The reason only the A-pillar of the G-wagen was damaged is not because the B and C pillars held up, but because the bumper collided with the truck's rear wheels, absorbing the impact just as the A-pillar was about to be completely damaged. If the truck had a longer rear overhang, both the B and C pillars would likely have been pushed in as well.
True - in my country a defender had its entire side ripped off after hitting a high floor bus - dont see any smaller vehicle winning against a larger one
The Tesla Model 3 did well because it was low enough to slip under this specific truck without involving (and therefore deforming) much of the A-pillar.
It is totally misleading to arrive at that conclusion just because a car is low enough. Sportscars would perform flawlessly. I assume it's just the robot voices the uploader of the video added which is basically just his own opinion and not the conclusion from the agency that actually conducted the test because that would be very silly.
Your conspiracy theory could have been valid except Model 3's height and ES' height are about the same, 56.8" vs. 56.9". So, your conspiracy theory is total BS. Keep coping.
Canadian trailers have much wider vertical beams that connect to the rear impact bar which absorb most of the impact energy and not let a vehicle go under the trailer. The problem is just cost cutting since narrower beams can be directly bolted to the main frame with no extra plates.
Because it isn't worth for both parties, Insurance companies benefit from wrecks and logistics companies don't want to pay massive for something that won't affect them.
Because you live in the US and you got trucks running 3 mil miles on the clock, just as the trailers. They are not economical at all and have huge limitations, but hey, stick to long nose cabin trucks loooool 😂😂😂
Well no, it's not stupid. Since there will be trucks that won't have proper protection. And having strong A B pillars is important invade of other types of crash too. Although here car shape and size played a big role. The Tesla that preformed the best, was quite low to the ground and had a sleek transition to the roof. Allowing the car to be pushed below and down, with a lot of the force being converted into downwards movement instead of it being diverted straight into the A pillar.
What this video completely ignores - not the passenger cars are the unsafe part here! They have crash structures, many things are done in car safety here in the last decades. But what do the semi-trucks have? There is nothing! Just a simple bar that does nothing! They are build as if to prevent the passenger cars crash-structures from working! Nothing has changed all the time I can remember! Istn't there much that can be done?
For every car they mention the driver has only slight injuries, uh yeah, maybe that's because the crash occured on the right side of the car on all of the tests? ;) lol
Exactly. This is a good example of what happens with many of the older trailers, but the newer ones since around 2020 or so are fkn stout. I got rear ended by a Dodge Charge traveling around 100-110mph, hit me exactly where the test shows and he ricocheted off my trailer. Lucky for him, it was only about a 40mph speed difference since I was going 65 in a 65. It's not like I was parked on the shoulder, otherwise nothing would've saved him. If he would've hit one of our 2016/2017 trailers, he most likely would've ended up underneath the trailer instead of bounding off. He still managed to do $34k worth of damage to the trailer. He cracked the metal floor 10 ft into the trailer and well as buckling the frame and bumper, but the trailer took the hit like a champ, unlike my back. I had a pinched nerve and if it wasn't for the seat belt, my face would've smashed my steering wheel. I only had about 18k lbs in the trailer, so I felt every bit of it. I imagine if I'd been pushing 80k, I would've barely felt it but unfortunately that's not the way it went down. He's still lucky he survived. He bounced backwards into the median on I 45 just north of Houston across 2 lanes. If I hadn't seen it happen in my mirror, I wouldn't have believed it. I thought for sure he was K on impact. I was found not at fault, and non preventable. Shame there's only like 250 million more morons just like him. People can't drive worth a fk. That was his 2nd vehicle he totalled in 2 weeks. That charger was his replacement vehicle and still had the paper tags. The tow truck driver told me he was the one that picked up his Dodge Ram he wrecked so he remembered him. 49yrs old driving like a 19yr old. Ridiculous.
The truck crash bar is the one that failed making it possible for the car to slip through. That is the main flaw because the cars are designed to withstand impact on a crash bar that would hold its structure well enough. The other question is how can you end up on the back of a truck while driving? My conclusion here is that you just should look in front of you while driving and not on your phone, or eat or do your make up while driving!
Yep, knew these would not be pretty. Saw some of these firsthand with my country police officer in the 70’s and 80’s. Was heartened that the Tesla did well. and glad I bought one last year.
