ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ต.ค. 2024
- Impact Speed: 35mph. (56km/h)
Head injury criteria(HIC):Driver-1938, Passenger-1844.
--
Thumbs up for the crash test dummies!
Do you think this vehicle is safe?
Do you like the test result?
More crash tests coming up every week.
Favorite this video and subscribe to CrashNet1!
Subscribe: th-cam.com/users/sub...
fb: / crashnet1
g+: plus.google.com...
twitter / crashnet1
On the web: www.CrashNet1.com
I owned one of these remarkable cars in '80-1 and it was more fun than any car I ever bought. Amazing--and comfortable too!
Wow this actually did better than i was expecting.
Remarkable performance for a small car designed in the late Sixties - I remember the crash footage of a huge Fifties Chevrolet Impala literally crumpling up (far more than the Renault 5)...
Structurally, it's quite strong yes, but the HIC values indicate an almost instant death due to the huge sudden deceleration. Modern cars have values of 250-500. A 1982 Volvo 240 gets 545. This? 1940. Not good at all actually, but better than becoming a pancake in something like a VW Beatle or Golf from that era.
Tampa0123456789 yes. better than the new KWID.
+Captain Woof very right you are. Check out the Yugo if you wish to see something worse in every aspect.
@@stevealexR1 that was 1959 crumple zones are in place
Considering this car first rolled off the line in 1971, it's kinda impressive. The bumpers were actually really tough - they were a composite material formed under high pressure, then they were mounted on rubber blocks backed by frame rails.
Yeee! Russian car was inspired by R5 - "Oka"1989. But firstly sayed, that Oka like japanese K-cars of 80's. But many of them alsou inspired by R5. Even R5 more bigger car.
th-cam.com/video/XM1Si4zDadA/w-d-xo.html
1:18 - 1:54 was my favourite part
Lol
Ha haa, what a dumbass.
Haha
the struggle is real!!! lol!
hahahaha omg
I got in an accident in one of these. The front bumper is like a tank! Very well made, strong car 🚗
auxmike do you remember the speed you where doing ?
Yeah, high pressure composite material. Strong as hell those bumpers were.
No injuries recorded
No wonder the poor bloke crashed, he had a bloody great lemon curd stuck to the screen
The shoulder belts don't appear to have done much at all.
this was really impressive for 1980's standards notice how the roof doesn't crumple and the steering wheel moves up instead of inward. plus it had great head whiplash protection and the dummy didn't rebound and hit the b pillar either. this car did a better job in crash protection then most cars twice its size back then let alone in its own class back then.
Way better than expected.
Juan Carlos Damonte way better than the new kwid
@Henry Discipline eu disse que é bem melhor que o novo Kwid
As a kid 😊I wanted one of these so bad ❤
1980. When, as long as the dummy's head wasn't ripped off by the steering wheel, they would give a car 5 stars. lol
The star test didn't exist until 1997 .this was a much more basic test .
There is very limited crumple zone with a longitudial engine in such a short car, so though the roof seems intact, the brains of passengers would crumple instead, moreover the seatbelts cannot cope with such a rapid deceleration. HIC over 1000 is deadly.
Well I don't agree all the way, volvos use longitudinal engines in many of their vehicles and as you know Volvo is the safest car.maker in the world.
@@salazmiguel5542 Volvo was rwd so obviously. Many early fwd had longitudinal engines like Saab for example. Many safety features were pioneered on saab but everyone thinks ovlov and forgets the contribution Saab made...
At least the car won't crash
That's actually considerably better than some compacts of 1980. Japanese compacts did much worse during that time
A cute french Little car ! Its a legend ! Fuel saving/good perfo for cruise in good comfort
6:45 wow clever engineering to make the steering column to protect the driver from smashing into the windshield,
Now I understand why they call us a soft generation, you know whit all our airbags, side curtains, knee bags etc
now just install at least 4 airbags, and the retro car could be brought back to production!
And they did!
What a classic car! I love Renault Cars from 80ies and 90ies....great stylings!!! Renault R9 and R11 are my favourites!
Il primo che vedo: la scocca resiste, miracolo, il vetro si rompe, la ruota interna nel motore si alza e "spinge" la plancia zona passeggero, la ruota è integra, ma i danni all'interno dell'abitacolo sono la plancia i più evidenti.Complimenti bellissimo video.
An intact passenger compartment isn't everything, as can be seen here.
I loved mine, it was good on and off road , reliable.
I had a wide body Renault 5 with a turbo, it was stupid fun, I wish I had it back....
Nowadays , Renault 5 turbo are iconic and worth about 100 000 euros !!
The reason this vehicle failed is due to the dashboard moving upward as well as insufficient occupant restraint (seat belts had too much give). If the dashboard issue could be fixed and a set of stronger seat belts installed, this might have done quite well.
June 13, 2018 10:16 pm
If they fixed the fuelcap, it would withstand a 10 megaton nukeblast.
What I loved about the 1970s and 80s the different designs of cars we had all looked so individual . French cars ,American cars ,German cars ,Japanese cars ,Italian cars British cars etc all looking so distinct . Now they all look so hideous, are very expensive and unreliable and most you can't do any repairs or basic service you are at the mercy of the dealership.
The slow mo footage is in 4:54 the video is stupidly long
Eran excelentes carros esos Renault 5!!! Tuve tres de estos y puedo decir con base que son de lo mejor que he tenido.
Para ser lo mejor que has tenido, no has tenido muchos autos entonces.
Ad a set of pre-tension seat belts and maybe an airbag and it will most probably pass modern test.
MAybe it would, but you need a better crush zone.
Well said..Honest and true.
Take off all the tape and it looks just like the one I bought new. Two years later someone stole it and took a corner way to fast. It rolled about 5 times from the look of the ground , landed on its side crumpled up like a can. The thief was no where to be found
With the spare tyre in front and two torsion bars linked in font with the suspension and its bumper give added strength during frontal accident. The torsion bars can be lowered and give the car a stiffer ride and excellent road holding.
Renault ha sempre puntato prima alla sicurezza ! Grande Auto !
Phew!!! I thought the whole video was gonna be somebody fighting with the gas cap
Rock solid vs rock solid = your face smashed into the wheel
Der R5 hat die Energie erstaunlich verarbeitet. Mit Airbag und anderer Lenksäule wären mindestens drei Sterne drin. Das Getriebe direkt hinter der Stoßstange sorgt dafür, dass die Bewegungsernergie der Motomasse nicht von der Karosserie aufgenommen werden muss. Müsste man heute generell so machen.
Seat belts were too slow to lock up. Useless. I must admit, the body is stronger than I thought of a 1970's design. I think the people had no knees left.
60s design, really. They rolled off the production lines in '71
French cars in general were usually unsafe for their time through the 1980s. In the '90s you started to see them pay attention to safety, especially Renault who made some of the safest cars in the world by the early 2000s. But in the '80s, vehicles from Renault and Peugeot almost always badly failed NHTSA tests. Citroen pulled out of the USA market in 1974, before NHTSA testing began in 1978, so they're an unknown. The worst two performers in NHTSA front test history were two French cars - the 1979 Peugeot 504 and 1982 Renault Fuego. Isuzu, Mazda and Honda were also some of the worst in the late 1970s; Honda made massive improvements starting around 1981-1982 and Mazdas were generally doing well by the mid-late 1980s. Isuzu improved as well to meet safety standards but stayed below average for the most part until they went out of business in the USA in 2008.
February 20, 2022 1:26 am
For 35mph into a solid barrier it did not fare too poorly.
For 70/80s pretty good.
its not about how the car looks after a crash its all about the G force put on your body.. most cars this size always was unsafe period... infact most small cars are still unsafe against a bigger vehicle or solid object.... ur talkin to a dude that's been in the business.. the less G force the more likely of survival and less injury... in an accidents there 3 impacts car hits object..body hits interior, and 3rd your internal organs.. this video was an example of obsolete car standards,
But it can still work That's all that matters!
Just like in games
As the banner say. We die like a real man. No airbags.
R5's were pretty stout. Funny how the guys who are doing the testing can't even get a gas cap back on!
french build quality
I just bought an R5 to restore and I have trouble with the cap, I'm pretty sure it's just bad design
I don't know why raw engineers have problem with old cars gas cap.
Ok, that was pretty upsetting to watch. I don't think either of them are walking away from that one.
love the gaz cap. . . . .
Se ve más seguro este carro que algunos autos actuales que se venden en Latinoamérica y se desmadra menos
2:27 11:45 LeCar (americano) tiene abajo una placa y unas barras en el chasis que R5 (francés y mundial) no tiene.
Interesante.
Makes me feel better since I've just bought one.
It failed miserably
any hic over 1000 is fatal
The energy transfer to the occupants was deadly. However, i'd like to see side impact tests. The box itself was robust but
skin and bone have very clear limits of force absorption. Still. you could drive an asian pick up truck and do the same test
at half the speed of this test and both passengers die. In fact the truck folds up so badly, may as well dig an extra big hole and call it your casket. Drop it in the hole and call it a life lived. Forgive the callous morbidity.
It was basically an improved R6 which in turn was far superior to the R8 / R10 although it was in turn an evolution of the Renault 4 ...
On the other hand, it might be surprising that in the case of the R5 against the Ford Gran Torino it had a total shortening of only 48.3 cm compared to that of the Gran Torino: 78.7 cm.
And it is that of the 1.4 meters of the total width of the front part (the maximum total width was 1.53 meters) 660 mm asymmetric (only 740 mm coincide (just 52.85% overlap with the front part of the Gran Torino
which means for that great saloon only a 36.66% overlap)
And the Golf I against the same saloon under the same speed and overlap conditions (660mm mismatched - overall width of its front end matches
with its maximum overall width, which was 1.61 meters). Of the matching 950mm
they only represent a 47% overlap for Torino,
hence the total shortening was 63 cm and 59% overlap for the Golf I
which meant a total shortening of 76.2 cm ...
That is, the Golf I endured less level of effort
than the R5 / LeCar under the same speed and overlap conditions against the same 2000 kg saloon including two dummies and measurement material (double the Golf I / Le Car).
For the R5 / LeCar it is a hypothetical crash at just 50k / h (43.3 k / h for the Torino).
For the Golf I / Rabbit I it is a hypothetical shock at 54-55 k / h (40-39 k / h for the Torino)
This in terms of deformations.
Because in terms of decelerations for both the R5 / LeCar and the Golf I / RabbitI, it is a theoretical shock of 62 k / h and barely 31 k / h for the Gran Torino ...
And what when the opposite (the big and heavy ) It is more deformed and means less deceleration for the small car (HIC of "just" 553 which is not bad for a car without any type of airbags) ...
Not as in the case of the Rabbit I / Golf I which, without being bad, is no longer so favorable (HIC of 656 and at the same time greater deformation of the passenger compartment and much greater total shortening).
Although I keep repeating in those conditions of overlap and speed it is more than likely that "all" a Ford Torino of more than 5 meters long was much less aggressive than cars of no more than 4.7-4.8 meters at 50 k / hy 50% overlap from the late 90s ...
Even a 2003 VW Polo at 50 k / h was much more aggressive against the Golf I than that Ford Torino ...
Nor is it so strange knowing about the compatibility test of the Toyota Yaris II against the Volvo 940 (64 k / h each and 50% overlap).
And let's not say about the compatibility test of the Renault Modus against the same Volvo 940 tb. at 64 kph each and 50% overlap.
Regards
Manolom.
