Author Topic: Insane overengineering of a car headlight  (Read 18018 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #75 on: March 06, 2022, 02:32:04 am »
There's a reason for this.

The cars are sacrificed to save the life and limbs of the drivers and passengers in the cars, which are the real "expensive bits."

Those big steel bumpers we remember on our grandfathers' cars? They transferred the energy of the impact to the driver and passengers. Sure, the paint job was spared, but passengers were injured.

Design changes like this is one reason why deaths per capita have gone down while the number of miles driven every year keeps going up. Drivers surely aren't better drivers.

Maybe you missed the 30 years or so between the big rigidly mounted steel bumpers and the expensive painted bodywork that is in place of bumpers on modern cars. My cars have heavy duty bumpers mounted on shock absorbers that can compress a good 6 inches to absorb impacts. They are aluminum and covered with a heavy duty un-painted and easily replaceable plastic skin. The crumple zones are there too, and I had the unfortunate opportunity to try them out on one occasion. More minor impacts are absorbed by the bumpers without damage though.
 

Online coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10034
  • Country: gb
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #76 on: March 06, 2022, 03:25:59 am »
There's a reason for this.

The cars are sacrificed to save the life and limbs of the drivers and passengers in the cars, which are the real "expensive bits."

Those big steel bumpers we remember on our grandfathers' cars? They transferred the energy of the impact to the driver and passengers. Sure, the paint job was spared, but passengers were injured.

Design changes like this is one reason why deaths per capita have gone down while the number of miles driven every year keeps going up. Drivers surely aren't better drivers.

Maybe you missed the 30 years or so between the big rigidly mounted steel bumpers and the expensive painted bodywork that is in place of bumpers on modern cars. My cars have heavy duty bumpers mounted on shock absorbers that can compress a good 6 inches to absorb impacts. They are aluminum and covered with a heavy duty un-painted and easily replaceable plastic skin. The crumple zones are there too, and I had the unfortunate opportunity to try them out on one occasion. More minor impacts are absorbed by the bumpers without damage though.
The Volvo you showed was far ahead of its competition for crash safety when it was launched in the 1980s. It would crush most other cars in an impact, while its occupants walked away. However, the standard of crash protection has progressed a lot. Even a small modern car does very well in an impact with that Volvo, and in some glancing impacts, and side impacts will do better than the Volvo. Visually comparing that 1980s Volvo with my new V90, the old one kinda looks a lot more robust. However, crash the two into each other, and I could walk away while you die.
 

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #77 on: March 06, 2022, 04:17:11 am »
I remember being rear-ended by a VW Jetta while driving a rented Buick LeSabre in around 2005.  The Jetta had to be towed... radiator sprung a leak.   ...while the Buick...  you literally could not tell it had been in a crash, not even a scratch in the painted bumper.  Looking underneath, I saw why - a big aluminum bumper with shock absorbers hidden under the painted flexible bumper.   I was pretty impressed with General Motors that day!
 

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #78 on: March 06, 2022, 06:19:38 pm »
Quote
More minor impacts are absorbed by the bumpers without damage though.

I had someone run into the back of my car. Trashed their headlights and put a dent in the bonnet. My rear end looked OK but I took it into a garage anyway to check, and the chap just gave the back an almighty kick and said "They take a huge bang before being damaged". It's a Golf with no apparent bumber, but having taken it off I can say it's shell over the crumble-zone bodywork.

I wonder if it's part of NCAP, perhap about taking off pedestrians legs? The bumpers on your motor are fine, but when a typical rear-ender occurs the back of yours is up in the air and the front of theirs is dragging the ground, so the impacts aren't where you'd expect when looking at a static car. Perhaps they reason that a prang that will damage the shell-as-bumper would do for your bodywork anyway, so might as well make it look nice.
 

Online Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8134
  • Country: gb
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #79 on: March 06, 2022, 06:25:50 pm »
I wonder if it's part of NCAP, perhap about taking off pedestrians legs?

Pedestrian safety is exactly why the exterior bodywork is softer today. It turns out you can't trust people with upwards of a tonne of metal and have to take measures to protect others from them.
 