Why, OP asks? The cynic would say the Teamsters have bought enough politicians NOT to have to make safety sense of trucks. Which is also why railroads are not used as much or more to transport goods
This is stupid - this is not a frontal collision , this is an offset front collision . The problem is not these cars , it’s trucks dont have enough protection for smaller vehicles and they’ve done nothing in 45 years whereas every manufacturer has grown leaps and bounds . The narrators are idiots , they don’t know what they’re talking about
Cars are not really designed to withstand this kind a crash. The outcome is random. And it also comes down to the hight of the car. If the A pillar is exactly at the center of impact, it can't hold up that force. If the car is a little lower or much higher other parts of the car will absorb most of the impact. The Tesla for example have had a great hight and design for this kind a crash. CHANGE the test. Different outcome! BTW. The Tesla caught on fire 3 days later and burnt down the testing facility. LOL (of course I am only kiddding 50/50. Tesla boys don't get mad!)
As a former long-distance professional driver and instructor, I always point out to my wife and son safety tips and ask questions. Like, "Are we in their blind spot?" or "Are you checking your mirrors to know what's going on around your vehicle?" "Is this a safe enough following distance?" Then I mention how much to count for the following distance if it's raining to snowing. Once you get into your vehicle you MUST always think of safety. You never know when sh*t will hit the fan. There are a lot of crappy drivers out there.
The Model 3 does good, because of the coincidence that the truck in the test was quite high and Model 3 quite flat. An other truck, which is lower in it’s construction, will turn the test results just opposite and with a positive effect for all the other cars. Besides to that, why did they do the test with a just 20% overlapping?? The normal accident in such cases will be a rear-end-collision over the full width.
Yes, you're right. The SUVs did poorly for the same reason. However, I was impressed by the Tesla's safety. The Maybach had the advantage of a long hood and large engine to absorb a lot of the impact.
That test is silly. They just destroyed bunch of expensive cars to proove nothing. All of these cars have driving supports such as auto braking, so there is no way to hit the trailor that way.
@@dougie8010 It is safer to behind the truck in some distance away, they have higher view point can see what happen in front in distance, if anything bad happened, the truck will open a path for you. The worst spot is beside the truck or the truck lost its break and control during high speed down hill.
Here in Brazil, it is mandatory to have a standard bumper behind any truck, even the oldest ones, that is low enough and strong enough to prevent a vehicle from getting under the truck. It is also mandatory to use reflective tapes on this bumper.
The dummy on the passenger seat of the Tesla Model 3 was just lucky because this car has such a low profile.. the A-Pillar would have failed in a direct hit too.. The trucks need a MUCH MUCH better underride protection ... almost any truck on the road is by far still not safe enough !
Your conspiracy theory could have been valid except Model 3's height and ES' height are about the same, 56.8" vs. 56.9". So, your conspiracy theory is total BS. Keep coping.
The TM3 is not any lower than most cars we drive in Europe. We have less SUVs here than in the US (although they are unfortunately getting more and more common here too). The TM3 did clearly better than the other sedan in this test. The main issue remains with the trucks design. It only needs a bumper that can prevent the cars to penetrate as deeply below the container. In Europe, the trucks have this, which somewhat mitigates the risk. You are still doomed in case you stop behind a truck and you are followed by a loaded truck that cannot stop in time. For this case, only active security can help here (the AEBS systems that became mandatory in EU since 2013 for trucks and coaches).
Tesla is the safest vehicle available. The cost makes it even better. The performance makes it even better. The low maintencance makes it even better. FSD makes it THE BEST! Legacy auto is obsolete!
The G-class is nothing but a 50 year old military vehicle that got converted to road use. It's as sophisticated as a toaster, nothing to brag about here.
The underrun protection on these trucks is absolutely ridiculous. It does nothing except slash the tires and sides of the cars. Repeat these tests on trucks with stable underrun protection according to EU specifications and you will get completely different results. Btw. the Tesla had less overlap on impact than the rest of the cars, explaining less intrusion towards the passenger's face.
Not all trucks have these safety bars. I drove past a Testarossa deep underneath a semi rear in Germany years ago. It was lunchtime near the Nurburgring on the autobahn, I always figured they’d gone out for a test drive blast and their massive speed difference caught them out.
In this particular test, the tesla is much lower than the Maybank. The Maybank is almost as tall as an SUV, and the tesla is lower than many regular sedans. The part of the truck doing the most damage is a little high up and that's why the SUVs didn't stand a chance. It would be nice to see how the model X would fair up. Also, it's interesting how the two people talking is just AI.
Also, it ignores the fact that the Tesla is a relatively low vehicle (low roof line) compared to the others, so it mostly slips below the tray of the other vehicle. Make them all trike a wall or a truck head on and then measure the results
As the son of a country police officer who regularly attended fatal crashes with him in the 70’s and 80’s, I wasn’t surprised at these results. I’ve seen my father having to pull the bits of bodies out of these sorts of crashes from cars made before any safety systems were implemented. I knew it would not be pretty. But amazed at the Tesla. Good on them.
