Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by Nifty3929 on Wednesday September 14, 2022 @09:50PM
(#32846043)
Why were they offset side-to-side about half a car width? Was this on purpose, or just poor aiming?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by Doxin on Thursday September 15, 2022 @03:15AM
(#32848232)
That's on purpose. Used to be they only tested straight-on crashes. Of course this ment that car manufacturers only optimized for that situation. In the real world you're rarely aiming squarely for the front of the other car though, so those sorts of crashes were rather a lot more lethal until crash testing started taking them into account.
It's also generally just a harder crash for a car to deal with, so it makes sense to use in a comparison like this.
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by TheJoeMan on Thursday September 15, 2022 @01:00PM
(#32855021)
Unfortunately they may be over-optimizing... https://danluu.com/car-safety/ discusses "gaming" the tests. Maybe protect the driver more at the passenger's expense.
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by Doxin on Friday September 16, 2022 @05:35AM
(#32864070)
What's that quote about metrics and goals again?
Crash testing will need to continually get updated to avoid manufacturers being able to target the tests too much.
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by ununoctium87 on Wednesday September 14, 2022 @09:51PM
(#32846049)
Most common type of collision IIRC
Re:Head-On Crash: 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs. 1959 Bel Air (2009)
by csixty4 on Wednesday September 14, 2022 @09:55PM
(#32846073)
It also distributes stress between the "safety cage" around the passengers and the structures on the side of the car. Modern cars respond pretty well to a perfect head-on collision but things get messy with an offset crash.