|
Alright that's actually absurdly cute
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 13:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 07:01 |
|
|
Sab669 posted:Alright that's actually absurdly cute It really, really is. Are Chinese cars (still?) Deathtraps in crashes? Or is that just some dumb myth I heard years ago? Edit: I mean obviously the car is tiny, but I expect different things in a crash from a Miata and a smart car. https://paultan.org/2021/09/09/chin...sist%20systems. Suggests that Chinese car manufacturers are capable of making large, well made, safe vehicles; making a 1,000 clown car safe might be a physical impossibility? Jack B Nimble fucked around with this message at 14:14 on Apr 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 14:00
|
|
|
You just can't beat the fact that mass is king in a lot of crash scenarios. Most crash tests simulate hitting a car of identical weight and small cars still do great, then you watch the crash test of a MB 300 hitting a smart car or an Avalon hitting a Yaris and you watch the smaller car get punted across the test facility like a football. Reminds me of those smart car videos where they sat an F-150 on top of it and said woah look how strong this cars structure is. My immediate thought was always "okay, now drop the F-150 on it from 30' up which is closer to what it'd experience in an actual collision and let me know how well it does." I thought I was pretty safe in my F-150, until I got rammed by an F-250 towing a giant trailer. Gonna get an EV Hummer to be safer. Or maybe a semi. And if mass is king then volume is queen, i.e. room for lots of crumple zone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 15:52
|
|
|
Jack B Nimble posted:It really, really is. Are Chinese cars (still?) Deathtraps in crashes? Or is that just some dumb myth I heard years ago? Yeah, but that's for vehicles that has a price tag like other manufacturers (starts at 40k / 60k USD). I don't think anyone doubts that they cannot make safe vehicles if they want to (or maybe they are). But you won't see small cheap ones passing crash standards.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 16:18
|
|
|
Nothing is safe against an idiot armed with a 9000lb hummer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 16:21
|
|
|
cursedshitbox posted:Nothing is safe against an idiot armed with a 9000lb hummer. Especially US road infrastructure
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 16:31
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:Especially US road infrastructure Its too heavy for rte66 in California, numerous bridges in the upper midwest.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 16:33
|
|
|
At this rate, when are they going to start making civilian versions of mining dumper trucks? For safely getting to soccer practice, of course.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 16:38
|
|
|
9,000lbs? Good thing the bridge infrastructure in America is fastidiously maintained. *holds ear piece* Oh dear god.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
It's a Hummer. We don't need no stickin' roads... Oh...
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 17:08
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:You just can't beat the fact that mass is king in a lot of crash scenarios. Most crash tests simulate hitting a car of identical weight and small cars still do great, then you watch the crash test of a MB 300 hitting a smart car or an Avalon hitting a Yaris and you watch the smaller car get punted across the test facility like a football. maybe we should not be continually adding mass then
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
If you're not driving at least a cat 797 to work, and to little Ehdyn and Lehkynnn's dance recitals and soccer games then you obviously just don't give a poo poo about the safety of your family.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 17:33
|
|
|
I'm hoping to pick up one of those captured russian tanks for my morning commute.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 17:48
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:You just can't beat the fact that mass is king in a lot of crash scenarios. Most crash tests simulate hitting a car of identical weight and small cars still do great, then you watch the crash test of a MB 300 hitting a smart car or an Avalon hitting a Yaris and you watch the smaller car get punted across the test facility like a football.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 17:58
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:You just can't beat the fact that mass is king in a lot of crash scenarios. Most crash tests simulate hitting a car of identical weight and small cars still do great, then you watch the crash test of a MB 300 hitting a smart car or an Avalon hitting a Yaris and you watch the smaller car get punted across the test facility like a football. Is there any reliable data regarding the ability of electronic driver aids to prevent DUI-related collisions (driver aids for the perpetrator or driver aids for the victim, either way). I imagine that driver assist tech will make it harder to spot drivers under the influence that can afford vehicles with this tech.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 18:12
|
|
|
PBCrunch posted:single-vehicle collision. The majority of which are attributed to DUI, distracted driving, or going too fast for conditions. For MVAs you want mass and size, for SVAs you want to not be driving like an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 18:32
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:The majority of which are attributed to DUI, distracted driving, or going too fast for conditions. DUIs aside, everyone drives like an idiot sometimes, because they're having a bad day, or just have a moment of distraction at the wrong time, etc etc. Yes, some drivers are bad and others are good, but no one's immune to a single vehicle accident.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 18:42
|
|
|
quote:A bunch of extra mass probably doesn't help in a collision involving an animal (hitting or swerving to avoid them) either. What percent of fatalities are caused by hitting or swerving to avoid an animal? I really doubt it's a large number. Jack B Nimble posted:DUIs aside, everyone drives like an idiot sometimes, because they're having a bad day, or just have a moment of distraction at the wrong time, etc etc. Yes, some drivers are bad and others are good, but no one's immune to a single vehicle accident. Sure but none of that is a reason to nullify anything I said.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 18:50
|
|
|
Was it international that came out with a “consumer” version of a truck like 10-15 years ago? And we all laughed at how ridiculous it was?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 19:16
|
|
|
I think the Ford Mach-E is probably one of the safest vehicles on the road right now. Fair amount of weight, relatively large crumple zones, great crash test results, good safety avoidance tech, relatively low CG for its weight/size/class.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:I think the Ford Mach-E is probably one of the safest vehicles on the road right now. Fair amount of weight, relatively large crumple zones, great crash test results, good safety avoidance tech, relatively low CG for its weight/size/class. And it can barely go faster than parking lot speeds!
