01-23-2014, 07:03 PM
|
#29 (permalink)
|
(:
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
|
With "war" of course! The military-industrial complex needs all the cannon fodder it can get. Ahhhh haaaaa... so that's why the government pays people, especially idiots, to reproduce.
|
|
|
01-23-2014, 09:21 PM
|
#30 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Alabama
Posts: 625
Thanks: 40
Thanked 156 Times in 103 Posts
|
Lets see the Edison2 VLC take this test!
__________________
Aerospace Controls Engineer.
Currently driving a mostly stock 2014 Mitsubishi Mirage DE hatchback.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to HydroJim For This Useful Post:
|
|
|