What are the strongest cars?
Discussion
We all know which cars are fastest, most economical, most practical etc..... but which cars are the strongest and safest? The NCAP ratings are ok, but I don't believe for one second that a Renault Megane with 5-star rating is as strong/safe as a Volvo XC90 for example.
Safety is good but I think strength is also important e.g. tortional rigidity.
Does anyone have an opinion or know information of what are the strongest and/or safest cars at the moment? Sorry if this is a boring topic....
Safety is good but I think strength is also important e.g. tortional rigidity.
Does anyone have an opinion or know information of what are the strongest and/or safest cars at the moment? Sorry if this is a boring topic....
Interesting fact about the Ncap ratings is that they crash cars into stationary objects or objects only of the weight of the original vehicle (correct me if I am wrong...). This means they only have their own mass/momentum to dissipate.
Imagine a head-on between an Audi A2 and a 2,500kg Range Rover both traveling at the same speed... because the A2 is lighter and therefore carrying less momentum, it will be shunted back by the accident subjecting the occupants to much more serious forces, even if there is no intrusion into the passenger space.
It's a sad fact, because I am not a fan of big cars or the ludicrous arms race to own the biggest and safest thing on the road, but big cars are an advantage to the occupants in an accident.... to the detriment of whatever they crash into of course.
Imagine a head-on between an Audi A2 and a 2,500kg Range Rover both traveling at the same speed... because the A2 is lighter and therefore carrying less momentum, it will be shunted back by the accident subjecting the occupants to much more serious forces, even if there is no intrusion into the passenger space.
It's a sad fact, because I am not a fan of big cars or the ludicrous arms race to own the biggest and safest thing on the road, but big cars are an advantage to the occupants in an accident.... to the detriment of whatever they crash into of course.
Folksam, a Swedish insurance company, produce reports every so often on car safety, where they analyse the results of real life crashes to determine which are the safest cars.
This is the latest version I can find in English: http://www.folksam.se/polopoly_fs/1.11226!/webbver...
These are the latest results, in Swedish, but they're quite easy to understand: http://www.folksam.se/testergodarad/bilkoparguider...
I would say this gives a much better view of what a safe car is than EuroNCAP tests do, and there are some surprising results - the cars with the green circle and the plus are the safest (bearing in mind there are lots of other cars excluded as I guess they don't have enough data):
oh and
This is the latest version I can find in English: http://www.folksam.se/polopoly_fs/1.11226!/webbver...
These are the latest results, in Swedish, but they're quite easy to understand: http://www.folksam.se/testergodarad/bilkoparguider...
I would say this gives a much better view of what a safe car is than EuroNCAP tests do, and there are some surprising results - the cars with the green circle and the plus are the safest (bearing in mind there are lots of other cars excluded as I guess they don't have enough data):
oh and
Edited by ad551 on Friday 20th January 11:02
ad551 said:
Folksam, a Swedish insurance company, produce reports every so often on car safety, where they analyse the results of real life crashes to determine which are the safest cars.
This is the latest version I can find in English: http://www.folksam.se/polopoly_fs/1.11226!/webbver...
2000-2009 Volvo S60: "safest choice in class" This is the latest version I can find in English: http://www.folksam.se/polopoly_fs/1.11226!/webbver...
2002-current Volvo XC90: "safest choice in class"
I'm happy with that
We'll not talk about the Golf though
Mr Gear said:
Interesting fact about the Ncap ratings is that they crash cars into stationary objects or objects only of the weight of the original vehicle (correct me if I am wrong...). This means they only have their own mass/momentum to dissipate.
Imagine a head-on between an Audi A2 and a 2,500kg Range Rover both traveling at the same speed... because the A2 is lighter and therefore carrying less momentum, it will be shunted back by the accident subjecting the occupants to much more serious forces, even if there is no intrusion into the passenger space.
It's a sad fact, because I am not a fan of big cars or the ludicrous arms race to own the biggest and safest thing on the road, but big cars are an advantage to the occupants in an accident.... to the detriment of whatever they crash into of course.
I have argued this as a flaw in the testing even on "Head Ons" they tether both vehicles with a cable that restricts the ability of the A2 or similar from being flung over the hedge by the Rangerover, surely that is not accurate represntation of a real accident? It should pretty quickly reverse direction once attached to the front of a two tonne 4 x 4 non? Imagine a head-on between an Audi A2 and a 2,500kg Range Rover both traveling at the same speed... because the A2 is lighter and therefore carrying less momentum, it will be shunted back by the accident subjecting the occupants to much more serious forces, even if there is no intrusion into the passenger space.
It's a sad fact, because I am not a fan of big cars or the ludicrous arms race to own the biggest and safest thing on the road, but big cars are an advantage to the occupants in an accident.... to the detriment of whatever they crash into of course.
My 10 year old E39 with eight airbags will do me just fine compared to a bloody Smart car thanks.
My father (who use to work in testing for JLR and all its previous guises ford/rover/bmw etc before that) said to me once that when Ford owned them some Volvo guys came over to witness some crash testing.
After they had witnessed the standard low speed NCAP test they were astonished that the Land Rover guys were not going to repeat the test at higher speed like Volvo did. Volvo, at the time, wanted their cars to be as safe as they could practibly make them not just meet the regulations.
After they had witnessed the standard low speed NCAP test they were astonished that the Land Rover guys were not going to repeat the test at higher speed like Volvo did. Volvo, at the time, wanted their cars to be as safe as they could practibly make them not just meet the regulations.
Passive and active devices will only do so much- they can't defy physics. If you drive a 20 year old Range Rover in a brand new C1, the C1 is not going to come off particularly well.
If you were to crash a 20 year old Range Rover and a C1 into a tree at 25mph, I'd take the C1 however.
If you were to crash a 20 year old Range Rover and a C1 into a tree at 25mph, I'd take the C1 however.
10 Pence Short said:
Passive and active devices will only do so much- they can't defy physics. If you drive a 20 year old Range Rover in a brand new C1, the C1 is not going to come off particularly well.
If you were to crash a 20 year old Range Rover and a C1 into a tree at 25mph, I'd take the C1 however.
You say that, but when 5th gear tested the little Nissan against the big Volvo the Nissan was the place to be which I didn't expect. Your example is a bit more extreme, I wonder where the 'tipping point' (i.e. you'd rather be in the bigger, but less 'safe' car) is? Plenty of big, heavy, infexible V8 to squidge you in a range rover...ladder frame chassis isn't going to give very much either, I dunno, I reckon as long as the rangie doesn't go over the top of the C1 you might still be better off in the Citroen.If you were to crash a 20 year old Range Rover and a C1 into a tree at 25mph, I'd take the C1 however.
varsas said:
10 Pence Short said:
Passive and active devices will only do so much- they can't defy physics. If you drive a 20 year old Range Rover in a brand new C1, the C1 is not going to come off particularly well.
If you were to crash a 20 year old Range Rover and a C1 into a tree at 25mph, I'd take the C1 however.
You say that, but when 5th gear tested the little Nissan against the big Volvo the Nissan was the place to be which I didn't expect. Your example is a bit more extreme, I wonder where the 'tipping point' (i.e. you'd rather be in the bigger, but less 'safe' car) is? Plenty of big, heavy, infexible V8 to squidge you in a range rover...ladder frame chassis isn't going to give very much either, I dunno, I reckon as long as the rangie doesn't go over the top of the C1 you might still be better off in the Citroen.If you were to crash a 20 year old Range Rover and a C1 into a tree at 25mph, I'd take the C1 however.
I'm happy that my v70 came off well, but you've got to say that the OP was probably not far off the current high water mark with the XC90.
mind you, this disco 3 did it's job with some style, gotta say, because of this article, it's now on 'the list'
http://www.4wdhandbook.com/rmp/blog/how-safe-is-a-...
versus said:
The reason I have asked this is that I witnessed a very bad accident today involving an XC90 and a Vauxhall Astra. Both cars badly damaged, but the Astra is pulverised and the guy is in hospital whereas the Volvo guy walked out without a scratch.
It depends on what you hit - if you hit something solid, the NCAP ratings are pretty fair. If you hit another car, the relative weights of the two vehicles matters as the lighter car will take the brunt of the deceleration. Nothing to do with strength as such, just relative weights. versus said:
The reason I have asked this is that I witnessed a very bad accident today involving an XC90 and a Vauxhall Astra. Both cars badly damaged, but the Astra is pulverised and the guy is in hospital whereas the Volvo guy walked out without a scratch.
well that confirms the old indian statement of 'might is right', they are both 5 star cars (unless it is an old astra)the 'answer' is the biggest 5* car you can buy that isn't completely roly poly in the suspension department, so it is a toss up between the newest version of X5/6, XC90, Disco3, FFRR, Land Cruiser et al. But for me, probably XC90 because Volvo take this sort of stuff REALLY seriously.
Mr Gear said:
It's a sad fact, because I am not a fan of big cars or the ludicrous arms race to own the biggest and safest thing on the road, but big cars are an advantage to the occupants in an accident.... to the detriment of whatever they crash into of course.
Not always the case. I think it was fifth gear that done a test with an old Volvo the size of an aircraft carrier and a modern little city car/hatchback and staged a head on collision.
I would of rather been in the little car when you look at the damage. As mentioned above they are now designed to move the energy away from the drive.
I also remember a TG episode (I think)when they done a head on crash in some new renault and the back crumpled from a front end impact because of the energy passing through bars in the body/chasis to the rear of the car.
Im sure somebody will be along soon to post links etc - at work and cant be arsed to search.
ETA - Found it - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emtLLvXrrFs
Edited by DaveH23 on Friday 20th January 12:15
The "problem" with the NCAP rating is that it is comparative only - the vehicles are all tested in the same way using impacts into or with non-deformable objects in only certain directions. A real world collision will involve many more factors, so very difficult to predict how a car will really behave when it is involved in a collision that is outside the scope of the NCAP tests. It's a bit like manufacturer's fuel consumption figures - if you know how the test is done then you know how to design the car to give a good result (not that I'm suggesting manufacturers do this, but it's theoretically possible).
DaveH23 said:
Mr Gear said:
It's a sad fact, because I am not a fan of big cars or the ludicrous arms race to own the biggest and safest thing on the road, but big cars are an advantage to the occupants in an accident.... to the detriment of whatever they crash into of course.
Not always the case. I think it was fifth gear that done a test with an old Volvo the size of an aircraft carrier and a modern little city car/hatchback and staged a head on collision.
I would of rather been in the little car when you look at the damage. As mentioned above they are now designed to move the energy away from the drive.
I also remember a TG episode (I think)when they done a head on crash in some new renault and the back crumpled from a front end impact because of the energy passing through bars in the body/chasis to the rear of the car.
Im sure somebody will be along soon to post links etc - at work and cant be arsed to search.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff