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 |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
MIKE Hunter's smal car v large car thesis is correct
|
Ads |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
MIKE Hunter's smal car v large car thesis is correct
In article <yQXhi.1919$bO2.289@trnddc05>, "Go Mavz" >
wrote: > You can sit in a warehouse all day and slam stuff into cars and come up with > the obvious that the smaller car is going to get more abuse. Any moron could > tell you that. However, how do SUV's play into it? > > A smaller car, hitting another smaller car is going to do less damage than a > smaller car being hit by an SUV... And if two large SUVs, which have typically less crush zone than a mid sized car, hit one another the occupants in both large SUVs are usually seriously injured. The ultimate dumbness in this "drive very large for safety" argument is the person driving a large SUV to defend themselves from a semi. |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
MIKE Hunter's smal car v large car thesis is correct
In article .com>,
Johnny Hageyama > wrote: > and observing the result on crash > > dummies. -who were driving large SUVs when they had a single vehicle roll over accident? |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
MIKE Hunter's thesis??
In article >,
"Mike Hunter" > wrote: > Finding NG is not the problem, getting it to market is the problem. If you > ever fly over the Gulf of Mexico, look down. All those fires you will see > are the oil wells burning off millions of CF of NG every year, because the > environmental laws, pushed by the environuts in the US, prevent it from > being distributed through the country. Typical stupid 'go good' thinking of > the lefty kooks So the oil drilling companies only employ left handed people. Mike your prejudices are showing again! |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
MIKE Hunter's smal car v large car thesis is correct
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 01:28:51 GMT, Josh S > wrote:
>In article .com>, > wrote: > >> Jeff wrote: >> > Mike Hunter wrote: >> >> > > I am retired now and what I do have is fifteen years of >> > > my thirty years experience, as an automotive structural >> > > design engineer, designing automobile crumple zones >> > > and test crashing hundreds of all types of vehicles and >> > > observing the result on crash dummies. >> > >> > From your comments, it looks like you volunteered at one point. That >> > would explain your brain damage. ;-) >> >> Mike is an idiot savant who knows everything about cars and absolutely >> nothing about anything else. Sound engineering, insane politics. >He probably has most of his money invested in GM, the company that just >loves making big profit on big SUVs. As a point of fact, it seems more vested in Ford. Either way, he's on the loosing end. |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
MIKE Hunter's smal car v large car thesis is correct
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 14:11:07 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> wrote: >You are entitled to you own opinion. However I know better. > >mike > Well I'm also a structural engineer and your assumption is flawed. I agree with you if the two different size vehicles have equal stiffness but if the larger one was more stiff and the smaller one less stiff, it may be that the larger one has the fatalities and the smaller one has survivors. |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
MIKE Hunter's smal car v large car thesis is correct
<Houston> wrote in message ... > On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 14:11:07 -0400, "Mike Hunter" > > wrote: > >>You are entitled to you own opinion. However I know better. >> >>mike >> > > > Well I'm also a structural engineer and your assumption is flawed. I > agree with you if the two different size vehicles have equal stiffness > but if the larger one was more stiff and the smaller one less stiff, > it may be that the larger one has the fatalities and the smaller one > has survivors. I believe this is called "crush zones" where sections of a car are designed to crush easily in a crash to absorbed the impact. The old race cars were built so stiff and solid that they readily survived crashes relatively intact, but the driver was killed. This also depends on how small the vehicle is. I recall the original Honda that was about half the size of a standard compact car. There was no room for any crush zone and it would go flying when hit due to lack of weight. This is not good if slammed into a tree or other structure. Depending on the specifics of the crash, a large SUV will not be pushed as much as a smaller car and in some instances a larger vehicle will give the occupants a better chance of surviving. It all depends on so many factors that you can not make any blanket statements about survivability. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is anyone using a smaller steering wheel in a C3 ? | dave | Corvette | 1 | March 31st 05 04:13 PM |
Smaller Wheels | CobraJet | Ford Mustang | 17 | February 17th 05 04:35 AM |
4WD smaller vehicle choices | Dan Birchall | 4x4 | 2 | August 11th 04 08:24 PM |