<VV> Was "Corvair mentioned in another GM timeline" now "Crashworthiness"

[Jason Cesana]

I was always interested in the OFFSET crash tests. That puts more stress on
one side more than the full frontal crash. That is the most common accident
scenario. Many vehicles that pass the government and vehicle manufacturer
tests often fail the frontal offset test. Another thought to ponder. Jason
Cesana

-----Original Message-----
From: virtualvairs-bounces at corvair.org
[mailto:virtualvairs-bounces at corvair.org] On Behalf Of Ron
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 7:27 PM
To: RoboMan91324 at aol.com; virtualvairs at corvair.org; hyarnell1 at earthlink.net
Subject: Re: <VV> Was "Corvair mentioned in another GM timeline" now
"CrashWorthiness"

So the solution is to ban all vehicles larger than a Smart.  Simple.
RonH

----- Original Message -----
From: <RoboMan91324 at aol.com>
To: <virtualvairs at corvair.org>; <hyarnell1 at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 3:36 PM
Subject: <VV> Was "Corvair mentioned in another GM timeline" now
"CrashWorthiness"


> Harry,
>
> You are probably referring to the tests the government conducted in 
> 2008 where the Smart passed quite well.  Like any car built or allowed 
> to be sold in the USA, the Smart must meet or exceed crash test 
> parameters set by the government.  However, the tests conducted by the 
> Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) are often more difficult 
> and some consider them to be more reflective of reality.  Earlier this 
> year, the IIHS conducted tests that do not leave the Smart in such 
> good light.
>
> Among other tests, a test they conducted was between a Smart and a 
> Mercedes C Class in a head-on collision at 40 MPH.  The C Class is not 
> one of Mercedes' larger vehicles.  The Smart literally went airborne.  
> Here is a link.
>
> http://www.gearlog.com/2009/04/smart_fortwo_goes_airborne_in.php
>
> Lets say the government tests assume that the vehicle hits an 
> immovable object like a bridge abutment.  Of course, this is severe 
> because the abutment has no crush zones and will not absorb a lot of 
> energy.  The Smart must dissipate almost all of its own kinetic energy 
> when it hits the abutment.
> If
> the Smart has a head-on collision with another Smart traveling at the 
> same speed, the net effect is much the same as one car hitting an
abutment.
> Each
> Smart dissipates the equivalent of its own energy.  I agree that the 
> Smart is very well designed for safety in a world where all cars are 
> of similar size.
> The problem comes when the Smart has a head-on collision with a larger 
> car and obviously, the vast majority of cars out there are larger than 
> the Smart.  This is oversimplified but since the larger car has more 
> kinetic energy than the Smart at a given speed, the Smart will 
> experience a much more severe deceleration and in fact is likely to be 
> accelerated in the opposite direction while the larger car decelerates 
> less and will likely maintain some lower level of speed in the 
> original direction.  The G-forces experienced by the passengers in the 
> Smart will be much worse than those suffered by the passengers in the 
> larger car.
>
> The Smart is fairly good when it comes to tests against cars of 
> similar size and stationary objects but does not do so well against 
> larger cars moving towards it.  This is basic Physics.
>
> Doc
> 1960 Vette; 1961 Rampside; 1962 Rampside; 1964 Spyder coupe; 1965 
> Greenbrier; 1966 Corsa Turbo Coupe; 1967 Nova SS; 1968 Camaro ragtop 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In a message dated 6/2/2009 7:31:03 PM 
> Pacific Daylight Time, virtualvairs-request at corvair.org writes:
>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 19:47:02 -0400
>> From: "Harry  Yarnell" <hyarnell1 at earthlink.net>
>> Subject: Re: <VV> Corvair mentioned in another GM timeline
>> To: "shortle" <shortle556 at earthlink.net>, <ScottyGrover at aol.com>,
>>     <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
>> Message-ID: <5F7AE717F22A472E94C6CDBAE123CBD3 at HEY>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>>     reply-type=original
>>
>> Do some research on the crashworthyness of the Smart. I think you'll 
>> be surprised.
>>
>> Harry Yarnell
>> Perryman garage and orphanage
>> Perryman, MD
>> hyarnell1 at earthlink.net
>
>
> **************
> Shop Inspiron, Studio and XPS Laptops
>> at Dell.com
>> (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222616459x1201464730/aol?re
>> dir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215218145%3B37264238%3Bd)
> _______________________________________________
> This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights 
> are the property of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, 
> mailto:vv-help at corvair.org This list sponsored by the Corvair Society 
> of America, http://www.corvair.org/ Post messages to: 
> VirtualVairs at corvair.org Change your options:
> http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairs
> _______________________________________________
> 


 _______________________________________________
This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are
the property of the writer, please attribute properly. For help,
mailto:vv-help at corvair.org This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of
America, http://www.corvair.org/ Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.org
Change your options: http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairs
 _______________________________________________