Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
That’s insane! But another example of how safe these vehicles are! And probably some element of luck. Glad to hear she walked away relatively unscathed. Was she at a stop when she was hit?Damn. You got lucky. My wife was hit head on in her LC 200 earlier this year and walked away with only a concussion. Great vehicles. We found a replacement luckily with only 90 miles on it. They are hard to find.
Below is also the truck that hit her. Was a light rain and the lady hydroplaned and hit my wife at 75 mph.
View attachment 3490178
View attachment 3490179
No, she had moved over to the sideThat’s insane! But another example of how safe these vehicles are! And probably some element of luck. Glad to hear she walked away relatively unscathed. Was she at a stop when she was hit?
I can only guess that there is significantly more energy in a head on collision where 2 vehicles are approaching each other vs 1 vehicle hitting a stationary object. My mind is blown right now!No, she had moved over to the side trying to avoid the sliding truck coming at her and thinks she got down to 40-45 mph and was all the way in the grass on the shoulder when she got hit. That highway is posted 70 mph but due to the light rain, she said she never got above 60. Here in the Texas hill country, the roads get pretty slick with only a small amount of rain due to the way the roads are built. That tar/petroleum slick makes it no fun.
I think it helped that they did not hit directly head on. In the pic with the truck, the truck was spinning and hit my wife’s driver side corner with the trucks passenger front corner. The truck then spun counter clockwise and the passenger bed side hit my wife again on her driver side rear quarter panel. Here is the DPS illustration from their report.I can only guess that there is significantly more energy in a head on collision where 2 vehicles are approaching each other vs 1 vehicle hitting a stationary object. My mind is blown right now!
If you end up in a serious car accident and you are injured, lawyer up. It's unfortunate, but you have to fight tooth and nail to get what the insurance companies owe you.
Pretty much, yes. If both vehicles are going 50mph in a head on collision, the impact is the same as one of the vehicles going 100mph and the other one stopped.I can only guess that there is significantly more energy in a head on collision where 2 vehicles are approaching each other vs 1 vehicle hitting a stationary object. My mind is blown right now!
I can only guess that there is significantly more energy in a head on collision where 2 vehicles are approaching each other vs 1 vehicle hitting a stationary object. My mind is blown right now!
As I understand it that’s not strictly true. Kinetic energy increases with the square of velocity. So while those 50mph cars would “cancel out” and basically be like hitting a wall, the same car at 100mph with double the velocity would have four times the kinetic energy hitting whatever it did.Pretty much, yes. If both vehicles are going 50mph in a head on collision, the impact is the same as one of the vehicles going 100mph and the other one stopped.
It has been a long, long, time since I had my college physics courses (or made use of much of it), so my memory is kind of foggy on lots of it... These sites seem to do a decent job of explaining what happens in the 2 scenarios:As I understand it that’s not strictly true. Kinetic energy increases with the square of velocity. So while those 50mph cars would “cancel out” and basically be like hitting a wall, the same car at 100mph with double the velocity would have four times the kinetic energy hitting whatever it did.
It has been a long, long, time since I had my college physics courses (or made use of much of it), so my memory is kind of foggy on lots of it... These sites seem to do a decent job of explaining what happens in the 2 scenarios:
Mythbusters on Head-on Collisions | Greg Laden's Blog
gregladen.com
There are, of course, a ton of variables involved. For example, crumple zones make a huge difference in the amount of damage the human ends up with and walls don't usually have crumple zones (this is probably why some of the barriers on highways now have something similar to crumple zones instead of just a solid block of concrete).
No matter what the specifics are, these types of collisions are never fun. When someone walks away relatively unharmed, it's a good end result.
Yeah, I ran into the pay wall on some of the articles that looked promising as well.What appeared to be of the best online articles I could find about where mythbusters was right and wrong is mostly behind a paywall.. I’m curious enough to learn more that I’m considering paying for it.