Are Pony Cars Getting TOO Big?

[Gearbanger 101]

Ok....so the tracker nose dived during braking...making the front even lower than the F150s height.

It's the height and what part of the car that gets hit. Let that be a lifted F-150 hitting it and what will the result be?

Two equally built, equal sized vehicles, with equal weights....what exactly do you think the results would be? Does the phrase "Immovable force meets unstoppable object" come to mind?

I thought this had turned into a comparison between the survivability of smaller, lighter crumple friendly vehicles vs. solid sturdy tanks? If you're gonna argue a point, you've gotta make up your minds which direction you're going, and stick with here people!?!

 

[nmcgrawj]

Are hoods/headlight panels/headlights really supposed to stand up to a bumper?

 

[nmcgrawj]

Brian,

The point of my posts was that it doesn't make sense to compare cars vs trucks. Trucks will always win. They will hit cars where there's no defense.

Compare old sedans vs new ones. Old trucks vs new ones.

I got it, what's gonna win...a smart car or a h1 hummer? Lol

seriously tho, a fox mustang crashing vs a sn95 or even a s197 isn't remotely close to comparing a truck vs a car. Maybe I'm missing the pt of the argument but it just makes sense to keep it apples to apples. The point of impact the car sees the impact will greatly affect the damage done.

 

[revhead347]

Brian,

The point of my posts was that it doesn't make sense to compare cars vs trucks. Trucks will always win. They will hit cars where there's no defense.

Compare old sedans vs new ones. Old trucks vs new ones.

I got it, what's gonna win...a smart car or a h1 hummer? Lol

seriously tho, a fox mustang crashing vs a sn95 or even a s197 isn't remotely close to comparing a truck vs a car. Maybe I'm missing the pt of the argument but it just makes sense to keep it apples to apples. The point of impact the car sees the impact will greatly affect the damage done.

Yeah, I think we need to stay on topic. The S197 wouldn't honestly have any real safety disadvantage being 6 inches shorter and a couple hundred lbs less. I'm sure the 370Z is comparable in a crash. Not really fair to compare a Fox Chassis to an S197 because the age difference.

Kurt

 

[revhead347]

Fair enough....so tell me....which vehicle would you rather be in should these two have met head to head at closing speed of 60mph?

Go ahead....tell me it would be the Tracker.

...I know my ass would be planted in that F150!

I know you'd like this to be a clear cut comparison, but there's most certainly a compromise between bigger/heavier and safer.

And keep in mind....a NASCAR's and a street cars are two completely different animals. Stock cars are built to keep weight down and handle 200mph crashes. Street cars are not.

You'd actually be better off in the Tracker. You need to go track down the National Insurance Institute corner crash videos at 40mph. Progressive used to have them on their website, not sure if they still do. I'm on hotel internet, so I can't look that stuff up. You can argue theory all you want, but after you watch the crash test videos, you'll change your mind.

Kurt

 

[revhead347]

Here is a good example of what I'm talking about. Pay particular attention to the motion of the occupants heads.

YouTube - Honda Accord Vs Dodge Ram 1500

Kurt

 

[Gearbanger 101]

Here is a good example of what I'm talking about. Pay particular attention to the motion of the occupants heads.

YouTube - Honda Accord Vs Dodge Ram 1500

Kurt

I'm not exactly sure what point you were trying to back up with this video. I saw a full sized pick up go head on into a stopped Honda accord and come away with what looked like very little front end damage. Save for their not being a driver’s side airbag on the Dodge, both occupants seemed to handle what looked like a 60mph head on pretty well. The Honda on the other hand was wiped out. I also agree that the passengers in the Honda looked like they faired well, but thats from a stationary hit.

What I'd like to see is the roles reversed and see what the Honda might have looked like after hitting the Dodge on the fly while it was stationary?

 

[revhead347]

I'm not exactly sure what point you were trying to back up with this video. I saw a full sized pick up go head on into a stopped Honda accord and come away with what looked like very little front end damage. Save for their not being a driver’s side airbag on the Dodge, both occupants seemed to handle what looked like a 60mph head on pretty well. The Honda on the other hand was wiped out. I also agree that the passengers in the Honda looked like they faired well, but thats from a stationary hit.

What I'd like to see is the roles reversed and see what the Honda might have looked like after hitting the Dodge on the fly while it was stationary?

Dude, like seriously. Did you graduate high school? And if you didn't, I guess I'll put my foot in my mouth. What difference does it make which vehicle is moving and which is not. The relative velocity is the same either way. The only thing the matters, THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS. (that's in caps lock for a reason) is the rate of acceleration or deceleration. Who cares what the truck looks like after the accident if your dead. The deceleration is the change in velocity over time. Time in this instance is a direct relationship to distance. At the point of impact, that truck is going about 40mph. Now, mass plays a role in the relative displacement of the vehicles, but keep in mind there isn't much difference in mass between a full size truck and a mid size car. My Mustang weighs 3380lbs, and my F150 weighs 4180lbs. It's not a huge difference compared to deceleration distance, so focus on the distance there. That Accord collapsed about a meter upon impact, the Dodge Ram, only about 10cm. That means the force of deceleration inside the Accord was much lower than in the Full size ram. And it is readily apparent by the motion of their heads.

Kurt

 

[nmcgrawj]

Dude, like seriously. Did you graduate high school?

LOL

And if you didn't, I guess I'll put my foot in my mouth. What difference does it make which vehicle is moving and which is not. The relative velocity is the same either way. The only thing the matters, THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS. (that's in caps lock for a reason) is the rate of acceleration or deceleration. Who cares what the truck looks like after the accident if your dead. The deceleration is the change in velocity over time. Time in this instance is a direct relationship to distance. At the point of impact, that truck is going about 40mph. Now, mass plays a role in the relative displacement of the vehicles, but keep in mind there isn't much difference in mass between a full size truck and a mid size car. My Mustang weighs 3380lbs, and my F150 weighs 4180lbs. It's not a huge difference compared to deceleration distance, so focus on the distance there. That Accord collapsed about a meter upon impact, the Dodge Ram, only about 10cm. That means the force of deceleration inside the Accord was much lower than in the Full size ram. And it is readily apparent by the motion of their heads.

Kurt

Trucks have the ability to be absorb the impact also...they just have to be hit in that spot.

YouTube - Crash Test 2009 - 20** Dodge Ram 1500 SLT (Full Frontal) NHTSA



In your video kurt, the airbags saved the heads/necks of the accord it seems like. The Ram didnt eject the airbags...for whatever reason. I guess in this instance the sensors didnt get hit because the car is so low compared to the truck. But since that bumper did get smacked pretty hard...i dont see why they didnt come out?


I bet if the airbags deploy then the passengers dont go through such abuse.



Again...not a real apples to apples comparison. One car has safety equipment in the steering wheel, dash, roof, and side doors....the other has NOTHING. Geeee i wonder who's head will get hurt the most?

 

[revhead347]

I'll track down some more videos tonight if the internet is better in Mobile to make my point. My guess is that the airbags in the truck were disabled for the purpose of this crash test. But don't focus on the airbags, the motion is the same. And the results speak for themselves.

Kurt

 

[nmcgrawj]

I'll track down some more videos tonight if the internet is better in Mobile to make my point. My guess is that the airbags in the truck were disabled for the purpose of this crash test. But don't focus on the airbags, the motion is the same. And the results speak for themselves.

Kurt

But isnt the purpose of airbags to cushion/slowdown head/neck/body movement?

If the accord didnt have airbags those passengers would have bent over just as far as the truck. The airbag stopped them.


And do me a favor, restate your point. LOL

 

[Pokageek]

Oh, ok..so are we saying if the F150 nose dived into the tracker it would have crunched like that? Why the attacks? I think he's got a point. Its heavier, its bigger, it sits higher... I'd rather be in it. Call me crazy.

 

[nmcgrawj]

Oh, ok..so are we saying if the F150 nose dived into the tracker it would have crunched like that? Why the attacks? I think he's got a point. Its heavier, its bigger, it sits higher... I'd rather be in it. Call me crazy.

I dont know if the f150 even nose dived if it would get down low enough to miss the bumper support. My point was it doesnt make sense to compare 2 cars that arent of equal height. The taller car will almost always come away with less damage because of where the shorter car hits it. You see this every day when a car hits a truck/suv.


I think the point Kurt and a few others are trying to make is that the bigger/heavier vehicle will experience larger forces when it goes from cruising speed to 0mph instantly.


But again, the examples being used on both sides arent very valid IMO. Airbags slow you down and cushion passengers....both cars should have them for an equal "experience".

 

[xr8d302]

Wow, horribly derailed....

First point, I think these cars are getting too heavy, from a performance stand point. Going back to the first question asked.....It would have been nice to see Ford keep the weights down around 3400lbs and yet still wedge in the new 5.0 powerplant. My .02

Somewhere, I have a picture of a Challenger parked next to an 03 Cobra and it looks an awful lot like me parking my F150 next to my Mustang.

