FJ80 vs F150
- Thread starter Josh9180
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
fjfar80
GOLD Star
Wow...glad you are AOK...cars can be fixed and/or replaced...
Pay attention to my wording and you'll see I never said they were.You probably are a pussyand 80's aren't unibody
I'd never own a truck that would see the road once it had frame damage. I'd wheel the hell out of it, but not trust my life to it in an at speed accident.
I'd never own a car that has had unibody damage.
Josh, good that you are okay. When I wrecked mine (https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=71240) I began the process of repairing it but then ran out of spare time so I sold it. You can gather up the parts on eBay and from places like Slee Offroad, www.cruiserparts.net and www.car-part.com. Raise hell and get it totalled, and go after a '95 or newer truck.
As alaskacruiser said, the common misconception is that the "tougher" car/truck is the safer one. Its actually the opposite. Something has to take the impact and if its not the truck, it will be you. Its physics. The guy in the Ford was the safer person in this accident.
You have to consider more than that - passenger compartment intrusion and distortion for one. There are a few pictures of wrecked F150s out there that took the hit and absorbed it well but the steering wheel is now where the driver's chest was.
Just glad everyone is OK! If you want a stock front bumper, I think I still have mine. Let me know!
My theoritics on this IS: the F150 was the sacrificial vehicle absorbing the impact while the LC enjoyed a nice cushioned unintentional stop. So as long as the other vehicles on the road are made to be crushed the LC and occupants stands a better chance of survival and injury. Now if the LC was say something like a Ford Ranger I am sure the F150 might have been repairable...following?
I feel much safer in my FZJ80 than my VW with like 6 airbags and crumple zones. (Though the VW does go faster, stop faster, and gets 3x better mileage and is a diesel to boot.)
I feel much safer in my FZJ80 than my VW with like 6 airbags and crumple zones. (Though the VW does go faster, stop faster, and gets 3x better mileage and is a diesel to boot.)
Just think about this- if the LC had also absorbed the impact equally, less force would be transmitted to the passenger compartment. There is a big difference between deformation of the front end crumple zone and deformation of ther passenger compartment, and it is quite possible to build a vehicle where the front end looks like the ford but the passenger compartment looks like the LC. That is closer to ideal for the passengers. I think a lot of people forget this when looking at accident pictures and they instead focus on accident damage and how much it will cost to fix and who "won", which is really pretty old-school thinking as far as passenger safety. The F150 may not be the best example in this case since that model run did not fair particularly well in crash tests.
I'd venture to guess that your VW is probably MUCH safer in front impact, side impact, and rollover vs. the 80. I believe crash test ratings back this up, especially since your 80 has no airbags. Don't let the vehicle pics fool you.
I'd venture to guess that your VW is probably MUCH safer in front impact, side impact, and rollover vs. the 80. I believe crash test ratings back this up, especially since your 80 has no airbags. Don't let the vehicle pics fool you.
Last edited:
F150's have the highest injury and death rates among full sized trucks, they do not do well in accidents,
I will call straight out BS on part of this. In a front impact the cruiser is way safer than a vw sedan. Mass is the main factor in this unless hitting a train, semi or overpass structure. In a side impact I would still say cruise due to mass, might be a draw if the VW has side impact airbags. In a roll over the VW is better hands down.
I am Joshes brother and the fact is the guy in the Ford went to the emergency room and my brother did not. The Ford guy had a lot of swelling in his knee and cuts on his face. And my brother just had some sore shoulders.
The crash dynamics are an incredibly complex discussion and hashing out whether this single impact makes one vehicle safer than another are counterproductive and will/may lead to conflict simply because the discussion is not well defined.
The factors for survival in a severe crash come down to the G's experienced by the occupant, and the injuries they sustain from this force and any trauma with the car's interior.
