new vs old safety technology

[redressonance]

My girlfriend is deeply concerned that my daily driver is a 39 year old car with 39 year old safety technology. This might be a broad question but how much safer are new cars vs old cars?





Some topics that I imagine might come up are:



ABS
Airbags
Body-on-Frame vs. unibody (Monocoque)
crumple zone
side beams
Collapsible steering columns

If you had to guess a percentage of likelihood that you would survive a serious crash in new car vs an old one what would your guess be?

-Alonso

[silver69camaro]

My opinion is, well, there really is no comparison. Old cars are death traps compared to new cars. Yeah, there are stories about guys who got into a serious accident in their musclecar and came out just fine, but lets face the facts, the liklihood of serious injury is seriously reduced in a new cars.

Full frame cars don't really allow much more protection at all. Factory frames are just there to support the suspension and connect it to the body - about 2/3s of vehicle stiffness comes from the body itself. Crumple zones and side impact beams is where, IMO much of the difference is made. Avoiding injury is about absorbing and transferring energy, and old cars don't do this well at all. A stiffer car (say, McLaren F1 or similar) will actually increase the deacceleration rate which can cause further injuries. Crumple zones slow deacceleration - so the impact is softened.

Roll bars and cages don't help either, unless if you plan on wearing a helmet 100% of the time. If you smack your head on a door bar, you're dead - plain and simple - and you'd be amazed how far your body will travel in a serious accident.

I have ABS on my car, and while that does make me feel better, it doesn't do anything when the impact actually occurs.

[David Pozzi]

IF you have 3 point safety belts in your car and you USE THEM, you are way ahead of many others who are not. At least safety was being worked on pretty hard when the late 60's cars came out, with 1967 being a huge improvement year. Things like safety glass and protrusions in the dash were fixed for the most part by that time. Earlier cars had no seat belts (they were offered as an option), metal knobs and low dash panels that would impale the passengers in a crash. Unrestrained passengers flew through the windshield (no laminated safety glass) and landed on the pavement in many crashes.

A first gen Camaro has modern tweaks like weakened sections in the hood so it buckles and won't come through the windshield, the subframe was designed to bend and absorb energy, the car has at least some consideration to roll over protection with a padded dash, the collapseable steering column was introduced in 1967, attention was paid to steering wheel impact to the driver's chest. These were brand new innovations back then. I'm not saying you are as safe as in a new car, but you are safer in a 67 Camaro for example than an early 60's car.

[Vegas69]

Tell her your going to buy a motorcycle instead and she'll forget all about it. Night and day that's the difference. I would get a 3 point belt set up if you intend to drive it on a daily basis.

[DoABarrelRoll]

ABS is for people who don't know how to use brakes, or panic easily.

Air Bags are neat, but they have caused quite a few deaths themselves (yes the people were wearing their belts properly).

Remind her that these new technologies work great when you have nothing but new tech. on the road. An old car will cut through a new car, regardless of how many air bags, crumple zones, and how fast the windows automatically get rolled up.

[silver69camaro]

ABS is for people who don't know how to use brakes, or panic easily.

Boy, that's just plain wrong. Once you get deeply involved with how ABS works, you'll know how good it really is.

[monza]

ABS is for people who don't know how to use brakes, or panic easily.
An old car will cut through a new car, regardless of how many air bags, crumple zones, and how fast the windows automatically get rolled up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xwYBBpHg1I
I was just looking for this utube to show how wrong the above statement is , besides this video, there is tons of evidence the old " big steel" is just not as safe. I wish it was not true.
The ABS comment ...it's already being debated.

[dannyho]

I couldn't find the video, but i remember seeing a crash test of two cars, that were the same make and model, but 10 years apart or so. both had received the highest crash rating and when the cars hit each other the newer car destroyed the older car. I remember them saying specifically that any occupants in the older car would've surely died. and those cars were definitely not even close to 30 years old. there are a number of similar tests, do a search on google or youtube. In the end you really need to rely on you being a good driver in the first place, which includes avoiding all the idiots out there.

[Vegas69]

Most wrecks have nothing to do with you being a good driver. When I was 15 years old and made my first trip to school on a school permit I was blindsided at a 2 way stop. I had no way to see him coming due to some trees and bushes.

[ProTouring442]

I couldn't find the video, but i remember seeing a crash test of two cars, that were the same make and model, but 10 years apart or so. both had received the highest crash rating and when the cars hit each other the newer car destroyed the older car. I remember them saying specifically that any occupants in the older car would've surely died. and those cars were definitely not even close to 30 years old. there are a number of similar tests, do a search on google or youtube. In the end you really need to rely on you being a good driver in the first place, which includes avoiding all the idiots out there.

I know what you're getting at, but at the same time that video sounds a bit fishy considering that many of the new standards are add-ons to the old.

In my opinion, and it is only that, I would think that any good sized car from somewhere in the 80's on up would be reasonably safe in a crash if the occupants are properly belted, etc. Newer technology, such as multiple air bags, really comes in when the crashes approach high speeds, such as would be the case in a head-on collision.

As others have pointed out, the installation of a roll cage will actually cause more danger due to the chance of the passengers impacting the cage. On the other hand, i would think it would be completely possible to make a "cage" of smaller diameter tubing, integrated into the A, B, and C pillars, door jams, etc, surrounding the passenger compartment with higher strength bracing. You could even add a door impact bar tied in with the hinges in the front, and the latch at the back of the door. This, in theory, will create a situation where the passenger compartment remains fairly in tact whilst the front or rear of the car becomes a "crumple zone." True, we as amateurs cannot engineer the collapsing of these zones, but with some careful thought a reasonable solution should be doable.

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

[69stang]

Roll bars and cages don't help either, unless if you plan on wearing a helmet 100% of the time. If you smack your head on a door bar, you're dead - plain and simple - and you'd be amazed how far your body will travel in a serious accident.

I disagree with this kind of blanket statement. I agree that your "typical" roll bar could increase your chances of injury IF it intrudes too much in the occupant's space. Regardless, if you smack your head on a roof brace or doorway structure you're just as dead. Again -

you'd be amazed how far your body will travel in a serious accident.

On the other hand, i would think it would be completely possible to make a "cage" of smaller diameter tubing, integrated into the A, B, and C pillars, door jams, etc, surrounding the passenger compartment with higher strength bracing.

Creating a safe zone, so to speak, where occupants can survive while leaving the other areas to crumple seems to be a viable option. You want the passenger compartment to remain intact while the rest of the car crumples or dissintegrates dissipating the energy of the impact.

I don't think anyone can argue against newer cars are, overall, safer than older cars, they're supposed to be. Just knowing about it and understanding you can make some improvements to an older car then get on with life. Millions & millions of cars have been built and driven for over a hundred years. Worrying about it does nothing but cause stress. Keeping your car in good reliable condition will do more for peace of mind than being overconcerned about "old" safety technology. Enrolling in a driving school to improve your skills, I think, would do more good though there's always bonehead drivers out there. Untill everyone is required to pass a real driving skill test (vs a current driving test) to get a license, I don't see old or new safety technology being all that important.

[silver69camaro]

I disagree with this kind of blanket statement. I agree that your "typical" roll bar could increase your chances of injury IF it intrudes too much in the occupant's space. Regardless, if you smack your head on a roof brace or doorway structure you're just as dead.

I dunno Roger. Part of my job is designing cages and roll bars, and I've never really seen setups that truely impressed me (in typical cars) that were able to keep the roof line/brow bar/hoop away from the driver enough to where a helmet was not needed. I'm sure it's possible in larger sedans and pickups, but say a Camaro...I don't know how it could be done safely.

Keep in mind that all roll bars or cages will be 1-5/8" to 1-3/4" closer to ANY roof or door structure to your head.

[69stang]

Matt,
I can see your argument but I look at it from possibly a slightly different view. My job, before my employer was sold and moved out of state, was designing armor packages for a wide variety of vehicles including cash-in-transit, SWAT, SUVs and luxury cars. The armor thickness runs from .125" on the low end to .5" and up depending on the cutomer's security requirement. Armor steel is very stiff and requires many small pieces to make up a package that conforms to the body structure with as little intrusion into the passenger compartment as possible. Factory panels are trimmed where possible and re-fit to the vehicle. Where the original panels can't be used the panel is usually covered with auto carpeting or possibly a thin layer of foam and some leather. If you bounce your head off that you'll be wishing it was a padded roll bar. Things like the headliner and pillar trim no longer have any give either. I've knocked my head on spall guards around the doorways too. I don't know, maybe not such a big difference in the real world.

[Norm Peterson]

The concern is that a 1.75" OD tube is still going to be closer to your head than most any fitted plates. Even if the difference is only 1", that's potentially significant. Consider the case where your head would travel (say) 4". Do you prefer the half inch thick armor 4.5" away or the cage tubing 3.5" away? Consider both to be equally padded.

Unfortunately, I've had a little personal experience with how far the human body can stretch during an accident. Not anything recent, but you tend to remember things like having hit the rearview mirror with your forehead hard enough to make it punch a nice big star in the windshield - while belted in (think 2-point 1960's-era belts). I'm sure that there was at least some belt stretching involved, though it's a bit moot to bother separating belt stretch from body excursion.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Some topics that I imagine might come up are:

ABS
Airbags
Body-on-Frame vs. unibody (Monocoque)
crumple zone
side beams
Collapsible steering columns

If you had to guess a percentage of likelihood that you would survive a serious crash in new car vs an old one what would your guess be?

-Alonso

Wow, that's quite a variety of categories to cover in a single thread. Maybe a little separation is in order.

Structural improvements

Elimination of secondary hazards or reduction of their likely consequences (i.e. collapsible steering columns, double-pivot rearview mirrors, and I'd lump air bags and belt pretensioning here as well)

Electronic driver assists (ABS, stability control, etc.)

