Topic: CR Crash Test Selector

[Brig]

Brig, your :hairtossnosepick: doesn't seem to be working.

No, really?   

Back on topic, though, the CR selector is great for those who value mitigating personal injury (in the event of a crash) when choosing a vehicle.  Thanks for posting it, Mit.

[tpl]

Why look down your nose at drivers whose priorities are different than yours?

I thought it was one of the more popular activities around here.  :hairtossnosepick:

Please don't  ggl or bat your bigbabyblues or toss your auburn hair  as well Miss B

[Sir Osis of Liver]

LOLer to you Mam!

/you wouldn't be looking down your nose at me, would you?

[Brig]

Please don't  ggl or bat your bigbabyblues or toss your auburn hair  as well Miss B

I'll do what I want, Sir.  :fingersalute:   

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I honestly didn't know what M was doing. Took me a bit to figure out that she was using smilies that don't work on this site. 'Cause I'm cleavr, claevr smart.
:pukesonshoes:

[Mitlov]

Brig, your :hairtossnosepick: doesn't seem to be working.

No, really?   

Back on topic, though, the CR selector is great for those who value mitigating personal injury (in the event of a crash) when choosing a vehicle.  Thanks for posting it, Mit.

You're welcome, but for the record, Careener posted it

[avtoller]

Don't you find it all a bit much?

Must have 8 airbags, watch your cholesterol, no red meat, more fish but not the ones with mercury, more vegetables, but not from Mexico or China, Bird Flu, SARS, exercise more, but not too much, lead in toys, child predators around every bush, can't let the little snowflakes walk to school, bike helmets for all, pads for playing soccer(?), Terrorists around every other bush, Bush provoking the terrorists, etc etc.

All during the safest period of time in history. I say meh. Man up nancy.

  Well put! 

[Brig]

You're welcome, but for the record, Careener posted it

Well, if that's the case, I think the whole concept sucks.    

(Props to Careener.)

[Sir Osis of Liver]

You're welcome, but for the record, Careener posted it

ca·reen  (k-rn)
v. ca·reened, ca·reen·ing, ca·reens
v.intr.
1. To lurch or swerve while in motion.
2. To rush headlong or carelessly; career: "He careened through foreign territories on a desperate kind of blitz" Anne Tyler.

Now isn't THAT ironic!

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Don't you find it all a bit much?

Must have 8 airbags, watch your cholesterol, no red meat, more fish but not the ones with mercury, more vegetables, but not from Mexico or China, Bird Flu, SARS, exercise more, but not too much, lead in toys, child predators around every bush, can't let the little snowflakes walk to school, bike helmets for all, pads for playing soccer(?), Terrorists around every other bush, Bush provoking the terrorists, etc etc.

All during the safest period of time in history. I say meh. Man up nancy.

  Well put! 

Thanks. I guess working in 25ft seas on an open 18ft boat puts things in a different perspective. Of course now I'm a committed cube-dweller.

[Mitlov]

Holy crap, could we possibly have any more old men arguing that they didn't have seat belts when they were growing up, and they lived through it, so kids today don't need them either?  Of course, the people who died in car accidents but would have lived but for airbags and seatbelts--the counter-examples--generally don't post on the internet.  Funny how that works, isn't it? 

And for the record, all this "cars don't need safety features, and anyone who thinks they do is a sissy" crap sure comes off as callous to those of us who have lost friends or family members in automobile accidents.  If you don't want airbags, good for you, but it's been proven time and time again that they DO save lives.  Particularly given the increased congestion and increased speeds on modern roads.  So you have no right to criticize me for actually taking those statistics into account when choosing my own car.  I don't judge your choice of automobiles; you have no right to judge mine.

For those who care, over 43,000 Americans were killed in traffic accidents in 2005 (don't know the statistics for Canada).  That's a dozen September 11s.  The good news is, fatalities per mile traveled are down 18% from 1994, the earliest date where these records are available.  So cars are getting a lot safer.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

[dr_spock]

Woah, a crash of opinions...   Need airbags for the keyboard and mouse.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Holy crap, could we possibly have any more old men arguing that they didn't have seat belts when they were growing up, and they lived through it, so kids today don't need them either?  Of course, the people who died in car accidents but would have lived but for airbags and seatbelts--the counter-examples--generally don't post on the internet.  Funny how that works, isn't it? 

And for the record, all this "cars don't need safety features, and anyone who thinks they do is a sissy" crap sure comes off as callous to those of us who have lost friends or family members in automobile accidents.  If you don't want airbags, good for you, but it's been proven time and time again that they DO save lives.  Particularly given the increased congestion and increased speeds on modern roads.  So you have no right to criticize me for actually taking those statistics into account when choosing my own car.  I don't judge your choice of automobiles; you have no right to judge mine.

