![]() |
F-150 vs. Mini-Cooper (please don't shoot the messenger)
http://www.bridger.us/2002/12/16/Cra...operVsFordF150 Year tested was 03'. wonder if this means 97'-03'? 04' they got their ***** together again.
|
That looks like an 03 F150. An 04-08 would have held up much better. But I still call BS. I didn't see it happen so I don't believe it. :ll:
|
I will call bull on that as well...
|
Trucks have always done poorly in that test.
BTW read the article. It clearly states that the 04 redesign meets all the safety criteria |
Originally Posted by StrangeRanger
(Post 4190453)
Trucks have always done poorly in that test.
BTW read the article. It clearly states that the 04 redesign meets all the safety criteria |
Just don't hit a concrete barrier going 40 mph..... :lol:
I, unfortunately, rear ended a 1990 Mustang doing 45 mph and my air bags didn't even deploy and I drove home with only the bumper, grill, 1 tow hook and 1 head light broken.... Of course, the Stang was totaled, but no one was hurt in the Stang, THANK GOD! I'm still driving the same truck and it's been fine for the 5 years since that unfortunate situation... Oh, I think I can put a Mini in the bed of my truck! :lol: Mitch |
Originally Posted by MitchF150
(Post 4191029)
Just don't hit a concrete barrier going 40 mph..... :lol:
I, unfortunately, rear ended a 1990 Mustang doing 45 mph and my air bags didn't even deploy and I drove home with only the bumper, grill, 1 tow hook and 1 head light broken.... Of course, the Stang was totaled, but no one was hurt in the Stang, THANK GOD! I'm still driving the same truck and it's been fine for the 5 years since that unfortunate situation... Oh, I think I can put a Mini in the bed of my truck! :lol: Mitch I have complete faith in my 87' F-150 though. |
Yea, it's no secret that the 97-03 (and 04' Heritage) fair poorly in front end collisions according to the NHTSA or what ever. But like someone else mentioned, the worst seems to be when crashing into a concrete barrier doing 40+ mph. I've seen a few front end crashes with this style F150 in the car to car category (luckily not mine knocks on wood :lol:) and they seem to fair a lot better.
|
http://www.bridger.us/pictures/mini_vs_f150.jpg
keep in mind that the doors are a structural member of the cab, and they removed the door, makes the cab weaker |
This is definitely old news. If I recall correctly the problem only existed with the SCABs. The SCREWs and regular cabs had the B-pillar to maintain integrity.
|
Originally Posted by Patman03SprCrw
(Post 4206405)
keep in mind that the doors are a structural member of the cab, and they removed the door, makes the cab weaker
|
Something else to consider. This test is done with the vehicle going straight into a wall. This very rarely happens. Typically a person who is awake will be attempting to miss the wall and hit at an angle. Similarly a drunk or passed out person will have "wandered" off the road and hit a stationary object at an angle. What all of that means is a lot of the force will be expended by the vehicle spinning off the object. The tires will then consume energy when they skid rather than transferring it to the cab. Any secondary collisions will most likely be to the rear or side of the vehicle. This means all or most of the energy of the impact will not be directly transferred and absorbed by the cab of the vehicle, like it was in the test.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:41 AM. |
© 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands