Bought a Jeep WK today for $1800. Has the 4.7L, tow package (I own 3 boats so that’s appreciated), and most of the interior options originally offered on it. I really like it so far. I was shocked to learn about the UConnect feature, I didn’t realize they were a common thing on Chrysler’s of the era.
New RDX. The concept car came first (which looks very similar to what the production form looked like), then the production model came.
You compared a modern unibody compact SUV to a 90s framed fullsize sedan. Also, decelration doesn't really work that way. In my opinion, a bigger grievance is giving smaller cars a scoring crutch, misleading people about their actual relative safety.
What do I have to do with it? They do say "ratings can only be compared between cars of the same class". Anyway, what's your idea on improving this?
In a comedic sense. Or as a rat rod. --- Post updated --- Or if the metalhead is between the late 70s and late 00s, and isn't into cars.
It could also be depending on what type of metal that metalhead likes (could also be based off the band they like the most). I wonder what car would best suit a Ice Nine Kills fan...
And how do you conduct these tests? In modern tests, lighter cars have an advantage since less force is applied to them in a crash.
A fitting car is what suits the needs of the guy/gal. --- Post updated --- Deformable battering ram about the size, weight and shape of the average car?
In the real world, heavier and bigger cars have an advantage in crashes assuming they are crashing into a smaller and lighter car. However, rating them as such wouldn't help. Since it would be a sure fire way to ensure that all cars will get bigger and heavier in order to keep up with each other, essentially a weight race to ensure they can keep their 5 star rating. As such all cars would be bigger and heavier, and no one would be safer (since the advantage was only due to a ratio between vehicles). In fact they would likely be less safe, since in crashes like side pole impacts, heavier vehicles are at a large disadvantage, or any crash with an "unmovable" object like a wall more or less. Driving a tank is only safer if you are the only person driving one, once everyone gets one, no one is safe.
Deformable battering ram about the Most crashes are between vehicles, and IIHS death rate reports show bigger vehicles of a certain size usually getting safer. In a similar way, the Volvo XC90 is the only car with no reported UK fatalities. And larger vehicles have room for bigger crumple zones.
Well here is a way to make your vehicle much safer, attach a 1000kg lead weight to the engine bay. It completely screws over every other person on the road driving a lighter car, but it will make yours safer. Therefore, that is clearly a measure that manufacturers should be praised for including, and given a market advantage over. Even though it provides no improvement in safety whatsoever if every vehicle has it fitted, and serves to make older vehicles far less safe than they would otherwise be, while increasing stopping distances, and reducing the vehicles ability to avoid a collision due to degraded handling, and making everyone else more vulnerable, including people in houses/shops that get crashed into etc.
Except that cars are designed with their weight in mind, so here goes your snark. Also, when it comes to other road users, my sense of self-preservation is active and telling me to protect myself first.
