dangerous vehicles

[FLATHEAD1]

Did any one see 5th Gear on Saturday. They simulated a pedestrian being struck by a small hatchback and a Range Rover. Both about mid 90 models. They used a 75kg adult crash test dummy travelled at 60kph and braked hitting the dummy at about 30kph. It was repeated several times.

The small hatch hit the dummy in the knee area causing the legs to be flung up into the air and the head to smash down onto the bonnent or windscreen. As there is little clearance between the bonnent and the heavy metal components the dummies head was effectively hitting the top of the engine. The dummy body was scoped up on to the bonnent and as the car braked the dummy continued on to have a second head first impact with the road.

When the dummy was hit with the range rover it was hit in the lower body region and the head came down onto the bonnet. The bonnet deformed cushioning the head impact as there is much greater clearances between the bonnet and the engine components. The dummy was carried forward and dropped onto the road when the range rover stopped.

Conclusion was that you had a better chance of survial and with less body truma being hit with a 4x4 than a small hatchback.

AS this a English show the rangie did not have a bull bar.

I think we should take up a petetion and have all small hatchbacks banned as they are a danger to pedestrians.

Cheers
FH1

[cooky]

small hatch backs will be very popular if fuel stays very high - I actually get a little scared driving behind one with passengers in the back - particularly kids or babies. They're about 2 foot from the back of the car - I'd hate to bump into one.

[saphire]

Dear Dear Ronnie.......
My family goes camping, fishing and we have rural land at Esk.
We live in the city and I own a 4WD.
I cant afford to own 2 cars so I choose to own a car that will serve me best.
Im not a rev head and I drive very conservativly and boring.
Driving back over the Wivenhoe dam today I saw 2 normal road cars speeding over the dam wall and overtaking on a double white line.
These drivers were not behind the wheel of a 4WD.
Where do these statistics come from?????
I think you have been watching too much today tonight and those other evening shows that scrape the bottom of the barrel for current affairs issues.

[saphire]

I love my 4wd (with a bullbar #) because on my way to the beach to rip up the sand dunes and do do nuts, I can push pedestrians and hyundai's off the road and out of my way easily. They are also far more stable and I don't spill as much beer in my lap while driving.<br><br>

Hey Dicko,
I hope you dont run ausfish members off the road.
Im the one in the hyundai..... blue santa fe.
Well.........at least I know if I see you coming I will have to hide my car behind a tree.
Oh yer.... on my car they call it a nudge bar
saphire

[seabug]

"A worldwide campaign against this 'urban assault vehicle' is already underway, targeting their fuel consumption and safety record"

OK Ronnie,
Try these facts.
My 100 series turbo Cruiser does 9.9 km per litre.Better than my '97 standard 6 cyl. Fairlane at 9km. per litre. # (Two people plus luggage)

A recent report in the Herald/Sun was that the new Cruiser's brakes in a shorter distance than a new Commodore.

And the reason I bought my Cruiser was so I can tow a caravan and keep up to the traffic on the highway.and not have convoys behind me .

Something that my Old 80 Series did not have the grunt to do. >
And that my Fairlane could not legally do(See towing restrictions in Ford Handbook)

Regards
Seabug

[PinHead]

Dammit..I had better get a bar for my 4WD..and the sooner the better or would I be safer taking the son's Club Sport for a blast up the highway ?

[bootyou]

I was in Coolooah in August found no signs of poo in the bush There are toilest you know all the 4x4 owners were nice only cane accross one druiver driving stupidly I give it 4 stars if you understand the star rating system and i must compliment the ranger that looks after the area keep up the good work Kerin {NP Ranger}. Queensland people should be proud of the way the national parks are run up there I can only say that NSW national parks should get their finger out and and fall into line with the trend set in Queensland as in new south wales the method of maintaining a national park is to fence everyone out close all the old access roads that have been in use since time began thnmbs down to NSW national park management. PS I am a greenie in my own way I love the bush and want it preserved and accessable to all whom wish to experience just keep the deveopers out.
Bill.