Elle était fiable surtout malgré le point faible de la corrosion aile arrière
I think the car can be restored back to its former glory! I'm not sure about the occupants though!
I just bought one today "GULP!"
Just don't crash it. Btw you are lucky this car was a rally legend
@@EngiNetion it's very early UK import L reg was the 1st year and it's a Jan 73 right at the end of 1st year production
@@edgarbeat275 Nice! You are lucky to own one!
God bless airbag inventors!
1:19 what a fuck gas filler cap ahahha!
so you been in the business whats your name and what school did you go to then for crash safety.
How fast are these cars going? I'm surprised this is not written on the side of the car as I have seen in many test.
WHEREISTHEREASON 35mph.
Where do you obtain such footage?
better than renault KWID.
1:51 / 1:55 like a boss
No good. If it were involved in an offset frontal test, like today's crash standards, it would be horrific !!!
Uh , it is surprisingly good for a car from this era , i mean you'd still be in an awful shape but...
Old European cars were much better designed than American cars...
I got hit head on in mine and all I got was a bruise from the shoulder belt
*most american cars. A few GM cars were actually quite safe. They actually did some crash testing and crumple zones. But please note: Very few did though. :p
But it's the old-style test though. Where you drive it directly into an object that is at a 90 degree angle. I bet it wouldn't do as well on an offset test, and it would be shocking in a side-impact.
Really? the 80´ american cars looks all the same, like when a kid draw a car in the kinder
Although it appeared not too bad the blunt trauma would and can be fatal and head trauma serious... renault back then knew nothing of car safety
What is he speed ??
50km-h
Gotta love the French gas cap..
It turned into a Le Carcass
was it imported to US?
*****
Merci
+"The calling" Otis Imported by American Motors and sold and serviced by AMC dealers.
yes it was in the US under the AMC Renault Le Car from 1976-1984.
What is the deal with the gas cap?? If it's that difficult I'll just stuff a rag in there. lol
My cousin died on this car
Maintenant no auto se son des machines a laver programee pour la panne
blunt trama the head hit the steering wheel in away where it wouldn't have cause serious injuries. They obv knew more about safety then you give them credit for besides Volvo and Benz back then this car faired pretty good in this crash compared to dodge ford and gm products where they would crumple up like a tin can just look at their small cars in this era and see how bad they were.
Bu araça 5 yıldız verenin aklını seveyim
a 10 km/h fai un ncap e di questa scatola ne rimmarra un pezzo d'arte contemporanea e ti fa sbucare il volante dal culo
Non potrà uscir peggio della Fiat Seicento, costruita 25 anni dopo questa.
how did that shit box not turn to a pancake
+marcus colvin
The engine is what protects the car from frontal accidents and avoids the body from being more crashed.
How is that a shitbox?
1980 cars don't have airbag lol
some of them dont have airbags but some has airbags couse airbags are made in 1970s
There is no airbag..
It did GREAT at ITS time. But now....... WTF IS THAT SAFTEY
IT WILL GET POOR AND INNADEQUIT IN EURONCAP AND IIHS
it was a deathtrap at any time, but good gar to ride , still nbow it's fun
Cazzo nemmeno il tappo della benzina riesce a mettere 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Le Crap
Dead
Jesus died for us all. please give your lives to him, he loves you!🙏🙏❤️
fake!$
How is this fake? You saw the video, it isnt fake.
at very low speed but making it appear a fast violent impact. EVERY ONE KNOWS THAT A RENAULT 5 WOULD BE OBLITTERATED IN A CRASH
15 km/h maybe?
not every old small car is poorly built 😉
the impact was at 40 mph
Shit box
Some roll on the 5s. But that was their charm
4:12 those floor papers they always have on new cars to keep the car clean are still there they really did not touch the car much if those are there. and to think the design has not changed at all after all these years
Takúto R5 vlastním... Radšej budem jazdiť opatrnejšie!
Poučné video. marian10xR