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 19:31
|
|
|
Means the GT is the safest, better handling and braking plus it can barely accelerate past 70 mph.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 19:55
|
|
|
wesleywillis posted:If you're not driving at least a cat 797 to work, and to little Ehdyn and Lehkynnn's dance recitals and soccer games then you obviously just don't give a poo poo about the safety of your family. Yeah I mean, besides being a comfortable and safe family hauler, you never know when you have to go to the hardware store to pick up some mulch or to the local quarry to pick up some limestone. The best family vehicle in my view.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 20:02
|
|
|
PBCrunch posted:Not all vehicle collisions take place between two passenger vehicles. Here in Nebraska, 61% of known collisions take place between two motor vehicles. Those collisions account for 46% of traffic fatalities. This suggests that multi-vehicle accidents are less likely to result in a fatality than a single-vehicle collision. Adding mass doesn't necessarily improve the survivability of a collision with a tree or even with a CDL-heavy vehicle. A bunch of extra mass probably doesn't help in a collision involving an animal (hitting or swerving to avoid them) either. I'd imagine minor single vehicle collisions are much less likely to be reported than minor collisions involving more than one vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 20:26
|
|
|
im sure theres no correlation between the zillion miles of poorly maintained roads and highways, the idiots blasting down them in their 5 ton, 7 foot tall vehicles, and the outsized portion of deaths related to single vehicle rollovers anyways off to Bass Pro Shops in my F-650 COME AND TAKE IT 1776 THESE COLORS DONT RUN Chris Kyle Memorial Edition truck
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 20:35
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:What percent of fatalities are caused by hitting or swerving to avoid an animal? I really doubt it's a large number. The point is that multi-vehicle collisions aren't the only source of fatalities or serious injuries. Adding mass to improve the probability of a favorable outcome in a multi-vehicle collision doesn't necessarily increase safety overall given that increased mass generally decreases maneuverability and increases stopping distances. That's on top of the consequences of increased mass related to fuel economy, performance, and non-fuel production and operating costs. In any case, I look forward to seeing minimally biased long-term data related to the effects of driver aids on safety. Do unjustified increases in driver confidence lead to more collisions? Do the systems require too much costly additional maintenance that leads them to be inactive when the vehicles accumulate miles? Will automakers and the aftermarket do a good job of keeping any parts needed for continued operation of these systems available? (We already know the answer to that question will be no.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 21:42
|
|
|
Be wary the vehicles with limo tint.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2022 21:44
|
|
|
The Hummer being obnoxious, gaudy, dangerous, and cheap looking despite the price, is exactly what the Hummer brand is for, so well done GM, nailed it. Though the argument that "Giant Hummer EVs make the Corvette possible" only works if this was somehow GM's first truck, and they weren't already raking in profits on Sierras and Silverados. Olympic Mathlete posted:I love Corn. The Corn is taller than I am.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 00:04
|
|
|
PBCrunch posted:I don't know that there is an answer to that question, at least to the latter part. The animal isn't going to stick around to answer questions. In a state with a low population and few urban centers like Nebraska I would not be surprised to find out that collisions involving animals are a meaningful portion of collisions that result in serious injuries or fatalities. Swerving to avoid an elk or a deer falls into the bad driver category. You just shouldn't do it. And I would be extremely surprised if they were a meaningful portion, and for that meaningful portion to be avoidable in a more nimble car enough to offset the other safety disadvantages? Nah. quote:The point is that multi-vehicle collisions aren't the only source of fatalities or serious injuries. Adding mass to improve the probability of a favorable outcome in a multi-vehicle collision doesn't necessarily increase safety overall given that increased mass generally decreases maneuverability and increases stopping distances. The increased crash protection in larger/heavier vehicles exists all the time, not just in MVAs. It's just an even bigger factor in MVAs. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 00:44
|
|
|
Residency Evil posted:Was it international that came out with a “consumer” version of a truck like 10-15 years ago? And we all laughed at how ridiculous it was? I think it was a little bit longer ago than that, but yeah. 99% certain it was International.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 00:53
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:Swerving to avoid an elk or a deer falls into the bad driver category. You just shouldn't do it. And I would be extremely surprised if they were a meaningful portion, and for that meaningful portion to be avoidable in a more nimble car enough to offset the other safety disadvantages? Nah. cowards made this graph. Show me 1973-1980. Show me the Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham. Show me the Lincoln Mark V.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 01:50
|
|
|