@@stoner27th The Tesla has a much lower front end, sloping A pillar and slightly lower roof line than the Lexus. All I am saying a better test would be a head on with the the truck or a solid wall. By the way both the Tesla and the Lexus score a 5 star ANCAP safety rating.
Fun fact: both the glc and gle, produced by Beijing Benz, in this series of videos have a major issue that visible flames appeared when the airbag was deployed. However, the host of this crash test show pointed out that in the footage provided by IIhs and Ncap, there is no flames when airbags of both deployed, which makes him concern that Mercedes might have hided the safety issue of Beijing Benz on purpose in order to further cut the cost and lower the price to make it more competitive in the automobile industry here.
Volvo has the best protection systems against crashes like shown in the test. The rest of the European common manufactures ignore every crash scenario that might happen outside the NCAP-test scenario.
One good thing about them low slung sedans is that you can do a crazy sharp turn at last second to avoid the collision altogether and the Sedan would happily oblige. With some luck of free space on the shoulder or parallel lane both the driver and car would be walking out without a scratch. Happened to me atleast 4-5 times due to parked trucks and animals in the lane that were successfully dodged without flipping anything
The tesla is is also quite low, so cars sports cars will slide under the main body of the trailer. Improvements should be in the trailer design with a proper rear underrun protection bar. The rear bar should break off whenhit at high speed but bend and deflect the vehicle hitting it
Your conspiracy theory could have been valid except Model 3's height and ES' height are about the same, 56.8" vs. 56.9". So, your conspiracy theory is total BS. Keep coping.
@ The Maybach would also be low enough. The A-pillar did not collapse on the Tesla, that is the outstanding feature. The roof also withstands pressing in other tests (for rollover simulation). Presumably Model X and Y also pass this test?
In drivers ed. they taught us that proper distance is 1 car length for every 10 mph or the 2 second rule. That means that at 100 mph, you should have 10 car lengths between you and the car in front of you. That's 150ft considering the average car length is 15 feet. Or, the 2 second rule that says you shouldn't pass the same object as the car in front of you for atleast 2 seconds. These cars were doing about 100 mph and had about 25 feet between them. You saw what happened! Nuff said.
no its not! also generally collision will happen at much higher speeds and nothing is going to help unfortunately, unless youre a much higher vehicle or the truck has a much better rear end protection.
We had an accident like this crash test. All survived, a-pillar ramained in place. Car was a 2003 Citroen C5, trailer was a Krone. Even a F1 car could not dive under that kind of trailer.
True! But with the current conditions of trucks right now, vehicles should be prepared for their unreadiness. Rather do something than wait around for trucks to become safer for cars, yknow?
Rear bumper of the semi trailer should be inforced to make it stronger so that the cars do not go under in a crash. This should be illegal! You don't expect an A pillar to stop a car instead of it's front end. Model 3 survived because it was too low and the impact remained mainly in the front end as its supposed to be, not because it's a better car. Try testing Model X and see what the height makes a difference.
The problem is being approached from a possible wrong perspective. Truck trailer rear bumper designs and standards are likely the best approach to the issue to where it wouldn't matter what vehicle ran into it. Make the trailer corner bumpers structurally impossible to dive under at the usual speeds they are impacted. This way, vehicles of modern design can depend on current offset collision structures.
1. Comparing the driver view between Tesla and Maybach, the Tesla clearly traveling at a slower speed. Not sure if the channel/ test was ran/paid by tesla. 2. All car tested here has auto crash avoidance technology, so unless the driver deliberate crash the car, highly unlikely it will happen. 3. How many cars can survive a 35mph crash with no injury? 0 regardless if it's against another car, a truck of a wall. 4. Key point of this test. Don't tailgate. Don't crash lol
The tesla won’t easily win this because it did not really absorb the impact properly. The main reason why cars are soft and mold to the shape of the obstacle is to absorb energy of the impact so that the passengers won’t be decapitated. Unlike the Toyota, it was able to absorb the impact while keeping the roof intact so that the passengers will not get hit.
Since the 1970s, Americans have always come up with something new to protect their own auto industry. First European vehicles had to have abnormally thick bumpers and now this test... Ridiculous
This video convinced me to buy a semi.
😂😂😂😂 I love that joke
😂😂😂😂
....convinced me not drive from the passenger side.
😂😂😂😂😂😂
I drive my semi truck for personal when I'm not working. Being the bigger car on the road means I'm always going to win.
You know what the creepiest thing about this video is? The man and the woman narrating it and talking to one another are AI.
