I would rather be in my old truck. Id rather have my body absorb those forces and the vehicle remain intact than having my car crush like a tin can and having the paramedics unable to get me from the car in the event I do get injured. An old girlfriends mom was an EMT and she says this happens alot. Call me old fashioned. An airbag would be nice though- my steering wheel is gonna hurt if I ever hit it.

 

Man screw crumple zones! Look at what we've got...the old days you had real bumpers that actually took the pounding before you even got to the rest of the vehicle. People say fender bender--that's what it was in the old days...bang it out and roll on. There's no such thing anymore...hit something at 10 mph and the whole car disintegrates. Bumper caves in, crumple zones crumple, motor mounts breakaway and the engine drops (so as not to enter the delicate passenger compartment) as both of your front airbags, side airbags, head curtain airbags deafening you with their explosions and filling your vehicle with that nifty burning odor.

It's either all or nothing anymore...gimme a tank anyday!!

 

Actually, the idea of a crumple zone is that it absorbs the impact better than a tank of a vehicle, for the benefit of all parties involved in the accident. It doesn't trap you inside, but it does make a mountain out of a molehill, so to speak - what usually would be a little fender bender may turn out to be major body work.

IMO, if people didn't drive like jerks, we wouldn't need all these fancy-schmancy safety systems.

XXL

 

I will say this much, I rearended another 150 a few months ago, slid through an intersection in the rain, hit him about 15-20 MPH...I put a dent in my bumber, and bent the mount brackets on his......both trucks were 02 F-150s...only problem was when the dealership (it was their truck) charged 600 bucks to replace all four mounts..now i have had a girl run into me in her car, it destroyed her car and did not hurt mine....gimme a tank any day.

 

I think we all agree with the damage to the vehicle will be less, but i was thinkin more in terms of saftey. A kid from school had a 92ish Merc Sable. He somehow or another got it flipped on its doors and slid into a tree. They couldnt get the doors open, and he had to wait a good half hour to get out. The car looked like when you step on a cola can that is laying on its side and it wraps around your foot. Thank goodness he was OK, but if he had been injured? That 30 min could have cost him his life.

 

I prefer older Ford trucks where pretty much every vehicle in front of me are my crumple zone. I would not want to be in an accident..been in enough....but I want the protection. I never did like the activists that want to make trucks unsafer so little cars do not get tore up so bad. Let's make the cars safer instead. Today's bumpers are a joke at best.

 

Didnt think about that! But it does make sense. The other tin can car can absorb the impact- your truck doesnt have to. I suppose thats the only good thing about so many econo boxes being out there- its like a padded cell!

 

My son's first vehicle was a '71 F100. The cab sustained a little crushing in the rollover, not enough to keep them from crawling out. And I know for a fact it kept them from any major injuries. MORE METAL and less fiberglass!

 

Crumple zones all the way....

They combined with seat belts have saved my life twice...

Take your tank and run into a staionary object...odds are you dont live, even with a seat belt.


Cars are replaceable, lives are not.

 

Speakin' as a firefighter/medic, the newer cars are easier to extricate people from than the old. The old ones were a bear to open up, simply because they were built stronger. Overall, I think your chance of survival is better in the new ones. Your chances of fixing the damage to drive another day were better in the old. It's a trade-off.

 

Seen on the rear differential of a highly modified Scout II: "YOU ARE MY CRUMPLE ZONE!"

 

Crumple zones on the 70's and 80's cars meant the trunk or engine compartment gave way to absorb the impact. These 90 and up cars, foreign and domestic, have no real crumple zones. The sloped front ends push the other vehicle right up into the passenger areas. The rear ends have no real distance so an rear collision puts the rear bumper in the back seat. Forget side impacts, a 2 inch beam will cave every time requiring your car to be cut off of you. Look at some of the wrecks int he salvage yards.

Besides, just because I had an accident doesn't mean I want my vehicle totally destroyed by an overzealous fireman who feels the need to remove my roof to extracate me. I want a tank!.

 

Tell you what: let's have a "crash-off." I'll get in a new Taurus and run it into a wall at 30 mph. You can get into your 1958 Ford pickup with no seat belts and you can run THAT into a wall at the same speed. I guarantee you that I'll be the one attending your funeral. Let me know the date and time, and I'll be there.

 

And let me hop in my ole 71 stang..with seat belts, and then we'll have some firewood this winter...well next winter, need to dry it out some.

 

No offense, but that's not really a cool thing to say - if it comes down to both cars being totalled and both of us walking away VS my truck sustaining little damage but killing somebody else -

I'd give up my truck any day.

XXL