|
The problem is every car has become a heavy car with the massive amount of safety crap they have to stuff into them these days. A friend of mine is big into Geo Metro's and while they have absolutely nothing in them, they still get better gas mileage than most any new car. We can make the engines as efficient as possible but if we have to haul around +200lbs every year in stuff, it cancels out the benefit.
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 21:12 |
|
|
Is it that they have to meet ever-increasing crash safety regulations or just that everyone wants their vehicle to be 5-star rated? I feel like any old 5,000lbs SUV would crush me to pieces in one of my cars, but it wasn't something I cared at all about when shopping for that car. I guess there isn't a big market for "people who aren't afraid to die in a smorgasbord of metal, glass and bone."
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:32
|
|
|
Linedance posted:wow holy poo poo I hosed up there... I got myself very confused looking at different vehicle weights compared to their dimensions, and that Chrysler 300 spec Throatwarbler posted (I assumed the Charger weighed roughly the same, and missed the point it was 500lbs more than that whole group). Didn't help that I looked up Bentley Flying Spurs and Rolls Royce Ghosts just for a laugh... you want to talk heavy... So yeah, the Charger is lighter than a Ram, and heavier than porkers like a 7 series. And a 2 door RWD Ram is lighter than a Bentley and a Rolls. This concludes my research. What? The Charger weights less than the 300 and much less than the 7 series if you're comparing 6 cylinder to 6 cylinder. Jesus Christ how do you make so many posts with so little content? RWD  AWD  quote:How about you find a sedan that's the same size of the Dodge Charger which you consider to be of acceptable weight, so we know what you're aiming for here? I can only think of 1, the SWB Jaguar XJ is about 4000lbs even, lighter than an equivilant V8 Charger. Chrysler should start sourcing those super lightweight Lucas wiring harnesses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
PT6A posted:No, but that's because they're small cars. Not everyone wants a small car, though. Some people want a larger car. The larger car will be heavier! Okay, just making sure I didn't miss something. People want a large car and complain that it is also a heavy car like it's made of a bunch of metal or something. Crazy I know! Man, large cars of ages past sure didn't weigh as mu-  -oh. 2.5 tons. hurm.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 01:03
|
|
|
The WM Caprice V is about 4200lbs and is a slightly larger car. I can't think of anything much lighter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 01:07
|
|
|
The Beijing auto show is just down the street, maybe in a couple of days if I have nothing else better to do I'll go check it out, I bet there's some really lightweight and cheap cars there. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
The only way to go is forward from their current models:
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
davebo posted:Is it that they have to meet ever-increasing crash safety regulations or just that everyone wants their vehicle to be 5-star rated? I feel like any old 5,000lbs SUV would crush me to pieces in one of my cars, but it wasn't something I cared at all about when shopping for that car. I guess there isn't a big market for "people who aren't afraid to die in a smorgasbord of metal, glass and bone." That is the problem. The more safety crap they stuff into these cars, the more drivers (if you can call them that) seem to take themselves out of the driving equasion and the car is built to allow them to survive and continue to repeat their ways. A simple fix. Put a spike (or hell just no airbag) in the steering wheel. That will make drat sure that you are paying attention while driving. One problem would be others hitting you, but if everyone had one of these dangerous wheels, nobody would be wanting to try out the feature all too much.. Ahh a guy can dream slightly twisted can't he? Another fix that would also double as extra good income for DMV, Tiered Driving Licences that allow you to own a certain vehicle, require driven tested renewal, and do require actual driving skill to get the better ones... EdEddnEddy fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Apr 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:31
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:That is the problem. They more safety crap they stuff into these cars, the more drivers (if you can call them that) seem to take themselves out of the driving equasion and the car is built to allow them to survive and continue to repeat their ways. I'd like that last option please! Right now, there's nothing stopping someone who took their drivers test in a neon from jumping in one of these and taking it anywhere.  Also, there is nothing worse than being stuck behind a rental motorhome on a mountain highway because the driver is too scared of their vehicle to do even half of the speed limit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:36
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:Man, large cars of ages past sure didn't weigh as mu- Exactly. The magical period of time where cars were light didn't really exist. Cars seem to have been at their lightest in-general in the aftermath of the oil crisis - a time which is considered by enthusiasts who lived through it to be a sort of dark age of automobiles. Is that what folks want to go back to? Really? I can totally understand if you want to drive a really light and nimble car with no safety equipment. That's fine - I can see the appeal. But to then act flabbergasted about the fact that Joe and Sally down the street don't to drive a Geo Metro, and even talk with an aura of elitism about the fact they would rather drive a big, safe, powerful car, well - that's just loving stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:39
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:That is the problem. The more safety crap they stuff into these cars, the more drivers (if you can call them that) seem to take themselves out of the driving equasion and the car is built to allow them to survive and continue to repeat their ways. What is wrong with you. Maybe you should go post in E/N about your anger issues?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:40
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:Another fix that would also double as extra good income for DMV, Tiered Driving Licences that allow you to own a certain vehicle, require driven tested renewal, and do require actual driving skill to get the better ones... The problem is that "better" vehicles are very often the safer ones. If some kid ran out in the street in front of me I'm drat sure I'd rather be in a sports car than in a pickup.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:43
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:That is the problem. The more safety crap they stuff into these cars, the more drivers (if you can call them that) seem to take themselves out of the driving equasion and the car is built to allow them to survive and continue to repeat their ways. ah yes the halcyon days of when cars had no airbags and we were all really safe drivers and also did not die in crashes ever
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:46
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:ah yes the halcyon days of when cars had no airbags and we were all really safe drivers and also did not die in crashes ever Yeah, really. Even with modern safety standards, automobile crashes are still quite dangerous, and if that isn't enough, there's a significant financial penalty attached to causing an accident (even worse if you were doing something illegal at the time). The problem is that people are idiots and, well, there just ain't no way of fixing that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:49
|
|
|
Faceless Clock posted:What is wrong with you. Maybe you should go post in E/N about your anger issues? Maybe. I am only made angry due to the fact that all drivers are punished because of the stupid on the road. Insurance, car design, speed limits, what have you. Outside of that can you say my idea while barbaric, wouldn't technically work? Also as far as current "unsafe" light cars go, look at the more exotic things like the Atom or the Caterham or even the earlier gen Miata's. Sure they may have been plenty of the light POS cars after the oil crisis, but with a Good engine and a good suspension, all of a sudden these cars are fun, nimble, and can be extremely gas efficient. You have to pay to have a fast/light car. Also don't even start with the Pedistrian friendly shape of cars now...
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:50
|
|
|
Motronic posted:The problem is that "better" vehicles are very often the safer ones. But that's OTHER people's safety. No one cares about that :P See if you have a family you need to drive a big suv so that you'll be safe from all the other people driving a big suv to be safe from the other people driving a big suv to be... Introducing the 2013 Ford Recursion!
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:51
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yeah, really. Even with modern safety standards, automobile crashes are still quite dangerous, and if that isn't enough, there's a significant financial penalty attached to causing an accident (even worse if you were doing something illegal at the time). Just look at the way road told have gone since the 1970s - despite the vastly increased difference travelled these days they're far, far lower almost everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:53
|
|
|
dissss posted:Just look at the way road told have gone since the 1970s - despite the vastly increased difference travelled these days they're far, far lower almost everywhere. but gubmint taken are freedoms
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:55
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:Outside of that can you say my idea while barbaric, wouldn't technically work? Unless you think people actually drove better in the 1950s and 1960s, in which case you are an insane person, then yes, we can say that your idea is loving Retarded.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 02:56
|
|
|
davebo posted:But that's OTHER people's safety. No one cares about that :P See if you have a family you need to drive a big suv so that you'll be safe from all the other people driving a big suv to be safe from the other people driving a big suv to be... Good point, I was obviously thinking about that the wrong way.  Full disclosure: I put my wife in a 4800 lb SUV to drive my kids around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 03:00
|
|
|
I personally think it's a good thing that you are about 1/3 as likely to die per mile driven today than you were in 1967. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/USA_annual_VMT_vs_deaths_per_VMT.png
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 03:06
|
|
|
Maybe your average person is less likely to die but due to my autox prowess and my NA Miata's superior handling capabilities it is statistically impossible for me to die in a car accident.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 03:08
|
|
|
Plus the metal spike you put in the center of the steering wheel ensures that the road has your undivided attention.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 03:16
