Cab Mount Chop - Food for thought?

Safest vehicle ever.

 

Folk have swapped 3rd Gen sheet metal on to 2nd Gens, so I would think it close enough. Although, I believe the crash structure is significantly better.

On the ride height, talking offline with @hiPSI , it occurred to me that not so much slightly increased height but more that all Tacos are the same other than the Pros. Same height and same tire diameter. I have to wonder if this didn't play into the crash design? Risk versus reward, I wouldn't CMC my own Taco.

I do disagree a bit about the OP. I don't always feel that weight and size are the the only factors. There seems to be some real world results also. I've seen Saabs do incredibly well in what would appear to be deadly collisions. Newer Subarus seem to perform very well also. We have seen a lot of impressive crash pics posted here. I am confident in our vehicles.

 

Per mile, sure. But practicality and cost. Even a smaller International CXT was not really a workable solution.

 

Safest, not smartest.

 

Crash a Subaru Outback at 45 MPH into a new F550 Flatbed with a few tons secured in the back. In that scenario, it would be like the Subaru hitting the wall at 90 mph.
Here is an excellent video showing this concept:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExQUGk12S8U

 

Yep. It get that. But, there is no other aspect of an F550 that I want to deal with. The same could be said about crashing an F550 into a bridge abutment or a semi?

 

Ah! Crashing into a bridge abutment would be much preferable than a semi lol. That bridge abutment is not giving you anything, it's just absorbing energy. That semi will give you much more energy transfer into your 550.

 

It's the season of giving!

 

If you ever have to make a split second decision, "bridge abutment or semi," choose the bridge abutment.

Quick story:
Several years ago I was riding on an unfamiliar trail in Georgia. I was leading the group, flying downhill and popped around the turn to see a.... switchback. In a split second I had a decision: Saplings or rocks. I chose saplings and only ended up with a broke finger and some stitches.
Going back to the narrative, my mass and velocity was great enough to overcome the saplings and I came to a much slower stop than if I had chosen the rock.

 

The wheel is made from Cous-cous. Your argument is invalid

 

Eff that. Ghostride the whip

 

Newton's First Law be damned.

 

Bruce Willis


His first law

 

Ok so I have done a lot more research and I can’t find anything that shows where the high strength steel is on the 3rd gen frame. So I’m going back to my previous statement that cab mounts are mild steel.

If you can prove where the high strength steel is please post it.

 

Interesting.

EDIT: Sorry for bringing this thread back to life...

 

Blashemy. Dont you know the ability to run big tires and look cool far outweighs any safety engineered in the vehicle?

 

That Smart Fortwo is pretty impressive though. I seen a few crash tests and pics where it’s getting hit by something a lot larger and heavier and the cabin is pretty much fully intact. Quality engineering can go a long way.

 

Like I said, all this is for slow speed (below 45 mph) crashes. At higher speeds, chances are slim to none of walking away. It happens, but rarely.
When I was younger, a bunch of us were jumping off of cliffs into a deep lake. We had basically a 30, 60 and 90 foot jump. We could have gone higher but 90 ft is no joke. I only did 90 ft once. It bruised me on the bottom of my feet. It bruised my knee joints. It f'n hurt and I hit the water almost perfect. That same night, an older guy (late teens, early 20's) climbed on up to about 140 ft and jumped. He lived, with shattered legs, broken back and ruptured spleen. Speed is no joke man.

 

Excerpt from Consumer Reports:
"What the stars don’t say
Crash tests are useful for gauging how well a vehicle can protect occupants in a crash, but no test is infallible or universal. For instance, most tests use a 50th-percentile (average sized) crash-test dummy, and people much smaller or larger than that may not be protected as well as the scores indicate. Here are some other factors that affect how you should view the scores:

Heavy vs. light vehicles
Since the front-crash tests performed by NHTSA and IIHS simulate a collision between two vehicles of the same weight and height, the scores don't apply to crashes between mismatched vehicles. In a crash between a big car and a small one, you're usually better off in the big car. In such cases, the larger, heavier vehicle projects more of its crash energy into the smaller one. This, in turn, helps to better protect the larger vehicle's occupants, but it can inflict proportionately more injury to the occupants of the smaller vehicle.

Higher bumpers
Besides their weight, the higher bumper on many taller vehicles such as pickups and SUVs contributes to the truck vs. car mismatch. When an SUV or truck hits a typical passenger car, the impact occurs above the car's bumper line, exerting its force into weaker portions of the smaller vehicle and inflicting greater damage. To address this, SUVs—especially car-based models—are being designed with lower, more compatible bumpers.

More on the side
Side-impact tests apply more broadly than front-crash results do. Since the striking vehicle is the same within all the NHTSA tests and within all the IIHS tests, the results apply across all classes. In other words, a Good side-crash score for a small car is the same as a Good for a large car. That means that the side-crash results can be compared across all vehicle-size categories."