The Triumph Dolomite Club - Discussion Forum

What do you think of this?
http://www.koreus.com/video/crash-test-chevrolet.html

I'd take my 50 year old land rover against that chevvy any day of the week.

I always said of my lotus it felt a very safe car to crash, so times must have moved on. Mind y the last thing I crashed (before said lotus) was a mini into the side of a van (he shot a roundabout) 20 years ago!

basically if yo drive a classic carefully, you have to crash it carefully as well!

Bear in mind the chevy had a separate chassis, so the body isn't structural. And by god it shows.

Unsafe or not, that's a risk I am willing to take, I would take the '59 over the '09 any day

It would be interesting to see what the figures would be if you worked out the number of deaths/injuries/accidents per car (as a percentage) for 1959 and 2009. Are we really safer nowadays because the cars are?

If you have a big crash in any classic, you will be very poorly at best, or more likely dead pretty much instantly.

All those huge windscreen pillars and other things that we routinely moan about on new cars do work, and a modern car is now a pretty safe place to have a big impact, and getting safer all the time. In fact, most of the injuries in modern cars (ignoring motorway speed impacts which no mainstream vehicle can be designed to survive) are caused by objects within the car (mobiles, sat navs, luggage, etc) hitting the occupants in an impact.

A couple of years ago, Euro NCAP celebrated their anniversary by crashing a 1989 Sierra into a Mondeo. The results were similar to the Chevy test.

You only have to look at the wafer thin pillars, and complete lack of side protection on a Dolly to know that any significant side impact will be catastrophic.

Classic cars also have inferior braking systems and tyres compared to modern cars (you can fit new tyres but the size of contact patch with the road is still much smaller - even a Fiesta has 185 tyres minimum nowadays). the flip side to this is that they communicate much more to the driver what is going on, so the driver is much less likely to exceed the (lower) limits of the vehicle.

Basically, like all things in life, you can drive as carefully as you like but cannot mitigate for the completely unforseen. I love driving my classics, but on south London's busy streets I do leave a bit more room and I do exercise a bit more caution than I would in a modern.

I highly recommend a Mitsubishi recovery truck, they win when pitted against the rear of a Jag s type.
The mitsi come out on top when shunted up the arse as well.


Anyhow back on subject, yes most modern cars are very safe to have a crash in which is actually the cause of a lot of incidents as people are too relaxed driving their big quiet, smooth, im protected by a million airbags and crumple zones so forget that i have to still control the car, opps too late that armco does a good job, oh look im still alive so i will drive the new replacment car like a loon having not learnt my lesson ABS, full comp insurance its only a company car anyhow.

FACT - 97% of accidents (now referred to incidents by the police ect) are caused by human error and were preventable and therefore are not actually accidents at all.

Damn

Mind you, that Bel Air would probably be ok with a couple of weekends worth of work
They could have taken off the chromework, that is quite hard to get hold of
Gonna buy me a big old Volvo

I'm sure most of us grew up being transported by our parents, in what are now being called 'classics'. When we started driving, again, most of us drove 'classics'. The fact that we're all here today must say something?

As Justyn says, look towards human error, rather than design faults. Look round any car park, and see what computer designed cars look like. Definable only by badges.

1300dolly wrote:I highly recommend a Mitsubishi recovery truck, they win when pitted against the rear of a Jag s type.
The mitsi come out on top when shunted up the arse as well.


Anyhow back on subject, yes most modern cars are very safe to have a crash in which is actually the cause of a lot of incidents as people are too relaxed driving their big quiet, smooth, im protected by a million airbags and crumple zones so forget that i have to still control the car, opps too late that armco does a good job, oh look im still alive so i will drive the new replacment car like a loon having not learnt my lesson ABS, full comp insurance its only a company car anyhow.

FACT - 97% of accidents (now referred to incidents by the police ect) are caused by human error and were preventable and therefore are not actually accidents at all.

Totally agree on everything, Justyn - especially the last bit. My dear old Dad instilled the idea that "if you're involved in an accident it's your fault" in all of us as we learnt to drive. It may not be 100% true but it's a good attitude to have behind the wheel and helps develop pride in your own safety record (mine reached 24 years, about 350k miles and no accidents earlier this month ). I've actually wished they'd change those nice, unoffensive, "Police - Accident" signs for a long time to something that might help the message. Something like "Police - Another Driver Fcuk-Up" might be closer.

Nice to see it confirmed by someone who picks up the pieces that two cars being in the same place at the same time isn't something that "just happens" without Star Trek transporters!

That also applies to most "unavoidable" mechanical failures, btw. You're driving it, it's your fault if something important falls off!

Spunkmonkey for president!
After a night of BBQ and drinks, our very own Mr Spunkymonkay has some very intresting and quite possibbly workable ideas on driving laws.
For instances replacing the steering wheel airbag with a spike.

1300dolly wrote:Spunkmonkey for president!
After a night of BBQ and drinks, our very own Mr Spunkymonkay has some very intresting and quite possibbly workable ideas on driving laws.
For instances replacing the steering wheel airbag with a spike.

I can't take all the credit, I'm afraid. The spike idea originated, I believe, on one of those road safety / police action progs (having been suggested by someone at ROSPA!).

As for the other ideas (basically no road laws except lots of prison for those causing accidents or simply involved in more than chance would allow), Darwinian evolution has got the human race this far using the "let the unfit / stupid die" principle. I just don't see any reason to mess with nature - so it's a truely Green policy as well

purplebargeken wrote: Gonna buy me a big old Volvo

I wouldn't bother....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBDyeWofcLY

Funnily enough I was just going to paste the same video as Adam.....car safety has come on leaps and bounds, regardless of what size of car you're looking at

The clouds of rust exploding from the Bel Air hint at it lacking some of its original strength, however Still wouldn't save it, though!

that was a fantastic bit of film .
i think that after all time effort and money we
spend on our triumphs we should avoid such accidents
if i ever get my 1850 out of my garage and on road that the
last thing i want scrap

Would still rather have the 940, especially as the estate version.

Gotta die someday. rather do it in a Volvo than a Modus