Topic: VIDEO: Small Overlap Proving To Be Challenge For Minicars

[rrocket]

]Well obviously from the poor ratings of a subcompact is this article I would go with the Lexus LS430.
If you expand to a Civic or Mazda3 that aced the test, I'll go with those over the Lexus.

Wow..you've bought into the hysteria, eh?

So if there's 2 cars, one an LS430 and one a Civic and someone says "We are going to crash these cars head on into each other.  Pick one"  You're taking the Civic?

Wow....that's just insane. 

[tpl]

We will carry on driving our 2013 Fit.   We will do our best to miss any concrete blocks placed in our way.

[Snowman]

We will carry on driving our 2013 Fit.   We will do our best to miss any concrete blocks placed in our way.

 

[Black Hatch]

]Well obviously from the poor ratings of a subcompact is this article I would go with the Lexus LS430.
If you expand to a Civic or Mazda3 that aced the test, I'll go with those over the Lexus.

Wow..you've bought into the hysteria, eh?

So if there's 2 cars, one an LS430 and one a Civic and someone says "We are going to crash these cars head on into each other.  Pick one"  You're taking the Civic?

Wow....that's just insane.

Who says it has to be only headon?
Since we are talking about small overlap, why don't we compare it there?
How about side impact? I can't find data on IIHS about how safe it is from the side.

That's why I would choose the Civic. In a T-bone collision I know that the Civic fares well but unsure about how well the LS does (does it even have side airbags). We are not just talking about head-on-head.

[rrocket]

]Well obviously from the poor ratings of a subcompact is this article I would go with the Lexus LS430.
If you expand to a Civic or Mazda3 that aced the test, I'll go with those over the Lexus.

Wow..you've bought into the hysteria, eh?

So if there's 2 cars, one an LS430 and one a Civic and someone says "We are going to crash these cars head on into each other.  Pick one"  You're taking the Civic?

Wow....that's just insane.

Who says it has to be only headon?
Since we are talking about small overlap, why don't we compare it there?
How about side impact? I can't find data on IIHS about how safe it is from the side.

That's why I would choose the Civic. In a T-bone collision I know that the Civic fares well but unsure about how well the LS does (does it even have side airbags). We are not just talking about head-on-head.

The LS has side airbags, side curtain airbags, and knee airbags.  It has more airbags than a Civic. 

And it doesn't matter if we're talking front, side or offset front.  You've just listened to the hysteria without doing your own homework and understanding all the data.  Go read ALL of the data.  One of the single most important factors in determining who "wins" in a wreck is weight.  The NHTSA points this out many times in their data for all of their crash methodology.  Even a Civic or Mazda 3 that has aced the new test would lose to an LS430....terribly.  In any crash.  Even a car with a mere 300kg difference in weight suffers drastically more damage.  And 600kg difference is off the charts (almost).  Both the new Civic and Mazda3 fall into that ~600kg weight difference.

Look at these charts and the damage to either car.  The lighter car being the Civic or Mazda3 vs. something the weight of an LS430.  The difference in damage is dramatic.  And this at a mere 56 km/h.  Are you still sure you'd pick either of those over a Lexus LS430?  As I've been saying since the NHTSA has ramped up their rhetoric on these crash tests...there is MUCH more at play than a vehicle "acing" a test or getting a good recommendation.  You have to look at the data in its entirety, along with frequency of crashes they are testing for, the probability of it occurring, and quite importantly....weight of the car.






This chart reflects the weight of an LS430 vs. a Civic or Mazda3
Look at the vehicle deformation.  Which car would you rather be in?

[mixmanmash]

I'm sure they can design around the weight.  Forming certain shapes can yeild a higher strength than just more material/weight.

I remember seeing a collision test done between IIRC, an old Chevy Bel Air and a newer Malibu.  I'm pretty sure the Bel Air had a huge mass advantage, yet you would have survived in the Malibu and be dead in the Bel Air.

[rrocket]

I'm sure they can design around the weight.  Forming certain shapes can yeild a higher strength than just more material/weight.

I remember seeing a collision test done between IIRC, an old Chevy Bel Air and a newer Malibu.  I'm pretty sure the Bel Air had a huge mass advantage, yet you would have survived in the Malibu and be dead in the Bel Air.

Yes..but you're comparing 5 decades worth of progress.

I'm comparing 5 years.  Not that huge a difference.

[Black Hatch]

i concede you're right.
I knew the LS was a full-size (large-size) but I didn't do enough research to know it had side-air bags.
Would you still take a 20 year old LS over a new Civic in a crash?