The following users thanked this post: janoc, Bassman59, PlainName, SilverSolder, tooki

Offline coppercone2

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11336
  • Country: us
  • $
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #80 on: March 06, 2022, 08:18:01 pm »
don't get scared of optics engineering, its the future
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki, RJSV

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #81 on: March 30, 2022, 05:51:08 pm »
The Volvo you showed was far ahead of its competition for crash safety when it was launched in the 1980s. It would crush most other cars in an impact, while its occupants walked away. However, the standard of crash protection has progressed a lot. Even a small modern car does very well in an impact with that Volvo, and in some glancing impacts, and side impacts will do better than the Volvo. Visually comparing that 1980s Volvo with my new V90, the old one kinda looks a lot more robust. However, crash the two into each other, and I could walk away while you die.

Maybe so, but there was a point reached where in my mind cars were "safe enough" and my old Volvos are at that point. Sure some modern cars are safer, but I am perfectly willing to sacrifice some safety for a bit more robustness in minor collisions. The best way to survive an accident is to avoid getting in one, and the most important aspect in that is sat between the seat and the steering wheel. There is no way for a car to be 100% safe, there is always a risk of injury or death in a collision, some people have different comfort levels in terms of risk, but as long as a person can legally buy a motorcycle and ride it on public roads, the argument that some extreme level of safety must be mandated is invalid. If you want a very safe car and don't mind that a minor collision will cause thousands of dollars in damage or even total it then buy one that meets your needs. I want a car that can take a bit of abuse and keep going, while still being reasonably safe.

For what it's worth, the Volvo in the picture was rear ended by a tanker semi (lorry) while I was stopped in traffic on the freeway. It was an incredibly violent collision that knocked me forward a good distance, spun me around and then the still moving truck slammed into my passenger side and bulldozed my car a few hundred feet sideways before finally stopping. I walked away shaken but without so much as a scratch or bruise and the interior of the car was not deformed. That is proof enough in my mind that it is safe enough. It survived several far more minor rear endings with no more than small scuffs on the (unpainted) bumper skin, the shock mounted bumper absorbed the impact and protected the painted bodywork, exactly as it should be. There is no reason other than style trends to not have an unpainted and durable impact absorbing area to prevent minor bumps from causing major damage.
 

Online coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10034
  • Country: gb
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #82 on: March 30, 2022, 06:11:42 pm »
For what it's worth, the Volvo in the picture was rear ended by a tanker semi (lorry) while I was stopped in traffic on the freeway. It was an incredibly violent collision that knocked me forward a good distance, spun me around and then the still moving truck slammed into my passenger side and bulldozed my car a few hundred feet sideways before finally stopping. I walked away shaken but without so much as a scratch or bruise and the interior of the car was not deformed. That is proof enough in my mind that it is safe enough. It survived several far more minor rear endings with no more than small scuffs on the (unpainted) bumper skin, the shock mounted bumper absorbed the impact and protected the painted bodywork, exactly as it should be. There is no reason other than style trends to not have an unpainted and durable impact absorbing area to prevent minor bumps from causing major damage.
If you had several impacts in that Volvo and survived, I guess it has proven the car is pretty safe, but I'm really wondering about how safe your driving might be.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #83 on: March 30, 2022, 06:23:34 pm »
If you had several impacts in that Volvo and survived, I guess it has proven the car is pretty safe, but I'm really wondering about how safe your driving might be.

Every single time I have been hit I was not moving so I don't really see how my driving comes into play with any of them. Literally every one of them I was either stopped at a red light or stopped in traffic and BANG. Actually I take that back, there was one incident where a bicycle shot out of a parking lot right in front of me and I had to slam on my brakes, but even with that the gal that hit me was obviously following too close or not paying attention. I might jinx myself by saying this but in ~25 years of driving I have never hit anything, never caused an accident, never even gotten a ticket. I was pulled over for speeding exactly once and that was ~17 years ago. He told me to slow down and sent me on my way.
 

Online Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8134
  • Country: gb
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #84 on: March 30, 2022, 06:54:35 pm »
There is no reason other than style trends to not have an unpainted and durable impact absorbing area to prevent minor bumps from causing major damage.

Pedestrians disagree.
 
The following users thanked this post: Someone, Bassman59, tooki

Online coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10034
  • Country: gb
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #85 on: March 30, 2022, 06:56:59 pm »
There is no reason other than style trends to not have an unpainted and durable impact absorbing area to prevent minor bumps from causing major damage.

Pedestrians disagree.
Why would they? In the 80s the best cars for protecting themselves against bumps, like the Volvo 740, were also the best at minimising harm to pedestrians.
 

