General > General Technical Chat
Insane overengineering of a car headlight
<< < (20/29) > >>
Someone:

--- Quote from: coppice on March 30, 2022, 09:20:16 pm ---
--- Quote from: Monkeh on March 30, 2022, 08:12:40 pm ---
--- Quote from: coppice on March 30, 2022, 06:56:59 pm ---
--- Quote from: Monkeh on March 30, 2022, 06:54:35 pm ---
--- Quote from: james_s on March 30, 2022, 05:51:08 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.
--- End quote ---
Pedestrians disagree.
--- End quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---
Compared to a modern vehicle?
--- End quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---
Jumping over the argument there:

--- Quote from: Monkeh on March 30, 2022, 06:54:35 pm ---
--- Quote from: james_s on March 30, 2022, 05:51:08 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.
--- End quote ---
Pedestrians disagree.
--- End quote ---
Deforming bumpers and bonnets are the tradeoff, safer for pedestrians, more likely to need replacing in a minor collision.
tooki:
Clearly we just need to make the bumpers out of soft foam, and require pedestrians to be padded in sumo suits.
Someone:

--- Quote from: james_s on March 30, 2022, 05:51:08 pm ---I am perfectly willing to sacrifice some safety for a bit more robustness in minor collisions.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: james_s 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.
--- End quote ---
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.


--- Quote from: james_s 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.
--- End quote ---
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.
Someone:

--- Quote from: dunkemhigh 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.
--- End quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---
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.
Someone:

--- Quote from: coppice on March 30, 2022, 11:27:10 pm ---
--- Quote from: tom66 on March 30, 2022, 10:40:27 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.
--- End quote ---
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.
--- End quote ---
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
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod