Split thread: Older cars and safety - Page 8

NudgE^SIKBRO · 21-08-2010, 01:35 PM

Im sorry, SVO you have been proven wrong I have just read through this thread and I see several posts that prove you wrong. Humble Pie anybody?

randel · 21-08-2010, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NudgE^SIKBRO

Im sorry, SVO you have been proven wrong I have just read through this thread and I see several posts that prove you wrong. Humble Pie anybody?

please dont poke him and wake him up again.......

svo supporter · 21-08-2010, 05:05 PM

I can't help it if people are blind. I've said what I have, shown certain reasonings behind it, but those knockers choose to miss it.

As for the scenario of the role reversal with the accident I was involved in. I couldn't see myself having broken ribs, as there's only a seat between the passengers door and me. I can also see that if the airbag was deployed in the AU, no head injuries would have resulted. But what other injuries would the AU driver have suffered. I have no idea. Maybe our resident ambo could elighten us to that.

Not much else I can do, so time to move on.

BTW. I don't eat pie. I'd eat the ice cream, but it's too cold for that too

Nikked · 21-08-2010, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svo supporter

I can't help it if i'm blind.

Fixed

geckoGT · 21-08-2010, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svo supporter

I can't help it if people are blind. I've said what I have, shown certain reasonings behind it, but those knockers choose to miss it.

As for the scenario of the role reversal with the accident I was involved in. I couldn't see myself having broken ribs, as there's only a seat between the passengers door and me. I can also see that if the airbag was deployed in the AU, no head injuries would have resulted. But what other injuries would the AU driver have suffered. I have no idea. Maybe our resident ambo could elighten us to that.

Not much else I can do, so time to move on.

BTW. I don't eat pie. I'd eat the ice cream, but it's too cold for that too

Front airbags (all a AU has) do not deploy in a side impact as there is no need for them, the forces involved make them of no benefit. Nor does any AU have seat belt pre-tensioners so that would not have assisted preventing sufficient movement of an occupant from striking internal structures in a side impact.

The rest I have explained and not going to waste my time again, read some of my previous posts and work it out. I am sorry, I really can not make it any simpler than I already have, perhaps you should read and think about it a bit more.

As for your showing your reasonings, I have not seen a single example of this from you that stands up to any form of scrutiny.

geckoGT · 21-08-2010, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by randel

please dont poke him and wake him up again.......

You were too late, unfortunately.

flappist · 21-08-2010, 05:30 PM

Geography 1:01

Denial is not a river in Egypt........

The problem with many discussions on fora is they tend to mutate from "right vs wrong" to "win vs lose".

Right and wrong are logical, win and lose are emotional and for those to whom winning is more important than being right acceptance of a result that is not in their favour is almost impossible.

Wisdom comes from experience and learning from mistakes, failure to accept this ensures that neither wisdom nor experience will ever be attained.

**SSD-85** · 21-08-2010, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Front airbags (all a AU has) do not deploy in a side impact

The accident I had in my AU3 XR8 was a direct T-bone hit on my side, with NO impact on other parts of the vehicle. BOTH front airbags deployed. So yes, they do deploy. Whether or not it has benefit I am uncertain of, my shoulder is testament to the seatbelt doing all the work.

**GasoLane** · 21-08-2010, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Nor does any AU have seat belt pre-tensioners

The Fairlane does.

AussieAV · 21-08-2010, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

Geography 1:01

Denial is not a river in Egypt........

The problem with many discussions on fora is they tend to mutate from "right vs wrong" to "win vs lose".

Right and wrong are logical, win and lose are emotional and for those to whom winning is more important than being right acceptance of a result that is not in their favour is almost impossible.

Wisdom comes from experience and learning from mistakes, failure to accept this ensures that neither wisdom nor experience will ever be attained.

Whoa thats deep........., and me without my floaties !

geckoGT · 21-08-2010, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scotty85

The accident I had in my AU3 XR8 was a direct T-bone hit on my side, with NO impact on other parts of the vehicle. BOTH front airbags deployed. So yes, they do deploy. Whether or not it has benefit I am uncertain of, my shoulder is testament to the seatbelt doing all the work.