The creepiest thing about AI right now is that it makes everyone think everything is AI 😑
@@iceynuel9066 There's no doubt about this one. If you weren't able to pick up all the inorganic bits, the joke's on you.
Good catch! I was thinking the same too
@@JAnx01 you might be right about this one but it doesn't make my first comment false..
no shit
The reason only the A-pillar of the G-wagen was damaged is not because the B and C pillars held up, but because the bumper collided with the truck's rear wheels, absorbing the impact just as the A-pillar was about to be completely damaged. If the truck had a longer rear overhang, both the B and C pillars would likely have been pushed in as well.
👍
Quite right!
True - in my country a defender had its entire side ripped off after hitting a high floor bus - dont see any smaller vehicle winning against a larger one
But that was same for all cars. Bumper always hit truck wheels.
Yes that is true. So a longer overhang will simply tear more of the roof off.
The Tesla Model 3 did well because it was low enough to slip under this specific truck without involving (and therefore deforming) much of the A-pillar.
The Tesla caught on fire 3 days later and burnt down the testing facility!
It is totally misleading to arrive at that conclusion just because a car is low enough. Sportscars would perform flawlessly. I assume it's just the robot voices the uploader of the video added which is basically just his own opinion and not the conclusion from the agency that actually conducted the test because that would be very silly.
I saw this blatant oversight. Its low profile was its saving grace. Nothing to do with the strength of the A pillar.
The Model 3's height and the ES' height are about the same, 56.8' vs 56.9'. So, your conspiracy theory is total BS.
Keep coping 🤡.
Your conspiracy theory could have been valid except Model 3's height and ES' height are about the same, 56.8" vs. 56.9". So, your conspiracy theory is total BS.
Keep coping.
Why does the AI narration sound like a local radio station from the 90's?
It is the AI podcast feature of google’s NotebookLM (notebooklm.google.com)
computer generated, it's all fake.
Spot on!
video is computer generated, it is all fake.
it's awesome
The problem is the unsafe US trucks. Nobody would build such trailers. Why don‘t they adapt current technologies?
Canadian trailers have much wider vertical beams that connect to the rear impact bar which absorb most of the impact energy and not let a vehicle go under the trailer. The problem is just cost cutting since narrower beams can be directly bolted to the main frame with no extra plates.
Because it isn't worth for both parties, Insurance companies benefit from wrecks and logistics companies don't want to pay massive for something that won't affect them.
@@TechSurreal However, older trucks that are still on the road sometimes don't have these extra protection
@@sharl1633 What? How do insurance companies benefit from wrecks, that's crazy to say.
Because you live in the US and you got trucks running 3 mil miles on the clock, just as the trailers. They are not economical at all and have huge limitations, but hey, stick to long nose cabin trucks loooool 😂😂😂
I‘ll be the back seat passenger in the Maybach.
tesla winnee and more safe mercedes at fronts seat passenger
@@halilreissedyeci1956tesla is garbage
@@halilreissedyeci1956in this one unlikely situation. And only because the Tesla is lower and the maybach is extremely heavy.
@drewgreenhalgh9162 nooo, maybach low quality and tesle has too rigid than maybach
😅😅@@halilreissedyeci1956
A lot of destroyed vehicles just to see the problem is inadequate protection on semis
it's the design of the truck crash bar , not the design of the vehicles hitting it that causes the damage.
Stupid test. The issue is the truck not having adequate under-ride protection
In India most of the trucks don't have Under ride protection
This is a Chinese test made under Chinese circumstances but hey, we’re all experts in everything aren’t we?
...like they have in Europe for decades - all around
Actually, I see plenty of this kind of trailer in Asia roads. Esp all those old trailers.
Well no, it's not stupid. Since there will be trucks that won't have proper protection.
And having strong A B pillars is important invade of other types of crash too. Although here car shape and size played a big role. The Tesla that preformed the best, was quite low to the ground and had a sleek transition to the roof. Allowing the car to be pushed below and down, with a lot of the force being converted into downwards movement instead of it being diverted straight into the A pillar.
What this video completely ignores - not the passenger cars are the unsafe part here! They have crash structures, many things are done in car safety here in the last decades. But what do the semi-trucks have? There is nothing! Just a simple bar that does nothing! They are build as if to prevent the passenger cars crash-structures from working! Nothing has changed all the time I can remember! Istn't there much that can be done?
video is computer generated, it's all fake.
For every car they mention the driver has only slight injuries, uh yeah, maybe that's because the crash occured on the right side of the car on all of the tests? ;) lol
Well that also matters
Cringe wink
I noticed that too
Obviously, it's ubsurd how they do mention that as the reason😅
Why not show the real issue the cheap trailer having horrible under ride guard . What a waste of money this test was .
the reality is most truck don't have great strong rear bump guard
I think as this video has gone viral in China, someone just might bring this up to Xi~
Exactly. This is a good example of what happens with many of the older trailers, but the newer ones since around 2020 or so are fkn stout. I got rear ended by a Dodge Charge traveling around 100-110mph, hit me exactly where the test shows and he ricocheted off my trailer. Lucky for him, it was only about a 40mph speed difference since I was going 65 in a 65. It's not like I was parked on the shoulder, otherwise nothing would've saved him. If he would've hit one of our 2016/2017 trailers, he most likely would've ended up underneath the trailer instead of bounding off. He still managed to do $34k worth of damage to the trailer. He cracked the metal floor 10 ft into the trailer and well as buckling the frame and bumper, but the trailer took the hit like a champ, unlike my back. I had a pinched nerve and if it wasn't for the seat belt, my face would've smashed my steering wheel. I only had about 18k lbs in the trailer, so I felt every bit of it. I imagine if I'd been pushing 80k, I would've barely felt it but unfortunately that's not the way it went down. He's still lucky he survived. He bounced backwards into the median on I 45 just north of Houston across 2 lanes. If I hadn't seen it happen in my mirror, I wouldn't have believed it. I thought for sure he was K on impact. I was found not at fault, and non preventable. Shame there's only like 250 million more morons just like him. People can't drive worth a fk. That was his 2nd vehicle he totalled in 2 weeks. That charger was his replacement vehicle and still had the paper tags. The tow truck driver told me he was the one that picked up his Dodge Ram he wrecked so he remembered him. 49yrs old driving like a 19yr old. Ridiculous.
video is computer generated, it's all fake.
Because it would never be solved in Chyna. It's a Chinese show. They need to live in reality.
The truck crash bar is the one that failed making it possible for the car to slip through. That is the main flaw because the cars are designed to withstand impact on a crash bar that would hold its structure well enough. The other question is how can you end up on the back of a truck while driving? My conclusion here is that you just should look in front of you while driving and not on your phone, or eat or do your make up while driving!
5:33 "Physics doesn't care how much you've paid for the car" coldest line 💀🥀
its AI
Yep, knew these would not be pretty. Saw some of these firsthand with my country police officer in the 70’s and 80’s. Was heartened that the Tesla did well. and glad I bought one last year.
Man. I never thought someone would dare to actually put Google Notebook LM podcast out on public as a genuine content. 😮
The low cars went under the rear bar. Why are trailers on roads with incomplete rear bar coverage in the US?
Looking at the average rear bar coverage in the EU it’s the same deal imo I wouldn’t trust those. No way that’ll hold back a car.
Why, OP asks? The cynic would say the Teamsters have bought enough politicians NOT to have to make safety sense of trucks. Which is also why railroads are not used as much or more to transport goods
That truck owner/driver has got a lot of explaining to do... "Boss, they just kept rear-ending me!"
You've copied someone else's video and used it as your own.
it is AI bro, sad you fell for it.
@ChrisLoew your face is sad though.
@@Mangry101cope and seethe 🤡
This is stupid - this is not a frontal collision , this is an offset front collision . The problem is not these cars , it’s trucks dont have enough protection for smaller vehicles and they’ve done nothing in 45 years whereas every manufacturer has grown leaps and bounds . The narrators are idiots , they don’t know what they’re talking about
The narrators are AI generated. They are not real.
Quit driving under trailers.
It's AI chill..
The commentary is AI - the video is real. I care less about the commentary and more of the principle of testing and what they are trying to portray
Add volvo xc90 to the list
There is another segment i found with the S60 in this video and it performed phenomenal
5:32 "physics doesn't care how much you paid for your car." lol 😂😂
Cars are not really designed to withstand this kind a crash. The outcome is random. And it also comes down to the hight of the car. If the A pillar is exactly at the center of impact, it can't hold up that force. If the car is a little lower or much higher other parts of the car will absorb most of the impact. The Tesla for example have had a great hight and design for this kind a crash. CHANGE the test. Different outcome! BTW. The Tesla caught on fire 3 days later and burnt down the testing facility. LOL (of course I am only kiddding 50/50. Tesla boys don't get mad!)
But these crashes do happen in real life and only the Tesla came out on top.
@@KP-xi4bj
Taiwan Tesla car accident
th-cam.com/video/60G-J_tgT9w/w-d-xo.htmlsi=tBaW91woponfJY6F
You'd make a good dummy.
@@dutchdna Your best shot? I talk about cars and you make it personal? LOL
@@Nellie-H YW.
