Regain your privacy over your email: proton.me/andrew My (coming soon) newsletter with research notes and notifications on future videos: lamandrew.substack.com/
Fun fact from an industry insider: in many cases, the automakers had already identified and designed solutions for the problems that IIHS testing would later bring to light. The automakers calculated that they would lose money if they implemented these changes, however, so it's a good thing that testing authorities like the IIHS called the public's attention to these issues, since otherwise they might have never gotten solved!
I don't know if this translates correctly. In Germany, we say " a horse only jumps as high as nessasary" Or in other words, why should you spend money on something that nobody cares when burying this car.
Agreed, it would never have left the engineering labs if it weren't for outside forces pushing for change. There was a nhtsa study on the total cost of safety improves including research and implementation costs and it was something like under a $1000 a vehicle. Economics of scale. It probably was a money loser until they all agreed (and consumers) that cars could be more expensive. Also why they're all so expensive now. Thanks for the inside perspective! Edit: $1000 in 2002, $2000 in 2012. Source: crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/Publication/812354
You’ll see people on social media who wish cars didn’t crush and were tanks like older cars because “it’s obviously safer”. Like, ma’am, the car may have tanked all that energy but now it’s turning you into a puddle of meat and blood
I think the only thing i like about older cars was slow impacts that do small cosmetic damage were fairly easy to repair or did little damage, while on newer vehicles you would have to replace plastic panels and clips, which technically could be easier but you have to source replacement parts. But on crashes that are heavier/faster, yeah newer vehicles are way better, well as long as you still dont have a very large vehicle side impact a smaller one, enough mass and the small one will still usually loose out.
Two years ago my 2010 Honda Fit got hit almost identically to the small offset test. I was sitting in the left turn only lane with a red light. A small suv coming the opposite way wasnt paying attention and veered across the intersection probably going at least 35mph. Hit me driver side corner. This was my first real collision after almost 20 years of driving. It was crazy violent. Air bags went off, glass shattered. Car was totalled. After all of that the only injury I had was a small scrape on my left arm. I was around corner from the golf course which was my destination. After the police took the report and the car was towed away, i took my golf bag, walked over and played. These safety features are incredible.
That's what the engineering focuses on! So you can walk out of the car, say "wow that was bad!", and get on with your life. Though I strongly suggest going to the hospital for X-rays after any crash strong enough to activate the airbags or bend the vehicle frame. Many of us don't feel any pain when we have adrenaline, and a crash causes adrenaline. It's very possible to have internal bleeding, which is extremely dangerous, without knowing it. Also, some kinds of injuries like sprains may not hurt in that moment but will absolutely hurt the next day - and it's not fun to go to the hospital the next day when you're sore all over and it hurts to move. I've been in exactly that situation. Think of any boxer after a match. They look a bit red but they're still moving around, and they are jumping for joy if they won. But you won't see them the next few days, because that's when they're turning blue and swelling from all the bruises, and they can't get out of bed.
There's something demented about the idea of recommending people buy heavier cars _because_ heavier cars are a risk. The insurance industry hasn't understood the notion of insurance if it doesn't grasp that the risk is pooled across the entire ecosystem, not isolated in the object being used as the anvil.
@@oienu I think we should weight people _outside_ the vehicle (much) more heavily than those inside in our safety calculations. Not that I really want to be killed by my own car, but others-whether in other cars or pedestrians-have _no_ choice in what hits them, while I at least made an informed decision about what I'm driving.
@@stephenspackman5573 I think 2000 or 2800 lbs will do the same damage to pedestrians anyway. That's why I believe SUVs should need a special license, they are dangerous and not for everybody.
The engineering behind cars now is insane. I was in a horrible car accident in my VW Golf, head on into a tree at ~70mph. I somehow survived although considered critical condition. Multiple surgeries and months long icu stay later I’m ok now. Worst injuries had to be torn small intestine, brain bleeding fixed with removing part of my skull, and being in a coma for 16 days. Amazing speaking relatively that someone can survive a situation like that.
The one thing that is often ignored in the US and leads to a ton of SUVs and trucks is that crash tests rarely involve persons outside the car. Yet cars crashing into pedestrians and cyclists at low speed is super common! Adipositas cars (SUVs) usually fare badly here.
Good observation! In the US suv's and trucks tend to receive higher crash ratings because of this, hence the trend of more and more large vehicles on the road in the US. Other countries and testing standards actually rate them far lower due to their mass and size and damage they can cause. US crash tests tend to only focus on the occupant of the car.
@@MiroBG359 "GHSA projects at least 7,508 pedestrians were killed in traffic crashes in 2022, continuing the upward trend in recent years. This would be the most pedestrian deaths since 1981." US population: 333M (V2022, Census Bureau) US pedestrian fatalities: 7,508 (2022) - increasing sharply over time (more than 50% in a 10 year period) US pedestrian fatality rate per 1 billion vehicle miles traveled (VMT): 2.37* US pedestrian fatality rate per 1 million population: 22.5* *Based on GHSA projections EU population: 513M (EU-28, 1 January 2018, reported 10 July 2018) EU pedestrian fatalities: 4,763 (2018) - declining over time as member states adopt safety measures EU pedestrian fatality rate per 1 million population: 9.3 This would be even higher if more than 3% percent of people ever actually walked or cycled in the US (Census Bureau).
I can't see my hood at all. If you were short I wouldn't see you either. I hit a 4 foot post and couldn't see it at all. I really don't like it, I used to have cars where you could see down the hood to the bumper.
I'm quite surprised how you don't mention EuroNCAP at all. It's what Europe has been using for deciding what kind of cars are safe, and which most likely mutually helped the US crash tests.
I had to set limits on the scope of the video, the research alone for this was difficult. If I had to do Europe and weave a storyline, this video would have taken a year to finish. I am looking at European standards in the future
NCAP focuses to much on ADAS these days. It's irrelevant for crash-worthiness. You could have a 4 star vehicle that crashes better(meaning it provides more safety to everyone) than a 5 start one, simply because the 4 star one doesn't have all the bling bling gimmicky features of lane assist, auto braking, and other things like that which also bug a lot and are not even proven to actually reduce crashes.
@@Paul.V.24 Lane assist is kinda dangerous in winter conditions. My -17 Golf often misinterprets lane markings when the road is covered in snow, and tries to steer into oncoming traffic or into ditch.
The tests from the IIHS focus on half of the equation : the injuries sustained by occupants of the car considered by the test. What is missing is: what is the potential damage to occupants of the other car? If you don't consider that side of the problem, then you could end up in a "race to the biggest, heaviest car", which would be terrible for other road users. Not only other cars, which won't be able to absorb the energy from being hit by a heavier car, but pedestrians and other road users. Those bigger cars are often higher, and offer poor visibility on their immediate surroundings. We would probably all be safer overall if that "other half of the problem" was considered by regulators.
Yes, they also only consider how it survives a crash, not how it can avoid a crash. Cars have decreased visibility, more mass, and are harder to control. I'd rather have a car that does slightly worse in a frontal impact if it can stop 20' shorter from 60mph.
Its already a big problem in the United States, in the EU crash safety tests require evaluation on safety of the occupant of the other car, and in the case of pedestrian strikes, the united states and IHS does not test for either of those, hence why theres a trend towards large suvs and trucks in the US as they receive the highest crash ratings. Good observation!
As a bicyclist, motorcyclist, and 80s-00s car enthusiast (smaller cars with few or no airbags), I would say minimizing distractions while driving and having good tires and brakes go a very long way in improving your survivability, as well as improving the survivability of the pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists out there as well. I hope someone doesn't kill me while road raging in a Cybertruck one day ...
Exactly that. As a new driver I can say that it's so much easier to utilize everything we can to drive safer instead of crying on the internet about how cars are dangerous
Road raging? Hell an idiot could screw up the brake and accelerator pedal, and make you experience a 60 mph crash because their 3 ton electric accelerates faster than most sports cars did for the last 20 years. Touchscreen computers in cars these days are a major distraction which still is left untouched by safety regulations.
yes! having good brakes will help prevent you from causing secondary collisions, good tires will help prevent hydroplaning or sliding on ice (but you should drive slower in those conditions regardless bc you can still hydroplane/slide with the best tires ever), etc. i’m so wary of new cars with safety features like lane assist because people driving those vehicles get used to not needing certain driving skills & would cause hell in a vehicle without aforementioned features. don’t get me wrong, i think they’re great, i just also think their existence encourages people to learn only the bare minimum. my car’s only driver assisting feature is cruise control but i don’t ever use it because i live in georgia and no roads here are straight enough to properly use cruise control
@@panthermodern6572 doesn't matter how safe a driver you are when the driver next to you doesn't care for such things. People aren't complaining on the Internet just to whine about car safety, it is an absolutely necessary thing to worry about when most accidents are out of your control
I was involved in an accident like a month ago, and it was a small overlap type crash. I was riding in a small suv going to my home at around 50kph (30mph) when a drunk guy in a sedan hit me at around 140kph (~86mph), I was going uphill so the other car kind of slides under mine but still manage to impact like the test in your Honda fit. The floor of the car took the impact and broke one of the seat attachments, my car ended up like the shot at 16:41 but way worse in the underside, the A pillar actually held on pretty well leaving some space to not be absolutely crushed like in the test. Luckily, I only sustain minor damages with the worst things being that I broke a little bit of the lumbar area of the spine and broke my left foot, all recovering fine btw. Anyway cars are pretty safe nowadays, I also have an old Fiat with no safety features, so glad I wasn't driving it that day. Yours is too, just remember to wear your seatbelt, just don't crash that way 🤠 Sorry for my English, my first language is Spanish, Love your content, and keep it up!
Masterfully put together, another great video, so glad you released it! Im European and we have EuroNCAP in place of IIHS and they constantly change their tests, the latest one is highly focusing on other road users like bikers or pedestrians . It relegated a ton of previously highly rated cars into low or non existant score since they lack safery festures to avoid hitting external third parties. I believe this is the only way to improve safety in our cars and thats a good thing! Keep the fascinating topics and videos coming !
I'm a collision repair tech and you would be surprised at how much engineering goes into crash safety, also many of the very first safety features ie. Three point seat belts, proper headrests and even backup cameras, were introduced by Volvo who had their own safety design division in the 50s! They were also kind enough to not patent the designs allowing other manufacturers to use it for an easy safety increase thus creating a universal standard without having to enforce it (at least initially). UHSS was a big step in the right direction for passenger safety ensuring the safety cage is massively stronger than the rest of the car, and I'm glad more and more people are getting to see this stuff online. Also keep in mind Your Airbags NEED Maintenance Every 10 Years! On a side note being a car enthusiast myself I have to say, if you are going to modify any safety equipment, please replace it with something of equal or greater protection capabilities. For example replacing seatbelts and airbags with a cage and harness, even the pro's crash but the pro's are driving cars designed to crash at 100+ mph and be fine, your 30 year old miata would fail 90% of current test standards and wouldn't hold up well to a new F-150.