Offline Lord of nothing

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1591
  • Country: at
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #86 on: March 30, 2022, 07:13:36 pm »
Sorry when I not read everything but could such LED Modules shown in the Video use for other purpose like light the Garden or so? I dont know how much Tech is in the Module them self from prevent them to turn on when the get the right Voltage?  :-//
Made in Japan, destroyed in Sulz im Wienerwald.
 

Online Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8134
  • Country: gb
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #87 on: March 30, 2022, 08:12:40 pm »
There is no reason other than style trends to not have an unpainted and durable impact absorbing area to prevent minor bumps from causing major damage.

Pedestrians disagree.
Why would they? In the 80s the best cars for protecting themselves against bumps, like the Volvo 740, were also the best at minimising harm to pedestrians.

Compared to a modern vehicle?
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Online coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10034
  • Country: gb
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #88 on: March 30, 2022, 09:20:16 pm »
There is no reason other than style trends to not have an unpainted and durable impact absorbing area to prevent minor bumps from causing major damage.

Pedestrians disagree.
Why would they? In the 80s the best cars for protecting themselves against bumps, like the Volvo 740, were also the best at minimising harm to pedestrians.

Compared to a modern vehicle?
I see no reason why improving a car's self protection should conflict with making them safer for pedestrians. The growth of SUVs, with their tall flat fronts, has made cars more like battering rams hitting pedestrians.
 

Online tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7334
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #89 on: March 30, 2022, 10:40:27 pm »
Modern cars are specifically designed with pedestrian safety in mind.  Not only do you have camera-based ADAS systems which can intervene below 30 mph (the most common scenario a pedestrian is encountered in),  but you have the front crash beam which is deliberately designed to push the pedestrian onto the bonnet (by scooping them in the legs!) which then pops up prior to their head impacting the bonnet.  And the most harmful injury is the neck/head injuries from the head striking the bonnet.  Leg injuries can heal, but brain damage rarely does.

There's absolutely no way that a Volvo built in the 80's is safer than a car made today with respect to pedestrian safety.

 
The following users thanked this post: Someone, tooki, Miyuki

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #90 on: March 30, 2022, 11:02:38 pm »
Frankly I don't care about pedestrian safety. I'll stay off of the sidewalks, people should stay out of the road. If everyone just watched where they were going and paid attention this wouldn't be such an issue. The goal should be to not hit pedestrians, not to try to make cars less likely to injure them when they do hit.
 
The following users thanked this post: amyk

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #91 on: March 30, 2022, 11:10:06 pm »
Quote
Frankly I don't care about pedestrian safety.

Then why should anyone care about you or your car?
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #92 on: March 30, 2022, 11:14:29 pm »
Then why should anyone care about you or your car?

I can only assume that they don't. I pay attention when I drive though, I have never hit anything, I've only had people hit me. I would prefer cars to be getting lighter and smaller so as to cause less damage in collision but quite the opposite is true. I share the road mostly with huge heavy behemoths that cause massive damage in a collision. So I'm not sure what the point is here exactly. I've never put myself in a position where (my) pedestrian safety is an issue, I stay out of the street and look out for myself. 
 

Online coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10034
  • Country: gb
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #93 on: March 30, 2022, 11:27:10 pm »
There's absolutely no way that a Volvo built in the 80's is safer than a car made today with respect to pedestrian safety.
Now who would make a claim like that? This is the classic kind of bogus argument they teach you about in debating classes, and its the hallmark of a really slimy person.

An 80s Volvo was really good for pedestrian impacts. It was way ahead of its time, and most modern cars are not massively better. I suspect many of these tall flat fronted SUVs are probably worse. All cars tend to have a higher bonnet line than 30 years ago, and look more like rams than things that will scoop up a pedestrian. I'd like to see some serious data about that.
 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #94 on: March 30, 2022, 11:28:58 pm »
Quote
I pay attention when I drive though, I have never hit anything, I've only had people hit me.

No-one is perfect. In other fields you would be only too happy to take precautions just-in-case, and mostly because it's you that's at risk. It's a bit damning to effectively say it's someone elses tough shit if you ever make a mistake. Or they make a mistake and you made matters worse than they should have been.



