While I agree, there's also more to it than just weight. As you said, hitting a solid, immovable object, you're hosed either way. But I would also argue hitting other vehicles you'd be hosed too. It doesn't matter how much your car (CAR, note I said CAR, not SEMI-TRUCK or something) weighs, if it can't protect you, you're finished. My point was that he was arguing weight alone, when that is simply not the case. Sure, I agree that weight helps a tremendous amount in a crash, as you pointed out, it's purely physics. But it has to be able to protect you while you're traveling through that Honda Civic or Chevy Cruze, and an 80's car simply can't do that as effectively as something newer. Again, there's more to it than just weight, and he's failing to understand that. Remember when the IIHS crashed a 2010 Malibu and a 1960 Impala? Yea, that Impala weighed about 200-300 pounds more than the Malibu. And I'd rather be in the Malibu. Now, I'm fully aware that there's 50 years between those cars, but the principle remains the same.
Yup, 100%. If I remember correctly the A pillar designs on the 60's car did sweet f' all The weight thing is one of the main reasons small sports cars like the Lotus Elise don't always hold up so well in crashes though. Into a track barrier or other small cars they are fine, they are designed for that sort of thing, crash into a bigger vehicle though and its gonna hurt you a lot. The biggest issue with those heavy older vehicles is that they are a massive screw you to everyone else on the road in terms of safety. They don't offer much to the occupants due to the older designs and are very dangerous to be hit by if you are in a smaller vehicle. Especially if they have a higher ride height, since if they tip the roofs tend to be weak and most cars will struggle to deal with being driven over. This video from a very old episode of 5th gear kinda shows the issues with the older off-road style vehicles:
My dad has been hounding me to buy it. He loves that car SO much. He's willing to pay me over book for it so. It might be my best chance to move on for around what I paid for it. Would be kind of scary going from a 2004 to a 2000 tho.
Trus If I'm honest, a huge reason I'm going with close to stock coilover solution in the neAR future is deer. In the north east they are everywhere, and they are the dumbest animals ever. If I hit one in my civic it could go 2 ways. Either my radiator support and front end cave in and my radiator gets destroyed. New rad 50 bucks. Civic shell 3 to 800 bucks. A days labor and I'm back in action UNLESS the 400 pound animal comes up into my hood, and thru my windshield, wich results in a game over. Maybe getting those 3 or however many inches of ride height back can tip those odds back in my favor. Cars I can see and predict sometimes when I'm on my game. I can relate to a scared or inexperienced driver and maybe predict what he'll do next. Good luck guessing if that deer is going for it or not.
I never said 80's land yachtes have crumple zones, but they do have raw weight and yes im aware the last true american cars were early 70's but like it I said it was the closest I thought I'd be able to get, but that said if everyone else who is "thinking straight" is in love with their econoboxes designed for no purpose other than safety and idiot proofing then I think I'd like to avoid the alien mind control. --- Post updated --- Thats honestly part of the reason I'd want a larger vehicle, a giant "screw you" to the of the people on the road honestly sounds pretty appealing. --- Post updated --- I don't mean to sound like a rich dick, but rather a poor one who knows he has no future. --- Post updated --- I'm aware of that fact that it wouldnt protect you as well but that said I'm willing to accept that, and that said the 60 impala was ONLY 200-300 pounds heavier rather than 1000 or 2000 pounds heavier and had an X frame chassis, rather than the more typical ladder design,, the impala was actually a relatively light car for the time BECAUSE of the chassis, it was a sacrifice made for the sake of performance and weight at the cost of safety, something which I consider completely acceptable, not my cup of tea but I have no problem with other people driving cars like that, that was propaganda made to make people believe old cars are all more unsafe than they actually are, back then they were actually able to make sacrifices in safety, unlike now where companies have to make their cars safe at the cost of everything else.
Mhm, yes, the Camaro Z/28 is an econobox. Oh, I guess so is the Ford F-150, or the Chevy SS, or the Chrysler 300, or any other car on the face of the planet people actually buy. Last time I checked the Abarth 500 isn't an "econobox" per say, it's too much fun. Neither is the Dodge Ram, or the Challenger. How about Volvo's various offerings, or maybe the BMW 3-series. See how that argument falls apart? Hit me and I'll sue the fuck out of you. Being a giant "screw you" is fun until it isn't. You're failing there. Oh this one will be fun. 200-300 pounds it a lot of weight. That's exactly one you, for example. Or even one me. That makes some difference in crash forces and momentum. It's the reason why stripping the interior of your car that much weight can give you a couple tenths of a second in the quarter mile, or a couple tenths of a G in a corner. It's also the difference in weight between living in a crash or dying in a crash. And what do you mean by "at the cost of everything else"? Mclaren's vehicles are so strong they don't need roll cages in FIA racing, and I would say having been in one that it isn't exactly slow or bad handling or even uncomfortable. I never sit in a Mercedes and went, "Oh dear, I've suddenly sat in a barn." I've never gotten in a Honda Accord and thought, "My my my, what in gods name were the Japanese thinking making everything so nice." See how you're an idiot?
