@Barkydog … Thank you for the response and explanation.
In it’s day this car was probably above average for safety. That was 30 years ago. Compared to a current model of similar size the old BMW is much less safe. But what a nice car. Wear your seatbelt and drive with a big smile on your face.
It’s not just the airbags to consider here. The general crash energy dissipation and passenger compartment integrity of today’s cars is almost certainly better. Today’s seats and headrests probably have a better design. A new car might have seatbelt pretensioners and an old car might not. An old car might not have an inertia fuel cutoff. I wouldn’t say that this BMW is unsafe, but I don’t think there’s any doubt that you’d be better off in a modern car in a crash. It’s up to you to decide if some level of risk is worth whatever you see in this car.
The safety of your wallet in trying to maintain a 31-year-old BMW is another story, however!
@lion9car - good point, it’s not just about the airbags. The fatality rate in 1984 was about 2.6 deaths/hundred million miles, in 2013 it was about 1.1. Sure, lots of older cars influence the numbers, but it’s been constantly decreasing since then. The OP’s original question was, basically, whether a newer car would be safer. The answer is certainly yes. Whether it’s enough to worry about, well, that’s up to the OP.
Here’s data up to 2003:
http://www.saferoads.org/federal/2004/TrafficFatalities1899-2003.pdf
Drivers protected by air bags experienced reduced fatality risk of … 11 percent in all crashes.
Then there is the risk of injury from the air bag itself…
Although I think air bags are great, 11% reduction is not that great. In other words, 89% of the time, you are equally safe without them.
b
"89% of the time, you are equally safe without them. "
That is faulty reasoning, IMHO.
There are crashes every day in which airbags do not deploy, simply because they weren’t designed to deploy under those circumstances. Instead of “all crashes” we need statistics regarding crashes in which airbags actually deployed in order to make a valid judgment.
“89 % of the time, you are equally safe without them.”
I think NOT!!! 89% of the time you are alive but may be much more seriously injured without them than with them.
My ex-wife tangled with a Suburban (head-on) using my 2000 Accord. He hit her at 45 mph when she tried to turn in front of him. 2000 Accord front end was completely destroyed, hood crumpled, engine on the ground. Front air bags deployed. Besides a shoulder belt bruise on her chest she sustained zero injuries. First responders said that, without the airbag, she would have sustained serious, possibly life threatening, injuries. We are both big believers in air bags (and crumple zone protection) now.
Although I think air bags are great, 11% reduction is not that great. In other words, 89% of the time, you are equally safe without them.
11% is a SIGNIFICANT increase…that is a huge safety increase.
89% of the time, you are equally safe without them.
That’s a false assumption. Included in the 89% are the times you’ve been in a crash and the air-bags were never deployed.
Example 1: Just ran into a telephone pole at 2mph. Air-bag didn’t deploy and the outcome of if the vehicle was equipped with an air-bag or not would be the same.
Example 2: Just ran into the same pole again, only traveling about 25mph. Had my seat belt on and my air-bag did deploy. But at that speed the air-bag had no effect because I was wearing my seatbelt.
Example 3: Ran into the same pole again, but this time traveling at 60mph. Had my seatbelt on and my air-bad deployed. I’m still alive with minor injuries because of both the seat-belt and the air-bag. It’s this example that is most important in determining how effective an air0bag system is.
@PhattPete Airbags aside, That BMW 633 is one of my favorite cars of all times. Timeless styling with a great engine. With care, the engine will run almost forever. Parts for this “Shark” (it is what BMW club members call the car) are readily available. They are fairly simple to repair and there is a nationwide club (BMW CCA) that can offer service referrals for the car. The car was very safe for its time and should protect you well even today in a crash if you wear your belts.
In 1984 I was the only passenger with my boss driving his 633Csi through Kokomo, IN. As we approached an intersection, it became obvious to me that he didn’t see the red light. I said, “Red light!” and he slammed on the brakes. I was astounded at how quickly that BMW stopped straight and safely out of the intersection. This car’s ability to avoid accidents at least partially off-sets the lack of air bags.
Because I am an incredibly nerdy person, I’ve read several books about traffic safety and design. An interesting thing about safety statistics is that the safer you make a car or a road appear, the more dangerous drivers behave. For instance, if roads A and B are both 30mph roads, and A is a wide 4 lane road with generous breakdown lanes and large sidewalks and nothing to block your view of anything, while road B is a very narrow road with no shoulders and sidewalks that jut in toward the road at curves, and planters along the sidewalk so you can’t see the whole sidewalk, people will drive faster, and above the speed limit, on road A, but not so much on road B.