How this plays into the accident here. If the 80 was heavier or going faster than the 150, then the 150 would have been not only stopped, but pushed backward in the impact - increasing the 150's Gs. The softer front end would mitigate this to a degree and could even have made the 150 occupant's peak Gs lower than the 80s. The stiffness of the 80s front end works well against another vehicle, but can play against you in an impact against an immobile object like a tree or concrete wall where the 80 occupant may experience tremendous Gs and resulting damage. Here, it sounds like the 80 occupant experienced less Gs - assuming both occupants were buckled. Obviously if the 150 driver was not wearing a seatbelt it explains his injuries. The 150 driver's injuries may also be a result of the engine being driven into the firewall and shoving the dash into him.
I have a theory why this ended so lopsided. The 80 has a 2" lift, and perhaps more if the tires are oversized. This means that where without a lift the 80s frame would have been contacted directly against the 150s frame, here the 80s frame overrode the 150s and the force was instead transmitted to the 150s softer parts - hood, sheetmetal, etc. So the 150 looks much worse - lots of dramatic sheetmetal damage. Before you all opt to get a lift for better impact resistance, be advised that there are statistically more crashes that will reveal a lift to be less safe in accidents.
In the end, I suspect the 80 here has frame damage and massive deformation too, but its looks are minimized since its upper sheetmetal was up in the air not getting torn and scratched. It did its job, of course. And I too would rather be in an 80 than most any vehicle on the road for a random crash unless I could choose a specific vehicle for a specific type of crash.
Glad you were not hurt!!
DougM
The factors for survival in a severe crash come down to the G's experienced by the occupant, and the injuries they sustain from this force and any trauma with the car's interior.
How this plays into the accident here. If the 80 was heavier or going faster than the 150, then the 150 would have been not only stopped, but pushed backward in the impact - increasing the 150's Gs. The softer front end would mitigate this to a degree and could even have made the 150 occupant's peak Gs lower than the 80s. The stiffness of the 80s front end works well against another vehicle, but can play against you in an impact against an immobile object like a tree or concrete wall where the 80 occupant may experience tremendous Gs and resulting damage. Here, it sounds like the 80 occupant experienced less Gs - assuming both occupants were buckled. Obviously if the 150 driver was not wearing a seatbelt it explains his injuries. The 150 driver's injuries may also be a result of the engine being driven into the firewall and shoving the dash into him.
I have a theory why this ended so lopsided. The 80 has a 2" lift, and perhaps more if the tires are oversized. This means that where without a lift the 80s frame would have been contacted directly against the 150s frame, here the 80s frame overrode the 150s and the force was instead transmitted to the 150s softer parts - hood, sheetmetal, etc. So the 150 looks much worse - lots of dramatic sheetmetal damage. Before you all opt to get a lift for better impact resistance, be advised that there are statistically more crashes that will reveal a lift to be less safe in accidents.
In the end, I suspect the 80 here has frame damage and massive deformation too, but its looks are minimized since its upper sheetmetal was up in the air not getting torn and scratched. It did its job, of course. And I too would rather be in an 80 than most any vehicle on the road for a random crash unless I could choose a specific vehicle for a specific type of crash.
Glad you were not hurt!!
DougM
I posted aways back that mass is the most crucial factor in a head-on collision no matter what the crash test ratings since those tests are based on a vehicle hitting another of the same mass since the test is done by running into a fixed barrier.
The example I used is that a vehicle of the 90's weight (~5000 lbs) results in 42% fewer fatalites when in a head-on collison than with a vehicle like an RX300 that has weight of ~ 3900 lbs.
Now in the F150's case, there are several reasons why we call them "Found On Road Dead".
Cattledog- somehow I thought he said he had a VW Tourag, in which case I would stand by my statement. If he's talking about a VW sedan, then I agree with you. Must have misread his post!
Yup, just to confirm what others have written. The 80 is NOT SAFE if you crash against a tree, concrete obstacle or big truck. Beware when driving close to trees in winter. Oh well, beware in general, as hitting a hard object won't be fun in the 80.
But when we think of the 80 crashing against another (more modern = more plastic) vehicle, then we can really assume it's very safe. There is a G force generated during crash and both vehicles have to absorb it. The 'hardness' of the vehicle determines who absorbs it more. So now you do the math... Most passenger cars will absorb almost all the impact generated by the 80 and its mass.
