These crash tests were done in Europe, but I am sure similar would happen here. Definitely would not want to be in any of these vehicles in a crash.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-oblivion.html

 

This here is really scary 1999 f-150
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB0araA0T_k
Heres a 2004
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jongDRViwno
Good reason to buy newer..

 

Eh, I'll take my chances better in a solid steel '79.

Adrianspeeder

 

You'll lose

 

i think ill just avoid crashing into walls!!

 

I've seen plenty of older trucks drive away from accidents and the plastic cars need a rollback.

Adrianspeeder

 

IMO, if you are crashing into another vehicle or into a fairly small object, it is better to be in a heavier vehicle.

When crashing into an immovable barrier, there is no advantage to being in a heavy vehicle.

So what is more common in the real world, crashing into immovable objects, or colliding with other cars and fairly small objects (pedestrians, deer, stop signs, etc...)?

There is plenty of real world data out there about what is safe and what isn't. Unfortunately, the insurance companies are going to guard that information.

My bet is an unbiased review of real world data would show that heavier vehicles are safer. Sure, there are other factors, but vehicle weight matters.

 

I have to agree with you.

 

From reading the newspapers lately I'm beginning to think your best bet is to simply be inebriated all the time. For whatever reason, the guy who's "in the bag" always seems to walk away with a cut on his forehead while the rest of the gang gets hauled away in ambulance's.....

 

I definitely dont feel safer driving the old mustang. New cars are so much safer. My nephew got in a near head on in his 2010 focus and walked away. No way would That happen in my mustang. The newer the vehicle the more safe it is..

 

That's why I don't like seat belts that attach to the seat. The seat obviously didnt hold up well in the first video.
At least the driveline survived... not

 

http://youtu.be/joMK1WZjP7g
http://youtu.be/Tb_e3tllSfE

I will take the new one over the old one also.

 

One thing you might want to consider is that a certain amount of damage / deformation is actually a good thing in a crash. This is because it dissipates the energy of the crash. Let me explain.

Going back to the front engine roadster age at Indianapolis, those cars were well know for their ability to take a hard lick with minimal damage. Unfortunately, the drivers were often killed because most of the crash impact energy was sent right to their body. The latest open wheel cars create quite a mess when they crash, but the drivers almost always walk away. This is by design by the way.

This does create a bit of a paradox though. Do you want to save the driver but wipe out the car in doing it? The current theory is to build "crumple zones" in that deform during a crash and then need to be replaced. Some unscrupulous repair shops don't do this to save money. The next crash then becomes a killer.

As for our trucks, that 2001 we all saw in the video certainly crumpled up. but didn't do it in a fashion that actually helped the driver / passenger. The 2004 re-design did a great job or addressing that issue. As for an older truck taking a hit better, sorry, but no way.

 

Yea my vote would have to be for newer and bigger ....... size matters

 

Example. We just worked on a 2011 F-150. Moderate to heavy front end damage. He pretty much squarely rear ended a jeep grand cherokee at 20-30 mph (estimated)

Here is the lower radiator support crossmember that is tied into the Lt & Rt inner fender reinforcements. Yellow arrows show where the structure collapsed at uniform key points.



Radiator, condensor, intercooler, and air box were the only mechanical items damaged. Engine was untouched. The energy was absorbed and channeled away from the occupant just like it was supposed to.