As well.....I can try to dig up some stories about newer F150's hitting unusual objects (3 cows at 65mph). After all is said and done, I'd rather be in a truck than an accord when hitting 3 cows at 65mph. It only strengthens my opinion when I live in the land of moose.

Edit:

http://jalopnik.com/5380843/ford-ceo-approves-of-f+150s-ability-to-slaughter-cows

 

[revhead347]

Ok, the weather has been ****ty the last two days, and I haven't taken a break since about 1pm yesterday. So, it took me awhile to get back to this. But I did want to take the time to get some videos on here, because this is a very important topic, that I think everyone should see. Here is the video I really wanted to find. This is a compilation of crashes on a dateline special. Since this video was released, many of the manufacturers have made great strides in improving Pickup truck safety. But let's be honest, most of us are driving trucks from this era. If this doesn't solidify the argument that bigger doesn't make it safer, then I don't know what to say.

YouTube - Dateline NBC Offset Crash Test 2000 Full Size Pickup Trucks

Here is a video of a popuilar family car.

YouTube - Crash Test 2003 - 2007 Honda Accord / Inspire (Frontal Offset) IIHS

The difference is astounding.

I don't think this discussion on safety has at all derailed the thread. We are talking about good reasons to make a muscle car bigger, and safety clearly isn't a good reason.

Kurt

 

[Gearbanger 101]

Ok, the weather has been ****ty the last two days, and I haven't taken a break since about 1pm yesterday. So, it took me awhile to get back to this. But I did want to take the time to get some videos on here, because this is a very important topic, that I think everyone should see. Here is the video I really wanted to find. This is a compilation of crashes on a dateline special. Since this video was released, many of the manufacturers have made great strides in improving Pickup truck safety. But let's be honest, most of us are driving trucks from this era. If this doesn't solidify the argument that bigger doesn't make it safer, then I don't know what to say.

YouTube - Dateline NBC Offset Crash Test 2000 Full Size Pickup Trucks

Here is a video of a popuilar family car.

YouTube - Crash Test 2003 - 2007 Honda Accord / Inspire (Frontal Offset) IIHS

The difference is astounding.

I don't think this discussion on safety has at all derailed the thread. We are talking about good reasons to make a muscle car bigger, and safety clearly isn't a good reason.

Kurt

So you compare a 15-year-old pick up truck design, to a car design half the age?

Why not compare the crash test results of the newer 11th Gen F150 of that same era (the same as the one I posted above) and see where they sit in comparsion to one and other?

YouTube - Crash Test 2004 - 2008 Ford F-150 Pick-up (Frontal Offset Test) IIHS

 

[revhead347]

No I compared trucks that were in the age group of the Mustangs we own. I figured that would be the fair assesment, because that is the age group of vehicles most of us own.

Kurt

 

[Gearbanger 101]

No I compared trucks that were in the age group of the Mustangs we own. I figured that would be the fair assesment, because that is the age group of vehicles most of us own.

Kurt

Sorry...I gotcha. You compared crash testing of older trucks, similar to the age group of the Mustang the owners in the Forum would drive, to newer cars with improved designs and higher crash ratings. It's all so much more fair now.

How about a few mid-90's Honda Accord/Civic crash tests to even things out, since we're comparing cars of a similar era....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8mHyb3Z2BU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWeK0OQSHAE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y4yIjT83kA

Guess it’s all relative, huh?

 

[nmcgrawj]

Kurt, I understand your argument about bigger not really meaning safer. Automobiles have come a long way safety wise in a relatively short time. That said, every kind of vehicle has had to make improvements to its design for safety. In the same era, which is probably safer to get into an accident, a truck or a car? And im assuming we only get in frontal accidents? lol.


Seriously tho, its still not a valid point to compare the old bad designs of trucks to the brand new design of a mustang. I saw the cabs in those trucks collapsing. When i get home i'll have to watch the video straight through...but how many of those faults are just from it being a truck? Not just a big vehicle.


If they didnt need the extra weight, do you guys really think that the engineers wouldnt get rid of it? I mean they are fighting gas mileage and getting good performance out of the cars....yet they add weight for no reason? Cost is also a huge priority. Sure they could think of some exotic body/frame to make it light but how much more expensive will the mustang be? (and thats on top of the almost $40k loaded GT msrp price)


Its not built to have 100% satisfaction in our 5% of the population that cares. Its built to be sold like hot cakes to the other 95%.

 

[nmcgrawj]

To add, new cars are going to have higher/better safety standards to meet. (Everyone would love a 5 star rating). So again, weight is going to suffer so that the price remains low.