GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,286 Posts
I didnt listen to it but mostly from what I got from it is that newer cars, even if they are smaller are safer in general. I dont think it necessarily a good, small to large comparison (at least this vid) but it really does show how much safer, regardless of size, new cars are. Looking at simple physics a smaller car is at a disadvantage, but with the requirements of new cars its not really a crash, like show, that you have to worry about. Its when you have huge lifted trucks and SUVs with really high bumbers where its not a bumper to bumper crash, but the front end of the smaller car goes under the bumper of the other. They might be safer, but they cause themselves to be more of a danger to everyone else. Even when a large vehicle impacts the side of a car the smaller car would come out looking a lot better then you might expect. I could really get into this but not right now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,732 Posts
Strength is only half of the safety of a car. The other half is the g-force. The lower your weight compared to the car you're crashing into, the more g-force you have to deal with. Which is why no matter how well designed a small car its, its never going to be as good as a (well designed) large car.

This video proves nothing btw. That Volvo was ancient. And the Renault really wasn't that much smaller.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Strength is only half of the safety of a car. The other half is the g-force. The lower your weight compared to the car you're crashing into, the more g-force you have to deal with. Which is why no matter how well designed a small car its, its never going to be as good as a (well designed) large car.

This video proves nothing btw. That Volvo was ancient. And the Renault really wasn't that much smaller.
This isn't about the Volvo, it is about the Renault. The Modus is a Toyota Yaris/ Chevy Aveo sized car. So, it is pretty small. The crumple zones in a car are there to reduce the g-forces. You do not go from 40-0 in an instant, the car crumples in front of you so that that you have more time to come to rest, reducing the g-forces you face.

A well designed larger car is always going to be statistically safer but what this shows is that a modern small car is not a death trap.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,621 Posts
Did you watch the video? While you are right that you have to consider G-force factors, the video clearly shows that the Renault is designed to dissipate energy as evenly as possible. Plus, it was 80 MPH! That's crazy fast for a crash.

As for size, a Modus is very small dude! Like really really small... several sizes down from the Volvo. I'm very impressed with the Modus... Renault really advertises their crash-test ratings, and I see now that it's justified.

That's not to say that the Volvo is bad... back in it's day it was a very safe care. Renault has shown that you don't need huge size to survive in a crash.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
those two cars werent designed with the same specs in mind.

a large 5 star rated car will beat a small 5 star rated car, i have no doubt of that. this is because they dont cross test size categories. all a small car goes up against is small cars in its testing (a wall only reciprocates a force equal to the amount applied), while large cars go up against large cars. this means its safe to bet a large car is overdesigned for a crash with a small car. or at least, thats the way it seems to me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,010 Posts
Is it possible that since the structure on the modus is so stiff that instead of the car dissipating the energy as it crumples, more force is applied to the occupant, such as what happened to Dale Earnhardt when he crashed and ended up with basal skull fracture. NASCAR cars are built like tanks, but because he was subjected to such a great G-force his head snapped forward and ultimately was the reason for his death.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
Is it possible that since the structure on the modus is so stiff that instead of the car dissipating the energy as it crumples, more force is applied to the occupant, such as what happened to Dale Earnhardt when he crashed and ended up with basal skull fracture. NASCAR cars are built like tanks, but because he was subjected to such a great G-force his head snapped forward and ultimately was the reason for his death.
yeah, i see what youre saying. if youre gonna hit a wall or a tree in a stiff little car like that then i agree, with you. but if youre hitting something deformeable, i think the small rigid car uses the fact that the other car is designed to crumple to its advantage.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,004 Posts
That was a great little video.
I like that show. Is it from 'down under'?

Still, I am thankful my wife and daughter drive the Camry with it's many safety features.
I am not as safe in my older Buick but, I believe I am better off then that Volvo of yester year.
I at least have front and torso air bags in the Buick.
The torso ones were optional back then and state of the art...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,751 Posts
Plus, it was 80 MPH! That's crazy fast for a crash.
If you think about it, an 80mph closing speed is perfectly normal for a head-on crash between two cars - both cars travelling at 40mph, so therefore a huge combined velocity...

That was a great little video.
I like that show. Is it from 'down under'?
Nah moite, those aussies could never produce something as good as that.

Fifth Gear is a British motoring programme, rather like a more sensible, mature Top Gear...:D
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top