So even though road A is “safer” in its design, driver behavior negates that design - drivers tend to drive as fast as they feel safe doing. Safety features - even those that are only perceived safety features like 4 wheel drive in the snow - tend to make drivers feel more confident about driving faster and more recklessly.
In other words, statistics about airbags are likely to be skewed, because not only do you have to figure out if fatalities/injuries are lower with airbags than without, but you also have to figure out if driver behavior changes when airbags are added.
All that aside, the airbag is only going to be a factor if you get in a wreck. Don’t get in a wreck and you’ll be fine - and that means driving very defensively so you can predict when other drivers are going to do something stupid, and avoid them.
Others are right in another area too - don’t get this car if it’s not just a fun toy – Daily drivers that are more than 20 years old are risky if you need them to be reliable.
In other words, statistics about airbags are likely to be skewed, because not only do you have to figure out if fatalities/injuries are lower with airbags than without, but you also have to figure out if driver behavior changes when airbags are added.
I don’t agree with that. They are two different statistics.
One is how effective air-bags are in a crash. The other is how air-bags may or may-not effect your driving.
I also don’t buy your assumption that because the vehicle has more safety equipment people drive more aggressively. I do think that better handling vehicles a driver may drive more aggressively. I would drive my wife’s 96 Accord more aggressively then my wife’s Lexus. The Accord handled better then the Lexus…but the Lexus had several more safety features (traction control, Side air-bags).
I agree that driving defensively can HELP prevent accidents. I’ve been rear-ended 3 times and twice struck when someone ran a red-light. Not too sure how I could have driven more defensively to prevent those accidents. I know that two of those accidents I may not be here if I wasn’t wearing a seatbelt.
“you also have to figure out if driver behavior changes when airbags are added.”
I’m not really disagreeing with your overall premise, but–let’s face it–there are a whole lot of people on the road who don’t even know if their car has airbags or not.
We frequently see posts from people who…don’t know how to spell the model name of their car…have no idea what engine their car has…have no idea what octane gas their engine requires…whether it has a timing belt or not…whether the engine is of the “interference” design…how many lbs of pressure to put in their tires…and even what brand of tires are mounted on their car. IMHO, assuming that most people are even aware of the details about the specific safety systems in their cars is giving too much credit to a whole lot of people.
And, then, you have folks like you, me, and most of the forum members–who do know whether or not their cars have airbags. However, never once have I said to myself…I think I’ll take a chance with this risky behavior because this car has airbags.
Honestly–Has anyone here made a conscious decision to drive in a risky manner simply because of the presence of airbags in his car?
And all of that comes out in the wash - the deaths/100 million miles statistic. It’s been dropping pretty steadily, mostly from car safety improvements, in my opinion. If folks were changing behaviors because they knew they had airbags, etc., I guess they’re not changing them (driving more recklessly) enough!
MikeinNH: good point.
"Honestly–Has anyone here made a conscious decision to drive in a risky manner simply because of the presence of airbags in his car?’
For whatever reason, if you ask someone, “Would you drive more dangerously in a car with safety features?” they tend to answer “Of course not!”, BUT
If you ask them “Would you drive extra carefully in a car that did not have safety features?” they tend to answer “Why yes I would!”…
…and the above questions are just two ways of saying the same thing: if you drive MORE carefully without a safety feature, you are (necessarily) driving LESS carefully with it.
The same kind of thing happens with higher-mpg cars. The average fuel consumption per mile drops, say, 20%, but the total gas used only drops, say, 10%. Why? Folks know they’re getting better mpgs, so they drive more! Still a benefit, but not the FULL benefit.
Good roads lull people into a false sense of security and they start driving carelessly. The same reason is why there are so many more highway fatalities in the summer than in the winter when roads are the most dangerous.
Nothing “nerdy” about your observations!
In The Netherlands they are busy removing stop lights and stop signs, and replacing them with traffic circles. Drivers now have to use judgement and the accident rate has dropped sharply in those areas without stop lights and stop signs.
Take a look at the video in the ‘future of driving’ link I posted - imagine folks not having to pay attention! Yikes!
Interesting behavioral theory that needs to be kept in mind whether for driving, economics, etc. Sometimes you just can’t explain the results until looking at the behavioral psychology involved. My wife’s cousin is a traffic design engineer in the metro area. He says that their experience has been that accidents increase when stop lights are installed. Yet the first thing people want at dangerous intersections is stop lights. Gotta admit that if I have a green light, I tend to be less watchful of potential cross traffic than if it were an uncontrolled intersection. Of course there are other traffic flow reasons for stop lights but that’s their experience anyway on heavy residential roads. Might be different in other places.
I think its interesting anyway and especially the emphasis some drivers place on air bags. Like if I’ve got a dozen air bags, everything will be fine.