Pretty sure the Maybach owner wouldn't care, he'll be in the backseat anyways and would just hire a new driver if the crash happened.
Did a Volvo destroyed the truck, and that’s why you didn’t want to show that car?
As a former long-distance professional driver and instructor, I always point out to my wife and son safety tips and ask questions.
Like, "Are we in their blind spot?" or "Are you checking your mirrors to know what's going on around your vehicle?" "Is this a safe enough following distance?" Then I mention how much to count for the following distance if it's raining to snowing.
Once you get into your vehicle you MUST always think of safety.
You never know when sh*t will hit the fan.
There are a lot of crappy drivers out there.
Hidden ad for Tesla.
In the original video it shows the volvo s60 and that car is also doing very well.
It is strange that it was deleted
Can you send me link to the original video?
And they posted pictures of xc60 destroyed under the semi. They’re not pro Volvo
@@alifms2730 th-cam.com/video/xw1jdkYW6Yo/w-d-xo.html
Thank you for this information! Appreciate it!
It seems that the Tesla test was setup to hit the truck with a much lower offset than the other vehicles.
Copeium
Вольво: " Меня не взяли на эти испытания. Почему? Владелец прицепа запретил"🎉😂❤ "Вольво-живите долго и счастливо"❤❤❤
Well said!
7:05 OH MY GOD IT TOOK ME 7 MINUTES TO REALIZE THE VOICEOVER IS AI
Braw....
The Model 3 does good, because of the coincidence that the truck in the test was quite high and Model 3 quite flat. An other truck, which is lower in it’s construction, will turn the test results just opposite and with a positive effect for all the other cars.
Besides to that, why did they do the test with a just 20% overlapping?? The normal accident in such cases will be a rear-end-collision over the full width.
Yes, you're right. The SUVs did poorly for the same reason. However, I was impressed by the Tesla's safety. The Maybach had the advantage of a long hood and large engine to absorb a lot of the impact.
One thing I learned on this crash test... keep front passenger seat empty as much as possible.
That test is silly. They just destroyed bunch of expensive cars to proove nothing. All of these cars have driving supports such as auto braking, so there is no way to hit the trailor that way.
I learned not to rear end a truck. One of the most visually obvious vehicles on the road! If I didn't see this test I could have died.
@@dougie8010 It is safer to behind the truck in some distance away, they have higher view point can see what happen in front in distance, if anything bad happened, the truck will open a path for you. The worst spot is beside the truck or the truck lost its break and control during high speed down hill.
Here in Brazil, it is mandatory to have a standard bumper behind any truck, even the oldest ones, that is low enough and strong enough to prevent a vehicle from getting under the truck. It is also mandatory to use reflective tapes on this bumper.
Small hint guys...DON'T rear end into a truck :)
"defensive driving" : so true. Very very good video all the long !
what a bs test
Suuuuure
exactly, complete nonsense, result is almost entirely dependent on truck and specific car dimensions and shape
Kudos to the Chinese for experimenting on such expensive cars 👏
Thx for doing this tests
What is unacceptable is the inadequate training of drivers outside of Germany.
Who decided the height of the back of the metal piece on the truck - seems some cars were just lucky due to their height or sloped windshields ?
an AI is describing these accidents or something????
Thank you for uploading this very interesting video. Some of those results really surprised, no, shocked me. I'm so glad to drive a Tesla Model 3!
The dummy on the passenger seat of the Tesla Model 3 was just lucky because this car has such a low profile.. the A-Pillar would have failed in a direct hit too..
The trucks need a MUCH MUCH better underride protection ... almost any truck on the road is by far still not safe enough !
Your conspiracy theory could have been valid except Model 3's height and ES' height are about the same, 56.8" vs. 56.9". So, your conspiracy theory is total BS.
Keep coping.
The TM3 is not any lower than most cars we drive in Europe. We have less SUVs here than in the US (although they are unfortunately getting more and more common here too). The TM3 did clearly better than the other sedan in this test.
The main issue remains with the trucks design. It only needs a bumper that can prevent the cars to penetrate as deeply below the container. In Europe, the trucks have this, which somewhat mitigates the risk. You are still doomed in case you stop behind a truck and you are followed by a loaded truck that cannot stop in time.
For this case, only active security can help here (the AEBS systems that became mandatory in EU since 2013 for trucks and coaches).
Tesla model 3 is one of the safest car ever , you must search it.....
Tesla is the safest vehicle available. The cost makes it even better. The performance makes it even better. The low maintencance makes it even better. FSD makes it THE BEST! Legacy auto is obsolete!
Exactly! And people in these comment sections are saying that this video advertises Tesla… it’s a pretty known thing that they’re safe in general.
The G-class is nothing but a 50 year old military vehicle that got converted to road use. It's as sophisticated as a toaster, nothing to brag about here.
Good thing u can’t afford one then 😂
nonsense! its just the same design for 50 years, litteraly everything has changed years after years, its not the same vehicle educate yourself please.
As a Model 3 owner, this is pretty impressive.
Test results...........windshields do not prevent fatal accidents from shit built trailers across all brands.
The underrun protection on these trucks is absolutely ridiculous. It does nothing except slash the tires and sides of the cars. Repeat these tests on trucks with stable underrun protection according to EU specifications and you will get completely different results.
Btw. the Tesla had less overlap on impact than the rest of the cars, explaining less intrusion towards the passenger's face.
why have i never seen a Bugatti on these tests
cost
😅That one would disappear under the truck. 😅
The Bugatti will be underneath the truck.....and blown out.
Not all trucks have these safety bars. I drove past a Testarossa deep underneath a semi rear in Germany years ago. It was lunchtime near the Nurburgring on the autobahn, I always figured they’d gone out for a test drive blast and their massive speed difference caught them out.
In this particular test, the tesla is much lower than the Maybank. The Maybank is almost as tall as an SUV, and the tesla is lower than many regular sedans. The part of the truck doing the most damage is a little high up and that's why the SUVs didn't stand a chance. It would be nice to see how the model X would fair up. Also, it's interesting how the two people talking is just AI.
Stupid test. Totally ignores physics and geometry.
Also, it ignores the fact that the Tesla is a relatively low vehicle (low roof line) compared to the others, so it mostly slips below the tray of the other vehicle. Make them all trike a wall or a truck head on and then measure the results
@@Dino-zc5wi so compare it to the lexus then..
As the son of a country police officer who regularly attended fatal crashes with him in the 70’s and 80’s, I wasn’t surprised at these results. I’ve seen my father having to pull the bits of bodies out of these sorts of crashes from cars made before any safety systems were implemented. I knew it would not be pretty. But amazed at the Tesla. Good on them.
@@stoner27th The Tesla has a much lower front end, sloping A pillar and slightly lower roof line than the Lexus. All I am saying a better test would be a head on with the the truck or a solid wall. By the way both the Tesla and the Lexus score a 5 star ANCAP safety rating.
Still, in this type of crash, I'd prefer to be in the Tesla rather than in any of the other cars.
It never ceases to amaze me that the rear of trailers have no bumper to take such impacts.
Cars are not designed for this and shouldn’t need to be trucks need to be stronger
Copy that. Vehicles will submarine trailers, provided the trailer's deficit construction continues as the norm. Fix the F.. King trailer's rear end.
Fun fact: both the glc and gle, produced by Beijing Benz, in this series of videos have a major issue that visible flames appeared when the airbag was deployed. However, the host of this crash test show pointed out that in the footage provided by IIhs and Ncap, there is no flames when airbags of both deployed, which makes him concern that Mercedes might have hided the safety issue of Beijing Benz on purpose in order to further cut the cost and lower the price to make it more competitive in the automobile industry here.
Volvo has the best protection systems against crashes like shown in the test. The rest of the European common manufactures ignore every crash scenario that might happen outside the NCAP-test scenario.
One good thing about them low slung sedans is that you can do a crazy sharp turn at last second to avoid the collision altogether and the Sedan would happily oblige. With some luck of free space on the shoulder or parallel lane both the driver and car would be walking out without a scratch. Happened to me atleast 4-5 times due to parked trucks and animals in the lane that were successfully dodged without flipping anything
The offset test makes no Sense. The switch to bike ist even nonsens.
I'd definitely rather be in a tesla in any road crash situation
its a really stuppid test with no real datas to proove it what a joke
Did you use NotebookLM for the voiceover? If so, that'd be really cool💯💯💯
It was at this point 2:54 I realized I am listening to 2 A.I having a conversation
The tesla is is also quite low, so cars sports cars will slide under the main body of the trailer. Improvements should be in the trailer design with a proper rear underrun protection bar. The rear bar should break off whenhit at high speed but bend and deflect the vehicle hitting it
Your conspiracy theory could have been valid except Model 3's height and ES' height are about the same, 56.8" vs. 56.9". So, your conspiracy theory is total BS.
Keep coping.
cough cough tesla hater cough cough
Wow, didn't think the Tesla would do so well!
It didn't! It is just low enough to fit under a trailer. That's all
@ The Maybach would also be low enough. The A-pillar did not collapse on the Tesla, that is the outstanding feature. The roof also withstands pressing in other tests (for rollover simulation).
