Today had the ´74 DAF parked next to the resident female´s modern day SUV.
The latter is three times as heavy and they have about identical power/weight ratio.
Tyres 155R15 vs 255/55R18.
Both front engine RWD.
The oldie corners better, handles better and most importantly stops shorter. It even is about as economical with fuel because of the featherweight and narrower rubber.
Speaking of which, they do about as long with the tyres, thus the modern one pollutes with a lót more carcenogenic rubber particles.
The view on the world in the oldie is better too. Less glass surface but almost vertical and not low. Hardly any dead angle whereas the C-pillar of the SUV is a serious obstruction of the view.
The modern SUV has a significantly higher top speed but whether thát is better?
Also it´s tank-ness makes the driver feel less vulnerable. Again a doubtful point.
By Jove how much do we sacrifice in the name of progress; for ´comfort´ and the illusion of safety.
Quote from: Petrus on February 20, 2021, 18:52Today had the ´74 DAF parked next to the resident female´s modern day SUV.
The latter is three times as heavy and they have about identical power/weight ratio.
Tyres 155R15 vs 255/55R18.
Both front engine RWD.
The oldie corners better, handles better and most importantly stops shorter. It even is about as economical with fuel because of the featherweight and narrower rubber.
Speaking of which, they do about as long with the tyres, thus the modern one pollutes with a lót more carcenogenic rubber particles.
The view on the world in the oldie is better too. Less glass surface but almost vertical and not low. Hardly any dead angle whereas the C-pillar of the SUV is a serious obstruction of the view.
The modern SUV has a significantly higher top speed but whether thát is better?
Also it´s tank-ness makes the driver feel less vulnerable. Again a doubtful point.
By Jove how much do we sacrifice in the name of progress; for ´comfort´ and the illusion of safety.
Come on petrus even you can't argue about safety.
70s cars are death traps in comparison to modern cars.
Quote from: 1979scotte on February 20, 2021, 18:56Come on petrus even you can't argue about safety.
70s cars are death traps in comparison to modern cars.
The perception of safety again; Peltzman. Not so safe for the rést of the world.
Point is Schott that ´safety´ goes beyond passive occupant protection.
There is the active safety; the nibleness, stopping distance.
And what about the kinetic energy on impact.
A cyclist, pedestrian, motorcyclist I feel safer in the company of a Seat Marbella than when a 2 tonne heavy, 2 meter wide SUV with larger dead angles and aninvulnerable driver is coming up.
Quote from: Petrus on February 20, 2021, 19:02Quote from: 1979scotte on February 20, 2021, 18:56Come on petrus even you can't argue about safety.
70s cars are death traps in comparison to modern cars.
The perception of safety again; Peltzman. Not so safe for the rést of the world.
Point is Schott that ´safety´ goes beyond passive occupant protection.
There is the active safety; the nibleness, stopping distance.
And what about the kinetic energy on impact.
A cyclist, pedestrian, motorcyclist I feel safer in the company of a Seat Marbella than when a 2 tonne heavy, 2 meter wide SUV with larger dead angles and aninvulnerable driver is coming up.
SUV aren't all cars.
The golf fiesta polo clio are probably the biggest selling cars in Europe.
Idiot drivers are idiot drivers no matter what decade or vehicle.
Next you'll be telling us seat belts make us all reckless.
BTW road deaths have consistently fallen in the UK since 1966 until say 2010 where there has been a bit of a plateau.
Obviously vastly improved medical care and driver training has played its part.
Don´t forget better road design, guard rails, speed limits/control et al.
The point I am making Scott is that automotive progress does not result all thát great.
By all means compare a sixties Elan with a half century later Z4.
Fit modern tyres and seatbelts to the Elan ofcourse. Oh and electronic ignition.
Drive both a week about and tell me how much better a car the BMW is.
Ofcourse you are better off in a BMW when you crash it but I´d rather not crash in the fisrt place and I bet that the light, nible, short stopping Elan is pretty good at that.
Imo it is a bl@@dy marketing shame what we are being told/sold.
´We´ should not drive cars as if they are tanks but we should drive them like we are siting on a motorcycle; anticiating avoidance of an accident instead of feeling safe in case of a crash.
Just because you dont want to crash doesnt mean Dorris Doesn't!
An elan is an automotive icon.
A Z4 is just meh.
An elan weighs 700kg.
A current elise 930kg earlier models were much less.
A BMW 3200cs from the 60s weighs around 1500kg very roughly.
A BMW Z4M coupe is also 1500kg roughly .
Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:01Just because you dont want to crash doesnt mean Dorris Doesn't!
So you are told and gobble down hook ,line and sinker; wánt that a car is by law required to be a lardy crash tank and motorbikes? ... not.
By 2014 new cars are required to have backing up cameras and lane changing ´safety assistance´ so more people who should not be driving in the first place can drive ´safely´. Which then is foundation for your ´Doris´ argument.
We are being conned!
Seen that car commercial with a bint drinking coffee in the car and the car save that lovely young girl on the pedestrian crossing?
Like that is normal and that the car can deal with it.
Bl@@dy h###, such behaviour should be condemned; the bint banned from driving!!
The end game of the two pronged con is that we will be no-driving autonomous e-vehicles. But we will feel safe no?!
Quote from: 1979scotte on February 20, 2021, 21:17An elan is an automotive icon.
A Z4 is just meh.
An elan weighs 700kg.
A current elise 930kg earlier models were much less.
A BMW 3200cs from the 60s weighs around 1500kg very roughly.
A BMW Z4M coupe is also 1500kg roughly .
Edited
Even my diesel focus estate is lighter than a z4M
Quote from: Petrus on February 20, 2021, 21:31Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:01Just because you dont want to crash doesnt mean Dorris Doesn't!
So you are told and gobble down hook ,line and sinker; wánt that a car is by law required to be a lardy crash tank and motorbikes? ... not.
By 2014 new cars are required to have backing up cameras and lane changing ´safety assistance´ so more people who should not be driving in the first place can drive ´safely´. Which then is foundation for your ´Doris´ argument.
We are being conned!
Seen that car commercial with a bint drinking coffee in the car and the car save that lovely young girl on the pedestrian crossing?
Like that is normal and that the car can deal with it.
Bl@@dy h###, such behaviour should be condemned; the bint banned from driving!!
The end game of the two pronged con is that we will be no-driving autonomous e-vehicles. But we will feel safe no?!
Are you any where near sane?
Quote from: 1979scotte on February 20, 2021, 21:17An elan is an automotive icon.
A Z4 is just meh.