For those who care, over 43,000 Americans were killed in traffic accidents in 2005 (don't know the statistics for Canada).  That's a dozen September 11s.  The good news is, fatalities per mile traveled are down 18% from 1994, the earliest date where these records are available.  So cars are getting a lot safer.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

Just how many of those 43000 were drunk? How many were wearing seatbelts? How many were driving completely too fast for conditions? I know in NB last year ~64% of traffic fatalities were single vehicle, most roll-overs, most drunk and not wearing seatbelts. Develop a fool proof technology and people simply become bigger fools.

Car fatalities have dropped since 1994, about the same percentage as the previous 20 years, and the 20 years before that. Safety equipment, with the exception of seatbelts, has had very little effect.

[DockMan]

I know in NB last year ~64% of traffic fatalities were single vehicle, most roll-overs, most drunk and not wearing seatbelts.

NB, might not make a good representation of a national average when it comes to the involvement of alcohol. 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I know in NB last year ~64% of traffic fatalities were single vehicle, most roll-overs, most drunk and not wearing seatbelts.

NB, might not make a good representation of a national average when it comes to the involvement of alcohol. 

Last time I checked we had the highest per capita level of gun ownership too. Drunk, driving and heavily armed, well you have to have hobbies now don't you?

[Mitlov]

Car fatalities have dropped since 1994, about the same percentage as the previous 20 years, and the 20 years before that. Safety equipment, with the exception of seatbelts, has had very little effect.

Very little effect?  Really?

DETROIT, Oct. 4 — A driver’s risk of being killed in a side-impact crash decreases by more than a third if the vehicle has head-protecting side-curtain air bags, a study of accident data by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety shows.

That type of air bag is particularly effective in sport utility vehicles, cutting the chances of a fatality by 52 percent, according to the study.

“They can make the difference between life and death,” said Anne McCartt, the insurance institute’s vice president for research and an author of the study. “There’s very little else to protect an occupant in a side-impact crash.”

In comparison, side air bags that protect a driver’s chest and abdomen, but not the head, reduced the risk of dying by about one-quarter for all vehicles and 30 percent for S.U.V.’s, the study found.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/05/business/05crash.html?ex=1317700800&en=1dae92dac1f02641&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[sirAQUAMAN64]

Awwwww, they didn't go as far back as the...

Chevy Venture/Pontiac Montana (check this out! No wonder they extended the snout) http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=492

F-150 Heritage http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=511

Chevy Blazer/GMC Jimmy http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=287

Dodge Neon http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=382

Kia Sephia http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=418

Pity.

Cars really have improved crash protection dramatically in short time.

[dorin]

Don't you find it all a bit much?

Must have 8 airbags, watch your cholesterol, no red meat, more fish but not the ones with mercury, more vegetables, but not from Mexico or China, Bird Flu, SARS, exercise more, but not too much, lead in toys, child predators around every bush, can't let the little snowflakes walk to school, bike helmets for all, pads for playing soccer(?), Terrorists around every other bush, Bush provoking the terrorists, etc etc.

All during the safest period of time in history. I say meh. Man up nancy.

  Thanks for injecting a reality check Thumbie. 

[dorin]

Holy crap, could we possibly have any more old men arguing that they didn't have seat belts when they were growing up, and they lived through it, so kids today don't need them either?  Of course, the people who died in car accidents but would have lived but for airbags and seatbelts--the counter-examples--generally don't post on the internet.  Funny how that works, isn't it? 

Well it's their own damn fault for dying. 

And for the record, all this "cars don't need safety features, and anyone who thinks they do is a sissy" crap sure comes off as callous to those of us who have lost friends or family members in automobile accidents.  If you don't want airbags, good for you, but it's been proven time and time again that they DO save lives.  Particularly given the increased congestion and increased speeds on modern roads.  So you have no right to criticize me for actually taking those statistics into account when choosing my own car.  I don't judge your choice of automobiles; you have no right to judge mine.

Part of manning up is not getting all shaken up just because you know someone who died.  Death happens and inevitably it happens to someone you know, so just suck it up princess.

For those who care, over 43,000 Americans were killed in traffic accidents in 2005 (don't know the statistics for Canada).  That's a dozen September 11s.  The good news is, fatalities per mile traveled are down 18% from 1994, the earliest date where these records are available.  So cars are getting a lot safer.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

Goes to show you that the national hysteria over 9/11 is a little over the top, doesn't it?

[dorin]

On a more serious note, if people were truly serious about safety then they would demand 4 or 5-point harnesses and full roll cages instead of the current 3-point seatbelts.  I'd much rather have those than more airbags.