Residency Evil posted:Was it international that came out with a “consumer” version of a truck like 10-15 years ago? And we all laughed at how ridiculous it was? International XT https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_XT
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 05:19
|
|
|
There's also Supertrucks that do pickup conversions of F650s.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 13:16
|
|
|
Thomas has a reviw of the Mazda CX-60 PHEV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOL2Gb-eDW8 It's not the I6 version  but seems already pretty snappy even with this drivetrain, even though he doesn't really like the PHEV aspect. Not my cup of tea though, maka a new RWD 6 you cowards.bird with big dick posted:Swerving to avoid an elk or a deer falls into the bad driver category. You just shouldn't do it. And I would be extremely surprised if they were a meaningful portion, and for that meaningful portion to be avoidable in a more nimble car enough to offset the other safety disadvantages? Nah. Interesting chart, I don't think I've seen an analysis like this. Bigger crumple zones will of course always mean lower deceleration in a crash, but for recent cars though it seems like there's barely any difference. And a lot of what we see there could probaby be explained by smaller cars being cheaper econoboxes with fewer safety features.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2022 17:44
|
|
|
I'm more concerned that Thomas has been lying to us about his height for years! 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 04:02
|
|
|
A couple of days ago I was with my sister who is both in the market for a CUV at some point in the future, and also scared of going full electric and likes the idea of a PHEV. "Whats that, I kinda like how that looked?" She said as a brand new Mitsu something drove by us. I only caught the red badge so I knew it had to be a Mitsu. Too big to be a Sport or Eclipse Cross. Must have been an Outlander, and it looks like they updated the body of it since the last time I saw or got into one. We got one a couple of years ago as a rental and my coworkers and myself all agreed in its decked out form, it wasnt a bad vehicle. Cant speak for a base model, but in the version we got as a rental, I wouldnt be mad at someone for getting one. Especially if they pulled it off for loads of MSRP. So we pull around and sure enough we see Temp tags and "Outlander." "They make a PHEV of that too I think. Of they did. You could look into that too I guess" Then I look it up. The 2022 looks like the one I saw. Updated, different headlights. Then I look up the 2022 PHEV version. It loving looks like the one I rented 2+ years ago. WTF? Can anyone tell me why? Was this a styling choice to make it look different from the regular Outlander? If so, gently caress. Or is it that they just havent updated the PHEV to the new look? Maybe one comes from one factory and the other comes from somewhere else? Anyway the PHEV version looks like poo poo to me and would be a turn off if I was looking at that car.  
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:27
|
|
|
Franco Caution posted:A couple of days ago I was with my sister who is both in the market for a CUV at some point in the future, and also scared of going full electric and likes the idea of a PHEV. The refreshed PHEV model is coming later this year as a 2023 model.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
The Outlander PHEV is still mitsubishi's own vehicle. The new gas Outlander is a restyled Nissan Rogue, and both companies are total shithouses.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:40
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:Swerving to avoid an elk or a deer falls into the bad driver category. You just shouldn't do it. And I would be extremely surprised if they were a meaningful portion, and for that meaningful portion to be avoidable in a more nimble car enough to offset the other safety disadvantages? Nah. Neither of the axes on that chart directly references mass. Increased dimensions doesn't necessarily mean increased mass. Big increases in mass come from things like body-on-frame construction, drivetrains with heavy engines, heavy transmissions, heavy discrete transfer cases, and heavy axles. A quick Google search shows that a new Honda Civic stops from 60 in about 120 feet and a new F-150 needs about ten more feet. That might be enough to avoid some collisions entirely. The Civic probably makes that panic stop with substantially less drama because of a lower center of gravity and more even front/rear weight distribution. The chart is also based on "registered vehicle years" and not on something more telling like miles driven. I'm not entirely sure how that affects any analysis, but I think it is worth noting. mobby_6kl posted:Interesting chart, I don't think I've seen an analysis like this. Bigger crumple zones will of course always mean lower deceleration in a crash, but for recent cars though it seems like there's barely any difference. And a lot of what we see there could probaby be explained by smaller cars being cheaper econoboxes with fewer safety features.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 07:01 |
|
|
I’m sort of at the point now where new cars are in general expensive, used cars are stupidly priced and trying to get on a waitlist for something attainable like the twins/Miata itself is near impossible in a big metro area + insane markups again. So I decided gently caress it, it’s time to get into motorbikes but I’m juuuuust about to turn 30 and impending sense of mortality is creeping in so I timed even that wrong. I will forever regret passing on a C5 Z06, a 996 Turbo and a mint E90 in quick succession right before Covid, my only car is a Camry and that just isn’t cutting it anymore. gently caress me
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2022 18:03
|
|