I;ll second that, actually, third and fourth it :)
Rob
Agree not sure many rate the the regards of sportscar. Had this conversation with Nath in his 3ltr. ITs more a gran tourer, the same way a F type is. They are just too heavy to be considered sports cars for me. Z4 is also too soft.
Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:44Agree not sure many rate the the regards of sportscar. Had this conversation with Nath in his 3ltr. ITs more a gran tourer, the same way a F type is. They are just too heavy to be considered sports cars for me. Z4 is also too soft.
An F type is far better than a Z4 even if it is heavier.
It is, the point is they are both GT cars not sports cars.
Lets be honest, modern cars are great in many ways, safer, more reliable, mostly dont rust and lots more, they have imo opinion, become bland, stereotyped and at times fooking frustrating. Only this week whilst driving to work in my HRV, PING on the dash, tyre pressure warning, checked the pressures and they were fine, on numerous occasions when pulling on to my drive the bloody thing slams the brakes on just because there is a big edge there, perhaps I'm getting old but I'm more than capable of applying the brakes and checking tyre pressures myself
Rob
Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:36Quote from: Petrus on February 20, 2021, 21:31Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:01Just because you dont want to crash doesnt mean Dorris Doesn't!
So you are told and gobble down hook ,line and sinker; wánt that a car is by law required to be a lardy crash tank and motorbikes? ... not.
By 2014 new cars are required to have backing up cameras and lane changing ´safety assistance´ so more people who should not be driving in the first place can drive ´safely´. Which then is foundation for your ´Doris´ argument.
We are being conned!
Seen that car commercial with a bint drinking coffee in the car and the car save that lovely young girl on the pedestrian crossing?
Like that is normal and that the car can deal with it.
Bl@@dy h###, such behaviour should be condemned; the bint banned from driving!!
The end game of the two pronged con is that we will be no-driving autonomous e-vehicles. But we will feel safe no?!
Are you any where near sane?
No, he's in Malaga, Spain.
Quote from: Joesson on February 20, 2021, 22:18Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:36Quote from: Petrus on February 20, 2021, 21:31Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:01Just because you dont want to crash doesnt mean Dorris Doesn't!
So you are told and gobble down hook ,line and sinker; wánt that a car is by law required to be a lardy crash tank and motorbikes? ... not.
By 2014 new cars are required to have backing up cameras and lane changing ´safety assistance´ so more people who should not be driving in the first place can drive ´safely´. Which then is foundation for your ´Doris´ argument.
We are being conned!
Seen that car commercial with a bint drinking coffee in the car and the car save that lovely young girl on the pedestrian crossing?
Like that is normal and that the car can deal with it.
Bl@@dy h###, such behaviour should be condemned; the bint banned from driving!!
The end game of the two pronged con is that we will be no-driving autonomous e-vehicles. But we will feel safe no?!
Are you any where near sane?
No, he's in Malaga, Spain.
What was your daily in the 60s Tony?
How does it compare to your current steed?
Quote from: 1979scotte on February 20, 2021, 22:22What was your daily in the 60s Tony?
How does it compare to your current steed?
It's interesting to compare.
In the 60's my daily drive was one of a succession of Rover P4 or P5, all weighed about 30cwt, performance was adequate for the day, fuel consumption was something I didn't care about, simple to maintain. Lots of dials on the dash told you if something wasn't right. Safety wise they were built like a tank, still remember a picture of a P4 that had T boned a Zephyr on a motorway, splitting the Ford in half, the p4 just had it's front wings bent back.
Nowadays the daily has far more performance than you will ever need in the UK, has far too many computer driven things to go wrong or tell you something has failed and mostly can't be fixed by the home mechanic.
Is that progress?
There are major improvements with safety in newer cars, its undeniable how big the difference is.
Reminiscing on older cars is nice as I think some of them are more beautiful but that is an illusion. There are only a handful of vintage cars that look amazing and the rest were very ugly and the build quality fit and finish is laughable by todays standards. These ugly cars have mostly been junked.
Its all a mixed bag today as some newer cars are far more reliable and have less service intervals, and there are others like the newer German cars that have horrendous reliability issues and massive depreciation.
If there was an end of the world Mad Max scenario I would want to be in an older Land Cruiser.
On the personal safety front.
It would not seem too big an ask for the cyclists round my way to at least have reflectors fitted. We can work up from there to lights perhaps.
A high vis vest perhaps?
But no, it's left to the motorist to account for the cyclists own lack of care.
I'm firmly in the camp of responsibility for driving is being taken away by modern tech, allowing people to make mistakes and get away with driving behaviour they otherwise wouldn't.
But yeah, sure they are saving lives. Definitely. Cars are getting safer and stupid people are dying less because the car is rescuing them and others from their utter ineptitude.
This is the society we live in. Responsibility is a bad word. "surely it's them, not me". "This can't happen to me". "I'm entitled to..."
Possible a good way of wording it, alot of safety techs are to make up for the careless/lazy, dare I say it elderly drivers?
Sadly, they are not always the elderly - my neighbours 20 yr old son had an old 06 reg Fiesta 1.0 litre and has just brought a 17 reg BRZ, drives like an absolute nutter, no experience of driving a rwd. I hate to say this and I hope it doesn't happen but I can see him wrapping himself around a tree anytime soon. :'( Will he survive in a newer better safety BRZ opposed to a 15 yr old Fiesta with less safety :o depends how big the tree is I suppose ;)
This thread is mental.
If you honestly think that cars aren't safer than they were in the 70s, you are also mental.
If you want to make a statement as such, share your source.
This kind of misinformation is quite a bad idea to propagate.
I will have to dismiss this as utter gibberish.
agree Chilli :) we all have to learn, i resent the 18/19 old i was, risk didn't appear in my mind. The only reason i threw elderly in there was because after the WALL crash i had to attend a driving awareness course. The average age of 20 people bar 4 under 30s would have been approx 70
Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 23:12Possible a good way of wording it, alot of safety techs are to make up for the careless/lazy, dare I say it elderly drivers?
Let's get this right.
The under 25s are the most dangerous on the roads fact.
The problem with the elderly and we will all be like this when older is that they still think they are as good behind the wheel at 72 as they were at 42 and most aren't. My mum is bloody awful these days and my dad isn't too bad but he does drive a 2 ton land rover it basically drives itself.
Men are statically more dangerous than women. We all know this.
And I don't know this for a fact but parents who routinely drive with their kids seem more dangerous to me especially if there are more kids than adults. The things they do on the move are unreal. Just pull over ffs.
Quote from: tomaky on February 21, 2021, 01:19agree Chilli :) we all have to learn, i resent the 18/19 old i was, risk didn't appear in my mind. The only reason i threw elderly in there was because after the WALL crash i had to attend a driving awareness course. The average age of 20 people bar 4 under 30s would have been approx 70
Because most of the youngsters weren't offered courses because their offences were to severe.
Edit
I've been on courses.
None had elderly or young drivers on them.
I think people have drifted off track a bit on this thread, it isn't a debate about whether older/younger drivers are better/worse than others, but whether cars have progressed in comfort or safety.
Things should be put into perspective, speeds on the roads have increased considerably since the 60's. Motorways were fairly limited, fewer dual carriageways, fewer cars.
In the mid 60's I was driving weekly from Southampton to Liverpool. This involved a cross country journey from Southampton via Andover, crossing the site of M4 construction about Marlborough (the M4 was only complete westwards until about Newbury) up through Stow in the Wold to pick up the start of the M5 at about Tewkesbury/Worcester. Up the M5 until it finished at Frankley, then a tortuous route through Wolverhampton, Stoke to pick up the M6 at it's beginning at about Keele (the Midland Links motorways were still very much work in progress). Luckily the M6 went on up to about Preston so I could come off onto The East Lancs Road into Liverpool, probably about the only bit on non motorway dual carriageway on the route. This took about 5 and a half hours from memory on a late Sunday, more on a Friday night.
Vehicles have improved because of the road improvements and speed increases. Accidents in the 60's were at comparatively low speeds, and mainly fender benders, now Motorway travel has increased speeds and the consequences of damage, People want more comfort on long distance travel than you got in a Morris Marina, and regrettably, people need proximity warnings, lane change and service indicators etc.
But I still prefer the driving comfort of the old Rover 3 litre coupe I had when all you hear was the clock ticking at 70mph, the only driver assist was power steering, no a/c no warning lights except charging and main beam. A different era!
Quote from: scm2004red on February 21, 2021, 08:16I think people have drifted off track a bit on this thread, it isn't a debate about whether older/younger drivers are better/worse than others, but whether cars have progressed in comfort or safety.
Things should be put into perspective, speeds on the roads have increased considerably since the 60's. Motorways were fairly limited, fewer dual carriageways, fewer cars.
In the mid 60's I was driving weekly from Southampton to Liverpool. This involved a cross country journey from Southampton via Andover, crossing the site of M4 construction about Marlborough (the M4 was only complete westwards until about Newbury) up through Stow in the Wold to pick up the start of the M5 at about Tewkesbury/Worcester. Up the M5 until it finished at Frankley, then a tortuous route through Wolverhampton, Stoke to pick up the M6 at it's beginning at about Keele (the Midland Links motorways were still very much work in progress). Luckily the M6 went on up to about Preston so I could come off onto The East Lancs Road into Liverpool, probably about the only bit on non motorway dual carriageway on the route. This took about 5 and a half hours from memory on a late Sunday, more on a Friday night.
Vehicles have improved because of the road improvements and speed increases. Accidents in the 60's were at comparatively low speeds, and mainly fender benders, now Motorway travel has increased speeds and the consequences of damage, People want more comfort on long distance travel than you got in a Morris Marina, and regrettably, people need proximity warnings, lane change and service indicators etc.
But I still prefer the driving comfort of the old Rover 3 litre coupe I had when all you hear was the clock ticking at 70mph, the only driver assist was power steering, no a/c no warning lights except charging and main beam. A different era!
Rover P5 weren't exactly lightweight though somewhere around 1600kg.
A modern C43 AMG can be 1735kg. And its 4wd with all the added safety that brings.
Also I'm only 42 so don't know what it was like in the 60s but people 100% drive slower on the motorway now than they did in the 90s. Speed cameras have really brought it under control.
My mother thought nothing of doing 100 mph + with me in her XR3I cabriolet on the way to Dover because we were late for the boat.
And she got caught 😳.
Also drink driving has massively decreased in my lifetime. Most people don't drive to the pub anymore. They all did when I was a kid. And designated drivers didn't exist.
If you guys want to go back to driving 600kg mini coopers be my guest. I'm sure they're fun to drive but you'd be toast if someone in a P5 hit you. God forbid something like a 450 SEL 6.9 rear ended you a 2 ton car. FYI a modern S63 AMG starts off about the same weight. Wonder which one is safer?
Any of these cars are only as safe as the monkeys driving them.
They're inanimate objects.
Quote from: shnazzle on February 21, 2021, 09:20Any of these cars are only as safe as the monkeys driving them.
They're inanimate objects.
But cars now are safer.
Even if you say current range rovers are 1000kg heavier than they were in the 70s. They still stop and handle better.
Yes if they hit cyclists, bikers or pedestrians they do more damage but they are less likely to do so.
And in regards to Peltzman I learnt to drive with seat belts and ABS so I don't see how I take more risks. Older people maybe as they were introduced after they learnt to drive.
Guns are safer now than they were as well, but they're still killing machines. When used correctly
That's how I was introduced to cars. My dad called them killing machines when I was a kid. He loved driving as well.
Quote from: shnazzle on February 21, 2021, 09:37Guns are safer now than they were as well, but they're still killing machines. When used correctly
That's how I was introduced to cars. My dad called them killing machines when I was a kid. He loved driving as well.
Guns aren't safer they are designed to kill.
Cars are designed for transport but can be used as a weapon.
My pants are designed to keep my bits in place but once I've worn them they can be deadly.
Quote from: 1979scotte on February 21, 2021, 09:46Quote from: shnazzle on February 21, 2021, 09:37Guns are safer now than they were as well, but they're still killing machines. When used correctly
That's how I was introduced to cars. My dad called them killing machines when I was a kid. He loved driving as well.
Guns aren't safer they are designed to kill.
Cars are designed for transport but can be used as a weapon.
My pants are designed to keep my bits in place but once I've worn them they can be deadly.
Guns are definitely safer. Better trigger mechanisms, safety locks, etc. Less likely to go off on you by accident.
Same as cars really. Introduced modern tech to help prevent incidents through mishandling.
Adds a buffer for error/stupidity.
Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:36Are you any where near sane?
Übercool that your attempt to insult is not even in correct British ;-)
My take on the modern car:
It is designed to keep the occupants safe. It accomplishes this by making the car more bulky to allow for more structural compression in a collision, making the headlights brighter so the driver can see more, making the car taller to give a more 'commanding' driving position, adding as many driver aids as possible, so it brakes for you, parks for you, and tells you when you're likely to bump into something.
All very fine for those inside. For those outside the car, they now are faced with a heavier lump driven by someone who requires minimal skills to drive it, and who is so cocooned as to be paying a lot less attention to basic driving than is desirable. Its headlights blind those in other vehicles, or those on foot. A pedestrian struck by one of these taller beasts is more likely to suffer upper body injuries and the massive tyres are very noisy to those outside the car (that would be pedestrians).
