If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Small cars are death machines
|
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
So are the BIG cars that hit you when you're in the cross walk.....
The nice thing about the newer small cars is that you have all those pillows to cushion your lifeless bod during the viewing, before they drop it in the hole.... So, what are ya gonna do? Outlaw all big cars? outlaw all small cars? And what about those big trucks that carry everything you need from food to toilet paper? Want to shrink those? If you do, watch you prices rise because it takes more to move the stuff. As I recall, San Francisco already requires the loads in those BIG trucks to be repacked into smaller trucks before they enter the city/county limits. So transfer terminals had to be built further out. Now there is a shipping fee, and a transfer fee to be added to the delivery fees. On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 16:06:26 -0400, Rich > wrote: >Or, why they'll bury you WITH your smart car. > >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=15257209 Spike 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior; Vintage 40 16" rims w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A gForce Radial 225/50ZR16 KDWS skins; surround sound audio-video. Gad what fools these morons be.... Children are obscene but should not be heard Give me a peperoni pizza... or give me a calzone! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Spike" > wrote in message
... > So are the BIG cars that hit you when you're in the cross walk..... > > The nice thing about the newer small cars is that you have all those > pillows to cushion your lifeless bod during the viewing, before they > drop it in the hole.... > > So, what are ya gonna do? Outlaw all big cars? outlaw all small cars? I think the point was that accidents in small cars are generally worse than accidents in big cars. Having been recently involved in an accident in a compact car ('63 Falcon) I have decided I'm done with small cars, for now at least. I'm back to driving my '68 Galaxie. No question about safety in that car. If I were driving the Galaxie and got into the same accident I would have walked away from it with no damage. I actually almost drove the Galaxie that day, but since it was threatening to rain I drove the Falcon. Ironically it turned out to be a nice sunny day. So instead my two front teeth are snapped in half and one was nearly knocked out, still not sure if I'm gonna keep it. All the other teeth on my upper jaw were loose. My kneed impacted the dash pretty damned hard, so only now after a few weeks am I able to get around alright. Also had to have a bunch of staples in my head as I had a good sized gash there. Well at least I didn't go through the windshield... Thankfully the steering wheel broke my momentum. LOL If you wanna see pics and such check it out in one of the Falcon forums at: http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27862 Well, with the money I got as compensation for the damage to my car I'll probably be buying a ~1980 F-150 4x4 stepside shortbox, with a 302 and toploader. Should be a fun daily driver and parts hauler. Gonna go check it out more closely and take it for a test drive tomorrow and if I like it I'll take it home with me. Cory |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 11:07:24 -0400, "Cory Dunkle"
> wrote: >"Spike" > wrote in message .. . >> So are the BIG cars that hit you when you're in the cross walk..... >> >> The nice thing about the newer small cars is that you have all those >> pillows to cushion your lifeless bod during the viewing, before they >> drop it in the hole.... >> >> So, what are ya gonna do? Outlaw all big cars? outlaw all small cars? > >I think the point was that accidents in small cars are generally worse than >accidents in big cars. Having been recently involved in an accident in a >compact car ('63 Falcon) I have decided I'm done with small cars, for now at >least. I'm back to driving my '68 Galaxie. No question about safety in that >car. If I were driving the Galaxie and got into the same accident I would >have walked away from it with no damage. I actually almost drove the Galaxie >that day, but since it was threatening to rain I drove the Falcon. >Ironically it turned out to be a nice sunny day. So instead my two front >teeth are snapped in half and one was nearly knocked out, still not sure if >I'm gonna keep it. All the other teeth on my upper jaw were loose. My kneed >impacted the dash pretty damned hard, so only now after a few weeks am I >able to get around alright. Also had to have a bunch of staples in my head >as I had a good sized gash there. Well at least I didn't go through the >windshield... Thankfully the steering wheel broke my momentum. LOL > >If you wanna see pics and such check it out in one of the Falcon forums at: >http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27862 > >Well, with the money I got as compensation for the damage to my car I'll >probably be buying a ~1980 F-150 4x4 stepside shortbox, with a 302 and >toploader. Should be a fun daily driver and parts hauler. Gonna go check >it out more closely and take it for a test drive tomorrow and if I like it >I'll take it home with me. > > Cory > I got creamed in my 61 Galaxie by a Tercel. The bonehead who was looking at herself in the mirror instead of watching the road hit me from behind at about 50. She had airbags and walked away. I had no seat belts and low bench seats. I got whiplash and chest injuries from the steering wheel. The Galaxie was almost intact, the Tercel was crushed flat almost to the windshield. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Good observation.... the Tercel absorbs the impact in an attempt to isolate
