4 ms·

The crash videos of old vs new cars are very interesting (and scary). Especially 1959 Bel Air vs 2009 Malibu. In the older car, you smash into the dashboard and

by kens 4y ago

The crash videos of old vs new cars are very interesting (and scary). Especially 1959 Bel Air vs 2009 Malibu. In the older car, you smash into the dashboard and then the passenger compartment collapses and crushes you. In the new car, you hit the airbag. Of course you don't expect much from 1959, but even 1992 Nissan vs 2016 Nissan is a huge difference in survivability. I highly recommend the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TikJC0x65X0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TikJC0x65X0

dsfyu404ed 4y ago
You will never see a matchup that makes the old car look "eh, good enough" because the incentive for the kinds of organizations doing these kinds of tests is to showcase their work. If they produced content downplaying their work heads would roll.
- steveBK123 4y ago
  Eh, a bit conspirational much. There have been dramatic improvements in car safety in each of the last few decades. Accidents that used to be death sentences are now dust yourself off and walk away. Actuarially as well, the value of a human life is so high that a few $1000 in safety options on a car for marginal increases in safety will almost always be worth it. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state... Arguably the other thing you can do is live in a state with a 55~65mph max speed limit. Looking at the state level auto fatalities stats is pretty striking how much lower fatality rates are in the low limit / high traffic (and therefore low speed) northeast .. whether you measure per capita or per mile driven. The most interesting but hard to measure metric would be per vehicle hour, I would suggest. Commutes are driven more by time than distance, and in congested areas people commute shorter distances at lower speed vs some of the super commutes people do at 75mph+. You can see this sort of reflected in the stats where the per capita fatality rates are 1/3 to 1/2 the level of the Deep South, however on a per-mile basis closer to 2/3. You can also see that the northeastern per-capita miles driven is 1/2 ..
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    I'm not being conspirational. You can F right off with that implication. Follow the incentives. You will NEVER see them show you the difference between like a 93 and 94 of a given model (tons of vehicles went from airbags optional to airbags standard over that year so that's basically what you'd be testing) because a single variable or low variable test doesn't get them the DARE-esque messaging and "look how far we've come" back patting that these sorts of old vs new comparisons are meant for. Watching a dummmy face plant into the steering wheel of a 93 OJ bronco and then do the same thing into the airbag of a 94 (to just pick one example) just doesn't scratch those itches the same way comparing vehicles that are half a dozen major engineering revisions and 20yr of model bloat apart from each other. >Arguably the other thing you can do is live in a state with a 55~65mph max speed limit. Eh, I think you're reading too much into it. Speed limits don't reflect reality, anyone from the northeast will tell you that limited access highway speeds are predicated on traffic, weather and road conditions and 80mph middle lane speeds aren't uncommon pre and post commuting "hour" (in sarcasm quotes for obvious reasons). Reducing potential for high speed traffic conflicts probably matters a lot more than you're giving it credit for. You almost never have cross roads just dumping traffic onto a state highway where traffic goes 70+ in the northeast. This is pretty standard once you get out of the beltway in the more rural states and account for a lot of avoidable crashes.

by kens 4y ago

dsfyu404ed 4y ago

You will never see a matchup that makes the old car look "eh, good enough" because the incentive for the kinds of organizations doing these kinds of tests is to showcase their work. If they produced content downplaying their work heads would roll.

steveBK123 4y ago
Eh, a bit conspirational much. There have been dramatic improvements in car safety in each of the last few decades. Accidents that used to be death sentences are now dust yourself off and walk away. Actuarially as well, the value of a human life is so high that a few $1000 in safety options on a car for marginal increases in safety will almost always be worth it. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state... Arguably the other thing you can do is live in a state with a 55~65mph max speed limit. Looking at the state level auto fatalities stats is pretty striking how much lower fatality rates are in the low limit / high traffic (and therefore low speed) northeast .. whether you measure per capita or per mile driven. The most interesting but hard to measure metric would be per vehicle hour, I would suggest. Commutes are driven more by time than distance, and in congested areas people commute shorter distances at lower speed vs some of the super commutes people do at 75mph+. You can see this sort of reflected in the stats where the per capita fatality rates are 1/3 to 1/2 the level of the Deep South, however on a per-mile basis closer to 2/3. You can also see that the northeastern per-capita miles driven is 1/2 ..
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  I'm not being conspirational. You can F right off with that implication. Follow the incentives. You will NEVER see them show you the difference between like a 93 and 94 of a given model (tons of vehicles went from airbags optional to airbags standard over that year so that's basically what you'd be testing) because a single variable or low variable test doesn't get them the DARE-esque messaging and "look how far we've come" back patting that these sorts of old vs new comparisons are meant for. Watching a dummmy face plant into the steering wheel of a 93 OJ bronco and then do the same thing into the airbag of a 94 (to just pick one example) just doesn't scratch those itches the same way comparing vehicles that are half a dozen major engineering revisions and 20yr of model bloat apart from each other. >Arguably the other thing you can do is live in a state with a 55~65mph max speed limit. Eh, I think you're reading too much into it. Speed limits don't reflect reality, anyone from the northeast will tell you that limited access highway speeds are predicated on traffic, weather and road conditions and 80mph middle lane speeds aren't uncommon pre and post commuting "hour" (in sarcasm quotes for obvious reasons). Reducing potential for high speed traffic conflicts probably matters a lot more than you're giving it credit for. You almost never have cross roads just dumping traffic onto a state highway where traffic goes 70+ in the northeast. This is pretty standard once you get out of the beltway in the more rural states and account for a lot of avoidable crashes.