Clarkson once quipped "The best safety device would be a six-inch spike in the middle of the steering wheel - then you'd pay proper attention".
In short: It's a vehicle perfectly designed for our modern self-centred society. "I'm alright, Jack, screw you".
Quote from: Carolyn on February 21, 2021, 10:13My take on the modern car:
It is designed to keep the occupants safe. It accomplishes this by making the car more bulky to allow for more structural compression in a collision, making the headlights brighter so the driver can see more, making the car taller to give a more 'commanding' driving position, adding as many driver aids as possible, so it brakes for you, parks for you, and tells you when you're likely to bump into something.
All very fine for those inside. For those outside the car, they now are faced with a heavier lump driven by someone who requires minimal skills to drive it, and who is so cocooned as to be paying a lot less attention to basic driving than is desirable. Its headlights blind those in other vehicles, or those on foot. A pedestrian struck by one of these taller beasts is more likely to suffer upper body injuries and the massive tyres are very noisy to those outside the car (that would be pedestrians).
Clarkson once quipped "The best safety device would be a six-inch spike in the middle of the steering wheel - then you'd pay proper attention".
In short: It's a vehicle perfectly designed for our modern self-centred society. "I'm alright, Jack, screw you".
We all agree that more driver training is vitally important.
Bikers need more training too.
Same as cyclists.
And as pedestrians we need to pay more attention too.
Let's remember that modern cars are now tested for pedestrian safety.
And soon when there are no engines there won't need to be 200kg of metal under the bonnet.
Quote from: scm2004red on February 20, 2021, 22:46It's interesting to compare.
...
Is that progress?
Be careful. Your sanity might be questioned in incorrect British next :-)
I find it hilarious and insightful how many are challenged réading too.
On the other hand I find it highly worrying that even on a forum about a small sports car cabrio the hazards of modern lardy tanks is difficult to acknowledge.
Ask yourself: When on a roundabout with your Spyder, how do you feel when a 90ties Suzuki Alto vs a 2 ton modern BMW SUV approaches entering your path rather briskly.
As to the Elan and Z4 it is not about one being an icon and the other not.
Point is that there is over half a century of technological development between the two.
Even on the OVERALL safety front the progress is a jóke: Put the 60ties icon on equivalent modern rubber and it outbrakes the modern counterpart. Is thát safer? Same thing the dent it makes upon impact or is that not a safety thing?
All in all driver´s safety awareness is not improved by modern inhabitant safety perception.
Quote from: Carolyn on February 21, 2021, 10:13My take on the modern car:
It is designed to keep the occupants safe. It accomplishes this by making the car more bulky to allow for more structural compression in a collision, making the headlights brighter so the driver can see more, making the car taller to give a more 'commanding' driving position, adding as many driver aids as possible, so it brakes for you, parks for you, and tells you when you're likely to bump into something.
All very fine for those inside. For those outside the car, they now are faced with a heavier lump driven by someone who requires minimal skills to drive it, and who is so cocooned as to be paying a lot less attention to basic driving than is desirable. Its headlights blind those in other vehicles, or those on foot. A pedestrian struck by one of these taller beasts is more likely to suffer upper body injuries and the massive tyres are very noisy to those outside the car (that would be pedestrians).
Clarkson once quipped "The best safety device would be a six-inch spike in the middle of the steering wheel - then you'd pay proper attention".
In short: It's a vehicle perfectly designed for our modern self-centred society. "I'm alright, Jack, screw you".
Exactly.
Clarkson nicked that quote btw. ;-)
Quote from: shnazzle on February 21, 2021, 09:54Quote from: 1979scotte on February 21, 2021, 09:46Quote from: shnazzle on February 21, 2021, 09:37Guns are safer now than they were as well, but they're still killing machines. When used correctly
That's how I was introduced to cars. My dad called them killing machines when I was a kid. He loved driving as well.
Guns aren't safer they are designed to kill.
Cars are designed for transport but can be used as a weapon.
My pants are designed to keep my bits in place but once I've worn them they can be deadly.
Guns are definitely safer. Better trigger mechanisms, safety locks, etc. Less likely to go off on you by accident.
Same as cars really. Introduced modern tech to help prevent incidents through mishandling.
Adds a buffer for error/stupidity.
It's hardly mishandling if a pedestrian walks out in front of you with no warning and the cars I built radar reacts faster than humanly possible.
We are all guilty of doing stupid things humans are fallible even Petrus.
We've all driven cars in a manner in which we shouldn't and cut corners on maintenance I know I have and I know you have too.
Quote from: Petrus on February 21, 2021, 10:22Quote from: scm2004red on February 20, 2021, 22:46It's interesting to compare.
...
Is that progress?
Be careful. Your sanity might be questioned in incorrect British next :-)
I find it hilarious and insightful how many are challenged réading too.
On the other hand I find it highly worrying that even on a forum about a small sports car cabrio the hazards of modern lardy tanks is difficult to acknowledge.
Ask yourself: When on a roundabout with your Spyder, how do you feel when a 90ties Suzuki Alto vs a 2 ton modern BMW SUV approaches entering your path rather briskly.
As to the Elan and Z4 it is not about one being an icon and the other not.
Point is that there is over half a century of technological development between the two.
Even on the OVERALL safety front the progress is a jóke: Put the 60ties icon on equivalent modern rubber and it outbrakes the modern counterpart. Is thát safer? Same thing the dent it makes upon impact or is that not a safety thing?
All in all driver´s safety awareness is not improved by modern inhabitant safety perception.
Petrus you yet again miss the point the modern equivalent of an elan is an elise not a Z4. An elan on modern rubber doesn't out brake or handle an elise.
Quote from: Petrus on February 21, 2021, 10:01Quote from: tomaky on February 20, 2021, 21:36Are you any where near sane?
Übercool that your attempt to insult is not even in correct British ;-)
Perhaps he is dyslexic?
Although I accept his comment made me laugh its not really pertinent.
Quote from: shnazzle on February 21, 2021, 09:20Any of these cars are only as safe as the monkeys driving them.
They're inanimate objects.
And when those monkeys feel invulnerable they become quite dangerous. The more so the heavier and bigger the car they drive.
The perfect storm really: Bigger/heavier makes the feel safer, drive less careful in a potentially more damaging vehicle.
Progess indeed.
Technical progress could make the sixties lighweight with good view and great feelback réally safer. Take the Renault R4, add safety belts and soft shell dash, make it in modern steels/plastics differentiated for their respective jobs, propelled by direct injection 500 cc twin.
Do nót add electric central everything.
