Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
10-17-2003, 07:51 PM
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Brent P wrote:
> In article <VQYjb.489624$2x.202488@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> , Kevin wrote:
>
>
>>Heaver is better. Take a large SUV, spend a few bucks and put in a roll
>>cage, fire bottle system, and 5 point belts and you will be as close to
>>bullet proof as you can get.
>
>
> The same could be said of practically any motor vehicle, even a geo
> metro.
>
>
Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
generates more momentum
> In article <VQYjb.489624$2x.202488@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> , Kevin wrote:
>
>
>>Heaver is better. Take a large SUV, spend a few bucks and put in a roll
>>cage, fire bottle system, and 5 point belts and you will be as close to
>>bullet proof as you can get.
>
>
> The same could be said of practically any motor vehicle, even a geo
> metro.
>
>
Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
generates more momentum
10-17-2003, 07:51 PM
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Brent P wrote:
> In article <VQYjb.489624$2x.202488@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> , Kevin wrote:
>
>
>>Heaver is better. Take a large SUV, spend a few bucks and put in a roll
>>cage, fire bottle system, and 5 point belts and you will be as close to
>>bullet proof as you can get.
>
>
> The same could be said of practically any motor vehicle, even a geo
> metro.
>
>
Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
generates more momentum
> In article <VQYjb.489624$2x.202488@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> , Kevin wrote:
>
>
>>Heaver is better. Take a large SUV, spend a few bucks and put in a roll
>>cage, fire bottle system, and 5 point belts and you will be as close to
>>bullet proof as you can get.
>
>
> The same could be said of practically any motor vehicle, even a geo
> metro.
>
>
Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
generates more momentum
10-17-2003, 07:51 PM
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Brent P wrote:
> In article <VQYjb.489624$2x.202488@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> , Kevin wrote:
>
>
>>Heaver is better. Take a large SUV, spend a few bucks and put in a roll
>>cage, fire bottle system, and 5 point belts and you will be as close to
>>bullet proof as you can get.
>
>
> The same could be said of practically any motor vehicle, even a geo
> metro.
>
>
Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
generates more momentum
> In article <VQYjb.489624$2x.202488@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> , Kevin wrote:
>
>
>>Heaver is better. Take a large SUV, spend a few bucks and put in a roll
>>cage, fire bottle system, and 5 point belts and you will be as close to
>>bullet proof as you can get.
>
>
> The same could be said of practically any motor vehicle, even a geo
> metro.
>
>
Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
generates more momentum
10-17-2003, 08:06 PM
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> Bill Putney wrote:
>
> > ... I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> > accidents.
> >
> > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> > would they stay the same?
> >
>
> Basically, yes. An auto crash is fairly inelastic, the safety of the
> vehicle occupants will primarily depend on how progressively the
> vehicles crush. The amount of energy dissipated will increase
> (dramatically) but the end result will be the same. Since energy
> increases linearly with increased mass, it ought to scale fairly roughly
> as you describe it.
>
> This is, of course, a fairly simplistic explanation and the crash
> performance characteristics of the vehicles will be the primary factor
> in whether the occupants walk away or not. A head-on collision between
> two identical vehicles is essentially the same thing as a head-on crash
> into an immovable wall at the same speed; so crash test performance is
> the best gauge of safety in your scenario.
Thanks for the reply.
On the "two identical vehicles head-on = one vehicle into an immovable
wall" thing, it seems self-evident that you could also extend that
analogy and say that a heavier vehicle and a lighter vehicle head-on
would be equivalent to the lighter vehicle hitting a wall that is moving
at some advancing speed (i.e., more damage than head-on into a
same-weight vehicle), and the heavier vehicle hitting a wall that is
receding at some speed (i.e., less damage than head-on into a
same-weight vehicle)
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
10-17-2003, 08:06 PM
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> Bill Putney wrote:
>
> > ... I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> > accidents.
> >
> > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> > would they stay the same?
> >
>
> Basically, yes. An auto crash is fairly inelastic, the safety of the
> vehicle occupants will primarily depend on how progressively the
> vehicles crush. The amount of energy dissipated will increase
> (dramatically) but the end result will be the same. Since energy
> increases linearly with increased mass, it ought to scale fairly roughly
> as you describe it.
>
> This is, of course, a fairly simplistic explanation and the crash
> performance characteristics of the vehicles will be the primary factor
> in whether the occupants walk away or not. A head-on collision between
> two identical vehicles is essentially the same thing as a head-on crash
> into an immovable wall at the same speed; so crash test performance is
> the best gauge of safety in your scenario.
Thanks for the reply.
On the "two identical vehicles head-on = one vehicle into an immovable
wall" thing, it seems self-evident that you could also extend that
analogy and say that a heavier vehicle and a lighter vehicle head-on
would be equivalent to the lighter vehicle hitting a wall that is moving
at some advancing speed (i.e., more damage than head-on into a
same-weight vehicle), and the heavier vehicle hitting a wall that is
receding at some speed (i.e., less damage than head-on into a
same-weight vehicle)
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
10-17-2003, 08:06 PM
#106
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> Bill Putney wrote:
>
> > ... I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> > accidents.
> >
> > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> > would they stay the same?
> >
>
> Basically, yes. An auto crash is fairly inelastic, the safety of the
> vehicle occupants will primarily depend on how progressively the
> vehicles crush. The amount of energy dissipated will increase
> (dramatically) but the end result will be the same. Since energy
> increases linearly with increased mass, it ought to scale fairly roughly
> as you describe it.
>
> This is, of course, a fairly simplistic explanation and the crash
> performance characteristics of the vehicles will be the primary factor
> in whether the occupants walk away or not. A head-on collision between
> two identical vehicles is essentially the same thing as a head-on crash
> into an immovable wall at the same speed; so crash test performance is
> the best gauge of safety in your scenario.
Thanks for the reply.
On the "two identical vehicles head-on = one vehicle into an immovable
wall" thing, it seems self-evident that you could also extend that
analogy and say that a heavier vehicle and a lighter vehicle head-on
would be equivalent to the lighter vehicle hitting a wall that is moving
at some advancing speed (i.e., more damage than head-on into a
same-weight vehicle), and the heavier vehicle hitting a wall that is
receding at some speed (i.e., less damage than head-on into a
same-weight vehicle)
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
10-17-2003, 08:16 PM
#107
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
I don't know. Which way does the ninety mile an hour baseball
travel when it collides with at bat?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Bill Putney wrote:
>
> I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> accidents.
>
> Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> would they stay the same?
>
> Bill Putney
> (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> address with "x")
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
travel when it collides with at bat?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Bill Putney wrote:
>
> I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> accidents.
>
> Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> would they stay the same?
>
> Bill Putney
> (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> address with "x")
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
10-17-2003, 08:16 PM
#108
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
I don't know. Which way does the ninety mile an hour baseball
travel when it collides with at bat?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Bill Putney wrote:
>
> I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> accidents.
>
> Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> would they stay the same?
>
> Bill Putney
> (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> address with "x")
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
travel when it collides with at bat?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Bill Putney wrote:
>
> I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> accidents.
>
> Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> would they stay the same?
>
> Bill Putney
> (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> address with "x")
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
10-17-2003, 08:16 PM
#109
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
I don't know. Which way does the ninety mile an hour baseball
travel when it collides with at bat?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Bill Putney wrote:
>
> I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> accidents.
>
> Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> would they stay the same?
>
> Bill Putney
> (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> address with "x")
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
travel when it collides with at bat?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Bill Putney wrote:
>
> I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two
> otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a
> vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds,
> and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any
> ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the
> other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for
> corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different
> accidents.
>
> Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became
> convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle
> and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous
> vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle
> accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or
> would they stay the same?
>
> Bill Putney
> (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
> address with "x")
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
10-17-2003, 08:20 PM
#110
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Kevin wrote:
> Brent P wrote:
>
>> In article <VQYjb.489624$2x.202488@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> , Kevin
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Heaver is better. Take a large SUV, spend a few bucks and put in a
>>> roll cage, fire bottle system, and 5 point belts and you will be as
>>> close to bullet proof as you can get.
>>
>>
>>
>> The same could be said of practically any motor vehicle, even a geo
>> metro.
>>
>>
>
> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
> generates more momentum
>
Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly squat
when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than you (like
a semi)
I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
nate
--
remove "horny" from my email address to reply.
> Brent P wrote:
>
>> In article <VQYjb.489624$2x.202488@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> , Kevin
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Heaver is better. Take a large SUV, spend a few bucks and put in a
>>> roll cage, fire bottle system, and 5 point belts and you will be as
>>> close to bullet proof as you can get.
>>
>>
>>
>> The same could be said of practically any motor vehicle, even a geo
>> metro.
>>
>>
>
> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
> generates more momentum
>
Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly squat
when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than you (like
a semi)
I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
nate
--
remove "horny" from my email address to reply.
