Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In 1972, 54,589 people lost their lives on our highway driving big cars, we had a population of 210 million. In 2014, 32,675 killed driving more modern cars with a population of close to 330 million. The decline is not because of better drivers, it is however, the design of better and safer vehicles.
I gave my son a 1973 Ford station wagon land yacht as his first vehicle. He wouldn't have it any other way. I did have to teach him to drive defensively and then the common sense stuff after, of course.
Then we gave him a 30 year old VW compact and a 25 year old VW compact...he still wouldn't have it any other way and all his friends are high school aged teenagers just like him who enjoy their old vehicles. The joys of social media
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDrenter223
They crashed an old 1950's car into its 2010's conunter part. The late model not only kept the crash dummies safer, but it suffered less damage.
Get the biggest car with the lowest center of gravity. There is a reason the Toyota Sienna and Honda Odyssey have the fewest fatalities vs sales volume. Big, heavy, steel crash cage, decent handling, low center of gravity, and enough power to allow you to use either pedal to get out of trouble (if you have ever ridden a motorcycle it changes how you look at driving substantially).
I hate my minivan, it's not very fun to drive, but it's comfortable, and there's nothing safer on the road.
The problem is they used a car with a X frame design...that's simply never a good frame design. I wouldn't be surprised if the NHTSA knew it was a bad design and intentionally used it to hurt the reputation of old vehicles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardisle
You do not take the crash test ratings into account at all ?
I did just a little when I bought a new minivan when I started a family. When it came time to get a new minivan, I immediately wanted another Town & Country. Didn't think about the safety ratings of the T&C or anything else. At the time the new (current) generation was about to come out but we couldn't wait for it, and the local dealer wouldn't give us as much money for our trade in as the local Honda dealer. We knew that Hondas are known for their reliability, so we decided to buy a new '06 Odyssey Touring. Still have it today and it still has its Downingtown, PA dealer sticker and plate frame with a SC plate.
When it was 1993 and I wanted a sports car, I decided I wanted one of those newly redesigned Probe GTs. That's what I wanted, and safety didn't matter to me.
Bought our '88 Scirocco 16V new due to brand loyalty and nothing else.
Now my daily driver is a 1991 Chevy S10 Blazer and I'm completely okay with that.
This, I think, the essence of the truth. Sure, ambulances and trauma surgeons are better, but still, cars are simply safer. Brakes are better, and so is everything else. When you get in an accident, the more impact that can be absorbed, by crumple zones, by airbags, etc, the less impact that gets absorbed by your ribcage, your lungs, your other organs...The airbag keeps your heart or head from smashing into the steering wheel, etc...
You worry about cars being "hacked," but practically speaking, who would hack your car? If it were hacked, it would be by a thief to steal it. Hacking it is harder than just jimmying the lock and hotwiring an old car.
The simple truth is that cars last longer now than they ever did. It used to be that you didn't get a 6th digit on your odometer, as the cars weren't expected to last that long. Now, 200K is commonplace.
I do worry about hacking very much . The newest cars are like walking computers and to me it is not a matter of if they will be hacked but when. What about terrorists? What could they learn to do to a car they can gain control of ?
It may also be easier to steal a new car by hacking then you think thanks to modern computer technology that the automakers have so far not even tried to protect.
Never really looked at crash test ratings before. The way I look at it every car out there is safer than the one made 5 years ago. In 5 years the one you are driving now wont be as safe as a brand new one. A car that scores amazing today, if tested in 10 years may score poorly compared to a new one. I am not going to chase cars based on crash ratings and safety.
Never really looked at crash test ratings before. The way I look at it every car out there is safer than the one made 5 years ago. In 5 years the one you are driving now wont be as safe as a brand new one. A car that scores amazing today, if tested in 10 years may score poorly compared to a new one. I am not going to chase cars based on crash ratings and safety.
You accused posters of having a financial interest in Toyota on a recent thread. I don't think IIHS is being bribed by the manufacturers. IIHS is funded by insurance companies, private money, because THEY, the insurance companies, have a vested interest in how safe a car is. The IIHS does NOT exist for consumers, it exists for insurance companies. An unsafe car will cause them to pay out more in claims. They have a vested interest in making sure everyone walks away from an accident rather than rides off in an ambulance, as they pay for the ambulance rides.
The Cars are European models, but it gives you a good idea of how different cars, similar in mass, etc, perform in accidents, and what you get with higher ratings.