40 happy but very frugal horses would be enough for the at móst 600 kg practical and fun to drive nimble car.
But no, that would not net enough money: The same margin on a 3, 4 times more expensive car is 3, 4 times more profit. For the industry and for the State.
It's what the majority want
@Petrus That what happens in democracy.
Modern cars are still safer when compared like for like.
Quote from: 1979scotte on February 21, 2021, 10:21We all agree that more driver training is vitally important.
Same as cyclists.
And as pedestrians we need to pay more attention too.
Cyclists. Like not riding through red lights.
Pedestrians. So many are plugged in with ear buds or headphones, straight off the kerb to cross a junction, no so much as a look over the shoulder. Completely oblivious.
Lightweight atom or G wagon. It will be the drivers fault.
Quote from: Ardent on February 21, 2021, 10:50Quote from: 1979scotte on February 21, 2021, 10:21We all agree that more driver training is vitally important.
Same as cyclists.
And as pedestrians we need to pay more attention too.
Cyclists. Like not riding through red lights.
Pedestrians. So many are plugged in with ear buds or headphones, straight off the kerb to cross a junction, no so much as a look over the shoulder. Completely oblivious.
Lightweight atom or G wagon. It will be the drivers fault.
Imagine the mess an Atom would make 😳
Back to modern ´safe´ cars:
When on a sunny Sunday drive in your Spyder, would you rather be T-boned by a sixties Renault R4 utility vehicle of by a funny named modern lardy equivalent one weiging at least double?
Do add the likelyhood/difference of the driver paying atention and the speed differential he/she would probably be driving at.
Thát is all safety too. Píng!
So, where is the progress thére?
Quote from: Petrus on February 21, 2021, 11:01Back to modern ´safe´ cars:
When on a sunny Sunday drive in your Spyder, would you rather be T-boned by a sixties Renault R4 utility vehicle of by a funny named modern lardy equivalent one weiging at least double?
Do add the likelyhood/difference of the driver paying atention and the speed differential he/she would probably be driving at.
Thát is all safety too. Píng!
So, where is the progress thére?
Thr driving in Spain is much worse than here so you a probably right to be worried.
I live in a bit of a time warp here so have a comparison daily.
The average age of the car is the region is over 15 y.o.
Series 3 LandRovers by Santana, Lada Niva, Seat Marbella, Renault R4 are not weird exception as daily cars.
All are kept functionally safe by the downright OCD annual isnpection. All are on recent rubber.
Without exception driven with more prudence than the modern equivalents, certainly less fast.
I never ever have one on my rear bumper. Never ever are hazardously overtaken by one. Never ever blinded by one. Etc.
Pure coïncidence? or part of the price of progress in modern´safety´.
Quote from: Petrus on February 21, 2021, 11:10I live in a bit of a time warp here so have a comparison daily.
The average age of the car is the region is over 15 y.o.
Series 3 LandRovers by Santana, Lada Niva, Seat Marbella, Renault R4 are not weird exception as daily cars.
All are kept functionally safe by the downright OCD annual isnpection. All are on recent rubber.
Without exception driven with more prudence than the modern equivalents, certainly less fast.
I never ever have one on my rear bumper. Never ever are hazardously overtaken by one. Never ever blinded by one. Etc.
Pure coïncidence? or part of the price of progress in modern´safety´.
As always your bit of Spain is nothing like the bit I've known for over 30 years.
@1979scotte I did respond to your question about my early years in motoring but for some reason or other it didn't post, but that has been the subject of another thread!
I won't repeat myself but the biggest difference, for me, between vehicles of then and now is reliability. But that is double edged as a bag of tools some fuses and a roll of insulating tape could often get you going. Not so much chance of that today.
Driver and passenger comfort is also much better and simple safety aids such as anti freeze screen wash make a difference!
I drove as part of my job for 47 years, so a good many miles, in all weathers and times of day and night. "The elderly", of which I am now part cannot be categorised by the number of their years alone but in the content of those years.
I spent many of those years driving and I believe my anticipation is improved because of that. My reactions may not be as fast now as when I started out but the net result, because of my increased awareness/ anticipation meets my needs, not least of all because I likely drive slower now than then.
Patience/ impatience I suggest is a factor in the outcome of many situations in all aspects of life and not least of all in driving.
Interesting to note that driving a 3L Rover in the 60's was the place to be, wouldn't disagree, certainly not so comfortable in the more mundane. Not so dissimilar today. I drive a Fiesta, the same size as a Focus that I had one time in my working life, and in that I am very aware of my vulnerability compared to the SUV crowd.
A rule of the road that I learnt many years ago is : Might is Right.
I suggest that is more true now than then as there are more
comparatively larger vehicles on the road, and they are all large when you are in a 2.
Come to that a Fiesta as well.
Modern cars are safe in the modern environment, 60's cars were safe in the 60's environment. I would have been just as dead in my 60's Rover when flattened by a contemporary 20 tonne artic, as in a modern Mercedes flattened by a current 40 tonne artic.
By being on here we are all driving a car 20 years behind modern technology, is that therefore unsafe?
I drive my 40 year old Porsche happily in modern traffic aware that it has none of the driver aids of today, always aware that some idiot in a Clio will attempt to "brake test" me by jumping in front of me at a roundabout to prove that he can, or an equal idiot wants to prove he can out perform a Porsche at the traffic lights GP, driver awareness when using an older car is paramount, largely overtaken by todays reliance on in car warnings.
In the 60's F1 drivers rarely lived to an old age, nowadays the F1 car is enormously safe for the driver.
Progress is inevitable, safety and comfort improvements are inevitable.
Christ are you guys still going? :)
it's boring at the moment and it's nice winding up young Mr Scott ;)
Distracted driving is the biggest problem in my country. Not just for accidents but also for those that drive under the speed limit while texting and talking. We have laws now for this but its still not followed. I use to ride sport bikes in my youth and wanted to buy another but I cant with the way people drive these days. From what I have seen I wouldn't want to ride a bicycle. Every day there is someone driving slow and weaving slightly out of their lane.
You can do everything in your power to be safe driver but all that effort is wasted because of one bad driver that is not in your control. After bing in two bad car accidents I stay home if the roads are not ideal.
Quote from: shnazzle on February 21, 2021, 15:08Christ are you guys still going? :)
Not quite sure how to take that Mr V O!
Quote from: Dev on February 21, 2021, 16:14Distracted driving is the biggest problem in my country. Not just for accidents but also for those that drive under the speed limit while texting and talking. We have laws now for this but its still not followed. I use to ride sport bikes in my youth and wanted to buy another but I cant with the way people drive these days. From what I have seen I wouldn't want to ride a bicycle. Every day there is someone driving slow and weaving slightly out of their lane.
