1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Crash Test #s for the :rainbow: 80 series

Discussion in 'Chit-Chat' started by swank60, Aug 1, 2005.

  1. swank60

    swank60

    Messages:
    1,483
    Likes Received:
    232
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2002
    Location:
    One of Four Presidential Flying Saucers
    Anyone know where I can find comparable crash test numbers (that actually make sense) for various vehicles?

    If the 80 is better than the Avalon, guess what the better half might start driving?
     
  2. mabrodis

    mabrodis

    Messages:
    1,150
    Likes Received:
    5
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    Castle Rock, CO
    I would guess the 80 would do alot better, but size doesn't always mean good in crash tests...while doing a search for this info I found this...a compairson (well contrast really) showing a Mini-Cooper and a F150, both hitting the barrier at the same speed...

    "Oh, I'm safe, I'm in a F150" :rolleyes:

    http://www.bridger.us/2002/12/16/CrashTestingMINICooperVsFordF150
     
  3. swank60

    swank60

    Messages:
    1,483
    Likes Received:
    232
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2002
    Location:
    One of Four Presidential Flying Saucers
    On the chart at the bottom of that link, the Avalon had fewer deaths (per million cars) than any of the other vehicles (didn't see the LC on the list) - hmmm...
     
  4. Jman

    Jman

    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    176
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Location:
    If ya don't know, I ain't tellin'
    Not surprising at all. I read somewhere that the F150 series had the highest fatality per accident rating of any passenger vehicle.

    Another thing you have to think about is "active" versus "passive" safety--how likely are you to AVOID an accident in a more nimble vehicle? I have no doubt that I could have avoided the accident I had two years ago if I were driving a small car instead of a lumbering truck.
     
  5. Gumby

    Gumby Supamod Staff Member s-Moderator

    Messages:
    12,160
    Likes Received:
    619
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2002
    Location:
    Knee deep in hookers and gin
    I have personally crash tested the 80 series on a number of occasions and I can assure you it will take a tree or a big rock hit better than an Avalon. Or a deer. Or a Acura. Pretty much anything I've run into.


    You really want real crash numbers? make some up. Lie to her. Get the 80, dude. She'll thank you for it later. She already knows you lie to her. Women can measure, you know.
     
  6. 97 FZJ80

    97 FZJ80

    Messages:
    1,539
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    8
    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Location:
    Plano Texas
  7. semlin

    semlin discouraged user

    Messages:
    5,235
    Media:
    1
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,259
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    north of 49
    i can tell you anecodotally that an 80 with a stock bumper t boning an idiot in a tercel in the front wheel well at 25 mph without time to lock the brakes does almost no damage to the 80 (it drives away and wheel alignment is not affected), but obliterates 80% of the engine compartment of the tercel. after that accident my wife was freaked out about what would have happened if she hit him in the passenger door (paxseat was occupied). she doesn't want to drive an 80 because she does not think it is a fair fight and is scared she will kill someone in an accident because the 80 has no give. put an arb on the front and sliders on the side and the main issue is stopping power and manouverability, but then you have a 60 so you know about that :D

    you should search in the 80 section on idahodoug's thread on his brother Scott's collision with the cement counterweight on a crane at highway speed after drifting. the photos made my jaw drop. Scott is still around but would not be in an Avalon.
     
  8. Jonathan_Ferguson

    Jonathan_Ferguson ★ is in the wrong locale SILVER Star

    Messages:
    1,005
    Likes Received:
    107
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2003
    Location:
    Glen Waverley, Victoria, Australia
  9. rgsiii

    rgsiii

    Messages:
    778
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2004
    Location:
    Valley, AL
  10. bad_religion_au

    bad_religion_au

    Messages:
    2,213
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
  11. Tapage

    Tapage Club 4X4 Panamá SILVER Star

    Messages:
    23,015
    Likes Received:
    1,172
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2003
    Location:
    Panamá
    Jummm ok, last May I have an accident with a Mitsubischi Nativa ( V6 3.0 ) that's driving by a young drunk boy, make a ilegal turn and crash with my TLC.

