Safe Speed Forums

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7264155.stm

Given the possible off road use, this would appear to be more serious than the report suggests, and perhaps more widespread among similar models.

In my experience they should re-test some of the drivers of such vehicles too!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Personally I don't much care that it scored a 1 in the test, as I don't intend to drive into the flippin' wall in the first place

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Thats not a truck, it's a pickup. :p

_________________
Smokebelching,CO2 making,child murdering planet raping,granny mugging,politically incorrect globally warming (or is it climate changing now it's getting colder?)thug.
That's what the government want you to believe of me. If they get back in I'm emigrating.

*sits at the back of the class and sniggers*

(Seriously though, I'd be suprised if there were more than a handful of Navaras that were intentionally taken off-road, unless driveways count.

The crash test makes for pretty scary viewing though, I particularly like about 42 seconds into it where the passenger's head slides under the airbag and cracks into the dashboard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgEwF-SDQNk

I wonder how much this is due to old fashioned chassis rail engineering that presumably a pickup truck has? 4x4's also need greater emphasis on structural rigidity than cars which can have more cumple zone.

Still a woefull score mind, I'm just wondering if a vehicle like that can be as good as the best cars.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

Perhaps not, you can't make the bed into a crumple zone as that would be a great way for the occupants of the cab to get impaled by copper pipe if that's what happened to be in the bed at the time. I have occasionally wondered what happens in that situation when you see an estate car where the boot is crammed full of stuff from floor to ceiling. Sure kids toys and buggies will crush ok, but what about when those are full of wood and pipe, or a sofa or something?

There's no excuse for that passenger airbag though.

Currently, just about all EC-type approved passenger cars do a "luggage retention" test on the backs of the rearmost seats. There are various test "missiles" placed behind the seats and then the shell is decelerated violently and the bits and pieces mustn't penetrate the backret. Obviously there's a limit to what can be accomplished with this kind of test and it has to be said that the objects aren't particularly sharp. There's also the problem with estate cars about the space betwen the top of the rear seat and the roof.

I don't think it should be any harder to make a traditional "ladder" chassis to crumple either. At least most vehicles with separate chassis tend to be large - so they do have space - a luxury that small hatchbacks don't have when it comes to crumpling. I've seen a number of chassis members where the front section has pressed indentations in it to ensure that it "concertinas" in a nice controlled way as it hits something.

It is ironic that most or at least alot of these pickups get bought by people that don't use them as pickups for their rufty, tufty image and the fact that they are "safer" than a small car...

Those japaness pickups are pretty good utility vehicles, a friend of mine has one of another brand and it works hard and no self respecting muslim fundamentalist would drive his mates through the desert in anthing else. But they are not cars. Would a ladder chassis that has to put up with hauling stuff, towing too heavy trailers and serious off roading while loaded be able to deform in a collision? The L200, I think is used as a chassis for one of the Mitsubishi SUV's, would that vehicle have or need the same deforming charicturistics (sp) as the pickup donour vehicle?

As a side issue on big = safe. I used to drive one of 4 identicle American lorries. One day we had to do something behind the dash. Lurking behind the dash on a 377 is a horizontal aluminim plate about 0.25 inches thick. I said at the time that if anyone ever crashed one of them into something big enough to stop one of them the people in the cab would loose a leg. Last year I heard that one of them did crash into the back of another truck and the driver lost his leg.

Lets not get carried away..

1) The airbag issue was software related, resulting in the delay in deployment. This has been fixed.

2) The Nevara is classed as a commercial vehicle not a passenger car. Euro Ncap does not test commercial vehicles. I expect the this vehicle does considerably better than a van derived people carrier or the like.

If you drive pick truck up that’s exactly what you get....a truck, not a Range Rover with a pick-up bed in the back.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

I don't see why not. It's only the front bit that needs to deform. A quick look at the EuroNCAP site suggests that there are plenty of 4X4s that get 4 and 5 star ratings (although I'm not sure which of them have separate chassis).

i dont see how the off road capabilities are relevant. if you are into serious off roading you buy a landrover. anything else is a school run mobile

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585

I'd probably agree with you. I have a Discovery 3 Diesel loaned to me at the moment and it certainly isn't fit for ON road use.

It has so much turbo lag that pulling away smartly is nigh on impossible. Even attempting more rapid progress on twisty roads is frightening due to the insecure feeling you get from body roll and the absence of steering feedback.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

i have just had a thought on this subject. im not an engineer and know little about mechanics so my opinion is based solely on logic and knowledge of military vehicles (the army trained me well) BUT:

surely crumple zones would be a contradiction in design terms to off road capabilities

a serious off roader requires a strengthened chassis to cope with the demand of what it is used for therefore crumple zones would compromise chassis strength making it impossible to have a strong chassis that crumples on impact. it can be strong OR it can crumple but i fail to understand how it could do both.

maybe someone with a bit more knowledge on engineering would correct me but this is my understanding of the physics involved at the moment

_________________
Richie

SSAFA supporter
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=126025031585

Up to a point, I'd agree, but the crash loads tend to be largely ALONG the direction of the main longitudinal chassis members whereas the suspension loads when offroading tend to be mostly vertical. Put another way, if you had a massively stiff girder running along the length of the vehicle at each side, it wouldn't be impossible to bolt a crushable bit to the front of those members - which wouldn't need to be at all strong once it was in front of the foremost suspension attachment point and / or engine mounting.