Tony Lockhart
Avoiding Stress, at Every Opportunity
So ban any car that weighs more than...? Or heavily tax them? (Already happens)
Big heavy cars have always existed, it’s a fact of life. Making them safer for occupants and others is a good thing.
It’s not just 911s and Minis that are big now.
- Thread starter Tony Lockhart
- Start date
So ban any car that weighs more than...? Or heavily tax them? (Already happens)
Big heavy cars have always existed, it’s a fact of life. Making them safer for occupants and others is a good thing.
Nero
Re: Tired
Signora likes the Yeti, simply because it looks like a big version of her Panda. I rest the OP's case.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
I don't think it's a zero sum game, that's all. Yes, big heavy cars have always existed, but a far greater number of 'ordinary' cars now are bigger and heavier than the 'big heavy' cars of old. Yes, they now have better brakes, tyres, passive and active safety, but they also cocoon their occupants who, in turn, drive with less regard for the risks to others' safety because they are in that calm, secure little bubble. They pay less attention to their driving and are more easily distracted and less adept at spotting hazards. Women like SUVs and 'school run 4x4s' because they make them feel secure, and believe their kids are safer. If they thought their kids were more vulnerable, they'd surely drive more cautiously.
You have conservation of momentum. If you assume the car + person end up travelling at some combined speed, then the momentum of the car + person would match that of the original car (this is of course assuming no breaking etc).
So, say the car of mass 1,000kg is travelling at 13 meters per second (29mph), then the car has 13,000 kg.m/s of momentum. If the car hits a person of mass 80kg, then the combined car + person will be travelling at 13,000 / 1080 = 12m/s, or 27mph.
If the car weighed 1250Kg, travelling at 13 m/s, we'd have 16,250 kg.m/s, again divided by the combined mass of 1330Kg gives 12.2 m/s, or 27.3mph.
So yes, if the car weighs 25% less, the pedestrian would 'only' end up at 27mph after the collision, rather than 27.3mph. I don't know about you, but that isn't enough difference to really make me happy with being hit by either car.
linnfomaniac83
I bet you can’t wheelie a unicycle!
Same story with weight too, a new Vauxhall Corsa weighs as much as a MK2 Cavalier... the cav is slightly longer due to its boot overhang but it’s narrower and shorter than a new Corsa!
Tony Lockhart
Avoiding Stress, at Every Opportunity
Unless the heavier car has easily deformed front panels and a cushion that reduces the impact as your head cannons onto the bonnet/cylinder head
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
I don't think it works like that though (and, in passing, a 1000kg car doesn't weigh 25% less than a 1250kg car, but 20% less). The pedestrian doesn't become attached to the car, they are, typically, thrown some distance. So it's energy transfer from an impulse, not combined energy of an agglomerated mass. Forgive my rusty physics but the impulse is force over time. Assuming the time is the same, the force is proportional to the kinetic energy, which is directly proportional to the mass. In your example, the impulse experienced by the pedestrian would be 1.25 times as great.
davidsrsb
pfm Member
Wealthy Asian buyers like the aggressive grille, which says "Get out of my way peasant"
Big people carriers like Vellfires and Walds have had similar teeth grilles for years
You are on the right track:
Old/New: Length: 429/437, Width: 161/181, Height: 132/128. And Weight: 1210/1610 (400 kg plus really???)
But the big difference is in tire widht: 165/305!
If a pedestrian is hit by a car weighing 15 times as much as them the car mass does become irrelevant.
Had a dramatic illustration of the benefits of a little car mass and width when a Cavalier drove into my door. The car was shoved 10 feet sideways but my door, the main impact site, didn't move. Three large girders along the length of the door saved me from serious trauma. Took three months to fix the car though.
Had a dramatic illustration of the benefits of a little car mass and width when a Cavalier drove into my door. The car was shoved 10 feet sideways but my door, the main impact site, didn't move. Three large girders along the length of the door saved me from serious trauma. Took three months to fix the car though.
tones
Tones deaf
Appearance-wise, completely agreed, but a colleague Downunder once had one and it was such a nightmare reliability-wise that she got rid of it ASAP and bought something much more mundane that didn't need putting back together every 30 seconds or so.
In addition, those GTVs were not only expensive to repair from a mechanical point of view, but also in relation to panel damage. If I remember correctly, they had complex double-skinned panels, which cost a fortune to fix, so much so that the NRMA (NSW's equivalent of the AA) refused to insure Alfas of any kind - Porsche, sir? no problem, Alfa, sir, here are the addresses of some other insurance companies... It wasn't until the arrival of the relatively simple (from a construction point of view) Alfasud and Alfetta that the NRMA relented.
I would argue that if we compared todays American family sedan with a 50 year old one, the new one has actually lost considerably in weight.
When I was a kid we bicycled to school, several miles. Didn't do us any harm, did it. We didn't have to do extra 'training' in the evenings either as we already had our excersise on the school run (I spent my evening with plastic kits or a good book).
linnfomaniac83
I bet you can’t wheelie a unicycle!
Gorgeous looking thing!
The Alfa is just a cheap copy.
Though with the 1200cc 34HP 'Beetle' engine originally fitted, it broke few performance records.
You are right. When, some years ago the local sports car club was on a road trip, an MGB happened to very mildly (pedestrian speed) crash into a GTV. Hardlly noticeable on the MGB, the Alfa went to the scrap heap, wasn't possible to fix!
Here in Sweden they are called Bertone Coupes even though it was designed by Giugario!?!
Nero
Re: Tired
I always think it's wearing a caddish moustache - the Terry Thomas of sportsters
Space is the Place
pfm Member
The E-type was always big for a British sports car, look at it compared to the F-type!
It's a good job they've started building wider portcullis's on castles now and all the roads in the UK are much wider than they used to be.
It's a good job they've started building wider portcullis's on castles now and all the roads in the UK are much wider than they used to be.
Rack Kit
pfm Member
Not the same models I know, but...
Still wondering why BMW have dumped good looks and clean lines for the current ugly as sin designs.
Used to be a big fan but the current look is a real turn off.
The E-type was always big for a British sports car, look at it compared to the F-type!
It's a good job they've started building wider portcullis's on castles now and all the roads in the UK are much wider than they used to be.
Lol,
Tony Lockhart
Avoiding Stress, at Every Opportunity
They’ve mostly been a turn off since the Chris Bangle styling. And that was what? 15 years ago?
Very few cars from the last twenty years or more make me want to look twice.
Space is the Place
pfm Member
The BMW new designs are all about "road presence" and to outdo Audi, whoever has the biggest grill wins!
Oh and while your at it Audi do you think you could make your brake-lights a bit brighter?
Maybe 20 Suns instead of the 10 Suns brightness you currently have?
Because i really enjoy my retinas being burnt out every time one of your inconsiderate drivers applies the brakes.
Oh and while your at it Audi do you think you could make your brake-lights a bit brighter?
Maybe 20 Suns instead of the 10 Suns brightness you currently have?
Because i really enjoy my retinas being burnt out every time one of your inconsiderate drivers applies the brakes.