Crash testing the maybe-not-so-Smart ForTwo
If you live in the San Francisco Bay area, I'm sure you're probably familiar with the little golf-cart looking car called the Smart ForTwo. These trendy little things are gas efficient, eco-friendly, and easy to drive, but are they safe? Today's video demonstrates just how potentially dangerous these things are in an accident, so pay attention.
It's been noted that this video has an affiliation with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, although this claim has been disputed by some Web viewers. Regardless, this video is neat as it shows the testers setting up the crash test dummies for placement inside the vehicles. Then shortly after the 3-minute mark, the Smart ForTwo is pitted in a frontal collision test versus a Mercedes E-Class sedan. And even if you know which car is the safer of the two, you should still pay attention to the outcome as the amount of potential damage to a would-be rider in a so-called "Smart" car is hard to realistically comprehend without seeing it for yourselves.
The E-class received a "Good" rating for a frontal impact and an "Acceptable" for side impact.
"And even if you know which car is the safer of the two, you should still pay attention to the outcome as the amount of potential damage to a would-be rider in a so-called "Smart" car is hard to realistically comprehend without seeing it for yourselves."
From this video it is hard to conclude what potential damage happened to occupants in either car. The data collected from this impact is not available to the viewer. I saw 4 air bags deploy and 4 heads hit their air bags. I did not see any limbs or body parts exit the vehicles or hit any door pillars. So from a visual perspective its hard to conclude who faired better.
The title of your article seems to direct the reader/ viewer to the conclusion that the Smart for two is not as safe. In my opinion it is difficult to reach this conclusion based solely on this video clip, add to that a quick visit to the IIHS web site for their results and the cars have the same rating for front offset impact, "Good" (their highest rating). I'm not any kind of car crash expert, perhaps you are, am I missing something extraordinarily dangerous about this impact? Sure the small car seems to have more damage, but does that make it less safe? Why the same IIHS rating?
Try http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4404.pdf
The reality is that the smart for two is rated POOR for the frontal offset crash test. There was a statement by an iihs tester that if they had a rating below poor it would have gotten it because the smart for two did significantly worse than the honda fit and toyota yaris which also were rated POOR.
As should be obvious to the average high school graduate there is no way to bypass physics in a two car crash.
You could have investigated the clues you got from the "web viewers" and saved your credibility.
First, the smart is the older 450 model.
Next, the test was done in Europe, see the worker in the nice overalls?
See the Mercedes emblems on the stickers?
Could these be clues this test has nothing to do with IIHS?
Fact is, this test, along with the REAL data, was used by Mercedes to show the safety of the smart.
This sensational headline and fact-less reporting does not elevate you to a modern Ralph Nader.
Statistically, I believe that I have a better chances of dying by slipping in the shower or falling down the stairs than dying in a head-on collision in a small car, but I haven't quit taking either. The smart is not for everyone, but it is far from a "deathtrap" and better than many other small cars in that arena. Some people ride motorcycles, some eat at McDonalds, and some go hunting with others carrying rifles - everything we do has an associated risk. Motorcycle riders, hunters, McDonald's patrons, and smart owners must think the benefits of their choice are worth the small risk. And, larger vehicles aren't free of risk either - just ask the thousands killed in SUV/truck rollovers. Obviously, owners of those vehicles feel that the truck/SUV is worth that risk and who am I to question their choice?
I think the best point in here, which is one that I repeat often, is this: It is illogical to argue for safety based purely on vehicle size. If we follow this line of logic to its (absurd) conclusion, we should all be driving semi trucks for maximum safety. A camry may win against a yaris, but it won't win against a tundra, and that tundra won't win against a semi truck (which are extremely frequent on the road).
I much prefer small cars for some general reasons - cost, fuel economy, maneuvering/parking, and more stick shift options, but their safety bonus is accident avoidance. It's basically the flip side of their physics disadvantage in crashes - when a bigger car hits a smaller car, all things being equal, the bigger car is better off. However, all things being equal, the momentum of that larger car is going to make it slower to stop and less maneuverable. Personally, I'd trade a higher risk during an accident for a lower risk of being in an accident at all.
The car's safety systems are designed completely differently from your larger car, BECAUSE it is smaller. The front crush area is first, the wheels are second (yes, they are designed as part of the safety system), and then come the force-limiting seat belts, airbags, and collapsible steering wheel. The Tridion protects the driver from the other car by moving forces around it. It withstands over 9000 lbs of crush force in rollover testing, and does extremely well for its size. Survivability - even coming away with minimal injury - is excellent. And that's if the collision even happens; there are so many safety systems to prevent the crash that accidents don't even happen as often as they would in larger cars.
COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER!
If you want to establish some credibility instead of sounding like you are flaming (exactly what you accuse others of doing here), report on this article (http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4404.pdf), which actually gives some information instead of being a random video. And really, I do not see how the dummy set-up is so neat and even relevant to the arguement. The results are what matter.
Below is a link to the video from IIHS, which shows three crash tests designed to demonstrate the influence of size and weight in the outcome of crashes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmUBgTHppv8
-
by mcheely
October 20, 2009 5:55 AM PDT
- Invalid or at least 3 year old test. The car you are testing is the 450 Model sold in Europe, the model sold here in the US is the 451, deffirent car!
-
Like this
Reply to this comment
-
(16 Comments)Maybe you should get you facts strate before slamming a product.