WTK How safe is a 911 in a severe accident
08-27-2015, 05:53 PM
#46
Yes, but all that is factored into the death rates, so if in reality if small cars really do avoid accidents better than larger cars (which I doubt), then that means their relative crashworthiness is even worse than indicated by the numbers, because that would mean they're crashing at a lower rate, but killing and/or injuring at an even higher relative rate.
08-27-2015, 05:58 PM
#47
This is a very interesting topic as most of the severe accidents nowadays seem to result in people "walking away" much more often than even 5 years ago. I've been a professional firefighter for 16 years and have been on numerous accidents - severe, non severe, fatality, non fatality, etc.
One thing to consider, when comparing SUV/Pickup trucks to passenger cars, pickups conform to a different set of safety standards. A fullsize SUV such as a Suburban, Tahoe/Yukon, Expedition, etc - pickup based - are basically their respective pickup chassis with a more passenger friendly body sans the pickup bed.
Yes physics plays a role, as obviously a 6000 lb brick slamming into you in a 3000 lb lightweight, low vehicle will result in more mass transferred to the smaller vehicle. The caveat to this is, that doesn't always result in more deadly results to the smaller vehice, as modern vehicles deflect and blow up, similar to a crashed F1 car upon disintegration.
If a NASCAR stocker with all that steel crashed into a LMP car, which would do better? See what I mean, its hard to say definitively.
ALSO, these things don't happen in a lab or in a controlled environment. If the SUV driver were to swerve or deflect into an overpass (seen it happen), their A posts and roof are going to deflect into the passenger compartment much more than in the car. A risk to the car passenger is the lowness of the vehicle causing it to run under the higher SUV, well I've seen lower half of passenger doors in pickups deflect so badly into the passenger space, it forced the seat over and the passenger died when their head slammed into window glass.
Lastly, almost without exception, every German and Scandinavian vehicle I"ve run on in a major accident has resulted in ZERO fatalities. Thats just my experience - I'm obviously not saying it never happens. The A posts and B posts on these vehicles are so strong we have to use BAT (Big *** Tools) yes thats a thing! to open them up. Chevy's, Fords, Dodges, Hondas, etc - just like opening a can. The vaunted large SUV/pickup - they dont use any stronger steel in the body panels - just the frame.
Doctors roll in Porsches, Engineers roll in Porsches/German cars, Professors roll in Volvos - these smart people are on to something!
One thing to consider, when comparing SUV/Pickup trucks to passenger cars, pickups conform to a different set of safety standards. A fullsize SUV such as a Suburban, Tahoe/Yukon, Expedition, etc - pickup based - are basically their respective pickup chassis with a more passenger friendly body sans the pickup bed.
Yes physics plays a role, as obviously a 6000 lb brick slamming into you in a 3000 lb lightweight, low vehicle will result in more mass transferred to the smaller vehicle. The caveat to this is, that doesn't always result in more deadly results to the smaller vehice, as modern vehicles deflect and blow up, similar to a crashed F1 car upon disintegration.
If a NASCAR stocker with all that steel crashed into a LMP car, which would do better? See what I mean, its hard to say definitively.
ALSO, these things don't happen in a lab or in a controlled environment. If the SUV driver were to swerve or deflect into an overpass (seen it happen), their A posts and roof are going to deflect into the passenger compartment much more than in the car. A risk to the car passenger is the lowness of the vehicle causing it to run under the higher SUV, well I've seen lower half of passenger doors in pickups deflect so badly into the passenger space, it forced the seat over and the passenger died when their head slammed into window glass.
Lastly, almost without exception, every German and Scandinavian vehicle I"ve run on in a major accident has resulted in ZERO fatalities. Thats just my experience - I'm obviously not saying it never happens. The A posts and B posts on these vehicles are so strong we have to use BAT (Big *** Tools) yes thats a thing! to open them up. Chevy's, Fords, Dodges, Hondas, etc - just like opening a can. The vaunted large SUV/pickup - they dont use any stronger steel in the body panels - just the frame.
Doctors roll in Porsches, Engineers roll in Porsches/German cars, Professors roll in Volvos - these smart people are on to something!
Do any of you guys really think you're in a really safe car when you're sitting in your Porsche? Would you really be comfortable being in that in a really major accident and rather be in that than a big 4WD Escalade?