    One imgae more than 100 word .. Nativa

    [​IMG]

    And my TLC .. ( the windshield crash, it was my mystake, yea I now .. sit belt. )

    [​IMG]
     
  12. re_guderian

    re_guderian SILVER Star

    Messages:
    4,340
    Media:
    33
    Albums:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Location:
    Arizona
    Do what I did and get one of each! Last spring I replaced my DD '96 Nissan Sentra (death trap, but great MPG!), with a 2000 Avalon XLS. Dealer maintained, runs like a champ, just turned 100K on the clock, and averaging 25MPG commuting, 30+ on the highway. And then just bought a '95 FZJ80 for the family camping/wheeling rig. :D

    You're asking a pretty biased board here, so expect everyone to say "Get the Cruiser", and while I'm glad Scott's encounter with a crane ended with him still here, that's not the typical crash scenario. In almost all cases, I'd much rather be in my Avalon than the Cruiser. We tend to equate minimal damage to the truck with "better protection", and while maybe true at low speeds, crumple zones are there to absorb the energy so YOU decelerate slower inside the car, and the engine has less force coming through the dash into YOU. I'd much rather have the front end of my car look like crap, and the passenger compartment intact, than have a car with little damage, and me all banged up. Plus, VSC, low COG, better handling, lighter car w/4W discs make "typical" accident avoidance more likely in the Avalon over the Cruiser. When considering crashes with other cars, don't discount how big the Avalon is for a passenger car.

    Get 'em both. You could get both used for way less than the price of a new Avalon. And so far, the 80 is much better than the '83 FJ60 I sold this spring. My wife will actually ride in it :)

    Anyway, just my opinion.
     
  13. semlin

    semlin discouraged user

    Messages:
    5,235
    Media:
    1
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,259
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    north of 49

    hmm, I would really need to be convinced of this. I believe my wife would have been hurt if she had the same accident in our forester, despite the airbags and the crumple zones. As it was she said she did not even feel the collision because the tercel crumpled and moved from the inertia of the 80 and she basically experienced deceleration equal to very sharp braking. What you need to consider is whether the 80's old fashioned heft will protect the driver in more situations than the Avalon's more sophisticated crumple zone. I am sure that an 80 crumple design is not as efficient as an Avalon at absorbing impacts, but it does not need to crumple in many collisions that would crush the avalon because the other object it is hitting is crumpling or moving and allowing the 80 to decelerate safely. The real question is whether by the time you have an accident with something big or hard enough that an 80 can't plow through it and the inferior 80 crumple zone can't absorb it, that same accident would overwhelm the avalon crumple zone anyway. Scott's photos show the crumple zone in an 80 and that the motor does go under. I do not think Scott's accident would have been survivable in an avalon or any unibody car with the best protection available.

    Basically, I agree with my wife to a point: it's not a fair fight between an 80 and a modern unibody vehicle. The 80 is going to win most of the time. In an 80 with airbags, an arb and sliders, it is hard to think of an accident that would be more survivable in an avalon. The most compelling argument for the avalon is that you are better able to avoid accidents in the first place. My view on that having driven a lot of miles in an 80 is that this is true, especially if sharp braking is required, but that if you drive the 80 properly you can largely compensate for its handling shortcomings just as semi driver's do with their rigs every day.
     
  14. Gumby

    Gumby Supamod Staff Member s-Moderator

    Messages:
    12,160
    Likes Received:
    619
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2002
    Location:
    Knee deep in hookers and gin
    Two words sums it up


    Weight wins.


    If the Cruiser and the Avalon hit a tree, the Avalon occupant will be better off due to crumple zones and so forth. If a Cruiser hits an Avalon, it's all over for the Avalon.
     
  15. re_guderian

    re_guderian SILVER Star

    Messages:
    4,340
    Media:
    33
    Albums:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Location:
    Arizona
    Some good points, and I don't want to sound argumentative about this, but if the 80 is your DD, what is the "typical" accident going to be? We seem to be focusing on car v car, but forgetting the large % of single vehicle crashes. Most people that have an 80 with ARB and sliders are also lifted and large tires. Less braking, higher COG. Swerving to avoid the dog in the road, the crap falling off of someones improperly loaded pickup, drifting into the median on the freeway and over-correcting, all much more common than running into the concrete counter-weight of a crane, and will likely end up in a rolled 80 with lift, tires, ARB, etc. at a high rate of speed. I'd hate to roll in my 80. Much better chance of avoidance in the Avalon. We can come up with exceptions all day long, all's I'm saying is that if safety is your main criteria, the data has already been shown in links on previous posts. I'm not knockin the 80, heck I just bought one!. Just that we shouldn't try to convince ourselves that's it the safest car out there, especially since most all of our mods for off-road make it less safe in "typical" on-road accidents, where our rigs see probably 95% of their miles. I just don't think our driving skills "in the heat of the moment" can compensate.