Other (pedestrian protection - I think only European at this point)


There shouldn't be much question that newer cars are much better than the older ones with respect to the first two categories. Even more so when you consider the effects of corrosion.


I really don't want to get started on the third, so I'll keep it as short as I can. At best, they enable those with poor driving skills to drive at lower risk. At worst, they teach them to do the wrong things (or not do the right things) by actively assuming control.

I would ask anyone who has ever experienced ABS "ice mode" on dry pavement if they still think that ABS is a universally good thing. I have, and I don't.
"Smart cruise control" that maintains following distance - and arbitrarily lets anything and everything cut you off?
"Brake assist" that assumes whenever you're stopping hard that you need absolutely maximum deceleration, immediately?
Just wait until lane departure + automated course correction shows up.



Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Yes, ABS is very good for some things, like letting you steer while braking hard without demanding a whole lot in the way of driver skill (with ABS you don't have to even know that you can't have maximum braking and any cornering at the same time).

On the 'minus side' of the ledger, sometimes it can make some pretty stupid decisions, such as when "ice mode" gets inappropriately tripped. And even though I don't have hard test data, I can't help but think that every time you add something between the brake pedal and the pad/rotor interface that you're sacrificing some physical "feel" about what's going on. Then again, maybe that doesn't matter to most drivers <sigh>.


Depending on the specific ABS system, it may throw a code just from fitting tires of different size than OE. I've heard that it takes a year do develop and certify an ABS system, so I don't hold out a whole lot of hope for a user fix here.


Norm

[silver69camaro]

I disagree Norm. I have a C6 Bosch ABS system on my Camaro using manual brakes and Wilwood front and rear discs. Ice mode is a big possibility with a mis-programed aftermarket motorsports ABS system, not OE setups.

Pedal feedback is exactly the same as it was before, and pump cycling is barely felt. Stopping distances are extremely short and consistant, and I'll never flat-spot a tire. That's worth the money and time right there.

Any performance-oriented ABS controller will pretty much outbrake a good driver every time. Stability-oriented systems will not, which is where the "ABS is for people who can't drive" method of uneducated thinking came from.

[ErikLS2]

I work on cars everyday that have some of the most advanced safety features out there. The latest being one which keeps the car in the lane, thanks to electronic power steering, slows the vehicle if an obstruction is sensed up ahead and even "watches" the drivers face and alerts him if he dozes off. Now, these features may be annoying to many of us "drivers" who like to control our cars but most of them are outside of the driver's awareness. How would you like to be heading towards a car with some of these features and a sleepy or inattentive driver at the wheel? It could save your life without you even knowing it. IMHO, not a bad thing in this cell phone/texting/multi-taskin while driving world. The next time you or a loved one make it home alive may be due to one of these systems but you'll never know for sure.

What about pre-collision systems that cinch up the seat belts prior to impact to reduce bodily injury? Smart airbag systems that actually weigh passenger seat occupants or calculate driver distance from the steering wheel and adjust airbag deployment force accordingly?

The more advanced cars out there now have virtually no mechanical connections between driver and vehicle, steering is the only one left and the car can control that now too. Every input you give the car goes to a computer at 500 kb/ps or faster followed by a command by that computer sent to a particular actuator. The amount of data flying around inside the car just driving down the road in a straight line is incredible, never mind if a panic or adverse condition occurs. I've seen it first hand on scan tools and scopes.

Are we safer in modern cars? Absolutely. Is there a price to pay for that? Sure. At a minimum we lose some control and feedback from the vehicle. But, we can always build a kick ass older car too and isn't that why we're all here anyway? They haven't taken that away from us..........yet.

[Norm Peterson]

I disagree Norm. I have a C6 Bosch ABS system on my Camaro using manual brakes and Wilwood front and rear discs. Ice mode is a big possibility with a mis-programed aftermarket motorsports ABS system, not OE setups.

Maybe some OE systems. I've hit ice mode - or something scarily similar - a couple of times in my '08 Mustang GT, with no codes being thrown. On the street.

When, or maybe if, such systems can read the road conditions in real time instead of only relying on inferences I'll perhaps be convinced. I guess that all my life I've been able to do a decent job at threshhold braking, and I'll admit that I'm also concerned that placing full reliance on the electronics of ABS (what you must do in order to reap its benefits) will take that away. Thanks, but no thanks.


Norm

[vintageracer]

To put your girlfriends concern in perspective:

We KILL over 40,000 people per year in highway accidents on the roads of the US. Last time I looked that's more than most any disease or any other method of dying. I believe the numbers were over 50,000 people per year in the 70's/80's yet private foundations, individual people and interested companies will spend billions on research for diseases and other aspects that cause far LESS death every year. The ONLY entity that seems to do anything on any type of grand scale to improve the safety of cars/trucks is the government! And we ALL know how good they are at administering programs. The car companies have developed some neat technology however most was driven by regulation not necessarily innovation.

It has amazed me for YEARS that our society accepts the carnage on our nations highways with so little discussion or passion.