Spaceship-like car to hit U.S. roads

[NeilBlanchard]

Weight |= safety.

The only time when weight might help is in a head on collision. All other situations it is a hindrance. Slower and longer braking, far worse avoidance maneuvers, and in one vehicle accidents, you are much worse off in a heavier vehicle, all else being equal.

If weight is a good thing, then just build your car out of lead?!

The Aptera was always designed with safety in mind.

[Boreas]

Xjguy you say you race cars. Isn't a race car designed to be light weight and safe. Can't light weight and safe be engineered into a street car too?

[ConnClark]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Weight |= safety.

and in one vehicle accidents, you are much worse off in a heavier vehicle, all else being equal.

This statement is not true. Extra inertia means more energy imparted to the object hit and a slower deceleration for the occupants inside the vehicle.

I might add that there are insurance statistics that show a definite trend in an increase in fatalities with a reduction of weight per number of cars registered. In other words being able to stop and turn quicker doesn't overcome the better protection provided by a heavier vehicle

link to follow as soon as I find it.
edit link: not the one I was talking about but the summary pretty much wraps it all up http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/808570.PDF

Lets recycle http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...html#post57612

[EuroBalt]

ive seen one of these in my area realy looks like a MAC truck would just murder it

[XJguy]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Xjguy you say you race cars. Isn't a race car designed to be light weight and safe. Can't light weight and safe be engineered into a street car too?

Sure can and is, but it costs money and or comfort and convenience. Could you imagine driving to 7-11 in a full roll-caged car while wearing a 6pt safety harness and helmet? Neither can most people. Yet that would protect you from 200mph crashes and would allow for a vehicle to weigh under 2000lbs.

[jamesqf]

I'd just like to point out that the 3-wheeled Aptera is legally a motorcycle. So how do you think it fares, safety-wise, as compared to say a full-dress Harley?

Frankly, I've ridden motorcycles most of my adult life. (Though I don't have one now because a) the Insight gets better mpg than any bike I've owned. and b) the dog goes almost everywhere with me.) I was never too concerned about the safety arguments against motorcycles, nor about the small cars I've driven almost exclusively since I bought my first Austin-Healey back in the '70s.

And I've been known to fly airplanes, ride bikes in traffic, hike & back country ski by myself (except for the dog), ride horses, and much more that a lot of people think are too dangerous for words. But in my opinion, the most dangerous thing a person can do is to sit on their butt in front of the TV. Keep that up, and not only will it kill you as dead as any of those danger sports, you'll have a lot less fun before you die :-)

[ConnClark]

I do risky fun things too, but I don't go around telling people its safe.

The Aptera has some serious safety issues other than weight. Composites tend to splinter into razor sharp shards after a heavy impact. Having 3 wheels it is less stable. The choice of lithium Ion batteries poses a serious fire risk (if you have ever seen one of these batteries go you know what I'm talking about)

[NeilBlanchard]

More weight in a one vehicle accident means there is more momentum to dissipate. If it takes the same amount of time to stop, then a heavier vehicle will have far higher forces. Hitting a "stationary" object in a lighter vehicle is better than in a heavier vehicle, all else being equal.

Of course, the design of any vehicle is far more important that it's weight. If weight was the only thing that mattered, then why aren't we making cars out of lead?

[Christ]

Originally Posted by ConnClark

This statement is not true. Extra inertia means more energy imparted to the object hit and a slower deceleration for the occupants inside the vehicle.

I might add that there are insurance statistics that show a definite trend in an increase in fatalities with a reduction of weight per number of cars registered. In other words being able to stop and turn quicker doesn't overcome the better protection provided by a heavier vehicle

link to follow as soon as I find it.
edit link: not the one I was talking about but the summary pretty much wraps it all up http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/808570.PDF

Lets recycle http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...html#post57612

Probably never occurred to you that the added safety features have, over time, increased the weight of the vehicles being studied? This, of course, could lead to the false impression that heavier is better or safer.

Remember the Master lock company? They had (at the time) an inferior product compared to other mfgs... But they won because of a false impression that a heavier lock meant it was better or stronger. The reality, however, is that this is a false impression.

Even if the safety of the occupants was increased solely by increased mass, relative safety still goes down, because everyone else involved in the crash, accident, whatever, will now be subjected to that increased mass and the energy it carries.

[Christ]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

More weight in a one vehicle accident means there is more momentum to dissipate. If it takes the same amount of time to stop, then a heavier vehicle will have far higher forces. Hitting a "stationary" object in a lighter vehicle is better than in a heavier vehicle, all else being equal.

Of course, the design of any vehicle is far more important that it's weight. If weight was the only thing that mattered, then why aren't we making cars out of lead?

Inherent risk in and of itself... /smartass lol