5 ms·

If you're curious, like I was, about the side pole test, here's a video of the Tesla: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBvH3lysmJA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v

If you're curious, like I was, about the side pole test, here's a video of the Tesla: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBvH3lysmJA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBvH3lysmJA Here's a Prius for comparison (4 stars): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc0uUx2T37k http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc0uUx2T37k

mikeash 13y ago
That looks like the difference between waking up sore the next morning and waking up in the hospital the next morning. Pretty impressive how well the Tesla does given how little space is available to absorb the blow. Minor nitpick: your second link is a Prius c, which is quite a bit smaller than a regular Prius, and more like a Yaris aside from the drivetrain. Still a decent example of a "normal" car in any event.
Lagged2Death 13y ago
That's a Prius C, the new super-small one based on the Yaris chassis. Given its ultra-low-budget roots, four stars is actually really impressive. Yeah, the Tesla is better, but it's a newer, heavier, and far more expensive design. It should be better.
- teamonkey 13y ago
  Here's a Prius v. Looks worse than the c. http://youtu.be/GNZ5ojGRiRU http://youtu.be/GNZ5ojGRiRU
- ricardobeat 13y ago
  That fallacy is debunked by every sports car ever.
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    Sports cars have always made sacrifices in this regard. The first being simply that real sports cars are half the size of a modern saloon, which gives much less room for crumpling.
    - spullara 13y ago
      I'd gladly go up against every sports car that the Tesla beats off the line and the quarter mile. Which is quite a few.
      - sliverstorm 13y ago
        Err... what? If what you are trying to say, in the most roundabout way possible, is the Tesla accelerates fast- sure. But so does a top fuel dragster, and neither is a sports car. A sports car is a small, usually two seat, two door automobile designed for spirited performance and nimble handling. Sports cars may be spartan or luxurious but high maneuverability and minimum weight are requisite. -- Wikipedia (Notice it doesn't say a damn thing about horsepower)
        lostlogin 13y ago
        That's surprising to me. I have always considered a sports car to have a bit of extra power. I guess I'll have to open my mind a bit.
        James_Duval 13y ago
        I suppose that would be very difficult to define. I think sports cars have a higher power-to-weight ratio typically, but again if this was a prerequisite for a sports car then older cars would lose their sports car status over time. Alternatively, a cheap car intended to be sporty made by a low-end manufacturer could be disqualified from being a sports car because of higher-end manufacturers throwing off the curve.
        sliverstorm 13y ago
        They usually do, but extra power isn't what make them sports cars.
    - ricardobeat 13y ago
      The fallacious argument is newer/more expensive = more secure. Every car has compromises.
sjtrny 13y ago
That seems like such a shit way of doing the pole test and introduces too much randomness to be uniform across all cars. The much better way is to keep the car stationary on a moving platform like ANCAP does http://www.ancap.com.au/crashtesting http://www.ancap.com.au/crashtesting
- kbar13 13y ago
  is randomness not good? you aren't going to be driving around on a rail irl
  - nitrogen 13y ago
    Not when you're trying to make an objective comparison with a small number of trials.
    - simonh 13y ago
      If the test was always exactly the same, designers could optimize the car design for that precise impact force at that precise point.
      - nitrogen 13y ago
        The ability to compare different cars is probably more important than preventing designers from sticking a five foot thick plate of metal on the precise diagonal of the crash test, which would be obvious. A major part of crash testing has to be the forces felt by the test dummy, so there's not a whole lot designers could do to reduce those forces in exactly one direction without also reducing them in other directions.

mikeash 13y ago

That looks like the difference between waking up sore the next morning and waking up in the hospital the next morning. Pretty impressive how well the Tesla does given how little space is available to absorb the blow. Minor nitpick: your second link is a Prius c, which is quite a bit smaller than a regular Prius, and more like a Yaris aside from the drivetrain. Still a decent example of a "normal" car in any event.

Lagged2Death 13y ago

That's a Prius C, the new super-small one based on the Yaris chassis. Given its ultra-low-budget roots, four stars is actually really impressive. Yeah, the Tesla is better, but it's a newer, heavier, and far more expensive design. It should be better.

teamonkey 13y ago
Here's a Prius v. Looks worse than the c. http://youtu.be/GNZ5ojGRiRU http://youtu.be/GNZ5ojGRiRU
ricardobeat 13y ago
That fallacy is debunked by every sports car ever.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  Sports cars have always made sacrifices in this regard. The first being simply that real sports cars are half the size of a modern saloon, which gives much less room for crumpling.
  - spullara 13y ago
    I'd gladly go up against every sports car that the Tesla beats off the line and the quarter mile. Which is quite a few.
    - sliverstorm 13y ago
      Err... what? If what you are trying to say, in the most roundabout way possible, is the Tesla accelerates fast- sure. But so does a top fuel dragster, and neither is a sports car. A sports car is a small, usually two seat, two door automobile designed for spirited performance and nimble handling. Sports cars may be spartan or luxurious but high maneuverability and minimum weight are requisite. -- Wikipedia (Notice it doesn't say a damn thing about horsepower)
      - lostlogin 13y ago
        That's surprising to me. I have always considered a sports car to have a bit of extra power. I guess I'll have to open my mind a bit.
        James_Duval 13y ago
        I suppose that would be very difficult to define. I think sports cars have a higher power-to-weight ratio typically, but again if this was a prerequisite for a sports car then older cars would lose their sports car status over time. Alternatively, a cheap car intended to be sporty made by a low-end manufacturer could be disqualified from being a sports car because of higher-end manufacturers throwing off the curve.
        sliverstorm 13y ago
        They usually do, but extra power isn't what make them sports cars.
  - ricardobeat 13y ago
    The fallacious argument is newer/more expensive = more secure. Every car has compromises.

sjtrny 13y ago

That seems like such a shit way of doing the pole test and introduces too much randomness to be uniform across all cars. The much better way is to keep the car stationary on a moving platform like ANCAP does http://www.ancap.com.au/crashtesting http://www.ancap.com.au/crashtesting

kbar13 13y ago
is randomness not good? you aren't going to be driving around on a rail irl
- nitrogen 13y ago
  Not when you're trying to make an objective comparison with a small number of trials.
  - simonh 13y ago
    If the test was always exactly the same, designers could optimize the car design for that precise impact force at that precise point.
    - nitrogen 13y ago
      The ability to compare different cars is probably more important than preventing designers from sticking a five foot thick plate of metal on the precise diagonal of the crash test, which would be obvious. A major part of crash testing has to be the forces felt by the test dummy, so there's not a whole lot designers could do to reduce those forces in exactly one direction without also reducing them in other directions.