Normally they will not deploy unless the front impact sensors detect a preset level of force. Something strange happened in yours but it is not the norm.

BFZF8 · 21-08-2010, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svo supporter

No where have I suggested people go looking for an accident to test out their saefty systems in built in their cars. I just think the majority of younger drivers (and a few older ones) rely on the fact that they have these systems in the car, therefore expect they will work when needed, as demonstrated by a few postings through here. eg. "My ABS saved an emu jumping on my wifes lap" or something along those lines.

Since you chose to quote me, I don't rely solely on ABS to be able to stop the car safely. You seem to think that people who drive newer cars simply shut their eyes and hope for the best in emergency situations. Had the brakes locked, I am still able to cadence brake and avoid hitting large objects. ABS just means I don't have to do that. Modern safety features like these are supposed to complement good drivers, not replace them.

UNR8D · 21-08-2010, 06:39 PM

Ok, today I drove an XC and then home again in a NC fairlane, and then this afternoon in my IS300 Lexus and from the 'steeringbox' where you can have almost a 1/4 turn of play in steering while going straight is just plain scary, the brakes that are all std but BRAND new don't feel like they would pull up a beetle let alone an XC, no power steering is horrific to turn / do anything with, you get better vision out of a VE maloo ute than you do the back side or anything bar the A pillars in the XC, mirrors so tiny they may as well be USELESS or just nonexistent, the hard plastics, everything that was at face height looking as if it would split your head open or worse if you did hit anything solid

YES i did like it to drive, but only for a short period and I couldn't do it on a daily basis and there is NO way while this earth is turning you are safer in that than an FG or anything newer, hell even the NC had softer plastics and not so many sharp ridges and at least some form of a crumple zone, and well the Lexus goes without saying 8 airbags, ABS, BA, ESC, 4 piston brakes and a safety cell that gives it 4/5 star crash safety rating depending what country your in.

I only drove the XC differently because you have to allow time for the brakes to bite, you have to think about 2 miles ahead before you turn otherwise it WONT. But I found I drove both the NC and the Lexus BETTER than the XC, as it was easier to tell what was going on around you, you don't need to think 2 miles ahead to turn you just do and you leave the same braking distance but you know for sure you will pull up in time.

Driver factor removed, there is nothing apart from thin A pillars in the XC that makes it good for passive safety, and there is NO saving grace when it comes to active safety END OF STORY.

Monkey · 21-08-2010, 06:53 PM

they moved the keys to the column so they wouldn't get stuck in your knee cap

Boosh Brus · 21-08-2010, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monkey

they moved the keys to the column so they wouldn't get stuck in your knee cap

Safety features like that give the driver a false sense of security.

svo supporter · 21-08-2010, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Front airbags (all a AU has) do not deploy in a side impact as there is no need for them, the forces involved make them of no benefit. Nor does any AU have seat belt pre-tensioners so that would not have assisted preventing sufficient movement of an occupant from striking internal structures in a side impact.

The rest I have explained and not going to waste my time again, read some of my previous posts and work it out. I am sorry, I really can not make it any simpler than I already have, perhaps you should read and think about it a bit more.

As for your showing your reasonings, I have not seen a single example of this from you that stands up to any form of scrutiny.

Beginning of this quote.

I understand what your saying, so the info has been absorbed. In other words, I know the possible injuries sustained should the roles be reversed in this accident scenario.

So I reckon it's time to put this to bed. It's getting dragged out to the point of boredom

Kryton · 21-08-2010, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svo supporter

So I reckon it's time to put this to bed. It's getting dragged out to the point of boredom

I have to agree on this as well.
8 pages of back and forth - nothing is going to change with another 8 pages.
Time to lock it up and be done with it.

UNR8D · 21-08-2010, 08:50 PM

well that's no fun anymore is it.

Svo supporter, your standing by your word *i would say facts but there isn't any* is worthy of rep, even if your skewed logic isn't.