You can do everything in your power to be safe driver but all that effort is wasted because of one bad driver that is not in your control. After bing in two bad car accidents I stay home if the roads are not ideal.
Well, it is said that "things" go in three's so maybe not a bad idea!
So, does this "modern progress" mean that de coking and valve grinding are now no longer a thing?
Quote from: scm2004red on February 21, 2021, 11:31By being on here we are all driving a car 20 years behind modern technology, is that therefore unsafe?
and worse still; a small light cabrio :-)
Quotedriver awareness when using an older car is paramount, largely overtaken by todays reliance on in car warnings.
Nice wording of the Peltzman effect indeed.
QuoteIn the 60's F1 drivers rarely lived to an old age, nowadays the F1 car is enormously safe for the driver.
Progress is inevitable, safety and comfort improvements are inevitable.
Nevertheless I would happily swap current day ´safe´ cars for the safe sex of those days.
Quote from: Joesson on February 21, 2021, 11:28I suggest that is more true now than then as there are more comparatively larger vehicles on the road, and they are all large when you are in a 2.
Come to that a Fiesta as well.
The average car is way larger, above all heavier.
How many cars weighed around 2000 kilos even just 20 years ago? Never mind the eighties when electronic ignitions and safety belts were such an improvement.
Just have a look at the model development and the ligtweight cars nowaday.
Heck, even the drivers license categories have been adapted to a heavier category cars. The same level of competence is now good for WÁY heavier vehicles. Like heavier vehicles are not more of a challenge to control and not cause more havoc.
Nothing to do with safety; just money for industry and state.
Quote from: Petrus on February 22, 2021, 10:41Quote from: Joesson on February 21, 2021, 11:28I suggest that is more true now than then as there are more comparatively larger vehicles on the road, and they are all large when you are in a 2.
Come to that a Fiesta as well.
The average car is way larger, above all heavier.
How many cars weighed around 2000 kilos even just 20 years ago? Never mind the eighties when electronic ignitions and safety belts were such an improvement.
Just have a look at the model development and the ligtweight cars nowaday.
Heck, even the drivers license categories have been adapted to a heavier category cars. The same level of competence is now good for WÁY heavier vehicles. Like heavier vehicles are not more of a challenge to control and not cause more havoc.
Nothing to do with safety; just money for industry and state.
That's just not true in the UK my licence valid from 1996 allows me to drive much much heavier vans and trucks than some of my younger colleagues who passed in say 2010
Quote from: 1979scotte on February 22, 2021, 10:43That's just not true in the UK my licence valid from 1996 allows me to drive much much heavier vans and trucks than some of my younger colleagues who passed in say 2010
Looked at the changes for category B (passenger cars) per 2021 yet?
Buy hey, maybe we´ve stumbled upon tet another Brexit windfall for the green island!
Quote from: Petrus on February 22, 2021, 10:49Quote from: 1979scotte on February 22, 2021, 10:43That's just not true in the UK my licence valid from 1996 allows me to drive much much heavier vans and trucks than some of my younger colleagues who passed in say 2010
Looked at the changes for category B (passenger cars) per 2021 yet?
Buy hey, maybe we´ve stumbled upon yet another Brexit windfall for the green island!
Won't effect me.
My licence is valid until 2049.
Also I've spell checked for you. 😉
Quote from: 1979scotte on February 22, 2021, 11:40Won't effect me.
My licence is valid until 2049.
Which explains so many elderly who should not drive, driving over your islands... ;-)
Quote from: Petrus on February 22, 2021, 10:49Quote from: 1979scotte on February 22, 2021, 10:43That's just not true in the UK my licence valid from 1996 allows me to drive much much heavier vans and trucks than some of my younger colleagues who passed in say 2010
Looked at the changes for category B (passenger cars) per 2021 yet?
Buy hey, maybe we´ve stumbled upon tet another Brexit windfall for the green island!
Time changes everything.
My Father drove motor cycles, combinations and cars legally but never took a driving test.
I passed my test in January '63 and could drive all manner of vehicles, iirc up to 3 tons capacity and 14 seats.
I only drove 3 tonners a couple of times and a small bus similarly.
When a driver reaches 3 score and ten ( that's years, not points!) a licence has to be renewed. To keep the larger capacity vehicles a test is necessary as is extra payment.
I chose not to keep the licence for larger vehicles.
The licence has to be reapplied for every three years and a health declaration made.
I understand that awareness driving tests are available later in life.
Quote from: Petrus on February 22, 2021, 11:54Quote from: 1979scotte on February 22, 2021, 11:40Won't effect me.
My licence is valid until 2049.
Which explains so many elderly who should not drive, driving over your islands... ;-)
The Department for Transport publishes comparisons between the UK and other developed countries. Of the 38 countries looked at, the UK had the 3rd lowest rate of road deaths.
Drivers ages 16-17 continue to have the highest rates of crash involvement, injuries to themselves and others and deaths of others in crashes in which they are involved. Drivers age 80 and older have the highest rates of driver deaths.
The study finds that older drivers, who represent 15 percent of all licensed drivers, cause 7 percent of all two-car accidents (both fatal and nonfatal). Younger drivers, on the other hand, who represent 13 percent of all licensed drivers, cause 43 percent of all two-car accidents.6 Jul 2007
Who is most at risk? Older drivers, particularly those aged 75+, have higher crash death rates than middle-aged drivers (aged 35-54). Higher crash death rates among this age group are primarily due to increased vulnerability to injury in a crash.
Who Most Often Falls Asleep While Driving? ... In 82% of drowsy driving crashes, the driver was alone in the vehicle. Young People. Those between the ages of 16-29 are at the greatest risk, with two-thirds of these accidents occurring among drivers under the age of 30.
These comments were collected from a www search.
None seem to explain why "so many elderly who should not drive, driving over your islands... "
But then no reference to grinding axes either!
Let's keep this conversation away from generalisation as much as possible.
If so, needs to be backed up :)
The study of road incidents has entire government teams and private organisations behind it, so it's unlikely we're going to get a good full/valid picture here.
It would be good to see some stats based on studies that have been done recently wrt driving tech, law changes, changes to exams, etc.
Quote from: Joesson on February 22, 2021, 13:39None seem to explain why "so many elderly who should not drive, driving over your islands... "
Simply referring to the observations made by your fellow islanders my dear Joesson.
I sense a claim for age discrimination being brought by the Order of Ancient Drivers of Improper Motor Cars coming soon... ;)
Quote from: Petrus on February 22, 2021, 11:54Quote from: 1979scotte on February 22, 2021, 11:40Won't effect me.
My licence is valid until 2049.
Which explains so many elderly who should not drive, driving over your islands... ;-)
No argument there.
The amount of people who can barely walk but still drive is amazing.
They'd never pass the fitness test for a commercial driver and it wasn't hard at least when I did it 20 years ago.
Quote from: Joesson on February 22, 2021, 12:31Quote from: Petrus on February 22, 2021, 10:49Quote from: 1979scotte on February 22, 2021, 10:43That's just not true in the UK my licence valid from 1996 allows me to drive much much heavier vans and trucks than some of my younger colleagues who passed in say 2010
Looked at the changes for category B (passenger cars) per 2021 yet?
Buy hey, maybe we´ve stumbled upon tet another Brexit windfall for the green island!
Time changes everything.
My Father drove motor cycles, combinations and cars legally but never took a driving test.
I passed my test in January '63 and could drive all manner of vehicles, iirc up to 3 tons capacity and 14 seats.
I only drove 3 tonners a couple of times and a small bus similarly.
When a driver reaches 3 score and ten ( that's years, not points!) a licence has to be renewed. To keep the larger capacity vehicles a test is necessary as is extra payment.
I chose not to keep the licence for larger vehicles.
The licence has to be reapplied for every three years and a health declaration made.
I understand that awareness driving tests are available later in life.
The only time I've ever heard anyone having there licence revoked was for eyesight and maybe heart conditions. My mother in law is the only person I know who voluntarily gave up her licence.
I won't be any different when the time comes. I won't want to give it up.
Quote from: shnazzle on February 22, 2021, 13:44The study of road incidents has entire government teams and private organisations behind it, so it's unlikely we're going to get a good full/valid picture here.
Could make for an interesting meeting, when in some years time, they re-run the numbers and find nobody died in road incidents. Because every death, is now classed as a c19 death.
As bonkers as that is.
The 17, 27, 37, 47, 57,67, 77 year old stuffed it into a tree. But they "tested" positive for c19 less than 28 days ago.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CL1TNZ3JiFn/?igshid=zupc5d4z2wbi
Just going to leave this here.
The Volkswagen E-Golf weighs 1600 kg and accellerates from 0-100 km/h in just over 7 seconds.
Probably ´safe´ for the inhabitants when it crashes.
Would be easier to avoid a crash when weighing 1000 kg. so a lot less damaging to what it would crash into íf it would. But weight a moment (bb); stop shorter too, so not crashing into it at all again.
I am very sorry for the believers but you are sold a literally massive con under the flag of safety.
Just a thought.
Do modern braking systems stop a 1600kg projectile as well as, or better, than older technologies do a 1000kg projectile.
Quote from: Ardent on February 28, 2021, 22:33Just a thought.
Do modern braking systems stop a 1600kg projectile as well as, or better, than older technologies do a 1000kg projectile.
I'd put money on the modern systems stopping quicker...
Quote from: Ardent on February 28, 2021, 22:33Just a thought.
Do modern braking systems stop a 1600kg projectile as well as, or better, than older technologies do a 1000kg projectile.
I would imagine it depends on two factors. Four wheel disk brakes and improvements in tires.The majority of older passenger cars used some form of drum brakes in the rear.
It's not just braking force it's also stability control which is a big innovation for accident avoidance. Panic from the loss of control is usually what gets people in trouble making the situation worse.
Tyres anyone?
Once cars get an hydraulic system the limit is the tyres.
With repeated braking it becomes the heat dissipation.
Drum brakes are autoservo which is both an advantage and disadvantage. They can brake VERY hard but are not fool resistent as they can also lock up.
Overall, with modern rubber and friction material in the oldie I would most definitely not put my money om moders lardies.
I am a bit at an avantage here though, having competed with oldies using modern stuff.
We are however not comparing oldies with lardies are we?! I am questioning the wisdom of lardies versus applying modern tech/knowledge to manufacture a modern equivalent of the R4 or Golf. Those need not weigh more than the originals, be more frugal, cleaner and safer for all. Cheaper than de lardies too and thát is the con.
Given a choice between my Roadster and my other car that weighs 1920 kg I would rather be in the larger car in a potential accident situation. The larger car has stability control that keeps it straight and the suspension forgiving to regain control. It has airbags everywhere and modern tech to absorb the sudden impact. It is the sudden deceleration from older cars that is far more harmful.
It's really not about the cars weight or what kind of breaking system it has. The real reality is a lot of times its not about what you drive because its out of your control when someone hits you unexpectedly in a matter of seconds, therefore it's better to be in a safe car that you can walk away from. If someone hits you in a vintage car you are for certain going to the hospital or worse.
Saying accident avoidance without any of these aids is not for a majority of drivers because most do not posses skills to regain control in a panic situation. It is a very hard thing to do when your first reaction is to slam the brakes and overcorrect making it worse.
Again the easy brain short cut to the feel safer in a bigger tin Dev: Your starting point of being in a crash already skews any argument.
No, indeed, ´it´ is not áll about weight. Weight does shoot safety and mondern tech in the feet though.
Ah and then again the argument of the modern tech allowing drivers who should not drive to drive. Not sure that is a positive argument; at best it stands on a slippery slope.
Quote from: Petrus on March 1, 2021, 15:42Again the easy brain short cut to the feel safer in a bigger tin Dev: Your starting point of being in a crash already skews any argument.
No, indeed, ´it´ is not áll about weight. Weight does shoot safety and mondern tech in the feet though.
Ah and then again the argument of the modern tech allowing drivers who should not drive to drive. Not sure that is a positive argument; at best it stands on a slippery slope.
I never said the car that weighs more is safer because of weight. I think a lot of older SUVs are unsafe.
Its not about the weight its about the safety implementations in a modern car that are king starting with stability control. The way they are designed to absorb an impact without having any intrusions into the cabin along with the all of the air bag tech is not just saving lives its also allowing people to walk away with barely any injury.
Quote from: Dev on March 1, 2021, 15:51Quote from: Petrus on March 1, 2021, 15:42Again the easy brain short cut to the feel safer in a bigger tin Dev: Your starting point of being in a crash already skews any argument.
No, indeed, ´it´ is not áll about weight. Weight does shoot safety and mondern tech in the feet though.
Ah and then again the argument of the modern tech allowing drivers who should not drive to drive. Not sure that is a positive argument; at best it stands on a slippery slope.
I never said the the car that weighs more is safer because of weight. I think a lot of older SUVs are unsafe.
Its not about the weight its about the safety implementations in a modern car that are king starting with stability control. The way they are designed to absorb an impact without having any intrusions into the cabin along with the all of the air bag tech is not just saving lives its also allowing people to walk away with barely any injury.