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:A simple fix. Put a spike (or hell just no airbag) in the steering wheel. That will make drat sure that you are paying attention while driving. One problem would be others hitting you, but if everyone had one of these dangerous wheels, nobody would be wanting to try out the feature all too much.. I will say this like the British do, since they know what's up: Jeremy Clarkson is a oval office and his schtick ran out in the 90s. OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Apr 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 03:58
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:Maybe. I am only made angry due to the fact that all drivers are punished because of the stupid on the road. Insurance, car design, speed limits, what have you. It's not even your idea. People have been spouting that bullshit for as long as there have been online message forums. Probably longer. Your stupid idea isn't even your stupid idea. quote:Also don't even start with the Pedistrian friendly shape of cars now... Yea, please don't. I'd prefer if my brain didn't liquefy and begin to dribble out of my ears.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 04:14
|
|
|
I have heard that some of the new "pedestrian friendly" designs with the mandatory space between engine and hood may actually end up being worse because they're so tall now that instead of hitting people below the knees and smacking them onto the hood, they either get pulled under and crushed or thrown into the air and/or out into traffic. Pedestrians only account for like 10% of all vehicle accident fatalities, and those hoods only have any impact in a very narrow range of low speed collisions that I'm guessing aren't that common in America, so I'm questioning if it's worth the cost in aerodynamics, efficiency, etc. So far, there's been no evidence that they've helped anything Europe in terms of rates for pedestrian fatalities, injuries, or brain injuries. Definitely some of the design stuff has good returns and basically doesn't cost much more, but at the same time other stuff is probably far less effective than alternatives like better road design and urban planning. Useful stuff like sidewalks and street crossings. Probably is going to be way more effective than a stupid $400 airbag for the hood that is somewhat effective in slightly reducing injury for crashes under 20 mph from certain angles for certain people in a certain orientation. Edit: also, here's a possibly relevant video. 1959 Chevy vs. 2009 Chevy crash test. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_ptUrQOMPs OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Apr 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 04:22
|
|
|
Honestly I don't know much about pedestrian stands, I'm just sure that whatever EdEddnEddy says about it will be something like "well dang dabbit, if we just put giant saws on cars 'em pedestrians will think twice about gettin themselves hit!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 04:45
|
|
|
Faceless Clock posted:Honestly I don't know much about pedestrian stands, I'm just sure that whatever EdEddnEddy says about it will be something like "well dang dabbit, if we just put giant saws on cars 'em pedestrians will think twice about gettin themselves hit!" I'm actually interested in hearing it now. EdEddnEddy posted:The problem is every car has become a heavy car with the massive amount of safety crap they have to stuff into them these days. A friend of mine is big into Geo Metro's and while they have absolutely nothing in them, they still get better gas mileage than most any new car. We can make the engines as efficient as possible but if we have to haul around +200lbs every year in stuff, it cancels out the benefit. Yeah but that's balanced out by the fact that the Geo Metro is an absolute deathtrap. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkqgR4_Xb-0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkgTSaSLO6I pre:Driver Passenger HIC 1113 2025 Left Femur 9752 2478 Right Femur 3406 1224 OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Apr 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 05:44
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yeah, really. Even with modern safety standards, automobile crashes are still quite dangerous, and if that isn't enough, there's a significant financial penalty attached to causing an accident (even worse if you were doing something illegal at the time). People will always be idiots, but we're teaching less about driving and maintaining vehicles while the vehicles themselves are getting more powerful and require less skill on the side of the driver. Have any states tried to offer massive discounts for drivers that took higher level driving courses (if they even exist)? There's definitely nothing like that in Texas. I couldn't see a federally mandated change to driver's ed working nationwide, although it might be the only solution (and it would take quite a while to really show results) if the insurance companies don't want to play ball.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 06:10
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:People will always be idiots, but we're teaching less about driving and maintaining vehicles while the vehicles themselves are getting more powerful and require less skill on the side of the driver. Most insurance companies offer discounts for drivers courses. In alberta, with our government controlled insurance costs, it is treated as 3 years driving experience on the scale, but you can't add to it, meaning you don't move to 4 years on the scale until your actualy 4th year of ticketless, accidentless driving.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 07:01
