no they are in Area 52 now. LOL
1 Like
They moved? Damnit I was just closing in on them.
4 Likes
Of course!
A moving target is harder to hit.
You’re simply repeating the same things put out by big corporations like new is always safer, and whatever else needs to be said to buy our product. If you have to bring Area 51 in to this to make me look stupid then it shows your answer to my argument is weak.
Says the sales person to a person wanting a new compact car. Even the IIHS says that crash ratings can only be compared between vehicles of similar weight. It’s right there on the vehicle page, or at least it was on the old site before the redesign and Javascript mess. But you ignore any actual crash tests that disagree with what’s put forth by the big automotive corporations. I don’t care what the Smart fourtwo got since it’s only valid when compared to other sub compact cars. The IIHS themselves say this. I guess the IIHS is talking about Area 51 and aliens too.
In a single vehicle accident it does.
This is the one thing that is true. Maybe you read the article I linked about this in the past? You did use the phrase arms race which is what the study called it. For every life that is saved from driving an SUV, 4 other lives are lost in the rest of the population that didn’t get a big SUV. That study is 20 years old now, and a big part of the problem was the higher bumpers on SUVs at the time. The front ends have been lowered and the situation isn’t as bad as it was.
Are you going to drive a sub compact to be a good citizen? I doubt it.
How do you answer the claim that the Mitsubishi Mirage has earned the title of the most dangerous car? Since it can’t have anything to do with it being the lightest car on the road, then what reason do you have?
I’m suggesting that people drive vehicles that are average weight, which is 3200 pounds. I’m also in favor of more severe penalties for traffic violations for larger vehicles, especially DUI. I believe victims of DUI crashes could be cut in half if drunks were banned from being able to drive large vehicles. Of course someone will come along and say that drunks shouldn’t be allowed to drive any vehicles, then that fantasy will go through, then the drunks will drive an SUVs illegally and we’ll be back where we were.
Obviously, but not because heavier vehicles are inherently better in a crash than lighter ones. Slam a Smart Fortwo into a wall at 60mph and the occupant is much less likely to be fatally injured than slamming a '57 Chevy into a wall at the same speed.
As I mentioned, where weight becomes a factor is when the other guy is driving something significantly heavier than you. But since it’s impractical for all of us to drive semis or tanks, that’s not really germane to the issue, and encouraging people to get heavier vehicles “because they protect better” is not only wrong, but irresponsibly furthers the vehicular arms race that really needs to stop.
Mitsubishi sucks. Next question?
In seriousness, it has less to do with the Mirage’s weight and more to do with the Mirage’s crappy design. While I was being a little facetious up there, Mitsubishi really does suck.
If weight were the determining factor then why did the Dodge Journey, bulking up to 4,000 pounds, score so poorly?
1 Like
Dodge Journey 4WD: 2-44 deaths.
Dodge Journey 2WD: 25-65 deaths.
All 2017 vehicles death rates: 34-37 deaths.
The confidence limit or margin is so large that the rating is about worthless. 25 deaths compared to an average of 36 for all vehicles says that it’s safer. Or it could be 65 deaths and be a lot more dangerous. If you go through statistics with such large margins you’ll likely find whatever data you need to support what you’re saying, as long as you leave out the part about the huge margin.
Mitsubishi Mirage is 25 to 115 deaths. That has a large confidence limit too.
I assume you were also using the IIHS statistics, and the big problem with these statistics is that miles driven is not considered. It’s very useful to an insurance company that doesn’t know how much you drive the vehicle, but not to someone who wants to know if they’ll die driving 100,000,000 miles. Popular daily drivers are going to have more fatalities when statistics are done this way. Vehicles that rural people tend to buy are doing to have more fatalities. Notice how the hybrid and plug in electric vehicles tend to have lower fatality rates? Those types probably tend to be driven in the city more where it’s safer.
And to sum things up, there is no possible way that a 1990 Honda Civic is going to be as safe as a late model Mitsubishi Mirage
As long as I’m physically, mentally, and financially able to take care of my daughter, it is my obligation to do so, when or if I’m no longer able, it then becomes her obligation to take care of me.
