| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2006/8/16-18 [Transportation/Car, Transportation/Car/RoadHogs] UID:44025 Activity:low |
8/16 Every time I get a rental car, I'm shocked at why anyone, in their
right mind, would ever buy an American car. Do engineers at Detroit
just not realize how crappy their products are?
\_ They do, but they get paid for it anyway.
\_ I really don't think it's the engineers, I think it's the
management. But that's probably my bias talking.
\_ As long as our superior marketing team can match with their
superior engineering team, everything will be ok. -Detroit mgmt
\_ Screw the Japs and the Krauts. Buy American products. Support
our troops. -average American male
\_ There are a few good american cars out there. F-150, for example.
\_ awesome car:
http://www.bridger.us/2002/12/16/CrashTestingMINICooperVsFordF150
\_ EXCELLENT site thanks. Looks like Camry is in fact slightly
safer than the Accord. I wonder how safe Priuses are.
\_ Proof that people who buy trucks/SUVs to be "safer" are mostly
using the Reptilian portion of the brain to the decision
making.
\_ isn't that a truck?
\_ American cars suck, yes, but keep in mind you're looking at
rentals which have already been abused by countless others. They
are bad. They aren't *that* bad.
\_ My car was brand new (it had 20 miles on it) and it was
*that* bad. I've driven rental Japanese cars before and
even those were a step up.
\_ What car was it? Why the secrecy? And what specifically
were the problems?
The Corvette is a good car for what it is. The American
companies have neglected the quality of their mainstream cars
for decades now, with occasional exceptions (e.g.
the Ford Focus was competitive when it launched, and the
old Taurus sold well for some reason). Chrysler 300 sedan
is supposed to be ok.
\_ Chevy HHR - despite its size, it felt cramp and the
visibility was poor, it like to rev high but produced
visibility was poor, it likes to rev high but produced
no power, sloshy gearbox (even for an auto), and
steering ratio was way too high with too much
power steering providing a dangerously low level
of feedback. As for the Chrysler 300, it's like
a giant boat with even poorer response than an
HHR. Good way to get your passengers sick. |
| 5/24 |
|
| www.bridger.us/2002/12/16/CrashTestingMINICooperVsFordF150 Both of these vehicles hit the exact same off-set barrier at 40mph. Now there's no question what would win in a head-on collesion between th e two but then again the majority of accidents involve only a single car . All you have to do is look at the dummy's legs and you can get an idea of what would happen if you hit a wall in either car. The MINI had almo st no intrusion which "indicates that the driver's survival space was ma intained very well" - the F150 on the other hand had "Major collapse of the occupant compartment that left little survival space for the driver. " I'm interested in how a company could create a modern vehicle that could perform so badly on this test. Furthermore Ford had lots of space to wor k with to make this a safe vehicle. For BMW/MINI to do the job in 1/4 th e space is what engineering is all about. Broken Window Keep in mind also this is the best selling vehicle in the US. One would t hink that Ford, knowing this, would have put more effort into the engine ering of this truck. this platform is also the basis of b oth the Ford Expedition and to some extent the Ford Excursion. Both are marketed to be tough, safe, go anywhere SUVs and are sold as family tran sportation. Why are they more interested in 5mph bumper tests - shouldn't this be front page news somewhere? article in t he New Yorker with some interesting information. The statistics were compiled by Tom Wenzel, a scientist at Lawrence Berke ley National Laboratory, in California, and Marc Ross, a physicist at th e University of Michigan. The information comes form a recent article in teh New Yorker: "The numbers are expressed in fatalities per million cars, both for driv ers of particular models and for the drivers of the cars they hit." Among the safest cars are the midsize imports, like the Toyot a Camry and the Honda Accord. Or consider the extraordinary performance of some subcompacts, like the Volkswagen Jetta. Drivers of the tiny Jett a die at a rate of just forty-seven per million, which is in the same ra nge as drivers of the five-thousand-pound Chevrolet Suburban and almost half that of popular SUV models like the Ford Explorer or the GMC Jim my. In a head-on crash, an Explorer or a Suburban would crush a Jetta or a Camry. But, clearly, the drivers of Camrys and Jettas are finding a w ay to avoid head-on crashes with Explorers and Suburbans. The benefits o f being nimble--of being in an automobile that's capable of staying out of trouble--are in many cases greater than the benefits of being big." Now granted this doesn't change t he fact that Ford designed and released the previous generation of F150s knowing there were safety concerns. Further it doesn't change any of th e statistics showing larger vehicles cause more havoc on the roads. But it does show that Ford clearly understood the issues with the previous g eneration and worked hard to alleviate them. I think the government