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:People will always be idiots, but we're teaching less about driving and maintaining vehicles while the vehicles themselves are getting more powerful and require less skill on the side of the driver. So what? Traffic deaths are at an all time low per unit of population so obviously something has gone right in that area. We could probably achieve similar results if everyone drove smaller cars with only decent safety features, but people don't want that, so the only way to do that would be direct government intervention. That's not gonna happen. I'm also skeptical of the idea that driver education would impact traffic fatalities significantly. I know it's nice to think that being a better driver makes us a safer driver, but accidents tend not to happen when you're sitting there with hands ten-and-two, wide awake and ready to dramatically power-slide around an on-coming eighteen wheeler.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 07:53
|
|
|
CornHolio posted:So are modern small cars such as the Honda Fit and Ford Fiesta deathtraps since they weigh under 1.5 tons? By today's standards, maybe. An Accord outweighs a Fit by a good 800 pounds, and it's pretty clear which one you'd want to be in from this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6aWOmD0840 But, if you compare how the Fit did against the Accord to how the Geo Metro did against its own weight, the Fit is far closer in crash performance to the Accord than the Metro. Even more so when you realize the Metro test was a full-width impact and the Fit/Accord test was a 40% offset, which puts a lot more stress on a vehicle's structure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 07:59
|
|
|
Faceless Clock posted:So what? I try to find time to do some winter driving training on ice with the local autox group every year, and I think that stuff does help me quite a bit. Couple years ago I had a pretty bad close call during the winter that probably would have done me in if not for luck so I'm kind of paranoid about it now. But I think that's pretty much the only situation where driver training would help. I imagine most bad accidents involve factors like alcohol, drugs, distracted/tired driving and poo poo like that which no amount of training is going to mitigate. Driving the speed limit on a public road with a properly maintained car while not drunk/hosed up isn't really that dangerous or difficult. Even snow and bad weather isn't that big a deal if you just slow down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 08:42
|
|
|
I just traded from a 2000 VW Golf TDI to a 2012 Toyota Prius. The new car is larger in every dimension, holds more, has all sorts of additional safety equipment including the soon-to-be mandated backup camera, the hybrid system, et cetera and weighs maybe 1% more. For its size the Golf was a relatively safe car and the Prius is 4-5 stars all around. If safety equipment and gadgets were actually driving the increase in size, I'd expect it to weigh far more than 3000 pounds or be comparatively unsafe. For my money, the biggest factor has been the continued use of cheaper but heavier materials combined with dimension creep as yesterday's midsize becomes today's compact. Cars like the iQ and Smart are far closer to the Geo Metro in terms of curb weight because they're so small and use ultra-high strength steel to protect the passenger compartment. Additionally a lot of weight goes towards sound dampening materials covering the cabin and making the doors feel more substantial. People like that heavy thump that a more massive door produces when slammed since it makes the car feel more solid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 09:30
|
|
|
Funny thing about the door thunk, lots of manufacturers just stick strategically placed adhesive pads to replicate the noise on a thinner door skin. Much cheaper, same effect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 10:02
|
|
|
 someday this sound will make a comeback:http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2012/01/1985-porsche-911-the-doors.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
Cakefool posted:Funny thing about the door thunk, lots of manufacturers just stick strategically placed adhesive pads to replicate the noise on a thinner door skin. Much cheaper, same effect. For '05, Subaru added a single very small (2x2 inches, I think) square of sound deadening material in a strategic spot behind the door skin, solving the problem (as much as rattles can be solved on them). It's neat how much sound colours our perceptions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 22:19
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:In the '04 STI, Subaru stripped as much of the sound deadening as they could out of it, including the doors. This meant that the doors sounded sort of hollow and lovely when you slam it, and people bitched. The well-known Mercedes bank vault-like thunk is apparently achieved by putting bits of styrofoam in various parts of the door to deaden the sound. The blocks even have Mercedes emblems stamped into them. At least, that's how it was in my parents 80s and 90s Mercedes 190s and C-class.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 22:31
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:At least, that's how it was in my parents 80s and 90s Mercedes 190s and C-class. I don't remember my 190E having a bass note when door closing. It was clackier like the 911 door posted above.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2012 22:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 21:12 |
|
|
I sat in a new BMW 6 series at the auto show here, you just touch the door to the catch and a little eletric motor goes "BRRRRRRRRRT" and finishes shutting the door for you. Like luxury car trunks and stuff. All i can think of is "how much does that cost to fix"
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 00:45
|
|