Most of us here understand the safety aspects of modern cars, but undoubtably you have been faced with somebody telling you that they build them like they used to, and how much safer the ladder chassis is......
Whilst the text is American, it is worth watching the video of headon between the 2 cars, and the subsequent damage.
mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/28916/are-classic-cars-safe
And before we get on the large vs small argument remember that the brief for Smart Cars was to achieve S class safety. Not sure I would want to try it.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCecdOBCFjI&feature=youtu.be&t=326
To think that this has diverted me away from searching for swimming pool O-rings!
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Sun 1 May 16 at 10:39
|
Can there be any doubt that a unitary construction that includes the passenger cell is better? What is going to hurt you is acceleration and what the vulnerable parts of you come into contacts with.
Therefore you need a cell with some energy absorbing bits around it, and some stuff to stop you rattling around inside.
A ladder chassis won't help you if you aren't restrained within it, and it will likely do more damage to whatever it hits.
Now I'll watch the videos to see whether I am right:)
Small cars will be at a disdavantage, other things being equal, in a collision between two vehicles. Where scenery is concerned, it has to be about strength rather than weight. F1 cars seem to do a good job, and weigh about 25% less than a Fiat Panda.
|
|
That's all undoubtedly true, but people still feel safe enough to cycle and walk without the benefit of wearing a steel cage with a crumple zone.
|
>> That's all undoubtedly true, but people still feel safe enough to cycle and walk without
>> the benefit of wearing a steel cage with a crumple zone.
>>
But not normally in excess of 50km/hr and with oncoming projectiles :) Although I suppose Lycra does offer a sense of self protection.
|
If your 'old car' is built like a tank..... - Manatee