@@AlexandarHullRichter . Mostly checking the airbags condition (visual inspection) and looking for any software errors (SRS light), but airbags can have failures without any warning, stuff like water intrusion, dust, physical damage and corrosion are serious possibilities and some newer cars even have a timer for the SRS light to engage to prevent owner neglect from causing major problems when the bags fire ala Takata recall. And while it may seem doable for the average diy-er to check, know that without a proper scan tool you won't be able to diagnose any SRS codes and keep in mind there could be anywhere from 1 to over 20 SRS devices just in the interior.
@@terracar2003 I don't quite recall, but can't the explosives also fail over time? It was something about the compound is somewhat unstable, and will slowly degrade or denature overtime, meaning the force of the detonation decreases, as well as the chance of it successfully+completely going off. (I do not think it can cause premature detonation) But I can't recall if this is a pattern, rule of thumb, or exception. Have you heard of this as well or know anything about it. (I believe the lifetime of the explosive compound is also about 10-15 years)
@@XenocraftGalaxy .Yes the compound used in older airbag systems had this problem of degradation, luckily it is a binary explosive meaning it cannot fire without an electric impulse, I don't recall the specific lifespan of the compound but it is meant to survive past the life of the vehicle so easily 20 years and the newer compound is much more stable and no longer degrades as much over time so you get a significantly longer lifespan and as long as you keep up on maintenance you should never have to worry about the explosives having a misfire even 50+ years down the road.
I have watched many of these crash test videos, from many different people, over the years. While I applaud the advances car companys have made since I started driving in the 1970's, there is one thing that has been a glaring omission from every video posted. That omission is the lack of driver training to AVOID accidents in the first place. I don't know about other countries, but in Australia, people are only taught how to pass the test for a drivers license, NOT how to actually control a vehicle in a safe manner and recognizing potentially dangerous situations. We need to do much better. As the old saying goes, 'Prevention is better than the cure'.
I used to work for a tuning company that also did car repairings. One time a havily crashed Renault Modus came to the shop, and it was running. I even turned it off and started againg without hasitating. The design of the Modus is pretty much like the one in the A class. When in severe frontal impact the engine would tend to go under the seat in order to prevent foot/leg damage therefore the engine itself doesnt get totally crashed.
same here. i walk to work everyday and i have to cross this big fucking 5-lane road to get across the street. ive almost been hit more times than i can count.
You dont want safe cycling infrastructure you want good, neigh the best. An underground bike highway is safe infrastructure, but when it’s only got 2 points to enter and exit it’s not good. Good infrastructure is in Amsterdam but that just my thoughts I say this as someone who cycles home daily and has 0 cycling infrastructure. 30% grades suck
You did miss one thing, the lack of crash compatibility tests. Not Just Bikes mentioned it in his video about trucks but it goes a bit further than that. As big trucks and SUVs get more popular these crashes will also get more common, in effect making smaller cars even more unsafe through no fault of their own. And it is not just cars either as Semi-trucks also have the same problem, the small clip at 13:36 shows what could happen. I do not remember where I saw it but this is still a flaw in modern trailers as most of those crash bars are not tested to be able to hold back a crash and the height on most of them are too high to be of any use to small cars.
@@Wasabi9111 i wouldnt worry about being behind one. just keep proper following distance. my motto is if i crash its gonna be hard enough to kill me, so im either driving like a maniac or a grandma. no inbetween
All semi trailers on the road these days are either equipped with an ICC bumper or an IIHS guard. The forces required to fold one of those under the trailer is going to kill the driver. They can take the impact of a civic plowing into them at 60mph and still keep you from underriding
A couple of years ago I responded to a head on crash between a honda fit and a buick enclave. The Fit was torn in half and the engine was ejected into the ditch, passengers made it but barely..The enclave was smashed a bit but not much, its occupants walked away- big vehicles dont play fair
More modern one's do. They're designed to be softer, and the smaller cars are now stiffer. This is to improve the crash compatibility between the different groups.
i saw a pic of an enclave that folded up a 2000's expedition nearly fatally, but the enclave kept a solid cab. proof that ford didn't learn from their 97-03 mistake.
About 17:15: Small cars are not inherrently more deadly, bigger Cars _make_ them more deadly. Big modern SUVs might be safe to drive, but they are a safety desater for every car (or pedestrian) they crash into. But overall: Great video!
Agreed. The Toyota Yaris is a perfectly safe car in Japan, where the biggest thing on the road is the Misubishi Fuso, and only professional drivers have those. In a country where anyone with a learner's permit can get behind the wheel of something that big, I want a little bit more steel between me and the other guy.
@@TheSultan1470 haha, I don’t have the need to feel big and scary on the road, and no mentally healthy person shouldn’t either. But you do you, enjoy your lack of parking spaces
Love the demonstration of how the seatbelt elements work. I didn't realize how complicated modern seatbelts are. All but one of my cars are 40+ years old, so they have really basic seatbelts that are either basic ratcheting mechanisms or just straight up straps that you set the tightness manually.
12:38 Step 0: The seat belts are reasonably comfortable, self adjusting, and convenient. The driver and passengers are usually wearing them during a crash. 1960's seat belts were not nearly as good, with separate buckles for the lap and shoulder straps, must be adjusted every time like an airplane seat belt, etc.
@@Husshhh713 a motorcycle driver is usually more danger to himself than any kind of people who are also on the road There are few exceptions like bike and people walking but majority drive a car and they are far more dangerous to anyone on the road especially motorcycle and bikes
One of the reason you had a more efficient research in crash-tests is also the technological progress of simulations. while you will always need physical, real crash tests, the advancements in simulated material behavior helps saving a ton of money as (just for a rough example) instead of crashing 100 cars, you only crash 20 to get to satifying, in-charts results.
Yes! My dad worked pretty hard to make that a reality from the automaker side. He worked for Nissan but he truly believes in safety engineering and he helped pioneer the HBM human body modeling especially for children and other passengers that aren't "normal adult man" sized.
I just wanted to take a moment to let you know that I appreciate your setup and the execution of your videos! I love how you edit so that there's a great flow to all of the presentation and the information shared. I'm entertained and enlightened by your efforts, and even though I normally watch TH-cam on my TV I felt compelled to get my phone out to thank you for being one of the best content creators. I hope that you are having a fantastic day.
Wow, thank you! That means a lot when viewers like you appreciate the structure and flow. I spend a lot of time making sure that's done well. Hope you are having a fantastic day too!
One of the differences between European and US safety tests is that the European tests also look at pedestrian safety. You can see the design differences caused by this in the different sshapes of European and US vehicles.
4:18 The car in this video had a stupid number of sandbags stuffed in the trunk and rammed at the wall at a speed far higher than whats used in testing, and the reason this was done was to celebrate the opening of the test site (and ensure their brand spanking new wall was sturdy enough for the job)
My SEAT Leon ST (VW Golf 8) from 2021 has extended passenger protection, so it will tension the seatbelts (electric motors) and roll up the windows almost all the way up if open to avoid lems to fall outside but still let the pressure from the airbags to exit. A pretty cool option that should be standard on all new cars 🙂
Andrew : there aren't many channels on TH-cam producing video ls at that level of quality, being entertaining and so informative. Clearly you are putting a ton of time into this. There should be a way to support your work with a bit more than just a subscription...
Really appreciate it, while there's a donation link in my profile, I need to up my own production speed and even the bonuses I deliver my fans like you before I promote it. I want to deliver consistently. Getting there though!
@@Lam I don't know much on how the TH-cam algorithm works, but I really appreciate the quality of your work. Do what it takes to make your channel successful, but I don't mind the lower frequency if it's interesting (it is!). Heck, Mark Rober makes one video a month! I've just "bought you some coffee". I wish I could make it automatically recurrent. Is that doable on their platform? Anyway, you should mention that link in your video!
Just found your channel and it's SO GOOD! It shows how much research you put into these videos. They're wildly informative! Please don't stop making them :)
I just upgraded from a 2007 to a 2018 car and the change in technology is huge. Back up camera with cross traffic sensors, the blind spot sensors, the warnings for approaching a stopped vehicle, lane departure etc. I consider myself a safe driver, but it's pretty incredible what the tech can do now to make it even easier to be safe, and prevention is always the best safety.
Honestly all of these sound pretty useless if you just have self awareness. Useless tech imo, but in terms of actual crash tests yeah, newer cars are MUCH safer
in indonesia, safety car is treated as a joke and said "no one buy a car to be crashed" and choosing a resale value as the utmost priority despite the car is literally a coffin with wheels 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Same in India. Maruti Suzuki is the leader here which produce value for money car with no safety and people buys it. Even Hyundai and Kia does the same. The same Hyndai car in UK and India have dofferent metal and body materials. Its disgusting that safety is negotiable. Indian brands Tata and Mahindra do not compromise on safety, but no kne buys them as they compronise on engine (often 3 cylinder instead of 4).
@@Usersf134sskin defense of Philippine driver choice of vehicles: my old commute route average speed was 10mph with only one section where I exceed 40 mph. At those speeds, fatalities are exceedingly rare, and injuries are very minor, even if you are driving a body on frame design from WW2 and not wearing seatbelts.
This is both entertaining and informative. Keep up the good work! However, the fact that the IIHS does not consider lightweight vehicles as safe is indicative of a larger problem, wherein cars are being designed to be dangerous to other motorists, as well as those outside of motor vehicles due to excessive weight. Ps. Nice Canadian rubles :)
It's the paradox of lightweight cars. They would be safer, if the vast majority of cars on the road were also lightweight. But the vast majority of cars on the road are heavy, ergo lightweight cars are not safe.
Great breakdown! It was always interesting seeing these things evolve as I grew up. It was like cars getting AC and CD players as factory default options. I remember when they started showing those crash tests in all the car ads too.
I'm impressed how much research, source and content you put into videos which truly makes them a masterpiece worth watching. Concise and clear information. Also, if I saw someone in a garden with a teddy bear strapped in a chair hooked up to a car battery I would question his intentions
Well sometimes this can be impossible. Imagine you are not moving, someone rear end you, and your car is sent to the other side of the road with an incoming vehicle… only the car structure can save you
It's always good to see you post a video. I've been rewatching your dash cam videos and I just can't find anyone as informative as you. Anyways, thank you for an incredible video! I appreciate the dedication and knowledge used to put this video together.
That point about cars with greater mass being safer when involved in crashes with smaller ones...does that mean we should push for cars, on the whole, to be less massive in general? Try to reduce the amount of metal flying down roads on average.
@@jamesengland7461 No, it made US car makers ditch sedans and coupes in favor of pick-ups and SUVs, because they are light trucks and not subject to the same fuel mileage restrictions, so car makers make them huge with massive engines and sold the idiot public that they were extra safe because they were battering rams.