[drenno]

Well Ronnie, as someone who gets to go to car accidents every day, investigate the causes, listen to the excuses and deal with the carnage Im going to throw in my two cents worth - (For the record I do own a 4wd)

The biggest contributing factors other than those of speed, fatigue & alcohol are the drivers poor attitude & low skill levels (practical).

I watch the "trial by media" of 4wds and there are several points that are never raised, firstly in the instances of children being tragically killed - why are questions never raised regarding the lack of supervision, ie why was the 5 year old running around near the road??? Secondly, when a vehicle with a mass between 15 and 30 times that of an adult is travelling at 50km/h + an impact can only result in serious injury or death of the person - simple physics.

[Owen]

As with most issues regarding statistics you have to be very careful what you accept as proven.
I was involved in the design and manufacture of bullbars for many years and have seen some monumental twisting of the "facts" by people with the agenda of banning bullbars and/or 4wds.
Some years ago a "lobby group" in Victoria was touting some satistics that "proved" that something like 20-30 people per year (from memory) were "killed by bullbars".
When I got a copy of the study it included such things as;

• Pedestrians hit by trucks at speeds often in excess of 60km/hr (but the truck had a bullbar)
• Several people who were run over whilst sleeping on the highway (but the vehicle had a bullbar)
  

I have also seen another study that demonstrated the a pedestrian hit by a bullbar was more likely to survive. They reasoned that the majority of pedestrian fatalities are due to head injuries.
When the vehicle was not fitted with a bullbar the first contact was usually (depending on model) low on the persons body, causing them to be flipped off their feet and striking the lower windscreen frame with their head.
The tests with a bullbar fitted cause the "pivot point" to be raised and taken further from the vehicle which resulted in the head striking the soft bonnet panel.

Anytime you see statistics ask yourself

• Who commissioned them?
• Were they published in full?
• Can the person(s) who carried out the test be trusted to be impartial
• Were the tests carried out in such a way and with enough variation to be exhaustive and considered valid.

With bullbar designs these days, they must be crash tested to prove that they have a crumple rate that is +/- 10% of the original bumper structure.
This can be quite difficault to achieve because of the different materials used and also the fact that the point (height) of impact and the relationship between that point of impact and the mounting positions will have changed.
Most times it requires designing in a "crumple" section in the bullbar mounts.
I did have one case (on a Landrover 110) where I struggled to make the crumple rate the same because I couldn't get an Aluminium bullbar stiff enough.
If you look at a standard landy bumper it is mounted on short brackets which connect directly to the protruding chassis rails. This made the crash test curve rise slowly at first and then spike very sharply when the impact reached the chassis rails.
With a bullbar fitted the bar tended to rotate backwards from the higher point of impact in an arc around the mounting points.
This cause an impact graph that was quite linear in it's curve. i.e gradually absorbing energy.
So in my mind, the car was safer with the bullbar, but did not meet the standards.
I had to keep making it stiffer and stiffer until it matched the (extreme) impact curve that the original part exhibited.

So from this we can see that there are lies, damn lies and there are statistics
We can also see that well meaning politicians cannot design a "one size fits all" piece of legislation that is effective with aftermarket products.

cheers,
Owen

[Brian]

................. what ever you are smokin Ronnie STOP IT........ , Bugger i've said to much on this stupid topic already

Brian

[suead]

well bugger it im trading my patrol in on a hummer and i suggest everyone else do the same

[ronnie12]

oh how the small majority try to justify their urban assault vehicles, their lethal bull bars and their destruction of our beaches. A trip up to Double Island point truely justifies why their are slowly being banned from southern beaches and slowly being taxed off our streets.

[Black_Rat]

Yawn !! heard it before #

[roz]

Ronnie, Ronnie, Ronnieee

You poor narrow minded widdle cherub, get the chip off your shoulder.

How am I expected to go shooting soft little furry animals and get to some of my favourite fishing spots without my 4WD (with bull bar).

cheers Roz.

[revs57]

Ronnie...build a bridge...you know the rest