You see the problems with this?
But I think we will keep going in different cicles. I dó get the advances in car tech., even the passive safety. Also why the average public is not made any the wiser about the down sides including in safety. Without a doubt some more do but alas, we will get what they, State/ manufacturers/ power players, want us to buy.
Quote from: Petrus on March 1, 2021, 16:35Quote from: Dev on March 1, 2021, 15:51Quote from: Petrus on March 1, 2021, 15:42Again the easy brain short cut to the feel safer in a bigger tin Dev: Your starting point of being in a crash already skews any argument.
No, indeed, ´it´ is not áll about weight. Weight does shoot safety and mondern tech in the feet though.
Ah and then again the argument of the modern tech allowing drivers who should not drive to drive. Not sure that is a positive argument; at best it stands on a slippery slope.
I never said the the car that weighs more is safer because of weight. I think a lot of older SUVs are unsafe.
Its not about the weight its about the safety implementations in a modern car that are king starting with stability control. The way they are designed to absorb an impact without having any intrusions into the cabin along with the all of the air bag tech is not just saving lives its also allowing people to walk away with barely any injury.
You see the problems with this?
But I think we will keep going in different cicles. I dó get the advances in car tech., even the passive safety. Also why the average public is not made any the wiser about the down sides including in safety. Without a doubt some more do but alas, we will get what they, State/ manufacturers/ power players, want us to buy.
I can meet you half way. I do not think all of that lane departure and the car braking on its own to avoid hitting something head on is a good thing because it creates distracted driving and taking the car for granted.
However stability and traction control when activated becomes a drivers aid when the car is out of control to keep the car steady enough for the driver to regain control or to reduce the speed of the unavoidable impact by keeping the tires griping. No driver can do what stability control does since its able to activate each caliper separately and do it in fractions of a second.
This is important not just for one driver but the other driver involved that has also lost control. Many have benefited from this system but you never hear about it because it never really gets recorded as a statistic since the accident has been avoided.
Quote from: Dev on March 1, 2021, 16:55Quote from: Petrus on March 1, 2021, 16:35Quote from: Dev on March 1, 2021, 15:51Quote from: Petrus on March 1, 2021, 15:42Again the easy brain short cut to the feel safer in a bigger tin Dev: Your starting point of being in a crash already skews any argument.
No, indeed, ´it´ is not áll about weight. Weight does shoot safety and mondern tech in the feet though.
Ah and then again the argument of the modern tech allowing drivers who should not drive to drive. Not sure that is a positive argument; at best it stands on a slippery slope.
I never said the the car that weighs more is safer because of weight. I think a lot of older SUVs are unsafe.
Its not about the weight its about the safety implementations in a modern car that are king starting with stability control. The way they are designed to absorb an impact without having any intrusions into the cabin along with the all of the air bag tech is not just saving lives its also allowing people to walk away with barely any injury.
You see the problems with this?
But I think we will keep going in different cicles. I dó get the advances in car tech., even the passive safety. Also why the average public is not made any the wiser about the down sides including in safety. Without a doubt some more do but alas, we will get what they, State/ manufacturers/ power players, want us to buy.
I can meet you half way. I do not think all of that lane departure and the car braking on its own to avoid hitting something head on is a good thing because it creates distracted driving and taking the car for granted.
However stability and traction control when activated becomes a drivers aid when the car is out of control to keep the car steady enough for the driver to regain control or to reduce the speed of the unavoidable impact by keeping the tires griping. No driver can do what stability control does since its able to activate each caliper separately and do it in fractions of a second.
This is important not just for one driver but the other driver involved that has also lost control. Many have benefited from this system but you never hear about it because it never really gets recorded as a statistic since the accident has been avoided.
I don't think
@Petrus does meeting people half way ( not men anyway )
It's his way or the high way.
Quote from: 1979scotte on March 1, 2021, 19:38Quote from: Dev on March 1, 2021, 16:55Quote from: Petrus on March 1, 2021, 16:35Quote from: Dev on March 1, 2021, 15:51Quote from: Petrus on March 1, 2021, 15:42Again the easy brain short cut to the feel safer in a bigger tin Dev: Your starting point of being in a crash already skews any argument.
No, indeed, ´it´ is not áll about weight. Weight does shoot safety and mondern tech in the feet though.
Ah and then again the argument of the modern tech allowing drivers who should not drive to drive. Not sure that is a positive argument; at best it stands on a slippery slope.
I never said the the car that weighs more is safer because of weight. I think a lot of older SUVs are unsafe.
Its not about the weight its about the safety implementations in a modern car that are king starting with stability control. The way they are designed to absorb an impact without having any intrusions into the cabin along with the all of the air bag tech is not just saving lives its also allowing people to walk away with barely any injury.
You see the problems with this?
But I think we will keep going in different cicles. I dó get the advances in car tech., even the passive safety. Also why the average public is not made any the wiser about the down sides including in safety. Without a doubt some more do but alas, we will get what they, State/ manufacturers/ power players, want us to buy.
I can meet you half way. I do not think all of that lane departure and the car braking on its own to avoid hitting something head on is a good thing because it creates distracted driving and taking the car for granted.
However stability and traction control when activated becomes a drivers aid when the car is out of control to keep the car steady enough for the driver to regain control or to reduce the speed of the unavoidable impact by keeping the tires griping. No driver can do what stability control does since its able to activate each caliper separately and do it in fractions of a second.
This is important not just for one driver but the other driver involved that has also lost control. Many have benefited from this system but you never hear about it because it never really gets recorded as a statistic since the accident has been avoided.
I don't think @Petrus does meeting people half way ( not men anyway )
It's his way or the high way.
I see it more of a question of mental gymnastics. There are somethings I want badly to work in my favor but the available information which is rooted in hard facts not only on the data driven but also no dissenting opinion from the industry to give you another point of view makes it moot. There are exceptions where some of the safety devices do kill people but on the whole they consistency save more lives and they get increasingly better.
However on the flip side the industry and science does get it wrong. They were promoting daytime running lights as decreasing the number of accidents but as they examined further they realized that wasn't the case. Absolutism and quoting stats, consensus and when people say the science is clear is also a kind of fatalism than actual science that should always be questioned.
A nice perspective concerning the UK gvt set goals.
Despite the sales of e-vehicles: ´ the growth of SUVs over the past decade has actually been detrimental to the UK's carbon emissions target. While CO2 emissions have fallen 1 percent since 2011, this is less than the Department for Transport expected – and rising SUV sales are partly to blame.´
Mind, ´1 percent since 2011´ and that is including last years Covid19 limited mileages.
Way to go, yeahhh! ::)