another reason I drive a 1 ton as a daily driver

[pclausen]

I too drive a 1 ton quite a bit. I once rammed an old lady in a Caddy with it. There was an accident up ahead, and she realized it at the last minute and slammed on her brakes. At that very moment, I was checking my voice mails, and when I looked and hit my brakes, it was too late. I completely destroyed her rear bumper and trunk. It was an almost new CTS I believe. Fortunately nobody was hurt and the lady didn't blame me, but the car in front of her.

At any rate, there was no damage at all to my truck. I have a Warn 15,000 lbs winch on the front, that took all the impact.

 

[BXinNH]

Although it seems counterintuitive, we are actually seeing fewer and fewer serious injuries in vehicle accidents that look very serious. The problem with older, solid frame vehicles is that they don't readily absorb the energy of a crash, they just transfer it to the occupants. Modern vehicles with crumple zones and airbags come out of an accident looking like complete disasters, but they have done their job. The vehicle occupants are generally uninjured and able to get out on their own. Of course, all that being said, I wouldn't give up my Dodge 3500 for a Honda Civic.
Matt.

 

[JDgreen227]

Although it seems counterintuitive, we are actually seeing fewer and fewer serious injuries in vehicle accidents that look very serious. The problem with older, solid frame vehicles is that they don't readily absorb the energy of a crash, they just transfer it to the occupants. Modern vehicles with crumple zones and airbags come out of an accident looking like complete disasters, but they have done their job. The vehicle occupants are generally uninjured and able to get out on their own. Of course, all that being said, I wouldn't give up my Dodge 3500 for a Honda Civic.
Matt.

I was thinking of this issue as the thread progressed...while I have never been in a serious collision in my personal vehicles, had several rear-ended accidents in the 70's but none since...I know they build today's unibodies with crumple zones BUT, repeat BUT:

Sometimes I wonder if the older full frame cars and trucks that were heavier did a better job of protecting the occupants just BECAUSE they were stronger?

Case in point: I owned an '85 Crown Vic, body-on frame construction with 3 point seat belts, weight with a full tank and two occupants was about 3,700 pounds. My 2004 Lesabre is a unit body , 3 point belts, and air bags and with a full tank and 2 occupants it will weigh close to the same 3,700 pounds. Suppose we crash the two cars head on with each going 50 mph and the newer model will deform while the older car punches it's way into the Buick as the full frame on the LTD stays rigid? Seems to me the Ford is really going to demolish the newer car?

Are the airbags the automaker's way of making up for the lack of strength in the unibodies with their crumple zones? Just rambling here, feel free to blast me if you want.

 

[3930dave]

I remember an uncle of mine (self-confessed bad driver) talking about missing a turn in a new subdivision (low road, really high cement curbs) in a late 50's car. He sheared off a huge section of cement curb, kept going across a mud lawn, and back onto the road. Tiny scratch on his bumper, that's it.

Old cars like that were built like bridge beams, no give, steering columns did not collapse - that alone killed a lot of people. Modern car designs try and keep the passenger cell intact, while allowing both ends to crumple. My beef with the current designs is that even a low speed impact causes huge repair bills - the energy absorbing designs of the late 70's had bumpers mounted on shock absorbers - Canadian cars could deal with something like a 5mph (or was it 8 ?) impact with zero damage.

A modern Civic has a decent crash rating, what is really scary is the sub-compacts - some of them seem to have the rear hatch glass about 3" behind the rear seat passenger !!!

Somebody has a design in production (might have been discussed on here, can't remember where I saw it) for a mini bumper with an inline shock absorber that mounts in a receiver hitch. Seemed like a pretty good idea, as it would soak up minor impacts with no dents to the main bumper.

Didn't some really old cars (thinking 30's) have bumpers essentially horizontally mounted on leaf springs ? Ultrarunner ?

Airbags and crumple zones work, but one time only - no second chance in multiple hits, as in a freeway pileup.

Rgds, D.

 

[PoorMansCat]

I believe vehicles these days give a much better chance of walking away from a bad wreck, but at the expense the vehicle. When I was in high school, there was a girl and guy killed in a vehicle wreck just outside of town, we all saw the car several days later and it did not look hurt at all... (big mid 70's Caddy).. These days, cars seem to be totalled out in a relative fender bender, but the occupants walk away... A friend hit a small white tail and did $6K worth of damage to his GMC 1/2 ton!!..
Last week, there was a wreck near where I work involving a Mack truck hauling saltwater that rear ended a stopped Ford Explorer, the Mack was literally ontop of the Explorer and the front bumper of the Mack was where the drivers seat back should have been.... Looked like the occupants were dead... we later heard she went to the hospital with NON-life threatening injuries!!..
personally, Im glad for the increase in safety of autos... there are lots full of new cars, they can always be replaced... the human body cannot...

 

[IronHog]

with the 6" lift on mine.. It likely would have hit him in his tailgate.. but luckilly I didn't hit him.. big vehicle hitting a small vehicle is bad for the small vehicle no matter what usually.

it's a good thing I wasn't in my F 450 it sets even higher.. his bumper would have went under and mine would have pushed all his front clip back to his block probably...

Just another reason everyone needs to step up and get that Kenworth with a lowboy.

 

[sparc]

I don't think the front of your '99 would look much different under like circumstances.

99? Are you referring to the Hummer I had? That was a 95 but no matter they are all pretty much the same. Very few differences over the years except for the 06 Alpha which was the last year of production for the civy model Hummer.

 

[BXinNH]

As several people have said, the crumple zones and air bags definitely make the occupants safer but the repairs much more expensive. In the Buick vs LTD example that JDGreen referenced, I think the answer is yes, and no. In his example, the Buick becomes the "crumple zone" and absorbs the energy of the collision. If you drive the LTD into a fixed object at the same level of speed/energy, there is no crumple zone to absorb that energy and the occupants are more likely to be injured as more energy is transmitted to them.

 

[IronHog]

As several people have said, the crumple zones and air bags definitely make the occupants safer but the repairs much more expensive. In the Buick vs LTD example that JDGreen referenced, I think the answer is yes, and no. In his example, the Buick becomes the "crumple zone" and absorbs the energy of the collision. If you drive the LTD into a fixed object at the same level of speed/energy, there is no crumple zone to absorb that energy and the occupants are more likely to be injured as more energy is transmitted to them.

Mom had an LTD when I was a kid........ hit a deer dead center one day doing about 50 mph....... deer went under the car.


Would have totaled a modern sedan....... that LTD didn't have a scratch. Compete tank.

 

[jeffsw6]

My beef with the current designs is that even a low speed impact causes huge repair bills

A friend and I were recently talking about the huge repair bills. I think there should be a limit to how much you, or your insurance, has to pay if you hit someone and only their bumpers are damaged. Call it $300 per bumper. These fancy painted bumpers, fiberglass / plastic ones that need total replacement, etc. that's fine if people want to buy them, but those people (and their insurance) should bear the cost of that styling. They do somewhat by their own insurance being more, but I would be really pissed if I bumped someone in a parking lot and ended up with a $1000 claim against me, and it happens all the time.

My girlfriend has a late-model Mustang and both her front and rear bumpers are trashed from parking lot hit-and-runs. It is $600 for one, $700 for the other. Since she has a $500 deductible on her insurance she has to pay for most of it. In my honest opinion (not that I will tell her this) she should have to pay most of it even if the other drivers did stop and give their information. They are cheap bumpers that are designed to fail and be replaced, not get dented and keep on going.

At any rate, there was no damage at all to my truck. I have a Warn 15,000 lbs winch on the front, that took all the impact.

Did the winch still work?