 
The following users thanked this post: Someone, tooki

Offline Someone

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5155
  • Country: au
    • send complaints here
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #95 on: March 30, 2022, 11:56:43 pm »
There is no reason other than style trends to not have an unpainted and durable impact absorbing area to prevent minor bumps from causing major damage.
Pedestrians disagree.
Why would they? In the 80s the best cars for protecting themselves against bumps, like the Volvo 740, were also the best at minimising harm to pedestrians.
Compared to a modern vehicle?
I see no reason why improving a car's self protection should conflict with making them safer for pedestrians. The growth of SUVs, with their tall flat fronts, has made cars more like battering rams hitting pedestrians.
Jumping over the argument there:
There is no reason other than style trends to not have an unpainted and durable impact absorbing area to prevent minor bumps from causing major damage.
Pedestrians disagree.
Deforming bumpers and bonnets are the tradeoff, safer for pedestrians, more likely to need replacing in a minor collision.
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13157
  • Country: ch
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #96 on: March 31, 2022, 12:02:26 am »
Clearly we just need to make the bumpers out of soft foam, and require pedestrians to be padded in sumo suits.
 

Offline Someone

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5155
  • Country: au
    • send complaints here
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #97 on: March 31, 2022, 12:06:04 am »
I am perfectly willing to sacrifice some safety for a bit more robustness in minor collisions.
Frankly I don't care about pedestrian safety. I'll stay off of the sidewalks, people should stay out of the road. If everyone just watched where they were going and paid attention this wouldn't be such an issue. The goal should be to not hit pedestrians, not to try to make cars less likely to injure them when they do hit.
But you wanted a car that is better at surviving collisions? why do you need that if you never run into anything?

Ahh, other cars run into you and thats completely normal and needs protecting against, but magically pedestrians, cyclists, and motor cyclists should keep away from you.

Frankly I don't care about pedestrian safety. I'll stay off of the sidewalks, people should stay out of the road. If everyone just watched where they were going and paid attention this wouldn't be such an issue.
Except pedestrian/car collisions are not always pedestrian fault, what about the careful pedestrians? they dont deserve safety? Also not all car drivers are you. So you want a special car for "better" drivers. Good luck with those economies of scale, they're already available and you won't like the prices. The road and road-related area is shared with vehicles and pedestrians, they interact often, accidents happen.

Perhaps you only be allowed to drive your special vehicle on completely segregated roads with zero pedestrians.....   since you have no regard for them and think they should keep out of the way. They probably think the same in return, you should be somewhere else.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Offline Someone

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5155
  • Country: au
    • send complaints here
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #98 on: March 31, 2022, 12:08:29 am »
Quote
I pay attention when I drive though, I have never hit anything, I've only had people hit me.
No-one is perfect. In other fields you would be only too happy to take precautions just-in-case, and mostly because it's you that's at risk. It's a bit damning to effectively say it's someone elses tough shit if you ever make a mistake. Or they make a mistake and you made matters worse than they should have been.
I'll be happily strictly liable for any damage I cause to cars as a pedestrian, if they accept the same in return (watch the insurance companies start taking an interest in these sorts of vehicle details). Until then these enforced safety measures are a win for society.
 

Offline Someone

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5155
  • Country: au
    • send complaints here
Re: Insane overengineering of a car headlight
« Reply #99 on: March 31, 2022, 12:23:00 am »
There's absolutely no way that a Volvo built in the 80's is safer than a car made today with respect to pedestrian safety.
Now who would make a claim like that? This is the classic kind of bogus argument they teach you about in debating classes, and its the hallmark of a really slimy person.

An 80s Volvo was really good for pedestrian impacts. It was way ahead of its time, and most modern cars are not massively better. I suspect many of these tall flat fronted SUVs are probably worse. All cars tend to have a higher bonnet line than 30 years ago, and look more like rams than things that will scoop up a pedestrian. I'd like to see some serious data about that.
Except a comparable market with the Volvo XC60 (not a small vehicle) has a more rounded front and almost identical impact point as your 740 example. Every single aspect of their front designs is optimised in the never vehicle to reduce the forces in the current safety tests, for pedestrians: Head Impact (rounded sloped bonnet and deformation), Upper Leg Impact (rounded impact point below hip), Lower Leg Impact (no protruding bumper).

Pedestrian tests go back to the late 90's, and Volvo were pretty average:
https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/latest-safety-ratings/en/results/volvo/s40/15475
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf