Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/03/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]One unique aspect of the smart car design is that it's essentially a ball. It doesn't have much of a crumple zone to absorb the kinetic energy of the vehicle(s) .Yet, in a collision with another automobile, it tends to get bounced sideways or upwards, and some of the kinetic energy is converted into moment of inertia. The cage structure is quite substantial (don't know about the Cabriolet version) unlike most other vehicles of similar size. But again, the best strategy is not to get in an accident, period. On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Henning Wulff <henningw at archiphoto.com>wrote: > With respect to small car/large car collisions, all is not what it seems. > > When the Smart car came out, some tests were done in Germany by > independent testers (non-govenrment or auto industry). One test was a > offset head on collision at 60km/hr (both vehicles) between an S600 and a > Smart car, ie, the largest and smallest Mercedes products. Yes, the Smart > car bounced away from the impact a greater distance, but the dummies and > their sensors didn't sustain much different injuries. The safety > performance of the Smart car was as good or better than most vehicles of > the time up to mid sized luxury vehicles, and substantially better than > that of virtually all SUVs or trucks. > > In any case, the occupants of the Smart car would have walked away from > this collision, whereas cars such as the Volvo 960 models would have been > shredded and their occupants unlikely to have walked again had they lived > (similar test parameters). > > A heavier car (or truck) will have certain advantages in an accident, but > those advantages exist in real life only if the vehicle has been thoroughly > designed with safety in mind. American vehicles have been slower to get the > advantages of this design philosophy, and trucks even less so. > > The safest vehicles in general tend to be luxury sedans. > > Henning > > > On 2012-03-06, at 10:26 AM, Tim Gray wrote: > > > On Mar 05, 2012 at 12:29 AM -0500, Chris Crawford wrote: > >> American-made small cars really are pieces of shit. They ride rough, > >> banging the heck out of the driver and passengers if you hit a bump, > which > >> is uncomfortable for anyone, but especially for frail old women. They're > >> also unsafe if you get in a wreck with someone in a truck or SUV, and > they > >> tend to be poorly made, low quality cars. > > > > To be honest, I think the newer Ford Focuses are really nice. > Particularly the 2012 model year. You get quite a lot of features for a > decent price, and 40 MPG. Decent room too. > > > > My Mini is way more fun to drive, but for a longer trip, I'd take > girlfriend's 3 year old Focus any day of the week. It gets better mileage, > has a more comfortable suspension, more comfortable seats (for long periods > of time), a more forgiving shifter and clutch, and more room for people in > the back. > > > > You are dead in either of them if you get hit by an Expedition. Note, > I'm not an American car apologist. I can barely remember the last American > made car my parents had growing up (that was 30 years ago), and I > personally have never owned one. However, my current car is getting up > there in the miles, and the new Focus and Fiesta are looking pretty nice. > (The new Fusion looks to be a pretty decent car too, but too big for my > needs.) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > Henning Wulff > henningw at archiphoto.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- Ken Iisaka first name at last name dot org or com