|| On or around Wed, 4 Oct 2006 19:06:30 +0100, "Richard Brookman" || enlightened us thusly: || ||| Austin Shackles wrote: ||| ||||| dunno how fast the crash test was, mind. but they're not ||||| silly-fast. Mind you, it's all about crumple zones and ||||| dissipating energy, innit. problem is it leaves you needing a ||||| new truck. ||| ||| Dunno - if you kind of ignore the bodywork and watch the dummy ||| driver, there's nowhere for his legs or torso to be after the ||| crash, and his head's somewhere behind the front wheel after it's ||| been pushed back. I'd reckon on 100% mortality for that one. || || yeah, doesn't look too impressive, I admit. || || 'ere, this is a good 'un: || ||
formatting link
|| || Smart vs. Merc S600 - 's not the foregone conclusion you'd expect.
Shows how cars of different masses behave - the Merc barely moves, whereas the Smart bounces around like a child's toy. The extent of damage was roughly equivalent, but I know which I would rather have been in.
And I guess we've all seen this one:
formatting link
As VBH says, the Smart can survive a horrendous crash, but it's likely the passengers would not.
Ain't no substitute for decent mass, a proper chassis (and good seat belts).