Presumably Model X and Y also pass this test?
This is a great test! awesome really
In many countries, trailers have to be equipped with a safety bar, to prevent fatalities of such accidents.
No, Safety bar still not safe enough, need to be box with vetical bar, also need to be low enough to cover more space.
The volvo: LOL LOL LOL 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮👁️👄👁️😝😜😬
In drivers ed. they taught us that proper distance is 1 car length for every 10 mph or the 2 second rule. That means that at 100 mph, you should have 10 car lengths between you and the car in front of you. That's 150ft considering the average car length is 15 feet. Or, the 2 second rule that says you shouldn't pass the same object as the car in front of you for atleast 2 seconds. These cars were doing about 100 mph and had about 25 feet between them. You saw what happened! Nuff said.
The BMW didn't even open airbags on time, and it wasn't mentioned at all?
The video is awesome. Mercedes is the safest car and PAOK the greatest team of all times
Notebook LM?
I would expect the Tesla automatically re directing the car to avoid collision..
The stricter the experiment, the more beneficial it is for consumers. This is simply too cool
no its not! also generally collision will happen at much higher speeds and nothing is going to help unfortunately, unless youre a much higher vehicle or the truck has a much better rear end protection.
No matter how expensive car you have,with truck you have no chance.
3 tons luxury car vs 40ton truck 😄
Excelente teste.
Is it just me, or is the trailer abnormally high?
Did they repair the truck for every single crash? It always looks flawless.
In the Maybach only the front left and rear right is important. The other two seats won’t be occupied
We had an accident like this crash test. All survived, a-pillar ramained in place. Car was a 2003 Citroen C5, trailer was a Krone. Even a F1 car could not dive under that kind of trailer.
This type of crash is really a worst case scenario. They do occur, but other more survivable crash scenarios are more common.
This is NOT about car safety!
This is about the rear of TRUCKS being unsafe! This is what needs to change!
True! But with the current conditions of trucks right now, vehicles should be prepared for their unreadiness. Rather do something than wait around for trucks to become safer for cars, yknow?
I’m slightly disappointed that they didn’t show Zeeker 7 test results when literally tractor trailer was crushed by it’s A pillar
They should have shown some of the Chinese cars too, especially the BYD Seal and the Xiaomi SU7!
One thing left out about the Tesla, was the battery damaged which could cause a catastrophic fire?
Go frame by frame and easy to see the Tesla is lower to the roof line than the others and therefore the A pillar and roof are not directly impacted.
He used google’s notebookLM to make the conversation in the background, if you’re interested
Yeah exactly. I bet 90% of the people watching this video don't know the voiceover is AI generated.
What speed are these tests done
underride protectors need to be so much stronger. manac has a really good one, and it hurts me that it’s not standard!
Rear bumper of the semi trailer should be inforced to make it stronger so that the cars do not go under in a crash. This should be illegal! You don't expect an A pillar to stop a car instead of it's front end. Model 3 survived because it was too low and the impact remained mainly in the front end as its supposed to be, not because it's a better car. Try testing Model X and see what the height makes a difference.
Great video!
Why Volvos are not included?
The "Drive Under" bar seems to break off. Is this for the Chinese market?
The problem is being approached from a possible wrong perspective. Truck trailer rear bumper designs and standards are likely the best approach to the issue to where it wouldn't matter what vehicle ran into it. Make the trailer corner bumpers structurally impossible to dive under at the usual speeds they are impacted. This way, vehicles of modern design can depend on current offset collision structures.
what a time for content creators : google podcast AI + some stock videos = boom, done
1. Comparing the driver view between Tesla and Maybach, the Tesla clearly traveling at a slower speed. Not sure if the channel/ test was ran/paid by tesla.
2. All car tested here has auto crash avoidance technology, so unless the driver deliberate crash the car, highly unlikely it will happen.
3. How many cars can survive a 35mph crash with no injury? 0 regardless if it's against another car, a truck of a wall.
4. Key point of this test. Don't tailgate. Don't crash lol
The tesla won’t easily win this because it did not really absorb the impact properly. The main reason why cars are soft and mold to the shape of the obstacle is to absorb energy of the impact so that the passengers won’t be decapitated. Unlike the Toyota, it was able to absorb the impact while keeping the roof intact so that the passengers will not get hit.
Nothing can survive that short of having a full roll cage, if car manufacturers did that, cars would be way more expensive.
Since the 1970s, Americans have always come up with something new to protect their own auto industry. First European vehicles had to have abnormally thick bumpers and now this test... Ridiculous
Where is Volvo?