[DML] Re: crash tests / safety
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DML] Re: crash tests / safety



Since the early 80's crash testing has evolved. They now do off-center
frontal impacts to more closely resemble real-world frontal
collisions. Bumper hieghts are regulated so now they do more closely
correspond but Deloreans are probably on the low end (if they even
meet current regulation). SUV's are a lot more common now than in the
early 80's so they weren't thinking about them so much vis'a'vie
crashing into Deloreans. The air bags were probably removed because
the crash tests were better than expected and to hold costs down since
they were not a required safety device at the time. Also seat belt use
was not mandated so compliance was much lower than today. Bottom line,
wear your seat belt and drive conservatively with your Delorean and
you will probably survive a crash. As long as the car does not roll
over or you are not ejected from the car your chances are very good.
That is unless an SUV gets parked on top of you!
David Teitelbaum
vin 10757


--- In dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "natesky1980" <ncskalsk@...> wrote:
>
> I agree, rigid barrier tests 'ideally' result in the same KE loss and
> deformation forces as a 'balanced' head-on collision.  So a 40MPH
> barrier test would be the same as two Delorean's colliding head on
> while both are traveling at 40 (in which they would both crumple-a-
> bit and come to a complete stop).
> 
> I think the primary difficulty with automobile safety and testing is
> the disparity in bumper heights.  These barrier tests assume that the
> bumper will be the interface between the two vehicles, which in
> general is not always the case, and certainly not always true with
> the Delorean. (I think about that every time I am sitting at a light
> and looking 'up' a truck's bumper).
> 
> But if you look at the footage, the results don't look that bad.
> Remember that the really telling bit of data is deceleration forces
> on the occupant (hopefully far less than what the car went through).
> It would be interesting to find more information/analysis of these
> tests.
> 
> 
> -Nate
> 11501
> 
> 
> 
> --- In dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Cameron, Peter" <cameron@> wrote:
> >
> > the statement below about fixed wall at 40 mph being equivalent to
> two cars crashing head-on at 60-80 mph is not true. If two equal
> weight cars travelling at the same speed crash head-on, they both
> stop dead, same as if one of them had hit a fixed wall instead of
> another car of equal weight coming from the opposite direction at the
> same speed.
> 
> 
> [long quote trimmed by moderator]
>






To address comments privately to the moderating team, please address:
moderators@xxxxxxxxxxx

For more info on the list, tech articles, cars for sale see www.dmcnews.com

To search the archives or view files, log in at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:dmcnews-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    mailto:dmcnews-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    dmcnews-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Home Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN


Copyright 2006 ProjectVixen.com.  All rights reserved.

Opinions expressed in posts reflect the views of their respective authors.
DMCForum Mailing List Archive  DMCNews Mailing List Archive  DMC-UK Mailing List Archive