I love my Porsches, but I don't kid myself into thinking they're even remotely one of the safer cars on the road. I'd be scared ****less having a major accident in one of my Porsches, especially my Cayman. There is literally zero room for that cabin to deform at all before the occupants would be impacted. Zippo.
08-27-2015, 07:47 PM
#48
Burning Brakes
The heavy SUV is the better place to be in most, but not all accidents. If you slam into a big tree head-on, that heavy framed SUV will subject you to much higher g loads than a 991 with its long energy absorbing crush zone. I agree with your points otherwise.
08-27-2015, 08:40 PM
#49
Rennlist Member
If you are unlucky enough to be sitting at an intersection and punted by an Escalade into an oncoming Hummer, yeah I suppose I would rather be in the X5 to have a fighting chance. But I am more concerned about the former scenario.
As you said, we all take our chances.
08-27-2015, 08:46 PM
#50
Rennlist Member
08-28-2015, 01:34 AM
#51
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd rather that SUV drivers drove smaller, lighter, more efficient vehicles. I expect that the likelihood of that happening is roughly the equivalent of world peace It's ridiculous how much more fuel efficient my 430 horse 911 is than the typical SUV.
08-28-2015, 10:42 AM
#52
You can squeeze 4 in the Targa and get 30mpg on the highway (so I'm told).
Eight people can lounge in the Navigator and it gets 15mpg on the highway.
Twice the people, twice the fuel, just as "efficient". Now, having a full-sized SUV and not using its capabilities could be called "inefficient" but I'm sure there are economy-car drivers that say the same thing about 400hp sports cars putting through traffic.
Drive carefully. Know your vehicle's strengths and weaknesses and proceed accordingly. Some are better, some are worse, but given the multitude of variables none will ever be "best".
08-28-2015, 03:10 PM
#53
Rennlist Member
As an SUV driver, I would love a lighter European vehicle with the same interior space, but BMW and Audi refuse to sell the 5-series and A6/S6/RS6 wagons here. And to keep it on topic, I would rather be in one of those than a full-sized GM SUV for safety.
08-28-2015, 03:52 PM
#54
Further back on topic, my impression is that any Porsche is going to fare remarkably well in an accident.
08-28-2015, 04:02 PM
#55
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good one. Most SUVs have just the driver in them. My Targa averages 22mpg+ in mixed driving, and that's with a reasonably heavy foot. My wife's ML350 is lucky to get 19mpg.
08-28-2015, 08:14 PM
#56
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: palm city, fl
Posts: 776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My wife drives an Audi Allroad which is a wagon very similar to the a6. It is very nimble and still holds lots of stuff. It is even fun to drive in the mountains! We never have to take more than 5 people.
Previously we had owned E class Mercedes wagons which are also much better vehicles than SUV's.
Previously we had owned E class Mercedes wagons which are also much better vehicles than SUV's.
08-28-2015, 08:24 PM
#57
Rennlist Member
from my perspective injuries (or death) in auto accidents result from 2 causes:
1) rapid deceleration causing internal injuries
or...
2) impact with, or intrusion by, some part of the vehicle, another vehicle, or part of the planet not attached to your car
I think Sir I.N stated it best F=ma wrt deceleration effects, in my mind this has little to do with the SUV vs sports car argument (except that since an SUV is more massive than a sports car the deceleration force is likely to be greater since m is larger for a given comparison)
So I honestly think that in terms of "mass" hitting a concrete wall in a sports car vs an SUV mass is not relevant for the 1st type of injury (apart from the force to be dissipated from F=ma).
What *is* relevant there is (all else being equal for the sake of argument) is the deceleration, if I build a 6000lb SUV that is so strong that little or no deformation occurs then the deceleration forces will be much greater than in that of a sports car designed with crumple zones, the intent of which
is to decrease the deceleration forces (by increasing the time to decelerate from x to 0) and
thus the force (-ve G's) acting upon the body...
for the 2nd class of injury again I dont think 'mass' (or size) is directly relevant, its the ability of the chassis to resist penetration of the passenger cabin by any interior or exterior objects...
and the two must be designed in concert; the chassis must absorb impact to reduce deceleration *and* prevent cabin penetration at the same time...