When it comes to different types of collisions then, as IdahoDoug said, there are too many random factors. I've had an accident in my 2nd gen.4Runner. It was a head on collision but slightly from the driver's angle. The speed was high and what saved me was nothing more but height. The other car virtually destroyed itself by ripping off my front wheel and slid under the 4Runner. The pedals were bent, the floor was all waves, the lower portion of the doors was cut off etc. I was absolutely fine and virtually opened the passenger door and walked away. Don't asked about the one who rammed me. Imagine what could happen if I were in a low passenger car.
So as you see, height and toughness are good when we collide against softer and lighter vehicles. I wouldn't like to roll over in the 80 because having 6000lbs on sheet metal pillars is not nice. But then, I would prefer to be hit and then rollover rather than have my legs crushed in a small car.
So many factors and so many stories to tell that I'd better go to sleep, it's almost 11pm here, I will stop boring you.
But when we think of the 80 crashing against another (more modern = more plastic) vehicle, then we can really assume it's very safe. There is a G force generated during crash and both vehicles have to absorb it. The 'hardness' of the vehicle determines who absorbs it more. So now you do the math... Most passenger cars will absorb almost all the impact generated by the 80 and its mass.
When it comes to different types of collisions then, as IdahoDoug said, there are too many random factors. I've had an accident in my 2nd gen.4Runner. It was a head on collision but slightly from the driver's angle. The speed was high and what saved me was nothing more but height. The other car virtually destroyed itself by ripping off my front wheel and slid under the 4Runner. The pedals were bent, the floor was all waves, the lower portion of the doors was cut off etc. I was absolutely fine and virtually opened the passenger door and walked away. Don't asked about the one who rammed me. Imagine what could happen if I were in a low passenger car.
So as you see, height and toughness are good when we collide against softer and lighter vehicles. I wouldn't like to roll over in the 80 because having 6000lbs on sheet metal pillars is not nice. But then, I would prefer to be hit and then rollover rather than have my legs crushed in a small car.
So many factors and so many stories to tell that I'd better go to sleep, it's almost 11pm here, I will stop boring you.
As one who has rolled both a suburban and an 80 at speed, I can say that they hold up about the same--not too bad. A vehicle with side curtain airbags is obviously preferable, but not all rollovers are single vehicle flat terrain--i.e. I'd rather roll an 80 into oncoming traffic than a VW sedan.
As far as the "safe" sedans go, getting hit by or hitting something with a greater frame height will rarely go well for you. Airbags don't help if the other vehicle is on top of you.
In addition, a side impact in a sedan will invariably set off your airbags, but even a stock height 80 will ride up on top of most sedans. Now, if you are getting hit by a suburban, I'd consider it a toss up.
I am not an expert, but here are a couple things to consider. None of the 80 series crashes I have heard about have caused
a. passenger compartment intrusion(except maybe scottm's wreck)
b. steering wheel movement
This in addition to the frame height, and also frame placement on the drivers side makes this a pretty safe vehicle in my opinion.
Josh, I am glad you are okay.
That isn't the physics I know. If the F150 deformed and absorbed energy, it also absorbed energy that would be transfered into the 80, thus making the entire accident 'better' for both drivers.
Take this scenario into the extremes. A train doesn't have any crumple zones but if it hit a Volvo head on, which vehicle do you think would absorb all the energy? Which 'driver' would be safer? Obviously this isn't directly applicable to this scenario but it goes to show that just having 'crumple zones' doesn't make you safer.
parabola- F = MA. That's why the force exerted by the train is so much more than that of a car and also why it receives less damage in an accident. You cannot compare this to a vehicle accident at all if you are talking about vehicles of approximately the same weight (SUV vs. SUV or Pickup truck vs. SUV) . In this case, the F150 and FZJ80 are in approx. the same weight class, so your physics doesn't apply. Less force would be transmitted to the passengers of the 80 had it crumpled as much as the F150 (while retaining a safety cage around the passengers). Saying you can just use the other vehicle as a crumple zone would only apply if you are talking about a very light vehicle vs. a much heavier vehicle, certainly not in this case.
Last edited:
