land cruiser crash safety? (2 Viewers)

[SWUtah]

I almost hit a big ass full size black bull around 11pm, going 50+mph down a 2 lane highway in the Missouri Ozarks back in 1999 I was driving my 1995 FZJ80 (Green) . The only thing that saved me was a oncoming car coming up the hill back lit him but all I saw was a big black dead zone of in the middle of my lane. I got all over the brakes and stopped only a couple of feet from him. He gave me a what the "F" look and slowly walked off the road. I turned into the farm woke up the farmer and he got his Bull off the road. If I would of hit that Bull going 50 mph, do any of you think any bumper would of saved me?

 

[Gentlejackjones]

It's always the GD pickups. They are a menace and should be subject to quarterly safety reviews. Article posted in this thread was fantastic in detail of how the wreck occurred, much better than average-- even threw out a nugget for plaintiff lawyers when it said it was unclear if the driver of the city utility truck was on city business. This family's loss will never be compensated, but a few years down the road, after a large settlement, they will at least have more stuff. What a horrible tragedy. Prayers to all of you from Alabama.

 

[Markuson]

I almost hit a big ass full size black bull around 11pm, going 50+mph down a 2 lane highway in the Missouri Ozarks back in 1999 I was driving my 1995 FZJ80 (Green) . The only thing that saved me was a oncoming car coming up the hill back lit him but all I saw was a big black dead zone of in the middle of my lane. I got all over the brakes and stopped only a couple of feet from him. He gave me a what the "F" look and slowly walked off the road. I turned into the farm woke up the farmer and he got his Bull off the road. If I would of hit that Bull going 50 mph, do any of you think any bumper would of saved me?

Glad you were ok!
No way to know for sure, of course, but I do think a strong bull bar could have at least kept the biggest impact out front initially--forward of the windshield.
Would have done major damage no doubt, but good chance you'd have been "saved" if "alive" means saved.
Who knows...
I know I'd rather whack a bull with a strong bar vs. no bar!
Glad you made it out of that one!!

Worse would be a bull MOOSE, with their super long legs, and a solid rack that flies through your windshield... A couple was killed not far from where we were on an Alaskan highway same day we were on that stretch. Tall bull moose, and rack when right through the windshield. Awful.

When driving home last June through Utah, I was surprised to find cattle right on the highway shoulder. Definitely don't wanna whack a beef critter!!

 

[M1911]

Moose are bad news. They aren’t black, but they are quite dark. They are also tall, so your headlights may only light the legs, rather than the body, but since the legs are thin and dark, they are hard to see. Cars are low enough that they hit the moose’s legs and the body comes through the windshield — typically fatal for the driver.

 

[cru1s3r]

Before I bought my LC, I did some research about crash safety...and found nothing in the US. However, I found this in Australia:

Toyota Landcruiser (Aug 2015 – onwards) Crash Test Results | ANCAP

5 stars, but not sure how other US based vehicles will compare.

 

[OregonLC]

Honestly, all aftermarket steel bumpers actually INCREASE impact force to passengers. Cars are designed to have "crumble" zone to absorb impact force. Just look at above youtube video for crash test, pay attention to what happen from the front bumper to firewall where it all got destroyed in the process, the windshield remained intact.

True the energy has to go somewhere and the crumple zones are designed to absorb it. However this statement assumes that neither vehicle has crumple zones. If my armored front hits a non-armored front then all that energy will dissipate on the other vehicle. Might not be very egalitarian, but I’ll take the armored vehicle over non.

The other item to consider is airbag timing. The lack of crumple make increase the timing of deployment a bit...

 

[zackro]

Weight and mass are what win in accidents, and alert and good driving are the best tools to avoid them. You can’t do a lot better than a 200 for safety, but I would imagine crash tested and approved bumpers like those from ARB are about the only mods that could make it safer than it is.

This is repeated so much that it often goes unchecked, but it's not true. There are tons of examples of big vehicles with higher death rates than smaller cars. Sure, in certain types of crashes, mass is almost always better. But there are all sorts of accidents, such as rollovers, where mass and size aren't helpful. Further, mass hinders accident avoidance.

One of the things people who drive big vehicles often make the mistake of is only focusing on specific types of accidents. According to the NHTSA, only 1.2% of crashes were rollovers, yet rollovers accounted for 35% of all deaths. I used to lurk on an Excursions forum, and all of those guys thought they were driving the safest rigs on the road because "mass wins." Of course, the actual numbers told a different story: Based on IIHS deaths-per-million-registered-years stats, the Excursion was one of the most deadly cars on the road in 2002, with a death rate nearly eight times that of the shrimpy VW Passat. The Excursions 100+ deaths per million registered years mark is literally ten times that of many much smaller modern cars. There is a lot more that goes into this equation than mass. "Winning" isn't even a great way of thinking about accidents. This is not a zero-sum game.

Don't get me wrong: I think cruisers are generally very safe vehicles. But rollovers are the single most dangerous type of accident, and we have a higher chance of being in one than the smaller cars that supposedly lose this "mass wins" game.

 

[coleAK]

Moose are bad news. They aren’t black, but they are quite dark. They are also tall, so your headlights may only light the legs, rather than the body, but since the legs are thin and dark, they are hard to see. Cars are low enough that they hit the moose’s legs and the body comes through the windshield — typically fatal for the driver.

I see bull moose all the time with 4-5+’ tall legs. I doubt there are many cruisers where the top of the hood is >5’ off the ground. So yes Moose come through the windshield of lifted trucks all the time.

 

[razzyrazz]

All this rollover talk makes me even happier I have AHC and dont have to ride around lifted all the time, only when I need it. Also over 50 mph the car drops almost an inch for an even lower stance at speed.

 

[HGB]

All this rollover talk makes me even happier I have AHC and dont have to ride around lifted all the time, only when I need it. Also over 50 mph the car drops almost an inch for an even lower stance at speed.

That's very comforting to know the vehicle drops down over 50mph. Do you have a cited source for this?

 

[razzyrazz]

That's very comforting to know the vehicle drops down over 50mph. Do you have a cited source for this?

It's in my owner's manual. 0.8 inches front and 0.6 inches rear.

 

[Madtiger]

The chances for rollover is not that high because apparently, the LC can go 45 degrees on side slope without tipping over in STOCK form. In contrast, the G-wagen of old could do much less because it is tall and narrow...not sure about the current gen G.

As long as you do not lift the LC or get bigger/taller tires, the LC should be pretty stable on-road as evident by side slope capability. In addition, LC200s also have vehicle stability control that mitigates oversteer...thus always favoring understeer. And lastly, we do have airbags that deploy in those rollover instances.

As for other types of collisions, sure anything can happen...but here mass DOES indeed win...unless you crash into a telephone pole.

And then for later model LCs, you have Pre-Collision System to aid you in front collision. Of course, an 18 wheeler barreling at you is something that PCS may not help.

 

[eatSleepWoof]

Guys that buy steel bumpers don’t want to hear the truth about force transfer. If it doesn’t kill you it makes you walk

I had steel bumpers on my '16 Tacoma. I removed the rear due to weight/practicality reasons, and got rear-ended a few months later (stock bumper, hitch, etc). I was stopped at a red light for a good 30 seconds when the Mazda 6 hit me. I'd guesstimate his speed was around 40kph.

I had a tow ball in the hitch (was towing a day earlier and expected to tow again a day later), and that ball was the primary point of contact, as the Mazda hit it pretty much dead-on in the middle. The result was that just about the entire force of the impact transferred through the hitch and into the frame, "down field" to my seat. On the Mazda, the ball went into the aluminium crash bar behind the bumper cover.

In the mix of adrenaline and anger I didn't pay much attention to how I felt, but the back pain set in pretty much immediately after the Mazda and I parted ways. More than a year and countless physio/chiropractor sessions later, the pain is still there on a daily basis.

That accident was part of the reason I got rid of the Tacoma and instead opted for a vehicle with more of a crumple zone in the rear. Theorizing about the safety pros/cons of steel bumpers online is one thing, but after experiencing the effects of force transfer (in a relatively minor accident, no less) in a vehicle with little to no rear crumple zone, I'm not going to consider any modifications that reduce (or otherwise negatively affect) the crumple zone, nor will I ever again daily-drive a truck. Same reason I'm not putting a winch in the front (despite wanting one).

 

[bloc]

Daily back pain will certainly make you look at life decisions in a different light. Sorry you are dealing with that.

The chances for rollover is not that high because apparently, the LC can go 45 degrees on side slope without tipping over in STOCK form.

......

As for other types of collisions, sure anything can happen...but here mass DOES indeed win...unless you crash into a telephone pole.

I’m not doubting the 45* thing but am curious where you saw it. I remember a picture of an 80 on an apparently toyota factory rig that tilted it sideways really far and could catch it if it started to go over. I assumed they did something similar for the 200 but hadn’t seen the numbers quoted anywhere.

Having flopped a vehicle once on a trail before will make you ponder such things.

Also, this is semantics but you’d be surprised how often SUVs go clean through telephone poles. I’ve been in emergency services for a few years and so far have seen three telephone poles with a section literally missing, where a bigger vehicle went through. Cars not all that messed up either, in relative terms. Definitely survivable accidents. Whole different ballgame if the car is a small compact, or the pole is a metal traffic signal pole or large tree.

 

[Madtiger]

Daily back pain will certainly make you look at life decisions in a different light. Sorry you are dealing with that.



I’m not doubting the 45* thing but am curious where you saw it. I remember a picture of an 80 on an apparently toyota factory rig that tilted it sideways really far and could catch it if it started to go over. I assumed they did something similar for the 200 but hadn’t seen the numbers quoted anywhere.

Having flopped a vehicle once on a trail before will make you ponder such things.

Also, this is semantics but you’d be surprised how often SUVs go clean through telephone poles. I’ve been in emergency services for a few years and so far have seen three telephone poles with a section literally missing, where a bigger vehicle went through. Cars not all that messed up either, in relative terms. Definitely survivable accidents. Whole different ballgame if the car is a small compact, or the pole is a metal traffic signal pole or large tree.

Sorry, the official number is 43 degrees, not 45.

