What new car to get??

jase1

It's coming...

http://www.kia.co.uk/New-Cars/new-models/Optima.aspx

Is getting some positive reviews in the press as well.

Kilty_2

Woah. Want that in my life tbh - looks awesome.

Sorry Chimera, O/T again :rotfl:

pwllbwdr

jase1 wrote: »

So, I take it from what you are saying then that you think a small 5-star car will not come off any worse in a collision when hitting a 5-star large car than the latter would?

You must do, if you do not accept that momentum is a factor.

The Primera weighs half as much again as the Fiat does. The Fiat receives more force during the impact than the Nissan does, in contrast to the NCAP test, so its safety features, better though they may be, must work harder to achieve the same result.

Sorry to go OT (!), but that is a big physics fail. Newton's 3rd law- the forces on each vehicle in a single impact are the same. Momentum is not the concept to be focusing on either - it is the energy which needs to be disippated.

Modern cars are designed with parts of the car which absorb the energy of the impact without allowing that to compromise the passenger areas. Older cars may come out of a collision looking better than a modern car, but you might find the doors wont open, or the driver's feet have been removed by the pedal box, and so on...

jase1

@pwllbwdr: with respect, the American Insurance Institute for Highway Safety disagrees with you.

http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr041409.html

Three controlled crashes in lab conditions, one result each time: the smaller car comes off far worse than the larger one.

The video (top right) of the Yaris vs Camry is particularly shocking.

The safety features of the larger car will not help the smaller car either: if a large (heavy), but poorly-performing larger car comes into contact with the smaller one, all that happens is that the larger car's occupants are minced as well.

Unless you can tell me why these results are bogus?

pwllbwdr

Just to remind you, we were talking about the differences between 5-star modern small cars and older, larger cars. You said

A large, older 3-star car will make mincemeat of a newer 5-star one in a high-speed head-on. The 3-star car probably won't be in a very good state either, but NCAP isn't the be-all and end-all.

I don't think your link addresses that point at all does it?

jase1

pwllbwdr wrote: »

Just to remind you, we were talking about the differences between 5-star modern small cars and older, larger cars. You said



I don't think your link addresses that point at all does it?

I have addressed that.

I never said, at any point, that you are protected in the three star car. What I said was, that the three star car would still cause massive damage to the five-star smaller car. Lack of safety features on the heavier car do not equate to increased safety for the lighter one -- the heavier car will still plough through the smaller car regardless of the damage it is simultaneously doing to its own occupants.

I have also, repeatedly, made it quite clear that I would not expect the 3-star car to do well.

If you, or bigjl, decide to ignore those qualifications, that is not my problem.

My point, made consistently throughout this conversation, is that a "five star" smaller car does not afford the same level of protection as a "five star" larger one does.

pwllbwdr

That isn't what you said then. Your quote in my above post is, I believe incorrect and misleading. Modern five star cars, including smaller vehicles, are designed to take massive damage and let the passenger space remain intact. Older cars were generally not designed around that concept.

jase1

As an aside, I would personally be in favour of implementing this kind of test into NCAP-style ratings. By all means make the static test a part of the process, but some sort of re-usable analogue to a "heavy" car would be a good addition IMO. Set the test car running against a moving target, two tonnes in weight, and see how the smaller cars get on then -- will there be any small 5-star cars?

jase1

pwllbwdr wrote: »

That isn't what you said then. Your quote in my above post is, I believe incorrect and misleading. Modern five star cars, including smaller vehicles, are designed to take massive damage and let the passenger space remain intact. Older cars were generally not designed around that concept.

What is misleading about it? Let's take the three statements in order:

• A large, older 3-star car will make mincemeat of a newer 5-star one in a high-speed head-on.

Right, what is misleading about this statement? Unless you are asserting that the lower star-rating of the larger car causes the effective safety rating of the smaller car to work in reverse, the statement is true. In essence, a car with zero stars will still cause the same level of damage as a car with five stars to the smaller vehicle. In fact, it could be argued that the older vehicle, designed not to crumple, will effect even more damage as less of the impact is being absorbed by its (non-existent) safety protection.

• The 3-star car probably won't be in a very good state either,

As stated. This is the only part of the quote in question that I can see -- if the word "probably" is the cause of this argument then I apologise.

• NCAP isn't the be-all and end-all.

As demonstrated by the clear video evidence above.

pwllbwdr

jase1 wrote: »

What is misleading about it? Let's take the three statements in order:

• A large, older 3-star car will make mincemeat of a newer 5-star one in a high-speed head-on.

Right, what is misleading about this statement? Unless you are asserting that the lower star-rating of the larger car causes the effective safety rating of the smaller car to work in reverse, the statement is true. In essence, a car with zero stars will still cause the same level of damage as a car with five stars to the smaller vehicle. In fact, it could be argued that the older vehicle, designed not to crumple, will effect even more damage as less of the impact is being absorbed by its (non-existent) safety protection.

Last go. Because "making mincemeat" or not is not the way to assess how a vehicle performs in a collision.