    And Gumby, as far as weight winning, did you see the link in post #2? :eek:

    Yeah, if I'm gonna get t-boned by a semi, I'd rather be in the cruiser I guess, but it probably won't matter either way... It's all a gamble, so you have to go with the odds of survivability v odds of having that kind of crash v the shortcomings of your vehicle.

    So Swank, I stick with my original recommendation of buying both :)
     
  16. Jman

    Jman

    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    176
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Location:
    If ya don't know, I ain't tellin'
    Weight doesn't always win:

    Deadly Crash Spotlights Classic - Car Safety
    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
    Published: August 2, 2005
    Filed at 3:38 p.m. ET

    DETROIT (AP) -- At a time when thousands of Americans were standing in bread lines, the luxury automobile of the day, the Duesenberg, sold for more than $15,000. The car -- miles ahead of the typical $500 family car of the day -- weighed more than three tons and was bigger than a modern Suburban.

    But like many pre-World War II cars, Duesenbergs were made without one of the basic safety features mandatory on modern cars: seat belts.

    And that might have contributed to the deaths over the weekend of a mother, father and their 8-year-old son. Police say a 2001 Volvo ran a stop sign near Ann Arbor and struck their newly restored 1929 Duesenberg while they were out for a drive near their home.

    The family of five was thrown from the car, and the two other children were injured. The driver of the Volvo was not injured and could face charges.
     
  17. Gumby

    Gumby Supamod Staff Member s-Moderator

    Messages:
    12,160
    Likes Received:
    619
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2002
    Location:
    Knee deep in hookers and gin
    I hate Volvos. I especially hate volvos that wreck Duesenburgs. People buy Volvos because they can't drive worth a damn so they buy something to protect themselves. Unfortunately, they still kill other people with their ignorant driving. It's not just me. It's a pretty common thing on motorcycle forums to hear folks bitch about Volvo drivers.

    We're gonna assume here that Swank's SO is gonna wear a seat belt since the 80 has a full complement of them and she (we are, of course, assuming it's a she. NNTAWWT) is concerned with safety.
     
  18. Gumby

    Gumby Supamod Staff Member s-Moderator

    Messages:
    12,160
    Likes Received:
    619
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2002
    Location:
    Knee deep in hookers and gin

    Did you read the first paragraph?
     
  19. Jman

    Jman

    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    176
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Location:
    If ya don't know, I ain't tellin'
    My favorite part of that comaprison was the table at the bottom (from an article on active safety vs. passive safety--click the link and read that, too).

    Weight usually wins in two-vehicle collisions, but look at the driver deaths per million vehicles for the big SUVs/trucks in that table--it doesn't always win in the long run. I'm sure it depends on design, but it's not a given that bigger is safer for the driver.
     
  20. RavenTai

    RavenTai

    Messages:
    6,048
    Likes Received:
    40
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Location:
    Dixie co. Florida
    I would 1look at more than just crash tests, they only tell you how a vehicle does against a brick wall. This tends to level differences between heavy and light vehicles. In reality if the heavy vehicle hit the light one the light one almost always receives more damage and the heavier one less damage/injury.

    Here is insurance losses due to injuries in $, from the insurance institute for highway safety. In general cost of the injury is directly proportional to had badly you were hurt. Choose the year span in the second drop down box to see data from the FZJ80 era. Deaths are shown on a separate chart and not included here.

    http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ictl/ictl.htm


    here is the 95-97

    http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ictl/previous/ictl_0399.pdf

    LC gets a 67 “substantially better than average”
    Avalon of the same era gets a 78 “better than average”
    (Lower is better) 100 is about average


    Note the theft cost for the LC 2,326 or >20 times average the highest on that chart by a large margin. Most of that has probably calmed down since that report was published.