Regarding car size and safety, I don’t necessarily want to drive the biggest thing on the road…but I don’t want to drive the smallest thing on the road either. One reason I got rid of my junky (not Toyota’s fault, it was literally almost sold for scrap moments before I bought it) 99 Tacoma is because I did not want my kids in it after I got rear ended and bounced my head off of the back glass. It suddenly dawned on me in that moment, “Gee…my head is literally inches from the rear window”. You’d think I would’ve already noticed. 
Those were great trucks, though. Possibly not the safest thing out there.
A good illustration of the value of modern passenger protection engineering vs. “mass” is this crash test from a few years ago:
2 Likes
Agree, but modern engineering plus mass is going to be safer than that same modern engineering in a low mass vehicle, right?
1 Like
It’s my duty to post this Yaris crash every time someone refers to the 2009 3500 pound unibody Malibu versus the 1959 3500 pound body on frame Chevrolet Bel Air crash. A unibody will always be stronger given the same weight.
Also, here are some death rate per mile statistics that lists the Corvette (due to risky driving) and the Mitsubishi Mirage (due to being small) as most dangerous: Study Names America’s Deadliest Vehicles With The Most Frequent Fatality Rates | Carscoops
1 Like
Why/how is that? Depends on the definition of “stronger”, maybe? A unibody will crumple more and may be safer for that reason. But I don’t understand how it’s “stronger”?
1 Like
Yes, but modern engineering–with a priority of passenger protection–can provide some incredible advantages, even for vehicles of lower mass:
Do they ALL do that (father of a 23 year old daughter)?
Thought it was just mine.
In my experience yes and that includes their friends and neice’s if you have them .when they want something you become their favorite uncle.
1 Like
Sure. Like a race car, for an extreme example. Just wrapping my mind around the variables.
A body on frame depends mostly on the frame for forward crash strength, to hold the wheels in place, the engine, the suspension, and to keep the bumpers in place. The body is there to hold small things in place and make it look a certain way, but not to provide the strength to hold the critical parts of the vehicle together.
It’s cheaper to build the body out of thin metal and not worry about making it strong enough to keep the vehicle in one piece. The body doesn’t need to have high strength welds, or thicker metal, or reinforcement sheet metal added in critical areas, or specially bent or punched out areas for crumple zones. The whole thing can be set on a frame that handles all the critical forces. A frame is a lot cheaper to make compared to building the same thing out of sheet metal or plate that is pressed in to shape and welded together.
So to make a body on frame vehicle safe for a front or rear end crash, the frame has to be made heavy enough to handle all the forces of the crash. The the body, which doesn’t handle these forces, is set on top of it. The body is dead weight that doesn’t help improve the strength of the vehicle.
By integrating the frame in to the body, the floorboard and foot area can be used to increase the strength of the frame, allowing the unibody frame that goes under the floorboard to be a lot smaller. This extends all the way to the back bumper. Strut towers can be built in to the unibody upper fender support rather than having separate heavy strut mounts that are separately bolted to the frame. Now the upper fender support can be made somewhat heavier and also serve as strut towers. This also gives the vehicle some higher up crash strength in case you rear end a truck.
The 1998 Fiesta versus 2018 Fiesta crash is a good one but the older one is almost 300 pounds lighter, so it’s isn’t completely fair. The old one did hold up quite well, and the stronger seat belt and airbag helped reduce injury. Both drivers would survive despite what the moderator said.
In the Mercedes versus Smart Fortwo test, it looks like the seatbelt and airbag were quite strong in the Smart and held up well, but with the test at only 28 MPH I can’t really say for sure.
It’s not just girls. When my 1977 Corolla needed to have the (manual) transmission overhauled, guess who went to dear old dad for a loan? I was still making payments on the car and $350 was a significant amount in the mid 80’s, at least to me. I was also older than my daughter is now.
Anyway, in regard to another comment, I mentioned her age, close to 30, which means she’s not a kid, and the fact that she doesn’t currently drive, which implies (to me, at least) that safety is an issue. I’m not sure how that translates to “too much info” about her.
1 Like
No offense intended I just don’t think I would have said that much about my daughter but the opportunity hasn’t come up yet. But one never knows.
No worries. That part wasn’t directed at you anyway.
1 Like