Several sources:

Events/Trails - I am WHEELING the 2008 Land Cruiser today!

My ACTION photos of wheeling the 2008 Land Cruiser Yep, I am at lunch break in Montana for the 2008 Land Cruiser drive session! :D Have done two, five mile loops before lunch (all off-road) and can report it kicks ass!! Some cool new electronic goodies that work very well, etc etc. I will try...

forum.ih8mud.com

Post #17.

https://www.fourwheeler.com/vehicle-reviews/129-0804-2008-lexus-lx570-reivew/

and then from horse's mouth: https://media.toyota.co.uk/wp-content/files_mf/1563531032190708M4LandCruisertechspec.pdf

But here, it says 42 degrees.

Either way, it is 42-43 degrees side slope.

 

[TacomaLC]

Gross Vehicle weight is a factor, for sure. In a former life I was an engineer. Structures were a big area of study, but we all know how "crumple zones" protect passengers by increasing the time of the transfer of energy and reducing the impact forces.

I have my own empirical data:

I have been rear-ended twice in the last few years-- both while I was stopped. The first one I was hit in a 2006 LS 430 by a passenger car that was doing 35-40mph. The second time I was in my 2000 Toyota Tundra and I was hit by a Chevy Avalanche traveling about 15mph (unable to stop due to snow and bad tires)

From a driver's perspective both impacts were violent and felt similar--even though the impact force was 4x greater when I was in my passenger car with crumple zones.

The LS430 was totaled (absorbing most of the impact) the Tundra only had a slight scratch on the paint where the bumper momentarily flexed--most of the impact was to my trailer hitch and transferred through the frame to the passengers. The vehicle that hit me in the Lexus had almost 4x the momentum and yet both impacts felt similar to the occupants.

My bottom line: Give me a well designed vehicle with crumple zones over a heavy, body on frame with little to no crumple zones any day!! Even better: a heavy, gas-guzzling LC with well designed crumple zones!!!

 

[Madtiger]

From articles I posted recently:

LandCruiser 200 has an all-new frame and newly designed underbody reinforcement in the upper body.

They are designed to act as one unit to better absorb impact in a frontal collision, by bending the frame and axial compression of the underbody reinforcement.

The frame has been completely redesigned at the front, as a moment-reducing structure.

The front side rails have 30 per cent more horizontal offset and 40 per cent less vertical offset to increase impact absorption.

The frame's side rails have preset bending points between the number two and number three cross-members.

Impact energy support areas (large reinforced box sections) have been built into the side rails at the number three cross-member joint.

These box sections are pressed from high-tensile sheet steel and have reinforcements in all four corners and for the entire outboard plate.

The front frame structure has been designed to increase impact absorption while increasing ground clearance for the front differential and the power steering box.

Inside, the LandCruiser 200 has head impact-absorbing structures for the inner materials of the pillar garnishes and roof headlining.

Each pillar garnish has one-piece moulded ribs to act as energy-absorbing panels.

The roof headlining has energy-absorbing resin angle brackets.

 

[CJ3Flyer]

Looking at that video of that old Dodge in the back of the small CUV I see many factors at play, a significant difference in mass being the most obvious. Next is IF the CUV were to have a fighting chance it would have needed to be hit by a much newer truck. Old trucks don’t have low front end structure specifically designed to help marry bumper to bumper. The crash video looked like the truck drove over top a lot of the CUV‘s lower “frame”/bumper structure right into the passenger compartment.

Such a tragedy...

I have no doubt the LC200 would’ve faired better in that scenario due being more substantial AND higher.

 

[bloc]

From articles I posted recently:

LandCruiser 200 has an all-new frame and newly designed underbody reinforcement in the upper body.

They are designed to act as one unit to better absorb impact in a frontal collision, by bending the frame and axial compression of the underbody reinforcement.

The frame has been completely redesigned at the front, as a moment-reducing structure.

The front side rails have 30 per cent more horizontal offset and 40 per cent less vertical offset to increase impact absorption.

The frame's side rails have preset bending points between the number two and number three cross-members.

Impact energy support areas (large reinforced box sections) have been built into the side rails at the number three cross-member joint.

These box sections are pressed from high-tensile sheet steel and have reinforcements in all four corners and for the entire outboard plate.

The front frame structure has been designed to increase impact absorption while increasing ground clearance for the front differential and the power steering box.

Inside, the LandCruiser 200 has head impact-absorbing structures for the inner materials of the pillar garnishes and roof headlining.

Each pillar garnish has one-piece moulded ribs to act as energy-absorbing panels.

The roof headlining has energy-absorbing resin angle brackets.

All this talk of crumple areas built into the frame.. makes me wonder how the sliders so many of us bolt on would effect things.

 

[bloc]

All this discussion makes me wonder what happened here. I ran across these pics on car-part.com looking for a rear view mirror. Apparently in California, to me it kinda looks like it went over a guardrail and maybe off a cliff? Seems like even that might not be enough energy to cause this level of damage though, unless it was quite a cliff.

Front passenger compartment looked great. No blood or anything, which is a good sign for those occupants. The second row looked good too, other than driver side having a lot less headroom.