#1
|
|||
|
|||
Is Bigger Better?
"Harry K" wrote in message om... "Cory Dunkle" wrote in message ... quote: Geo wants their Metro to be able to withstand a 50 MPH head on collision (100MPH combined impact speed) unquote. The force of impact on each vehicle of equal mass, both moving 50 mph, is 50mph, not 100mph. With two vehicles of disimilar mass the one with less mass will experience something more than 50mph, the other something less but nowhere near 100mph until the mass discrepancy approaches infinity, e.g., a Metro against a loaded semi. Would not a Geo Metro heading East at 50 MPH and a Geo Metro heading West at 50 MPH which collide head-on have the same effective impact speed and force as a Geo Metro headed north which hits a concrete barrier at 100 MPH? Oh, nevermind... I just figured it out. I feel stupid. The decelleration from the 100 MPH Geo would be much greater than that either 50 MPH Geos experienced. Esseentially it's as if in the first scenario both Geos hit a concrete barrier. In any case, when I wrote that I was thinking of a Geo Metro colliding head on with a Suburban/H2 or Excursion at 50 MPH. Either way you're right though. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Is Bigger Better?
"Ian St. John" wrote in message ... "Cory Dunkle" wrote in message news "Ian St. John" wrote in message news "Cory Dunkle" wrote in message ... "Paul" wrote in message ... "Don Quijote" wrote in message om... Larger vehicles, the argument goes, may guzzle more gas but they offer more protection, whether one hits a tree or another car. The argument has been a central one when efforts emerge in Congress to raise fuel economy standards. The two ton mom mobiles are safer, eh. Tell that to the dead girl. See the following. http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-onlin...12884481.shtml Oh, just a little FYI. The "two ton mom mobiles" of the 60s, 70s and 80s were station wagons, which weighed at least two tons, except maybe the compact station wagons like the falcon which probably weight a few hundred pounds less. Hell, _cars_ (i.e. not station wagons) used to weight in the neighborhood of two tons. So stop bitching about the weight of SUVs, because cars used to be just as heavy, and there are quite a few these days that still are two tons or more. We'll keep bitching till the two ton mom mobiles ( of whatever design ) are dead and the roads are safe. Remember that SUVs kill more in two car collisions and yet are not safer for their drivers or passengers because of roll instability and vision blockage. This has nothing to do with history or what went before. It has to do with creating an unnecessary threat to life, as well as a wasteful gas guzzler. It is just ANOTHER bad design. In that case _every_ vehicle on the road is "an unnecessary threat to life, as well as a wasteful gas guzzler". In times of old people used to live close to work, and for those that lived fartehr from work they rode a horse. Cars are _not_ needed at all to survive. Any time a human moves faster than he was designed to (i.e. faster than he can run) he risks his life, as the human body wasn't made to take the impact of such high speeds. Anything that uses more gas than a horse is wasteful. It is indeed all relative. Check the safety rating of cars before 'Unsafe at any speed". The citizens of 1905 were horrified at the breakneck speed and dangerous recklessness of these new 'horseless buggies'. We have improved the safety and regulation to a point where it is acceptable. But like the Chevy Corsair and it's dangerous handling, there are issues where we say 'not good enough' which is what is being applied to SUVs. There is nothing inherantly dangerous about the way a SUV handles. Just as there is nothing inherantly dangerous about teh way a Chevy Corsair handles. The driver must simply know how his vehicle handles and waht it is capable with and drive accordingly. The only reason people die in car accidents is because the accidents occurred in the first place. Attack the problem at it's root, unsafe drivers and unsafe laws. The type of vehicle someone drives is irrelevant. Unless you are going to 'perfect' humans you are talking through your anus. Is this some sort of bioengineering proposal? Otherwise we just have to minimise the danger by improving the instrument. **** happens and you will not get a better breed of human to cut down on the danger. That is really far out and weird logic even for you. I'm not talking about a better breed of human, or even a smarter human. I'm simply talking about engineering our roads, traffic signal, traffic control devices, and traffic laws entirely for safety and expedious travel. Do that and you drop traffic accidents by a huge amount simply from making the roads safe. Now make stiffer requirements for written and road tests and throw in good, logical enforcement and you've greatly reduced the amount of bad drivers getting on the roads as well as the number of accidents due to unsafe roads. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Is Bigger Better?
"Cory Dunkle" wrote in message ...
"Harry K" wrote in message om... "Cory Dunkle" wrote in message ... quote: Geo wants their Metro to be able to withstand a 50 MPH head on collision (100MPH combined impact speed) unquote. The force of impact on each vehicle of equal mass, both moving 50 mph, is 50mph, not 100mph. With two vehicles of disimilar mass the one with less mass will experience something more than 50mph, the other something less but nowhere near 100mph until the mass discrepancy approaches infinity, e.g., a Metro against a loaded semi. Would not a Geo Metro heading East at 50 MPH and a Geo Metro heading West at 50 MPH which collide head-on have the same effective impact speed and force as a Geo Metro headed north which hits a concrete barrier at 100 MPH? Oh, nevermind... I just figured it out. I feel stupid. The decelleration from the 100 MPH Geo would be much greater than that either 50 MPH Geos experienced. Esseentially it's as if in the first scenario both Geos hit a concrete barrier. In any case, when I wrote that I was thinking of a Geo Metro colliding head on with a Suburban/H2 or Excursion at 50 MPH. Either way you're right though. Yeah, the 100mph misconception is common. Just picturing what is happening clears it up tho. Question, from what speed does each decelerate? Ansewer 50mph. When phrased that way, even the hardcore holdouts seem to get it. Harry K |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|