Good crash test information is always interesting thanks. Perhaps it was unfair of me to think the IIHS employees were bribed but I do still wonder if the position of the car seats are taken into account. Even if they are not doing it deliberately is the IIHS doing enough to make sure the science of the test is equal for each car tested? Like for instance are the position of the seats exactly the same in each car ? Or are some farther forward?
I will try and find out which models they are testing in the video and if they have a US counterpart. It does seem to show that the higher crash test cars are actually better. And what was particularly interesting is that a small car with a high crash test rating actually did better than a large suv with a poor one . I never thought that could happen.
I gave my son a 1973 Ford station wagon land yacht as his first vehicle. He wouldn't have it any other way. I did have to teach him to drive defensively and then the common sense stuff after, of course.
Then we gave him a 30 year old VW compact and a 25 year old VW compact...he still wouldn't have it any other way and all his friends are high school aged teenagers just like him who enjoy their old vehicles. The joys of social media
The problem is they used a car with a X frame design...that's simply never a good frame design. I wouldn't be surprised if the NHTSA knew it was a bad design and intentionally used it to hurt the reputation of old vehicles.
I did just a little when I bought a new minivan when I started a family. When it came time to get a new minivan, I immediately wanted another Town & Country. Didn't think about the safety ratings of the T&C or anything else. At the time the new (current) generation was about to come out but we couldn't wait for it, and the local dealer wouldn't give us as much money for our trade in as the local Honda dealer. We knew that Hondas are known for their reliability, so we decided to buy a new '06 Odyssey Touring. Still have it today and it still has its Downingtown, PA dealer sticker and plate frame with a SC plate.
.
It sounds like your son will become a classic car enthusiast but are those 1970s land yachts hard to steer?When it comes to the crash test with the older vs newer car that is exactly what I thought too that they did not choose the best one.
How is your Honda doing ? Any car reliability problems like with the transmission?
Last edited by vanguardisle; 01-27-2016 at 10:02 AM..
I do worry about hacking very much . The newest cars are like walking computers and to me it is not a matter of if they will be hacked but when. What about terrorists? What could they learn to do to a car they can gain control of ?
It may also be easier to steal a new car by hacking then you think thanks to modern computer technology that the automakers have so far not even tried to protect.
Well, maybe, but then your way more likely to be killed by an overzealous law enforcement officer than a terrorist.
And, car thievery has always been a concern. Often as not they simply hook it up to a tow truck and tow it away. Or they carjack you with a gun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardisle
Good crash test information is always interesting thanks. Perhaps it was unfair of me to think the IIHS employees were bribed but I do still wonder if the position of the car seats are taken into account. Even if they are not doing it deliberately is the IIHS doing enough to make sure the science of the test is equal for each car tested? Like for instance are the position of the seats exactly the same in each car ? Or are some farther forward?
I will try and find out which models they are testing in the video and if they have a US counterpart. It does seem to show that the higher crash test cars are actually better. And what was particularly interesting is that a small car with a high crash test rating actually did better than a large suv with a poor one . I never thought that could happen.
They use the same size dummies, 50th percentile male and 50th percentile female size range, and a "small woman or 12 year old" dummy. And it looks like they position them in the same position relative to the pedals/wheel.
Never really looked at crash test ratings before. The way I look at it every car out there is safer than the one made 5 years ago. In 5 years the one you are driving now wont be as safe as a brand new one. A car that scores amazing today, if tested in 10 years may score poorly compared to a new one. I am not going to chase cars based on crash ratings and safety.
You may be right about that . I was wondering about your name the 60s mustangs are my favorite looking classic cars . Do you currently own one? What is your opinion about it's safety ?
You may be right about that . I was wondering about your name the 60s mustangs are my favorite looking classic cars . Do you currently own one? What is your opinion about it's safety ?
No one cares about the safety of a classic car. They aren't safe. They don't have crumple zones or ABS breaks. They don't have airbags, they might have seatbelts, they have metal steering wheels and dash boards. When you hit something, YOU absorb the impact, not the car.
But that's besides the point of a classic car. People like them for aesthetic purposes or because they harken back to a time when they were younger.
Don't be concerned about crash ratings, Just put the phone down, don't drink, don't tailgate, use your turn signals and you'll be safer than all those other drivers no matter what car they are driving.
Don't rely on the car to save your life, use your skills to save your life.
Yes that is true good driving skills prevent crashes in the first place
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