Curious though, why would you want it shut down now? I'm still awaiting your evidence and hard facts and supporting arguments? never know I might learn something :O

Kryton · 21-08-2010, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNR8D

Curious though, why would you want it shut down now? I'm still awaiting your evidence and hard facts and supporting arguments? never know I might learn something :O

Because it is never going to come, its just going to keep going back and forward for another how ever many pages till it does get shut down.
This thread is now pointless.
The arguments ahve been made, there is really nothing more that can be said so just be done with it and let it die a peaceful death (for once).

Barry_v · 21-08-2010, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNR8D

because you have to allow time for the brakes to bite, you have to think about 2 miles ahead before you turn otherwise it WONT.

exaggeration so severe jeremy clarkson would be be horrified. I look forward to more car reviews from you (strictly for entertainment only).

WMD351 · 21-08-2010, 11:24 PM

to quote Jeremy Clarkson when talking about Eric Bana's XB,
"if you've got a muscle car, you go round a corner, you're going to hit a tree!"

svo supporter · 22-08-2010, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNR8D

.

Svo supporter,

Curious though, why would you want it shut down now?

The answer lies in my signature.

I think the course of this thread has run its course. Don't think we need more people going to sleep now, do we

**DJR-351** · 22-08-2010, 12:34 AM

I have been waiting to use this...

ea90_S · 22-08-2010, 02:26 AM

nothing wrong with older cars if they are maintained properly. yes they lack all the airbags, abs, crumple zones but people have a choice of what car they want! People owning older cars need to maintain it to a high standard if your standard is to pop rivet sheet steel over rust and try and hide chassis rust with sound deadner and bog. buy a new car! One thing though who ever said if you jack one side of a older car up you cannot close the door that is wrong just tried it on my Escort and mates XB no problems closing doors lol!

**russellw** · 22-08-2010, 10:18 AM

No one is saying that there is anything "wrong" with older cars, indeed there are many of them that we revere as legends within the Australian automotive environment.

What we are saying is that both accident avoidance (active safety) and accident survivability (passive safety) generally improve with each decade newer a vehicle is.

Disclaimer: This assumes no impact from freak electrical failures; inteference from alien life forces or a shift in the earths magnetic field.

In simple terms: you are more likely to avoid an accident and/or survive one in a newer vehicle based on statistical averages.

No ifs and no buts.

Russ

GTP owner · 22-08-2010, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ea90_S

One thing though who ever said if you jack one side of a older car up you cannot close the door that is wrong just tried it on my Escort and mates XB no problems closing doors lol!

Depends on where you jack them up from. I have witnessed this occur on a vh commodore and a 4 door torana

geckoGT · 22-08-2010, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Depends on where you jack them up from. I have witnessed this occur on a vh commodore and a 4 door torana

I have seen the same on some of the older cars I have owned, on the HK, HT, VC, VL, VN and ED that I had you could feel the door foul on either the sill or the door lock striker when you closed the door. That is evidence of a weakness through the body allowing torsion and misalignment in the door opening. My BA and BF do not do this and either through body torsional stiffness or a result of its length (or a combination of both), when you jack the front wheel up on the mini, the back wheel raises too.

Barry_v · 22-08-2010, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by russellw

No one is saying that there is anything "wrong" with older cars

you must have missed the character assassination of the XC falcon! To give credit, the mentioned XC that needs time for the brake to bite and has 1/4 turn of steering wheel freeplay scares the willies out of me too!

geckoGT · 22-08-2010, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry_v

you must have missed the character assassination of the XC falcon! To give credit, the mentioned XC that needs time for the brake to bite and has 1/4 turn of steering wheel freeplay scares the willies out of me too!

It was not character assassination, it was just pointing out weaknesses that older technology has compared to the newer breed.

I think it needs to be considered that if we were paying todays prices for cars that do things no better than they did in 1977, we would be all feeling very ripped off. The car buying public demand improvements with each new model as time goes on, that is why the manufacturers spend billions developing these improvements and safety comes into that consideration

xy500 · 22-08-2010, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry_v

you must have missed the character assassination of the XC falcon! To give credit, the mentioned XC that needs time for the brake to bite and has 1/4 turn of steering wheel freeplay scares the willies out of me too!

1/4 turn of steering play? you blouses need to learn how to turn the steering box adjuster and adjust that free play out. 30 years of wear and tear would do worse to other cars.