is willing to look th e other way on a lot of things because the economy is tight. Maybe because they all drive thes e ridiculous vehicles? org) quote: "Why can't I compare vehicles from different categories? The kinetic ener gy a vehicle must absorb in a crash test increases with vehicle weight, so offset tests are more demanding of heavier vehicles. But people in he avier vehicles in real-world, 2-vehicle crashes typically fare better th an people in lighter vehicles (in many single-vehicle crashes, weight of fers no safety advantage). This is why test results shouldnt be compared among vehicles with large weight differences. "Now there's no question what would win in a head-on colles ion between the two but then again the majority of accidents involve onl y a single car" My point isn't to compare how the cars would do in a col lision with each other. Since most accidents involve only one car my poi nt is I was comparing the results of the off-set crash tests themselves. This indicates how well a car is made and how much time the company spe nt designing crash safety into them. My point is (and it's one that's ba cked up by every study I've ever seen) that larger trucks and SUVs don't offer the protection most people believe they do. On average they are m ore dangerous not only to others on the road but to their occupants as w ell. If identical tests are performed o n vehicles, the results can, and should, be compared. That the vehicles are from different classes doesn't make the dummy in the pickup any less dead. Permalink Where is the data that proves that "most crashes involve same-class vehic les or a single vehicle only"? I just can't imagine that a Mini driver i s going to coincidentally have an accident with a VW GTI or Honda Civic, when, in fact, our roadways are crowded with Jeep Grand Cherokees and F ord Explorers. BTW, a handful of popular SUVs have a better crash rating than the Mini. Ford GM, Mercedes and others are run by bean coun ters and they sell steel, plastic and glass by the pound. Their customer s are the share holders, not the person that buys the car. Why would a bean counter make an F-150 safer when they sell at a better p rofit margin without the extra work? The vehicle that is for sale is not the one they could build but the one the bean counters think you will buy. Ford engineers are no different than others and could build something bet ter if.... Permalink Larry - I guess that begs the question: Does Ford think so little of us? Why do BMW, Mercedes, and others engineer this safety into their cars fo r the mass market? Several Euro automakers even have teams that go out a nd investigate crashes on site right after they happen then take them ba ck to the lab for further study. Ford ma kes much more profit on a totally loaded F150 than BMW makes on a 32,000 325i. I don't think there's much questi on that a Mini would not fare so well in a collision with a pickup. Howe ver, don't you think that the occupants of an automobile ought to have d ecent chances of survival if they were to run off the road? I certainly wouldn't want to be in a collision between a tree and an F150. Yes the MINI is small - it has what's call ed active safety built in. Because it's incredibly agile and can allow p eople to get out of bad situations before they get into them. Most peopl e forget about the idea of active safety - but it's probably the most im portant part of the equation. this (thank s Azwed) National Center for Statistics and Analysis Study. Even though there are more cars on the road trucks are almost 25% more likely to be involved in fatal crashes. Permalink Raymi - please read the above comments before posting. If you did you'd s ee the point you were trying to make was discussed before. "My point isn't to compare how the cars would do in a collision with each other." Since most accidents involve only one car my point is to compare the results of the off-set crash tests themselve s This indicates how well a car is made and how much time the company s pent designing crash safety into them. My point is (and it's one that's backed up by every study I've ever seen) that larger trucks and SUVs don 't offer the protection most people believe they do. On average they are more dangerous not only to others on the road but to their occupants as well. Permalink Thanks for the great pictures showing so clearly that bigger does not nec essarily mean better. Accident a voidence capability (good handling, steering, brakes) has been an import ant car purchase criteria for years, and my current modern Mini is one o f a series stretching back to Austin Minis. Permalink I think this shows that people may think the SUV's and bigger vehicals ar e the answer to safer driving, but really a smaller car gives you a safe r compartment in a head on collision. That F150 picture makes me never w ant to get into a truck again. This article isnt comparing the two vehicals hit ting eachother, it is comparing the saftey compartment! My Dad has been concerned abo ut the size of the Mini and he drives a truck. If a MINI hits a brick wall at 40mph, th e driver lives - if he does the same thing in the Ford, he's toast. However, I've seen LOTS of photo's of wrecked MINI's - and I've... |