the passengers from the trauma.... Early 60s Detroit iron is hardly a shining star of impact absorbtion and will transfer the full impact of the event to the passengers. While I would prefer to be seen cruising top down in a 64 Sunliner, I would feel much safer in a smaller, more modern car. It's not about "solid"... it is all about survivability. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 00:10:36 GMT, "Jim Warman"
> wrote: >Good observation.... the Tercel absorbs the impact in an attempt to isolate >the passengers from the trauma.... Early 60s Detroit iron is hardly a >shining star of impact absorbtion and will transfer the full impact of the >event to the passengers. While I would prefer to be seen cruising top down >in a 64 Sunliner, I would feel much safer in a smaller, more modern car. > >It's not about "solid"... it is all about survivability. > > That's why mine is getting mods.... 3 pt seatbelts, high back buckets, padded steering wheel, and working on a collapsible column. Not too much I can do about the bumpers, etc. Probably the best thing I can do is only drive when totally drunk. (just kidding) because I've investigated so many accidents where the drunk walks away no matter what kind of car. Oh, and for good measure, it's probably a good idea to put it in my will that I be buried in the Mustang. Spike 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior; Vintage 40 16" rims w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A gForce Radial 225/50ZR16 KDWS skins; surround sound audio-video. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Warman" > wrote in message news:0eZ1f.5943$S4.4750@edtnps84... > Good observation.... the Tercel absorbs the impact in an attempt to > isolate > the passengers from the trauma.... Early 60s Detroit iron is hardly a > shining star of impact absorbtion and will transfer the full impact of the > event to the passengers. While I would prefer to be seen cruising top down > in a 64 Sunliner, I would feel much safer in a smaller, more modern car. > > It's not about "solid"... it is all about survivability. > > BINGO. Brad |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:17:57 GMT, "BradandBrooks"
> wrote: > >"Jim Warman" > wrote in message >news:0eZ1f.5943$S4.4750@edtnps84... >> Good observation.... the Tercel absorbs the impact in an attempt to >> isolate >> the passengers from the trauma.... Early 60s Detroit iron is hardly a >> shining star of impact absorbtion and will transfer the full impact of the >> event to the passengers. While I would prefer to be seen cruising top down >> in a 64 Sunliner, I would feel much safer in a smaller, more modern car. >> >> It's not about "solid"... it is all about survivability. >> >> > >BINGO. > >Brad > > Impact energy and heat energy are very similar. The larger object will absorb both better, and be less likely to "radiate" that energy into whatever is in or near them. So small cars are inherently less safe than large cars, you can violate the laws of physics. However, if a small car has things to protect to occupants that a large car doesn't have, it can be safer. So, a new small car "may" be safer than a 1970s LTD, but I'm not conceding that it is. All things equal, you are much more likely to live though or not sustain injuries in a larger car. -Rich |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article <0eZ1f.5943$S4.4750@edtnps84>, Jim Warman wrote:
> It's not about "solid"... it is all about survivability. Good passenger restraints can give the benefit of preventing passenger compartment intrusion and not impacting things inside the car. Plus maybe the car will survive too. Yes, I understand crumple zones and such, but sometimes (sides) there isn't much distance to crumple. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Patrick's Agenda -- CJ Explains It All | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 14 | February 27th 05 05:26 AM |
Drving faster, in my experience does not make a significant change in mileage... | Cory Dunkle | Driving | 118 | February 4th 05 04:00 PM |
528i vs 530i vs 540i USA Versions | FSJ | BMW | 37 | January 16th 05 07:38 PM |
Vintage Cars Get Hot with Makeovers | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 2 | December 5th 04 05:13 AM |
European Cars Least Reliable | Richard Schulman | VW water cooled | 3 | November 11th 04 10:41 AM |