,
Views: 71380,
Hodnocení: ,
Tags: MINICARS, MICROCARS, CRASH, TEST, FAIL, CAR, CARS, AUTOS, New, Tests, Demonstrate, the, Influence, of, Vehicle, Size, and, Weight,
MINICARS MICROCARS CRASH TEST FAIL CAR CARS AUTOS New Crash Tests Demonstrate the Influence of Vehicle Size and Weight on Safety in Crashes Results Are Relevant To Fuel Economy Policies Three front-to-front crash tests, each involving a microcar or minicar into a midsize model from the same manufacturer, show how extra vehicle size and weight enhance occupant protection in collisions. These Insurance Institute for Highway Safety tests are about the physics of car crashes, which dictate that very small cars generally can't protect people in crashes as well as bigger, heavier models.
"There are good reasons people buy minicars," says Institute president Adrian Lund. "They're more affordable, and they use less gas. But the safety trade-offs are clear from our new tests. Equally clear are the implications when it comes to fuel economy. If automakers downsize cars so their fleets use less fuel, occupant safety will be compromised. However, there are ways to serve fuel economy and safety at the same time."
The Institute didn't choose SUVs or pickup trucks, or even large cars, to pair with the micro and minis in the new crash tests. The choice of midsize cars reveals how much influence some extra size and weight can have on crash outcomes. The Institute chose pairs of 2009 models from Daimler, Honda, and Toyota because these automakers have micro and mini models that earn good frontal crashworthiness ratings, based on the Institute's offset test into a deformable barrier. Researchers rated performance in the 40 mph car-to-car tests, like the front-into-barrier tests, based on measured intrusion into the occupant compartment, forces recorded on the driver dummy, and movement of the dummy during the impact.
Laws of physics prevail: The Honda Fit, Smart Fortwo, and Toyota Yaris are good performers in the Institute's frontal offset barrier test, but all three are poor performers in the frontal collisions with midsize cars. These results reflect the laws of the physical universe, specifically principles related to force and distance.
Komentáře & Download
solarlightning - 22.2.2012 7:23:26
im positive even though it looked ok the insides a person in that crash would be fucked up to a fatal point
ShalonGlennyx703 - 4.12.2011 11:11:55
cool mia is langweilig
redracing20 - 23.9.2011 16:30:07
that's the way to make cars cheap
DRIFTking95M - 20.9.2011 23:00:57
the first crash... the LTD ftw^^ i own a 77 ltd and i start feeling safer in it ^^
notanova - 6.9.2011 18:18:02
After watching this I decided something. Anyone wanna buy a vega? Im gonna buy the gremlin down the street now LMAO
cmully1981 - 18.7.2011 1:13:57
i think your maths a little off there... a galaxie weighs about 2 tons or 4000 pounds and a pinto weighs around 1.5 tons or 3000 pounds. a ton is 2000 pounds not a 1000
jding19711 - 7.4.2011 4:01:56
Yes it does. The cage is the entire passenger compartment, from the door step around the frame of the windows to the main beams of the roof. The front of the car intentionally crumples to absorb crash energy: the frame will not crumple. You do realize that no matter how good car design is, you cannot design a car to protect its occupants in a highway-speed head-on crash unless you build a tank?
lordvamp1986 - 27.2.2011 13:21:10
You are stupid . Show me the cage in your car . There is not one . It has the strength of a coke can . The 40 mph crash test that destroys the modern cars is a city accident . It dissipates a little energy . How would it fair in a highway accident ?
ChrisMarsh5 - 29.1.2011 13:39:56
Ford Galaxie weighs as much as a ton, I feel bad for buddy in the little 1/4 ton pinto
al1500321 - 14.1.2011 0:57:52
I'm so glad I live in 2011
badgerbuddy - 26.11.2010 4:09:35
the gremlin actually did okay
fifoudujura - 25.11.2010 6:52:26
il on aussi consu pendan un certain temps de moteur qui s éjecter du véhicule en cas de crash exemple la 205
adrian8984 - 21.11.2010 23:11:26
@LuisLopezz eso es totalmente cierto
wyunaboy - 10.11.2010 6:30:03
worse than Chinese cars...
kadvid - 26.10.2010 1:33:02
wow, with that title I'm surprised anyone could even find this video. It's a good one though.
chad685 - 15.10.2010 23:16:04
Out of all of the vehicles, looks like the AMC Gremlin was the strongest little car.
SteelCity1981 - 8.10.2010 11:45:28
The Gremlin seemed to have held up the best out of all the midsize vs small car crash test.
frohman3 - 29.9.2010 5:15:28
That buick did pretty well.
frohman3 - 29.9.2010 5:13:51
Cars were a little too solid back then?
MUSTANGmaniak2010 - 13.9.2010 21:33:31
dude...
dvddude13 - 3.9.2010 1:25:21
THANK YOU I CAN NOW COMPLETE MY PSYCHOLOGY INTERNAL ASSESSMENT
catlovermarty - 26.8.2010 5:54:49
The model years on the cars are wrong. The 2 Fords and the 2 Chevys are 1972 models. The AMCs are 71s.
LuisLopezz - 9.8.2010 4:58:22
Los carros de antes eran mas durables que los de hoy, no tenían bolsas de aire en super desventaja pero no se hacían tanto "mierda" como los carros de hoy.
palebeachbum - 13.7.2010 8:54:57
Mmm...nice Park Ave.