[PJ]

I've never put any faith in bigger equals safer.  Even a Suburban is dwarfed by buses , semis and dump trucks.  Small and nimble and advanced driving training is the way for anyone actually concerned about safety. Way better to avoid an accident then hope for the best on impact. 

[Black Hatch]

I've never put any faith in bigger equals safer.  Even a Suburban is dwarfed by buses , semis and dump trucks.  Small and nimble and advanced driving training is the way for anyone actually concerned about safety. Way better to avoid an accident then hope for the best on impact.

So you don't mind these low ratings for the sub-compacts and wouldn't hesitate to buy one and take it out on the highway?

[rrocket]

i concede you're right.
I knew the LS was a full-size (large-size) but I didn't do enough research to know it had side-air bags.
Would you still take a 20 year old LS over a new Civic in a crash?

Hmmm...that's a tougher question for sure!!  I like the weight of the LS, plus its aircraft carrier front end length, which hopefully would keep much from pushing into the driver's compartment....but the Civic could be the safer car with all the new tech.  Geez..that's a tough one.

[johngenx]

I'd take the old LS just 'cause it's way nicer to drive.  Cars I'd love to own...

60's Shelby Cobra - horribly unsafe
1970 Camaro Z/28 - horribly unsafe
Porsche Speedster - horribly unsafe
Jeep CJ7 - horribly unsafe
Gen I Ford Bronco - horribly unsafe
60's vintage Beetle - horribly unsafe
1965 Corvette - horribly unsafe
1988 BMW M5 - maybe a bit safer than the list above, but not much

And so on.  I'd drive any of them daily, and enjoy it.

[greengs]

I gotta remember to try to hit someone head on instead of offset next time I'm in a crash otherwise I'm screwed 

[pcsp]

Weight is obviously a factor. For the most part, a positive factor in terms of safety. However, with weight, comes size, and that is not always positive. A 10-20% offset head on collision between 2 full size pickups (very common occurrence because of the driving habits and number of these vehicles on the road) would possibly be avoided totally if one of the vehicles was a compact or smaller because it's a foot or more narrower. So many factors come into play when discussing safety.

[PJ]

I've never put any faith in bigger equals safer.  Even a Suburban is dwarfed by buses , semis and dump trucks.  Small and nimble and advanced driving training is the way for anyone actually concerned about safety. Way better to avoid an accident then hope for the best on impact.

So you don't mind these low ratings for the sub-compacts and wouldn't hesitate to buy one and take it out on the highway?

No problem.  These cars meet all modern government standards and are far superior to the older cars that I have had no problem driving for the past 34 years. 

This test is new and car makers are still working on getting all their models to excel at it.  The hype is just usual scare tactics.

That and I know how to drive.

[normancw]

That said, I climb mountains, ski avalanche terrain, ride motorcycles, drive itty bitty roadsters that weigh 1000 kilos and have NO safety features and couldn't dream about passing any sort of crash tests, and other stuff that puts the "small overlap" test so far down on my list of concerns that it really doesn't register.  I know minicars are probably goig to be less safe than full sized SUVs, and if I wanted one, I'd just live with that.

One word, YOLO (well actually an acronym for 4 words)!  Sorry, but I have to post this video again 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5Otla5157c

[phazotron]

I love watching these offset crash videos...there no guilt 'cuz nobody got hurt (unless you like mannequins) and the cars get totaled...and the multi angles in slow-mo!

[greengs]

For those saying Lexus is safer, take a look at this vid.  Granted it's not a LS430 but ES350.  It does just as bad or worse than Fit in the small overlap 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPITYcgWjYs
starts at 2:05

[Fobroader]

For those saying Lexus is safer, take a look at this vid.  Granted it's not a LS430 but ES350.  It does just as bad or worse than Fit in the small overlap 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPITYcgWjYs
starts at 2:05

Thats just a Camry in better clothes,  how did the proper, bespoke Lexus' do??

[sailor723]

That said, I climb mountains, ski avalanche terrain, ride motorcycles, drive itty bitty roadsters that weigh 1000 kilos and have NO safety features and couldn't dream about passing any sort of crash tests, and other stuff that puts the "small overlap" test so far down on my list of concerns that it really doesn't register.  I know minicars are probably goig to be less safe than full sized SUVs, and if I wanted one, I'd just live with that.

One word, YOLO (well actually an acronym for 4 words)!  Sorry, but I have to post this video again 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5Otla5157c

Sure, as long as you are taking informed risks in return for something (thrills excitement fun...whatever ). I'm not sure choosing a Fit over another subcompact really qualifies     

OTOH if you really like the Fit better and know about the crash test results....go for it.