1) rapid deceleration causing internal injuries
or...
2) impact with, or intrusion by, some part of the vehicle, another vehicle, or part of the planet not attached to your car
I think Sir I.N stated it best F=ma wrt deceleration effects, in my mind this has little to do with the SUV vs sports car argument (except that since an SUV is more massive than a sports car the deceleration force is likely to be greater since m is larger for a given comparison)
So I honestly think that in terms of "mass" hitting a concrete wall in a sports car vs an SUV mass is not relevant for the 1st type of injury (apart from the force to be dissipated from F=ma).
What *is* relevant there is (all else being equal for the sake of argument) is the deceleration, if I build a 6000lb SUV that is so strong that little or no deformation occurs then the deceleration forces will be much greater than in that of a sports car designed with crumple zones, the intent of which
is to decrease the deceleration forces (by increasing the time to decelerate from x to 0) and
thus the force (-ve G's) acting upon the body...
for the 2nd class of injury again I dont think 'mass' (or size) is directly relevant, its the ability of the chassis to resist penetration of the passenger cabin by any interior or exterior objects...
and the two must be designed in concert; the chassis must absorb impact to reduce deceleration *and* prevent cabin penetration at the same time...
08-28-2015, 08:36 PM
#58
from my perspective injuries (or death) in auto accidents result from 2 causes:
1) rapid deceleration causing internal injuries
or...
2) impact with, or intrusion by, some part of the vehicle, another vehicle, or part of the planet not attached to your car
I think Sir I.N stated it best F=ma wrt deceleration effects, in my mind this has little to do with the SUV vs sports car argument (except that since an SUV is more massive than a sports car the deceleration force is likely to be greater since m is larger for a given comparison)
So I honestly think that in terms of "mass" hitting a concrete wall in a sports car vs an SUV mass is not relevant for the 1st type of injury (apart from the force to be dissipated from F=ma).
What *is* relevant there is (all else being equal for the sake of argument) is the deceleration, if I build a 6000lb SUV that is so strong that little or no deformation occurs then the deceleration forces will be much greater than in that of a sports car designed with crumple zones, the intent of which
is to decrease the deceleration forces (by increasing the time to decelerate from x to 0) and
thus the force (-ve G's) acting upon the body...
for the 2nd class of injury again I dont think 'mass' (or size) is directly relevant, its the ability of the chassis to resist penetration of the passenger cabin by any interior or exterior objects...
and the two must be designed in concert; the chassis must absorb impact to reduce deceleration *and* prevent cabin penetration at the same time...
1) rapid deceleration causing internal injuries
or...
2) impact with, or intrusion by, some part of the vehicle, another vehicle, or part of the planet not attached to your car
I think Sir I.N stated it best F=ma wrt deceleration effects, in my mind this has little to do with the SUV vs sports car argument (except that since an SUV is more massive than a sports car the deceleration force is likely to be greater since m is larger for a given comparison)
So I honestly think that in terms of "mass" hitting a concrete wall in a sports car vs an SUV mass is not relevant for the 1st type of injury (apart from the force to be dissipated from F=ma).
What *is* relevant there is (all else being equal for the sake of argument) is the deceleration, if I build a 6000lb SUV that is so strong that little or no deformation occurs then the deceleration forces will be much greater than in that of a sports car designed with crumple zones, the intent of which
is to decrease the deceleration forces (by increasing the time to decelerate from x to 0) and
thus the force (-ve G's) acting upon the body...
for the 2nd class of injury again I dont think 'mass' (or size) is directly relevant, its the ability of the chassis to resist penetration of the passenger cabin by any interior or exterior objects...
and the two must be designed in concert; the chassis must absorb impact to reduce deceleration *and* prevent cabin penetration at the same time...
08-28-2015, 09:09 PM
#59
Now having studied this thread I'm scared stiff and apalled at the money wasted on my 911. I'm selling it and buying a Hummer, and will be giving free rides to strangers to boost my mpg.
08-28-2015, 09:22 PM
#60
Rennlist Member
Good thought and makes total sense. A heavier object takes more force to accelerate it and in deceleration more force is applied in a crash trying to stop that mass as well on the object, meaning controlled deceleration, i.e.. crumple zones engineered into a design vs all out hell if the design is poor. Thanks Larry