I'd probably have the same chance of getting sued if I'm driving a 5 thousand pound brick and got in an accident as I would a 2000 pount budget sports car and got in one unless im misunderstnding something so why not. When was the last time you've seen a Camaro Chevy SS, Ram, Challenger Crysler 300, 3-series or a new F-150? And then compare it to how frequently you see new Prius' and other economy cars and yes the Abarth 500 isnt quite an econobox, but what about a fiat 500? Maybe not quite an econobox but it's definately the kind of car most people get because "its cute" Yes, all those vehicles I'm sure are very nice, however they also have 6 digit price tags so thats to be expected, but other than comfort(not much difference expected in that department) there are other sacrifices made in weight and cost, think how much all the airbag equipment, computers, crumple zones and other things like that must weigh and cost? Compare a road legal "offroad" vehicle to a purpose built offroad vehicle built from the ground up without concern for road use with just seatbelts and a roll cage as safety equipment. You could get a new mid engine turbocharged 4 seat offroad vehicle for just over 20 thousand, but a brand new road legal "offroad" vehicle in the US would end up costing about two, three, maybe even 4 times times as much, sure a lot of that is just due to the fact that you could get more use out of something you can drive on roads and comfort features like windows, full length doors, a windshield, heating, air conditioning, a roof panel, mirrors, a half decent instrument panel, safety, sound insulation and other things like that, but a lot of the expenses probably come down to overly strict regulations and because of safety regulations a lot of smallish cars have gotten bigger over the generations and a lot of light low weight sports cars have got heavier like the Miata even though they are using lighter lower quality materials everywhere. And this is just a bit of an irrelevant complaint about newer cars, but what ever happened to fake woodgrain and chrome? Do people honestly prefer the look of black bumpy plastic?
Ok, here we go, round 3. Let's do this, I got all night. I see the cars both you and I mentioned on a daily basis. Wanna know why? BECAUSE PEOPLE BUY THEM! Isn't that funny? The F-150 is the best selling vehicle in America, you dense imbecile. So, it's MORE common than your average econobox. The Dodge Ram is common, because people buy them. Chrysler 300... Kinda common? I dunno, they suck as a vehicle, but people buy them. BMW 3-series? Only one of the most common and bought mid-sized sedans on the road. Camaro and Challenger? American muscle, OF COURSE THEY'RE COMMON. And your last paragraph is hilarious. I can't even take it seriously when you say "all these vehicles have a 6-digit price tag," when I mention the Honda Accord, a mid-sized family sedan with a starting price of $23k, and a Mercedes, which can be had for as little as as $32,400 for the CLA coupe. Odd how those prices lack 6-digits, isn't it? Fake woodgrain was ugly and chrome has gone nowhere. Go outside, we don't all drive Scion XB's and Priuses. Oh, I'd also like to recommend you punctuate correctly and remove unneeded words from your responses. They're getting a little hard to read.
Well I'll be the first to admit that I dont get out much so I'm probably not the best person to know about what is common and what isn't and okay I admit I guess I was wrong about the cost of a new Mercedes, and I couldn't really tell what you meant when you were talking about the accord, and I even thought the BMW 3 series was their 3 cylinder subcompact car(I series?) for the first few minutes of writing that. the main reason my posts are occasionally a bit scattered is I go back and make changes then dont read the whole thing.
My father has a Volvo V70R. Yes, it's a Volvo. Yes it's a station wagon. So it's safe, right? But that R means something. It means that it has a turbocharged 2.4L I5 that pushes about 330hp (with computer delimited). It's far from slow. And it's quite nice to ride in. It is the safest, while being the sportiest, car I've ever ridden in. It's also quite a rare car in the US, with less than 1000 imported each year for the 4 years it was imported. There just so happens to be one for sale less than 100 miles from my house, and I'm looking into buying it. Guess how much it will cost me. Seriously, guess how much the current owner wants for it.
I'd guess maybe 5 to 9 thousand assuming its in good condition? I have no clue about imported cars, dont know what year and dont know what condition.
"Occasionally" But that's beside the point. I wasn't arguing to try and change your mind. I was arguing to try and make you go and do some research. Find facts to back you up. That's the only way you can move forward in a disagreement. Be credible and be clear. Take the time while making changes to unscatter your post and make it readable. Have facts to support your position. You're still an idiot, but hopefully you can now be a more informed and better prepared idiot.
Holy shit, I was expecting you to guess close to $30,000, given how much you think other, similar cars go for. Guess what, you're right. $6,000. Now, my point. It's reasonably new, less than 13 years old. It's both safe and sporty. You've distinctly mentioned that these three things can't go together.
That's why learn some more car knowledge before you speak you dumb twat!, you said an econobox is sh*tty, does a f#$%ing Ford Escort look sh*tty to you!?
yes actually looks like just another economy car to me, they are honestly probably better and more sporty than they look but still you asked about looks. Similar cars like what? When have I ever said that I thought 30K was a normal price for a used car that isnt a cult classic?
Bit of good news for Australian car enthusiasts. HSV/Walkinshaw just signed a 15 year lease on a new factory