Victims, bystanders, etc always want to marvel about how "it's a miracle that they walked away completely uninjured". But it's not a miracle. *It's meticulous engineering designed to substantially protect the passenger compartment.* A lot of people worked really hard to make those "miracles" happen.
Driving a small car "vw golf" I see those huge truck and suv more often than sedan nowadays, I'll likely be the one who will sufferer most in an accident wherever I'm at fault or not. I hope future safety test will focus on this
This is a result of car manufacturers abusing the tax loophole on "light trucks". It costs a fraction more to build a truck or SUV than a regular sized car but they can sell them for a LOT more because they're so much bigger. The EPA fuel economy regulations also work on weight to fuel consumption ratio so a heavier vehicle means they can be less efficient. These loopholes need to be fixed. At the very least you should require a commercial/truck/van license to be able to drive these things which will bring with it higher insurance and more competency to attain (in theory). This is how they're handled in other countries, mostly in Europe. France for example doesn't ban these kind of vehicles, but they disincentivise them by putting a heavy tax on their purchase. I believe it's 60,000 Euros. It's based on how much it pollutes too I think.
Also, I think that "crash compatibility" is a very useful concept that could be added to this very good video. It implies that cars must comply -or try to work- with previous "crash" technology and with cars that are actually used on the road. Also, it considers the car in its environment, and the probability and effect that could have when impacting different structures, cars, trucks and more important, pedestrians.
I rofled when you did the "Anxious Asian smile" at 2:05 . Great vid as always 👍 I always send your tire history video to new tire plant colleagues and everyone loves it.
So what happens when it runs into a Cybertruck? I’m worried about this potential vehicle mass and height arms race, since the taller heavier vehicle is often more safe in a crash, since you experience less deceleration, and expose the weaker upper cabin section less to damage.
@@Callsign_Sturm I made no comments about the trucks visibility, just that if the truck/suv is so tall it's bumper is level with my windows, then all the crash bodies in my car don't mean anything, do they? My issue with trucks is I don't want to spend a mortgage on gas commuting to use the bed like, once every 3 months.
I recently drove a 1987 Ford F-350 with a steel ranch hand bumper through the side of a 2015 Toyota Avalon at 35mph... I had the right of way, lady in the car ran a red light and I hit her passenger doors. If someone were in the passenger front seat of that car they literally would of took a truck to the side of their head. It blew the side curtain bags on the car but the front of my truck still smashed its way about 3 feet into the passenger cabin of the car, the car didn't "bounce" away on impact it was basically speared around my bumper between the A-pillar and C-pillar, like the truck was trying to drive through the cars passenger side windows and got stuck. It knocked the wind out of me, and my chest hurt pretty good where my seat belt snatched me, but I still opened the door and stepped out and called 911. Lady in the car was cut up pretty bad but was responsive, fire department had to pry the car open and helped her out of it and took her to the hospital. My truck fired up and went into reverse but it was dragging the car along with it, a wrecker had to pull the car off the front of it. I still have the truck and after some work it's road worthy again. it busted the grill and headlights up, but those were easy junkyard finds, it tweaked my radiator support enough that the lower rad hose popped off and it dumped coolant all over the crash scene (what kept me driving it home that day) I beat that back into shape with a hammer. If I had to pick a vehicle to slam directly into a brick wall I'd want something that would crumble and soak up the impact, but for plowing through lesser plastic vehicles being piloted by distracted idiots in lower speed traffic I'll stick with my old trucks.
I have yet to see it in a crash, I'm wondering if it has a lower bumper. The taller wedge might just be cosmetic where as the crash bar would be at a more appropriate height.
Great video like always, wasn’t expecting a new video so quickly. Also, didn’t expect a new video style but I think it improves the narrative and explanation, great job!
That's amazing, I'm assuming from how quickly you responded that you have notifications on and have probably watched a bunch of my videos. I say that because I think about fans like you so I want to ensure that the depth of information remains high while still being fun to watch. Sounds like I managed to do that. Glad your enjoyed it!
Get this through your head: The manufacturer of the thing IS NOT RESPONSIBLE for the accident or misuse of the thing. But I understand where you are coming from. A woman just drove an SUV into my mother. We've had sonar and digital control circuits since before I was born. NOW they get hooked up to the brakes...because it's economically viable now.
@ while that is true, indirectly they still are responsible, because the crash could've been less fatal even if the person who hit them drove just as recklessly, if they had better safety mechanisms in the car; mind you, this crash happened in the *60's* and seatbelts weren't in the car my family was in, as did most cars, I believe, lacked in those days
Personally, I prefer Euro NCAP over IIHS. IIHS focuses too much on occupant safety, Euro NCAP however focuses more on pedestrian safety and outright preventing accidents(driver aids). If IIHS is such a good standard, I believe USA will have less traffic deaths than Europe for sure.
You can see how the IIHS impacts safety rules badly in the part from 17:15. Heavier cars only increase the safety of their own occupants, endangering everybody else more as tradeoff for that safety. A sort of ludicrous prisoner dilemma played with bigger cars and safety.
Great coverage on the development history of vehicle passive safety features. I think there's more to be covered. Active safety features are important as well. Anti-lock brakes and electronic stability control also play important roles in car safety. IIHS recommends cars with electronic stability control for teenage drivers even for the used ones. Now, we also have automatic braking and back up cameras too. These active safety features prevent car collisions and injuries from happening in the first place. I think this would be a good topic for one of your future videos.
Yeah, and then the teenagers learn how to drive a vehicle that coddles them and are screwed if they ever drive something older, be it for a job or otherwise. Unless the conditions are really bad or there's a lot of traffic, I sometimes like to drive a little aggressively in the winter just to know how to handle when you're not quite in control. It's fun and a mental refresher. I've found that on loose or slick surfaces, ABS makes my vehicle understeer horribly (you should coast to regain grip in the first place) if you do what most normies and the manufacturer want you to do, which is to ride the brake until it makes you shudder to a stop. The problem I've found is that the ABS only focuses on getting the wheels stopped, especially on ice. After the wheels stop turning, the car kinda shrugs and lets you skate off into the ditch. With ABS I either continue to pump my brakes or cover brake (as in older vehicles), because I find that more often than not it just gets in the way. That, and all of our vehicles are manual transmission so I don't really use the brakes in the first place. Thankfully the only time I've gone off the road was when I WASN'T screwing around, looking for where I thought I remembered a stop sign in dense fog. I'm going 30 MPH and slowing down, kind of discerning the course of the road going "I know I'm coming up on that intersection" when all of a sudden I see it whizzing by my passenger side and I go off a "T" intersection into some grass. I drove out, and pulled over in the next town to check the car. No damage. I came back to that same intersection in the spring/summer and discovered that I must've threaded the needle between a power pole and a tree with a trunk the same width.
This channel is such a great repository of knowledge and just amazing content. I know word of mouth is as good as dead nowadays, but I can't stop telling my mates about your videos whenever the chances comes by. Thanks for everything.
Its unfortunate the approach to the weight issue is having a minimum weight. A better solution that solves lots of other problems would to have a maximum weight instead, or better alongside
@@yngndrw.nah I think figuring out how to conserve weight in larger vehicles would be a very good thing all around. Would have a couple of additional advantages on top of increased safety like better fuel economy and reduced wear on public roadways.
@@Zorro9129there's already a sort of maximum weight. In some cities, vehicles over 6k pounds aren't allowed on the streets as they cause excessive wear to the roads. If you go extremely heavy you basically become a commercial vehicle and you need a CDL. Vehicle weight is going to become critical once electric vehicles become common due to the large weight of the batteries and powertrain.
Andrew, I love your videos. You deserve much more recognition, for these well-edited, interesting dives into history of automotive and logistic safety. Hoping for more content.
as a recently habilitated Honda fit driver, I recently had an accident (nothing major, but scarry). There I could see the safety features in action. after that I'm obsessed with understanding transit and vehicular safety better. very cool vid!
I've had two drunks hit two of my cars. A drunk leaving a Fourth of July BBQ essentially PITed me, causing my car to roll down an embankment. The other when the car was parked in front of my house, unoccupied. I also had a woman with a leg in a cast hit me in traffic claiming she hit the gas by mistake. None of those were avoidable on my part.
I’m so glad that TH-cam recommended this video! Extremely educational, and entertaining? Perfect! Side note, most of my transport is done by ebike these days. Sticking to bike lanes, side streets, and always using a helmet. Bikes are the future of city mobility
A lot of being safe on the road comes down to being observant & watching for situations unfolding. Sadly to few people do this. It does make me glad though when I make a mistake driving & I visibly see other drivers react showing they are paying attention. Then the next correct thing to do is correct for my mistake in the safest way possible. VOLVO & Euro Encap are the other two main crash test authority's that have come up with some really cool tests. I always look at crash test safety when getting a new car, looked at it for my partners car to so he would have to best chance at survival if the worst happens.
Awesome job on the research. If I may suggest another topic, how about innovations on road design for limited access roads (e.g. the Autoban, US Freeway system, Canada National Highway System).
You didn't mention that Nader's book was later found to have been full of false information and outright lies. I just find that an amusing sidenote. It was very influential in bringing car safety to the fore.
I saw the result of a head on collision between a Fiat Cinquecento and a Volvo 240 around 1992 - not first hand, but in a garage. The Volvo had the front crumple zones bent, probably a broken radiator and maybe a few other bits, but the safety cell was intact. The Cinquecento on the other hand - The engine was in the back seat. The steering column had gone out the back window, through the driver. nobody knew what happened to the steering wheel... It's amazing how far car safety has come, even since the 80s/90s!
16:01 Fun fact about that guy, Adrian Lund, after retiring, he was in a severe crash, a head-on collision with another vehicle that had made an illegal u-turn on the highway, and they were both at highway speeds, 50-60 mph. But because he was in a modern car with the safety standards he spent most of his professional life working towards, he walked away with only minor injuries. It's worth looking up, he did a few interviews about it.
I was in a low overlapping head-on, like your fatal flaw. He popped out of the fog and I hit my breaks and immediately slid so I switched and punched the gas. That made my tail swing out more and the angle of contact changed at the last possible instant and I spun when we connected. I slid sideways out of the seatbelt and was stuffed into the rear passenger footwell headfirst. Totaled both cars. I guess I should add I got charged for criminal negligence because I was passing a few cars going very, very slow. Too slow for conditions, but fog has a way of changing to soup in an instant. I was found not to be. Mostly because I had the car 3 days and hadn't had time to take off the very bald tires that were on it and that was the first time I drove it in the rain. I tried to slow down and get back in my lane. But like I said, I just slid immediately, like I was on ice. I was stuffed the instant I hit the breaks. A consequence of not being rich more than any culpable intent.
For your mental image,; I was turning right away from him and on contact my car spun left into it. The hit was 20% overlap on the driver's side for both of us. With a 30° offset for my car to his going parallel down the road. So, if the center line points to 12 o'clock on the horizon, I was pointing at 2 o'clock.
Managing deceleration is essential to avoid internal injuries too, like a ruptured aorta. Cars can protect us externally and we can survive crashes without a scratch but die because of invisible internal injuries.
Wow I love this video. So much information in 1 single video. It's a matter of time until you reach a million subscribers. Thank you I have really enjoyed it. (And now I'm subscribed 😊)
10:41 I actually learnt about the Inertia Lock on seatbelts by accident as a kid, sometimes I’d get too excited and pull on the seatbelt to buckle myself in quickly but was caught off-guard when it stopped suddenly. When I tugged it, it wouldn’t move. So I waited a second before pulling again gently. Several years after, I connected the dots and realised I found a safety feature for cars I had no idea about. Seatbelts are awesome.
I know there's crash compatibility engineering for SUVs so they don't just run over smaller vehicles. Don't know if that's regulated or even tested. I'll think about this. Thanks!
In the USA SUV's and trucks have 0 safety regulations. You can quite literally build a gaint steal tank with square edges and sell it. This, combined with hardly any licence requirements and failing to invest in saver infrastructure is why the USA has such insanely deadly roads.
@@basmca1 There actually are some safety regulations. You ever noticed how tall the front of trucks are now compared to say the 90s? That's actually the safety regulations at work. Old 90s trucks sit at the same height as new ones, but their front end is considerably shorter. Problem with those 90s trucks if crashed into a smaller car, the crash bars pictured at 7:18 would not align resulting in bad crashes for the smaller car. Now the front ends are bigger because they've mounted the crash bar a lot lower and then covered up the empty space with a bunch of body work.
Amazing video essay from you always! Been following you since your first video essay. Your presentation style is easy to grasp, and very interesting to follow. I can understand almost the whole video in just one watch. I might adapt those elements for my future presentations in the university!
Great video, and happy I've come across your channel. Thanks to the algorithm for actually working once in a while. Just a little story for you about your little Honda. My wife bought a brand new Honda Jazz (Fit) here in Australia back in 2013. It was involved in a crash 1 month later when a driver in a Mitsubishi Triton loaded with construction tools, towing a 1.5ton excavator hit her from behind while she was stopped at a red light, he was traveling at 80k/h and never applied brakes (distracted on his phone) Wifes car then hit the car in front of her hard enough that his car was also written off. Front and back of her car were caved in really bad, steering column had come apart from the rack, engine got shoved part way under the car, the rear hatch was against the back seats, but we could still open all 4 doors, and her only injuries were a bruise from the seatbelt on her chest and a bruised knee from hitting the dash (she likes to sit too far forward) The car she replaced a month before this was a Daewoo Matiz and I think if she still had that car, I doubt she would have survived the impact or 5 tons hitting her car at 80km/h .
Surprised you did not reference the IIHS 50th Anniversary Crash Test of a 1959 Chevy BelAir against a 2009 Chevy Malibu. That video makes the case better than any description how the IIHS has saved lives. th-cam.com/video/xtxd27jlZ_g/w-d-xo.html I was involved in a frontal crash where the safety systems literally meant that my wife and I could walk away. We were in a 2009 Audi A3 when an American Full Size Pickup truck crossed the double yellow line and we had an almost perfect head on collision at about 40 Mph each (total 80 miles per hour closing rate). I do not know what damage the pickup had, our A3 was completely destroyed forward of the A pillar (as designed), from the A pillar back you could not tell it had been in a crash, the door gaps were still perfect. The German engineering of the passenger compartment and front crumple zone did their job.
That's not a representative test because the Belair has an X frame instead of much more common parallel frame rails that distribute crash energy better. In short, that video was deliberately misleading and people like you are too misinformed to realize the deck was stacked to maximize the intended result.
@@Noah_E I know people don't like to hear it, but cars don't become safe by Chance. There was no engineering towards safety back then and the outcome is according. There is another example in the video, where a Volvo much newer than the Bel air gets absolutely smashed by a much smaller modern car. Then there's plenty of other examples with 90's cars getting folded like tin cans by their modern counterpart. For example: -2016 Nissan Altima folding a 1992 Nissan Tsuru -a 2020 Ford Fiesta doing the same to a 1998 one The Bel air might be an extreme example, but that doesn't change the outcome. The driver is dead for multiple reasons, the Bel air just might provide some additional ones.
Thank you for clarifying the background and details about the small overlap test. Although the impact mechanism itsself is critical and the ability to withstand such extreme conditions is a great feature the window of great improvements nevertheless becomes smaller with the decreasing percentage of real-world crash scenarios that haven´t been covered by established tests before. My car for example, the BMW i3 aced the small overlap test despite having a relatively short crumple zone because of the carbonfibre construction with lighter and softer plastic panels on the outside of the frontal area. That made it possible for the car to get deflected by the barrier and not having to come to a dead stop on the initial impact.
Whenever someone says that a big car is safer, I always think back to an accident I've had. Flew out of a curve in my tiny little 2003 Toyota Yaris. Car flipped and everything. Outside and engine bay completely fucked to hell and back. Car even did the Lightning McQueen Kachao. Meanwhile, the inside (save for small glass pieces and the dented ceiling) was untouched. Got out with only whiplash. Do not underestimate small cars.
I hate the phrasing "My car became dangerous over night" because it's simply not true. that car had this flaw from the get go, only was it not known. You were at the exact same risks before the new test as you were after the new test only that now the flaw is known. You could argue the perceived danger is higher, yes. But claiming the car became more dangerous due to the new test, is just clickbait.
I drive a 90s Japanese sports car with no airbag and a MOMO Monte Carlo steering wheel from factory. To me, it was a bit of a revelation that people may not realize how safe or dangerous their steering wheel is. Seeing an actual, old school sports steering wheel in front of you makes it very clear, there is a sharp-ish bare metal edge across your entire head's width and nothing to keep your head in place. Outside of head-on collisions, a four point harness is actually SAFER in those kinds of cars.
Having been in quite a few bad accidents, I've opted for a motorcycle. I've had many situations I couldn't have avoided if I was in a car. That said, it's not for everyone. Your situational awareness is key. A heightened sense of danger while riding is useful.
This is why i love my 2014 fusion,if you watch all the crash test,the passager compartment is barley damaged in the test,if at all, the pedal box doesn't intrude into you lower body,on side impact the doors and frame do a great job of stopping the other'car' from intruding into the passenger compartment
I've had the privilege of visiting IIHS as part of my job (MEP engineering working on an addition for them) and our PM was even bold enough to see if we could see a test, which they agreed to. So, it was very interesting to get a peek under the hood (no pun intended) of their operation.
Regain your privacy over your email: proton.me/andrew
My (coming soon) newsletter with research notes and notifications on future videos: lamandrew.substack.com/
There is no privacy to be gained from Proton. They literally give data to government agencies like the FBI
By law in any country in the world you are not allowed to encypt data in such manner that the goverment cant decrypt it, mening all that privacy is bs
@@averagedev7768 False.
You let yourself act a little too uninhibited. People liked you better before. Beware, this will stop you from amassing any more viewers.
Go buy a Subaru. Along with its most dependable AWD system, you will get the best known safety from a Subaru.
Fun fact from an industry insider: in many cases, the automakers had already identified and designed solutions for the problems that IIHS testing would later bring to light.
The automakers calculated that they would lose money if they implemented these changes, however, so it's a good thing that testing authorities like the IIHS called the public's attention to these issues, since otherwise they might have never gotten solved!
they just still use the old design just in other markets. Example: renault sells old european dacias with current 1 star ratings as renault in latam.
Reminds me of Fight Club
I don't know if this translates correctly. In Germany, we say " a horse only jumps as high as nessasary"
Or in other words, why should you spend money on something that nobody cares when burying this car.
Agreed, it would never have left the engineering labs if it weren't for outside forces pushing for change.
There was a nhtsa study on the total cost of safety improves including research and implementation costs and it was something like under a $1000 a vehicle. Economics of scale.
It probably was a money loser until they all agreed (and consumers) that cars could be more expensive. Also why they're all so expensive now.
Thanks for the inside perspective!
Edit: $1000 in 2002, $2000 in 2012. Source: crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/Publication/812354
I just some how wish we could make older cars safer too :\
You’ll see people on social media who wish cars didn’t crush and were tanks like older cars because “it’s obviously safer”. Like, ma’am, the car may have tanked all that energy but now it’s turning you into a puddle of meat and blood
I like genuine comments like this
no boring C&P at all
I think the only thing i like about older cars was slow impacts that do small cosmetic damage were fairly easy to repair or did little damage, while on newer vehicles you would have to replace plastic panels and clips, which technically could be easier but you have to source replacement parts.
But on crashes that are heavier/faster, yeah newer vehicles are way better, well as long as you still dont have a very large vehicle side impact a smaller one, enough mass and the small one will still usually loose out.
Two years ago my 2010 Honda Fit got hit almost identically to the small offset test. I was sitting in the left turn only lane with a red light. A small suv coming the opposite way wasnt paying attention and veered across the intersection probably going at least 35mph. Hit me driver side corner. This was my first real collision after almost 20 years of driving. It was crazy violent.
Air bags went off, glass shattered. Car was totalled. After all of that the only injury I had was a small scrape on my left arm. I was around corner from the golf course which was my destination. After the police took the report and the car was towed away, i took my golf bag, walked over and played.
These safety features are incredible.
Priorities.
you were only saved by the fact you were sitting still. stop giving it credit it doesn't deserve.
@@gabesmath105 So you're just gonna ignore that this man is alive because of safety features? Someone's salty Hondas are good lmao
@@ActuallyEarth he'd be fine in basically any car since it was parked
That's what the engineering focuses on! So you can walk out of the car, say "wow that was bad!", and get on with your life.
Though I strongly suggest going to the hospital for X-rays after any crash strong enough to activate the airbags or bend the vehicle frame. Many of us don't feel any pain when we have adrenaline, and a crash causes adrenaline. It's very possible to have internal bleeding, which is extremely dangerous, without knowing it. Also, some kinds of injuries like sprains may not hurt in that moment but will absolutely hurt the next day - and it's not fun to go to the hospital the next day when you're sore all over and it hurts to move. I've been in exactly that situation.
Think of any boxer after a match. They look a bit red but they're still moving around, and they are jumping for joy if they won. But you won't see them the next few days, because that's when they're turning blue and swelling from all the bruises, and they can't get out of bed.
There's something demented about the idea of recommending people buy heavier cars _because_ heavier cars are a risk. The insurance industry hasn't understood the notion of insurance if it doesn't grasp that the risk is pooled across the entire ecosystem, not isolated in the object being used as the anvil.
What in the ai.
@sagnikmaulik ?
I know, heavy cars only add more danger, but the problem is lighter cars, and you will get a harder hit. You need an average weight to be safe.
@@oienu I think we should weight people _outside_ the vehicle (much) more heavily than those inside in our safety calculations. Not that I really want to be killed by my own car, but others-whether in other cars or pedestrians-have _no_ choice in what hits them, while I at least made an informed decision about what I'm driving.
@@stephenspackman5573 I think 2000 or 2800 lbs will do the same damage to pedestrians anyway. That's why I believe SUVs should need a special license, they are dangerous and not for everybody.
The engineering behind cars now is insane. I was in a horrible car accident in my VW Golf, head on into a tree at ~70mph. I somehow survived although considered critical condition. Multiple surgeries and months long icu stay later I’m ok now. Worst injuries had to be torn small intestine, brain bleeding fixed with removing part of my skull, and being in a coma for 16 days. Amazing speaking relatively that someone can survive a situation like that.
semen demon is actually a diabolical name💀
The one thing that is often ignored in the US and leads to a ton of SUVs and trucks is that crash tests rarely involve persons outside the car. Yet cars crashing into pedestrians and cyclists at low speed is super common! Adipositas cars (SUVs) usually fare badly here.
But the US is the land of the free and the selfish. So they still choose to drive tanks.
Good observation! In the US suv's and trucks tend to receive higher crash ratings because of this, hence the trend of more and more large vehicles on the road in the US. Other countries and testing standards actually rate them far lower due to their mass and size and damage they can cause. US crash tests tend to only focus on the occupant of the car.
where did you read crashes into pedestrians and cyclists are "super common" in the US?
@@MiroBG359 "GHSA projects at least 7,508 pedestrians were killed in traffic crashes in 2022, continuing the upward trend in recent years. This would be the most pedestrian deaths since 1981."
US population: 333M (V2022, Census Bureau)
US pedestrian fatalities: 7,508 (2022) - increasing sharply over time (more than 50% in a 10 year period)
US pedestrian fatality rate per 1 billion vehicle miles traveled (VMT): 2.37*
US pedestrian fatality rate per 1 million population: 22.5*
*Based on GHSA projections
EU population: 513M (EU-28, 1 January 2018, reported 10 July 2018)
EU pedestrian fatalities: 4,763 (2018) - declining over time as member states adopt safety measures
EU pedestrian fatality rate per 1 million population: 9.3
This would be even higher if more than 3% percent of people ever actually walked or cycled in the US (Census Bureau).
I can't see my hood at all. If you were short I wouldn't see you either. I hit a 4 foot post and couldn't see it at all. I really don't like it, I used to have cars where you could see down the hood to the bumper.
I'm quite surprised how you don't mention EuroNCAP at all. It's what Europe has been using for deciding what kind of cars are safe, and which most likely mutually helped the US crash tests.
I had to set limits on the scope of the video, the research alone for this was difficult. If I had to do Europe and weave a storyline, this video would have taken a year to finish. I am looking at European standards in the future
NCAP focuses to much on ADAS these days. It's irrelevant for crash-worthiness. You could have a 4 star vehicle that crashes better(meaning it provides more safety to everyone) than a 5 start one, simply because the 4 star one doesn't have all the bling bling gimmicky features of lane assist, auto braking, and other things like that which also bug a lot and are not even proven to actually reduce crashes.
@@Paul.V.24auto braking is mainly designed to reduce the severity of a collision. If it prevents it, great
@@Paul.V.24 Lane assist is kinda dangerous in winter conditions. My -17 Golf often misinterprets lane markings when the road is covered in snow, and tries to steer into oncoming traffic or into ditch.
IIHS is much more strict than euroncap.
The tests from the IIHS focus on half of the equation : the injuries sustained by occupants of the car considered by the test. What is missing is: what is the potential damage to occupants of the other car? If you don't consider that side of the problem, then you could end up in a "race to the biggest, heaviest car", which would be terrible for other road users. Not only other cars, which won't be able to absorb the energy from being hit by a heavier car, but pedestrians and other road users. Those bigger cars are often higher, and offer poor visibility on their immediate surroundings. We would probably all be safer overall if that "other half of the problem" was considered by regulators.
Yhea, my cars crash structures won't do much if I get tboned by a truck so tall the bottom of its bumper starts at my window line.
Yes, they also only consider how it survives a crash, not how it can avoid a crash. Cars have decreased visibility, more mass, and are harder to control. I'd rather have a car that does slightly worse in a frontal impact if it can stop 20' shorter from 60mph.
The fact that they needed to introduce the SUV side impact test says a lot.
Its already a big problem in the United States, in the EU crash safety tests require evaluation on safety of the occupant of the other car, and in the case of pedestrian strikes, the united states and IHS does not test for either of those, hence why theres a trend towards large suvs and trucks in the US as they receive the highest crash ratings. Good observation!
@@danbert8 not true. Part of IIHS Safety Pick designations now include crash avoidance technology and headlight visibility testing
You're lucky that you have a neighbor that cares so much to come and check on your well-being. Bless her soul 🙏
As a bicyclist, motorcyclist, and 80s-00s car enthusiast (smaller cars with few or no airbags), I would say minimizing distractions while driving and having good tires and brakes go a very long way in improving your survivability, as well as improving the survivability of the pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists out there as well. I hope someone doesn't kill me while road raging in a Cybertruck one day ...
Exactly that. As a new driver I can say that it's so much easier to utilize everything we can to drive safer instead of crying on the internet about how cars are dangerous
Road raging? Hell an idiot could screw up the brake and accelerator pedal, and make you experience a 60 mph crash because their 3 ton electric accelerates faster than most sports cars did for the last 20 years.
Touchscreen computers in cars these days are a major distraction which still is left untouched by safety regulations.
and keeping distance...... :D:D that saved my ass and car X times.
yes! having good brakes will help prevent you from causing secondary collisions, good tires will help prevent hydroplaning or sliding on ice (but you should drive slower in those conditions regardless bc you can still hydroplane/slide with the best tires ever), etc. i’m so wary of new cars with safety features like lane assist because people driving those vehicles get used to not needing certain driving skills & would cause hell in a vehicle without aforementioned features. don’t get me wrong, i think they’re great, i just also think their existence encourages people to learn only the bare minimum. my car’s only driver assisting feature is cruise control but i don’t ever use it because i live in georgia and no roads here are straight enough to properly use cruise control
@@panthermodern6572 doesn't matter how safe a driver you are when the driver next to you doesn't care for such things. People aren't complaining on the Internet just to whine about car safety, it is an absolutely necessary thing to worry about when most accidents are out of your control
I was involved in an accident like a month ago, and it was a small overlap type crash. I was riding in a small suv going to my home at around 50kph (30mph) when a drunk guy in a sedan hit me at around 140kph (~86mph), I was going uphill so the other car kind of slides under mine but still manage to impact like the test in your Honda fit. The floor of the car took the impact and broke one of the seat attachments, my car ended up like the shot at 16:41 but way worse in the underside, the A pillar actually held on pretty well leaving some space to not be absolutely crushed like in the test.
Luckily, I only sustain minor damages with the worst things being that I broke a little bit of the lumbar area of the spine and broke my left foot, all recovering fine btw.
Anyway cars are pretty safe nowadays, I also have an old Fiat with no safety features, so glad I wasn't driving it that day. Yours is too, just remember to wear your seatbelt, just don't crash that way 🤠
Sorry for my English, my first language is Spanish, Love your content, and keep it up!
Glad you're okay.
glad you're recovering well, and your english is great! dont even worry about it :)
that's the thing about classic & small cars,
they're simply cool
but very unsafe unfortunately:\
What happened to the driver of the Sedan? What were the 2 cars?
Glad you're ok, sounds like the height saved your life, maybe even theirs if the cabin wasn't crashed. Thanks for enjoying my videos!
Masterfully put together, another great video, so glad you released it! Im European and we have EuroNCAP in place of IIHS and they constantly change their tests, the latest one is highly focusing on other road users like bikers or pedestrians . It relegated a ton of previously highly rated cars into low or non existant score since they lack safery festures to avoid hitting external third parties. I believe this is the only way to improve safety in our cars and thats a good thing! Keep the fascinating topics and videos coming !
Will do! Thanks!
Bikers cause more traffic accidents involving cars than cars do.
@@Zorro9129source?
@@Zorro9129exactly, and these fools saying that biking is safer than driving, it’s not
I'm a collision repair tech and you would be surprised at how much engineering goes into crash safety, also many of the very first safety features ie. Three point seat belts, proper headrests and even backup cameras, were introduced by Volvo who had their own safety design division in the 50s! They were also kind enough to not patent the designs allowing other manufacturers to use it for an easy safety increase thus creating a universal standard without having to enforce it (at least initially). UHSS was a big step in the right direction for passenger safety ensuring the safety cage is massively stronger than the rest of the car, and I'm glad more and more people are getting to see this stuff online.
Also keep in mind Your Airbags NEED Maintenance Every 10 Years!
On a side note being a car enthusiast myself I have to say, if you are going to modify any safety equipment, please replace it with something of equal or greater protection capabilities. For example replacing seatbelts and airbags with a cage and harness, even the pro's crash but the pro's are driving cars designed to crash at 100+ mph and be fine, your 30 year old miata would fail 90% of current test standards and wouldn't hold up well to a new F-150.
Didn't know that about volvo thats actually really cool!
What maintenance do airbags require after 10 years?
@@AlexandarHullRichter . Mostly checking the airbags condition (visual inspection) and looking for any software errors (SRS light), but airbags can have failures without any warning, stuff like water intrusion, dust, physical damage and corrosion are serious possibilities and some newer cars even have a timer for the SRS light to engage to prevent owner neglect from causing major problems when the bags fire ala Takata recall. And while it may seem doable for the average diy-er to check, know that without a proper scan tool you won't be able to diagnose any SRS codes and keep in mind there could be anywhere from 1 to over 20 SRS devices just in the interior.
@@terracar2003
I don't quite recall, but can't the explosives also fail over time?
It was something about the compound is somewhat unstable, and will slowly degrade or denature overtime, meaning the force of the detonation decreases, as well as the chance of it successfully+completely going off. (I do not think it can cause premature detonation)
But I can't recall if this is a pattern, rule of thumb, or exception. Have you heard of this as well or know anything about it. (I believe the lifetime of the explosive compound is also about 10-15 years)
@@XenocraftGalaxy .Yes the compound used in older airbag systems had this problem of degradation, luckily it is a binary explosive meaning it cannot fire without an electric impulse, I don't recall the specific lifespan of the compound but it is meant to survive past the life of the vehicle so easily 20 years and the newer compound is much more stable and no longer degrades as much over time so you get a significantly longer lifespan and as long as you keep up on maintenance you should never have to worry about the explosives having a misfire even 50+ years down the road.
I have watched many of these crash test videos, from many different people, over the years. While I applaud the advances car companys have made since I started driving in the 1970's, there is one thing that has been a glaring omission from every video posted.
That omission is the lack of driver training to AVOID accidents in the first place. I don't know about other countries, but in Australia, people are only taught how to pass the test for a drivers license, NOT how to actually control a vehicle in a safe manner and recognizing potentially dangerous situations.
We need to do much better. As the old saying goes, 'Prevention is better than the cure'.
I used to work for a tuning company that also did car repairings. One time a havily crashed Renault Modus came to the shop, and it was running. I even turned it off and started againg without hasitating. The design of the Modus is pretty much like the one in the A class. When in severe frontal impact the engine would tend to go under the seat in order to prevent foot/leg damage therefore the engine itself doesnt get totally crashed.
I wish my city had safe cycling infrastructure. I feel like I'm risking my life everyday on my car commute.
same here. i walk to work everyday and i have to cross this big fucking 5-lane road to get across the street. ive almost been hit more times than i can count.
You’re absolutely right. I’m also tired of risking my life in a car.
You dont want safe cycling infrastructure you want good, neigh the best. An underground bike highway is safe infrastructure, but when it’s only got 2 points to enter and exit it’s not good. Good infrastructure is in Amsterdam but that just my thoughts I say this as someone who cycles home daily and has 0 cycling infrastructure. 30% grades suck
@@caesthoffe that's just a stroad,
@stefan3225 I use my car
You did miss one thing, the lack of crash compatibility tests. Not Just Bikes mentioned it in his video about trucks but it goes a bit further than that. As big trucks and SUVs get more popular these crashes will also get more common, in effect making smaller cars even more unsafe through no fault of their own. And it is not just cars either as Semi-trucks also have the same problem, the small clip at 13:36 shows what could happen. I do not remember where I saw it but this is still a flaw in modern trailers as most of those crash bars are not tested to be able to hold back a crash and the height on most of them are too high to be of any use to small cars.
I deliberately skipped it. It's an important issue for sure and it would have taken it off the testing angle I was focusing on.
This is why I’m always afraid to drive in front of or behind a a semi.
@@Wasabi9111 i wouldnt worry about being behind one. just keep proper following distance. my motto is if i crash its gonna be hard enough to kill me, so im either driving like a maniac or a grandma. no inbetween
All semi trailers on the road these days are either equipped with an ICC bumper or an IIHS guard. The forces required to fold one of those under the trailer is going to kill the driver. They can take the impact of a civic plowing into them at 60mph and still keep you from underriding
I absolutely love your videos! Some of the best, most interesting deep dives out there on these kinds of topics. Please keep making these videos!
Thanks Phoenix!
Welcome back! 🎉
A couple of years ago I responded to a head on crash between a honda fit and a buick enclave. The Fit was torn in half and the engine was ejected into the ditch, passengers made it but barely..The enclave was smashed a bit but not much, its occupants walked away- big vehicles dont play fair
More modern one's do. They're designed to be softer, and the smaller cars are now stiffer. This is to improve the crash compatibility between the different groups.
i saw a pic of an enclave that folded up a 2000's expedition nearly fatally, but the enclave kept a solid cab. proof that ford didn't learn from their 97-03 mistake.
@user-sf7kl9uh7k but rigidity in cars is a downside for the occupants
@@ActuallyEarth only if it's the front clip
The answer to your title question is: ...as soon as a human sits inside the car, the car stops being safe...
So if my dog or Jesus takes the wheel everyone is safe. Noted
@@AntiZer0 jesus is human
Nahh, it’s not even safe walking down the street no more 😭
Yup
@@laith8116he is son of God.
About 17:15: Small cars are not inherrently more deadly, bigger Cars _make_ them more deadly. Big modern SUVs might be safe to drive, but they are a safety desater for every car (or pedestrian) they crash into.
But overall: Great video!
Very true, unfortunately the trend is bigger and bigger.
@@Lam I feel like that has to do with the rise of egocentrism and lack of care for others currently.
@@foximacentauri7891 Enjoy your sardine can.
Agreed. The Toyota Yaris is a perfectly safe car in Japan, where the biggest thing on the road is the Misubishi Fuso, and only professional drivers have those. In a country where anyone with a learner's permit can get behind the wheel of something that big, I want a little bit more steel between me and the other guy.
@@TheSultan1470 haha, I don’t have the need to feel big and scary on the road, and no mentally healthy person shouldn’t either. But you do you, enjoy your lack of parking spaces
Love the demonstration of how the seatbelt elements work. I didn't realize how complicated modern seatbelts are. All but one of my cars are 40+ years old, so they have really basic seatbelts that are either basic ratcheting mechanisms or just straight up straps that you set the tightness manually.
Yeah, it's surprising how much there is! I left out the electric motors that some vehicles have.
Manual belts are great if adjusted well.
12:38 Step 0: The seat belts are reasonably comfortable, self adjusting, and convenient. The driver and passengers are usually wearing them during a crash. 1960's seat belts were not nearly as good, with separate buckles for the lap and shoulder straps, must be adjusted every time like an airplane seat belt, etc.
I ride a motorcycle, so I don’t care about safety
Ayyyy lessgo
"I ride a motorcycle, I don't care about the people around me."
The world needs donors too. Thank you for your service.
Same 🤚😅
@@Husshhh713 a motorcycle driver is usually more danger to himself than any kind of people who are also on the road
There are few exceptions like bike and people walking but majority drive a car and they are far more dangerous to anyone on the road especially motorcycle and bikes
One of the reason you had a more efficient research in crash-tests is also the technological progress of simulations. while you will always need physical, real crash tests, the advancements in simulated material behavior helps saving a ton of money as (just for a rough example) instead of crashing 100 cars, you only crash 20 to get to satifying, in-charts results.
Yup!
Yes! My dad worked pretty hard to make that a reality from the automaker side. He worked for Nissan but he truly believes in safety engineering and he helped pioneer the HBM human body modeling especially for children and other passengers that aren't "normal adult man" sized.
I just wanted to take a moment to let you know that I appreciate your setup and the execution of your videos! I love how you edit so that there's a great flow to all of the presentation and the information shared. I'm entertained and enlightened by your efforts, and even though I normally watch TH-cam on my TV I felt compelled to get my phone out to thank you for being one of the best content creators. I hope that you are having a fantastic day.
Wow, thank you! That means a lot when viewers like you appreciate the structure and flow. I spend a lot of time making sure that's done well. Hope you are having a fantastic day too!
One of the differences between European and US safety tests is that the European tests also look at pedestrian safety. You can see the design differences caused by this in the different sshapes of European and US vehicles.
4:18 The car in this video had a stupid number of sandbags stuffed in the trunk and rammed at the wall at a speed far higher than whats used in testing, and the reason this was done was to celebrate the opening of the test site (and ensure their brand spanking new wall was sturdy enough for the job)
My SEAT Leon ST (VW Golf 8) from 2021 has extended passenger protection, so it will tension the seatbelts (electric motors) and roll up the windows almost all the way up if open to avoid lems to fall outside but still let the pressure from the airbags to exit.
A pretty cool option that should be standard on all new cars 🙂
Andrew : there aren't many channels on TH-cam producing video ls at that level of quality, being entertaining and so informative. Clearly you are putting a ton of time into this. There should be a way to support your work with a bit more than just a subscription...
Really appreciate it, while there's a donation link in my profile, I need to up my own production speed and even the bonuses I deliver my fans like you before I promote it. I want to deliver consistently. Getting there though!
@@Lam I don't know much on how the TH-cam algorithm works, but I really appreciate the quality of your work. Do what it takes to make your channel successful, but I don't mind the lower frequency if it's interesting (it is!). Heck, Mark Rober makes one video a month!
I've just "bought you some coffee". I wish I could make it automatically recurrent. Is that doable on their platform? Anyway, you should mention that link in your video!
Just found your channel and it's SO GOOD! It shows how much research you put into these videos. They're wildly informative! Please don't stop making them :)
Will do! Thanks!
Will do! Thanks!
You’re alive today because of Volvo, not insurance companies
Amen.
I just upgraded from a 2007 to a 2018 car and the change in technology is huge. Back up camera with cross traffic sensors, the blind spot sensors, the warnings for approaching a stopped vehicle, lane departure etc. I consider myself a safe driver, but it's pretty incredible what the tech can do now to make it even easier to be safe, and prevention is always the best safety.
Honestly all of these sound pretty useless if you just have self awareness. Useless tech imo, but in terms of actual crash tests yeah, newer cars are MUCH safer
in indonesia, safety car is treated as a joke and said "no one buy a car to be crashed" and choosing a resale value as the utmost priority despite the car is literally a coffin with wheels 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Yeah...
@@snafu1635 ?
Same in the Philippines 😂
Same in India. Maruti Suzuki is the leader here which produce value for money car with no safety and people buys it. Even Hyundai and Kia does the same. The same Hyndai car in UK and India have dofferent metal and body materials. Its disgusting that safety is negotiable. Indian brands Tata and Mahindra do not compromise on safety, but no kne buys them as they compronise on engine (often 3 cylinder instead of 4).
@@Usersf134sskin defense of Philippine driver choice of vehicles: my old commute route average speed was 10mph with only one section where I exceed 40 mph. At those speeds, fatalities are exceedingly rare, and injuries are very minor, even if you are driving a body on frame design from WW2 and not wearing seatbelts.
This is both entertaining and informative. Keep up the good work! However, the fact that the IIHS does not consider lightweight vehicles as safe is indicative of a larger problem, wherein cars are being designed to be dangerous to other motorists, as well as those outside of motor vehicles due to excessive weight.
Ps. Nice Canadian rubles :)
It's the paradox of lightweight cars. They would be safer, if the vast majority of cars on the road were also lightweight. But the vast majority of cars on the road are heavy, ergo lightweight cars are not safe.
Great breakdown! It was always interesting seeing these things evolve as I grew up. It was like cars getting AC and CD players as factory default options.
I remember when they started showing those crash tests in all the car ads too.
I like how car insurance companies chose to change an entire industry instead of delaying claims, denying them, and defending their denial.
I'm impressed how much research, source and content you put into videos which truly makes them a masterpiece worth watching. Concise and clear information. Also, if I saw someone in a garden with a teddy bear strapped in a chair hooked up to a car battery I would question his intentions
hahah, thanks. I was wondering how it would look to any neighbors who could see down into the backyard area.
If you lived in the States you would have been swatted,lol
Quality content though. Subbed
Also, knowing the dangers in your vehicle can allow you to adjust how you strike something if its unavoidable.
Well sometimes this can be impossible. Imagine you are not moving, someone rear end you, and your car is sent to the other side of the road with an incoming vehicle… only the car structure can save you
It's always good to see you post a video. I've been rewatching your dash cam videos and I just can't find anyone as informative as you. Anyways, thank you for an incredible video! I appreciate the dedication and knowledge used to put this video together.
Thank you for your support and I'm glad you enjoyed my videos!
That point about cars with greater mass being safer when involved in crashes with smaller ones...does that mean we should push for cars, on the whole, to be less massive in general? Try to reduce the amount of metal flying down roads on average.
That's what I would support
That's what fuel economy standards and gas prices do- drive that balance by forcing weight down.
@@jamesengland7461 No, it made US car makers ditch sedans and coupes in favor of pick-ups and SUVs, because they are light trucks and not subject to the same fuel mileage restrictions, so car makers make them huge with massive engines and sold the idiot public that they were extra safe because they were battering rams.
No.
Love your experimental mindset and great content
Thanks! I'm going to do more. Appreciate your support!
Victims, bystanders, etc always want to marvel about how "it's a miracle that they walked away completely uninjured". But it's not a miracle.
*It's meticulous engineering designed to substantially protect the passenger compartment.*
A lot of people worked really hard to make those "miracles" happen.
Driving a small car "vw golf" I see those huge truck and suv more often than sedan nowadays, I'll likely be the one who will sufferer most in an accident wherever I'm at fault or not. I hope future safety test will focus on this
I was in a VW Golf that got T boned by a Ford F-150. Both vehicles were totalled, but the Golf protected me just fine.
This is a result of car manufacturers abusing the tax loophole on "light trucks". It costs a fraction more to build a truck or SUV than a regular sized car but they can sell them for a LOT more because they're so much bigger. The EPA fuel economy regulations also work on weight to fuel consumption ratio so a heavier vehicle means they can be less efficient. These loopholes need to be fixed. At the very least you should require a commercial/truck/van license to be able to drive these things which will bring with it higher insurance and more competency to attain (in theory). This is how they're handled in other countries, mostly in Europe. France for example doesn't ban these kind of vehicles, but they disincentivise them by putting a heavy tax on their purchase. I believe it's 60,000 Euros. It's based on how much it pollutes too I think.
Love the direction this channel is going in, keep up these awesome videos!
Lol I love your evil laugh after the airbag explosion 😂
Also, I think that "crash compatibility" is a very useful concept that could be added to this very good video. It implies that cars must comply -or try to work- with previous "crash" technology and with cars that are actually used on the road. Also, it considers the car in its environment, and the probability and effect that could have when impacting different structures, cars, trucks and more important, pedestrians.
I rofled when you did the "Anxious Asian smile" at 2:05 . Great vid as always 👍 I always send your tire history video to new tire plant colleagues and everyone loves it.
Dude! Amazing content and production - so informative and neat!
Thanks!
So what happens when it runs into a Cybertruck?
I’m worried about this potential vehicle mass and height arms race, since the taller heavier vehicle is often more safe in a crash, since you experience less deceleration, and expose the weaker upper cabin section less to damage.
I'm surrounded by lifted pickup trucks that have bumpers that *start* at my small SUV's window line
@@Callsign_Sturm I made no comments about the trucks visibility, just that if the truck/suv is so tall it's bumper is level with my windows, then all the crash bodies in my car don't mean anything, do they?
My issue with trucks is I don't want to spend a mortgage on gas commuting to use the bed like, once every 3 months.
I recently drove a 1987 Ford F-350 with a steel ranch hand bumper through the side of a 2015 Toyota Avalon at 35mph... I had the right of way, lady in the car ran a red light and I hit her passenger doors. If someone were in the passenger front seat of that car they literally would of took a truck to the side of their head. It blew the side curtain bags on the car but the front of my truck still smashed its way about 3 feet into the passenger cabin of the car, the car didn't "bounce" away on impact it was basically speared around my bumper between the A-pillar and C-pillar, like the truck was trying to drive through the cars passenger side windows and got stuck.
It knocked the wind out of me, and my chest hurt pretty good where my seat belt snatched me, but I still opened the door and stepped out and called 911. Lady in the car was cut up pretty bad but was responsive, fire department had to pry the car open and helped her out of it and took her to the hospital. My truck fired up and went into reverse but it was dragging the car along with it, a wrecker had to pull the car off the front of it. I still have the truck and after some work it's road worthy again. it busted the grill and headlights up, but those were easy junkyard finds, it tweaked my radiator support enough that the lower rad hose popped off and it dumped coolant all over the crash scene (what kept me driving it home that day) I beat that back into shape with a hammer.
If I had to pick a vehicle to slam directly into a brick wall I'd want something that would crumble and soak up the impact, but for plowing through lesser plastic vehicles being piloted by distracted idiots in lower speed traffic I'll stick with my old trucks.
I have yet to see it in a crash, I'm wondering if it has a lower bumper. The taller wedge might just be cosmetic where as the crash bar would be at a more appropriate height.
Great video like always, wasn’t expecting a new video so quickly. Also, didn’t expect a new video style but I think it improves the narrative and explanation, great job!
That's amazing, I'm assuming from how quickly you responded that you have notifications on and have probably watched a bunch of my videos.
I say that because I think about fans like you so I want to ensure that the depth of information remains high while still being fun to watch.
Sounds like I managed to do that. Glad your enjoyed it!
Wow, thanks Andrew, keep up the good work!
It's been 10 months and no one created a meme about the laugh at 11:40, I can see it in many Scenarios.
True
2:30 thanks car manufacturers for killing what would've been my fourth uncle because safety was expensive and ruining the "fun" of cars! 🙃
Get this through your head: The manufacturer of the thing IS NOT RESPONSIBLE for the accident or misuse of the thing. But I understand where you are coming from. A woman just drove an SUV into my mother. We've had sonar and digital control circuits since before I was born. NOW they get hooked up to the brakes...because it's economically viable now.
@ while that is true, indirectly they still are responsible, because the crash could've been less fatal even if the person who hit them drove just as recklessly, if they had better safety mechanisms in the car; mind you, this crash happened in the *60's* and seatbelts weren't in the car my family was in, as did most cars, I believe, lacked in those days
Personally, I prefer Euro NCAP over IIHS.
IIHS focuses too much on occupant safety, Euro NCAP however focuses more on pedestrian safety and outright preventing accidents(driver aids).
If IIHS is such a good standard, I believe USA will have less traffic deaths than Europe for sure.
You can see how the IIHS impacts safety rules badly in the part from 17:15. Heavier cars only increase the safety of their own occupants, endangering everybody else more as tradeoff for that safety. A sort of ludicrous prisoner dilemma played with bigger cars and safety.
Great coverage on the development history of vehicle passive safety features.
I think there's more to be covered. Active safety features are important as well. Anti-lock brakes and electronic stability control also play important roles in car safety. IIHS recommends cars with electronic stability control for teenage drivers even for the used ones. Now, we also have automatic braking and back up cameras too. These active safety features prevent car collisions and injuries from happening in the first place. I think this would be a good topic for one of your future videos.
Yeah, and then the teenagers learn how to drive a vehicle that coddles them and are screwed if they ever drive something older, be it for a job or otherwise. Unless the conditions are really bad or there's a lot of traffic, I sometimes like to drive a little aggressively in the winter just to know how to handle when you're not quite in control. It's fun and a mental refresher. I've found that on loose or slick surfaces, ABS makes my vehicle understeer horribly (you should coast to regain grip in the first place) if you do what most normies and the manufacturer want you to do, which is to ride the brake until it makes you shudder to a stop. The problem I've found is that the ABS only focuses on getting the wheels stopped, especially on ice. After the wheels stop turning, the car kinda shrugs and lets you skate off into the ditch. With ABS I either continue to pump my brakes or cover brake (as in older vehicles), because I find that more often than not it just gets in the way. That, and all of our vehicles are manual transmission so I don't really use the brakes in the first place.
Thankfully the only time I've gone off the road was when I WASN'T screwing around, looking for where I thought I remembered a stop sign in dense fog. I'm going 30 MPH and slowing down, kind of discerning the course of the road going "I know I'm coming up on that intersection" when all of a sudden I see it whizzing by my passenger side and I go off a "T" intersection into some grass. I drove out, and pulled over in the next town to check the car. No damage. I came back to that same intersection in the spring/summer and discovered that I must've threaded the needle between a power pole and a tree with a trunk the same width.
it also helps to stay aware when driving to prevent the car crash itself or the severity of it!
This channel is such a great repository of knowledge and just amazing content. I know word of mouth is as good as dead nowadays, but I can't stop telling my mates about your videos whenever the chances comes by.
Thanks for everything.
I'd love to see how the IIHS stacks up against the more strict Euro NCAP tests
They're more strict in different ways. Pedestrian protection is far stricter in Europe for example.
Its unfortunate the approach to the weight issue is having a minimum weight. A better solution that solves lots of other problems would to have a maximum weight instead, or better alongside
Agreed! I wish it was different that it's not a push for bigger and bigger
What about trailers? Or Vans? Heavy vehicles are unavoidable, so they are forced to go down the minimum-weight route.
@@yngndrw.nah I think figuring out how to conserve weight in larger vehicles would be a very good thing all around. Would have a couple of additional advantages on top of increased safety like better fuel economy and reduced wear on public roadways.
I don't think there should be a minimum or a maximum.
@@Zorro9129there's already a sort of maximum weight. In some cities, vehicles over 6k pounds aren't allowed on the streets as they cause excessive wear to the roads. If you go extremely heavy you basically become a commercial vehicle and you need a CDL.
Vehicle weight is going to become critical once electric vehicles become common due to the large weight of the batteries and powertrain.
Cybertruck: **Allow me to introduce myself ☠️**
And a lorry?
Andrew, I love your videos. You deserve much more recognition, for these well-edited, interesting dives into history of automotive and logistic safety. Hoping for more content.
as a recently habilitated Honda fit driver, I recently had an accident (nothing major, but scarry). There I could see the safety features in action. after that I'm obsessed with understanding transit and vehicular safety better.
very cool vid!
I think your car gets dangerous when you crash, so I personally don't crash my car.
I've had two drunks hit two of my cars. A drunk leaving a Fourth of July BBQ essentially PITed me, causing my car to roll down an embankment. The other when the car was parked in front of my house, unoccupied. I also had a woman with a leg in a cast hit me in traffic claiming she hit the gas by mistake. None of those were avoidable on my part.
Good thing there's no other car on the road
Insta click on notification. Awesome video!!
0:18 given Volvos great safety recorded would not be bad to choose a Volvo
I just want to say, your switch from dash cams to documentaries was elite
I’m so glad that TH-cam recommended this video! Extremely educational, and entertaining? Perfect! Side note, most of my transport is done by ebike these days. Sticking to bike lanes, side streets, and always using a helmet. Bikes are the future of city mobility
A lot of being safe on the road comes down to being observant & watching for situations unfolding. Sadly to few people do this. It does make me glad though when I make a mistake driving & I visibly see other drivers react showing they are paying attention. Then the next correct thing to do is correct for my mistake in the safest way possible.
VOLVO & Euro Encap are the other two main crash test authority's that have come up with some really cool tests. I always look at crash test safety when getting a new car, looked at it for my partners car to so he would have to best chance at survival if the worst happens.
Awesome job on the research. If I may suggest another topic, how about innovations on road design for limited access roads (e.g. the Autoban, US Freeway system, Canada National Highway System).
I put this in my content things to research! Thanks!
Maybe collab with Rob he's all about the road in US he had been interviewing a few road officials in several DOTs.
You didn't mention that Nader's book was later found to have been full of false information and outright lies. I just find that an amusing sidenote. It was very influential in bringing car safety to the fore.
Some of it for sure. I just used it to progress the story which is why I didn't spend much time on it.
A politician caught lying-imagine my shock!
I saw the result of a head on collision between a Fiat Cinquecento and a Volvo 240 around 1992 - not first hand, but in a garage. The Volvo had the front crumple zones bent, probably a broken radiator and maybe a few other bits, but the safety cell was intact. The Cinquecento on the other hand - The engine was in the back seat. The steering column had gone out the back window, through the driver. nobody knew what happened to the steering wheel...
It's amazing how far car safety has come, even since the 80s/90s!
16:01 Fun fact about that guy, Adrian Lund, after retiring, he was in a severe crash, a head-on collision with another vehicle that had made an illegal u-turn on the highway, and they were both at highway speeds, 50-60 mph. But because he was in a modern car with the safety standards he spent most of his professional life working towards, he walked away with only minor injuries. It's worth looking up, he did a few interviews about it.
I was in a low overlapping head-on, like your fatal flaw. He popped out of the fog and I hit my breaks and immediately slid so I switched and punched the gas. That made my tail swing out more and the angle of contact changed at the last possible instant and I spun when we connected. I slid sideways out of the seatbelt and was stuffed into the rear passenger footwell headfirst. Totaled both cars.
I guess I should add I got charged for criminal negligence because I was passing a few cars going very, very slow. Too slow for conditions, but fog has a way of changing to soup in an instant. I was found not to be. Mostly because I had the car 3 days and hadn't had time to take off the very bald tires that were on it and that was the first time I drove it in the rain. I tried to slow down and get back in my lane. But like I said, I just slid immediately, like I was on ice. I was stuffed the instant I hit the breaks. A consequence of not being rich more than any culpable intent.
For your mental image,; I was turning right away from him and on contact my car spun left into it. The hit was 20% overlap on the driver's side for both of us. With a 30° offset for my car to his going parallel down the road. So, if the center line points to 12 o'clock on the horizon, I was pointing at 2 o'clock.
Managing deceleration is essential to avoid internal injuries too, like a ruptured aorta. Cars can protect us externally and we can survive crashes without a scratch but die because of invisible internal injuries.
I swear they cheated that Volvo test by removing the Engine...
Volvo is the most safest car brand in the world
Ironically Cars r safer w/out engines, that's y Teslas r the safest cars in the 🌎
@@Eduardo_Espinoza I'd rather not burn alive in a glorified RC car thank you very much.
I agee , but no engine is still the safest. @@lukedavis436
Wow I love this video.
So much information in 1 single video. It's a matter of time until you reach a million subscribers.
Thank you I have really enjoyed it.
(And now I'm subscribed 😊)
10:41 I actually learnt about the Inertia Lock on seatbelts by accident as a kid, sometimes I’d get too excited and pull on the seatbelt to buckle myself in quickly but was caught off-guard when it stopped suddenly. When I tugged it, it wouldn’t move. So I waited a second before pulling again gently.
Several years after, I connected the dots and realised I found a safety feature for cars I had no idea about. Seatbelts are awesome.
Me in my 1996 Honda with no airbags 👁️ 👄 👁️
Fantastic video and channel! Could you make a video discussing the differences in safety regulation for trucks, SUVs, and cars?
I know there's crash compatibility engineering for SUVs so they don't just run over smaller vehicles. Don't know if that's regulated or even tested. I'll think about this. Thanks!
In the USA SUV's and trucks have 0 safety regulations.
You can quite literally build a gaint steal tank with square edges and sell it.
This, combined with hardly any licence requirements and failing to invest in saver infrastructure is why the USA has such insanely deadly roads.
@@basmca1 There actually are some safety regulations. You ever noticed how tall the front of trucks are now compared to say the 90s? That's actually the safety regulations at work. Old 90s trucks sit at the same height as new ones, but their front end is considerably shorter. Problem with those 90s trucks if crashed into a smaller car, the crash bars pictured at 7:18 would not align resulting in bad crashes for the smaller car. Now the front ends are bigger because they've mounted the crash bar a lot lower and then covered up the empty space with a bunch of body work.
how I felt like when I guessed the correct car at the start:🗿
Amazing video essay from you always! Been following you since your first video essay. Your presentation style is easy to grasp, and very interesting to follow. I can understand almost the whole video in just one watch. I might adapt those elements for my future presentations in the university!
Great video, and happy I've come across your channel. Thanks to the algorithm for actually working once in a while.
Just a little story for you about your little Honda.
My wife bought a brand new Honda Jazz (Fit) here in Australia back in 2013. It was involved in a crash 1 month later when a driver in a Mitsubishi Triton loaded with construction tools, towing a 1.5ton excavator hit her from behind while she was stopped at a red light, he was traveling at 80k/h and never applied brakes (distracted on his phone) Wifes car then hit the car in front of her hard enough that his car was also written off. Front and back of her car were caved in really bad, steering column had come apart from the rack, engine got shoved part way under the car, the rear hatch was against the back seats, but we could still open all 4 doors, and her only injuries were a bruise from the seatbelt on her chest and a bruised knee from hitting the dash (she likes to sit too far forward) The car she replaced a month before this was a Daewoo Matiz and I think if she still had that car, I doubt she would have survived the impact or 5 tons hitting her car at 80km/h .
Glad to hear a good outcome! Thanks for sharing with me!
0:07 Renault, thanks.
0:30 how does that count as a tiny car
It’s pretty small but definitely not tiny
Surprised you did not reference the IIHS 50th Anniversary Crash Test of a 1959 Chevy BelAir against a 2009 Chevy Malibu. That video makes the case better than any description how the IIHS has saved lives. th-cam.com/video/xtxd27jlZ_g/w-d-xo.html
I was involved in a frontal crash where the safety systems literally meant that my wife and I could walk away. We were in a 2009 Audi A3 when an American Full Size Pickup truck crossed the double yellow line and we had an almost perfect head on collision at about 40 Mph each (total 80 miles per hour closing rate). I do not know what damage the pickup had, our A3 was completely destroyed forward of the A pillar (as designed), from the A pillar back you could not tell it had been in a crash, the door gaps were still perfect. The German engineering of the passenger compartment and front crumple zone did their job.
Amazing and yeah I did see the video. It kind of got lost as I moved through the video.
That's not a representative test because the Belair has an X frame instead of much more common parallel frame rails that distribute crash energy better. In short, that video was deliberately misleading and people like you are too misinformed to realize the deck was stacked to maximize the intended result.
@@Noah_E I know people don't like to hear it, but cars don't become safe by Chance. There was no engineering towards safety back then and the outcome is according.
There is another example in the video, where a Volvo much newer than the Bel air gets absolutely smashed by a much smaller modern car.
Then there's plenty of other examples with 90's cars getting folded like tin cans by their modern counterpart.
For example:
-2016 Nissan Altima folding a 1992 Nissan Tsuru
-a 2020 Ford Fiesta doing the same to a 1998 one
The Bel air might be an extreme example, but that doesn't change the outcome. The driver is dead for multiple reasons, the Bel air just might provide some additional ones.
Thank you for clarifying the background and details about the small overlap test. Although the impact mechanism itsself is critical and the ability to withstand such extreme conditions is a great feature the window of great improvements nevertheless becomes smaller with the decreasing percentage of real-world crash scenarios that haven´t been covered by established tests before. My car for example, the BMW i3 aced the small overlap test despite having a relatively short crumple zone because of the carbonfibre construction with lighter and softer plastic panels on the outside of the frontal area. That made it possible for the car to get deflected by the barrier and not having to come to a dead stop on the initial impact.
Really good job Andrew. All you have exposed here is really vital information to know better where we are putting our lives.
Whenever someone says that a big car is safer, I always think back to an accident I've had. Flew out of a curve in my tiny little 2003 Toyota Yaris. Car flipped and everything. Outside and engine bay completely fucked to hell and back. Car even did the Lightning McQueen Kachao. Meanwhile, the inside (save for small glass pieces and the dented ceiling) was untouched. Got out with only whiplash. Do not underestimate small cars.
I hate the phrasing "My car became dangerous over night" because it's simply not true. that car had this flaw from the get go, only was it not known. You were at the exact same risks before the new test as you were after the new test only that now the flaw is known. You could argue the perceived danger is higher, yes. But claiming the car became more dangerous due to the new test, is just clickbait.
Cringe
I don't care about safety both my cars are less than a ton and don't have airbags why am I watching this
"Arms Race in Safety and Publicity" is such a wonderful concept to me. Well said
I drive a 90s Japanese sports car with no airbag and a MOMO Monte Carlo steering wheel from factory. To me, it was a bit of a revelation that people may not realize how safe or dangerous their steering wheel is. Seeing an actual, old school sports steering wheel in front of you makes it very clear, there is a sharp-ish bare metal edge across your entire head's width and nothing to keep your head in place.
Outside of head-on collisions, a four point harness is actually SAFER in those kinds of cars.
i find it hilarious that you sponsor a private email application on youtube, yet you need a GMAIL account to post videos.
Having been in quite a few bad accidents, I've opted for a motorcycle. I've had many situations I couldn't have avoided if I was in a car. That said, it's not for everyone. Your situational awareness is key. A heightened sense of danger while riding is useful.
This is why i love my 2014 fusion,if you watch all the crash test,the passager compartment is barley damaged in the test,if at all, the pedal box doesn't intrude into you lower body,on side impact the doors and frame do a great job of stopping the other'car' from intruding into the passenger compartment
Im so happy I found this channel, as a car safety nerd so-to-speak its nice to watch and learn more from you. thanks!!
(more please) haha
I've had the privilege of visiting IIHS as part of my job (MEP engineering working on an addition for them) and our PM was even bold enough to see if we could see a test, which they agreed to. So, it was very interesting to get a peek under the hood (no pun intended) of their operation.
My dude is back. Thank you for producing this video!
This was a genuinely great video with fantastic explanations and animations. Great work, keep it up!