Crash Test: Ford 150 vs Mini

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 27, 2004 | 08:48 AM
  #1  
SiGGy's Avatar
Thread Starter
Moderator Alumnus
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 2
From: Lenexa, KS
Crash Test: Ford 150 vs Mini

http://www.bridger.us/2002/12/16/Cra...operVsFordF150

Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 08:54 AM
  #2  
DISRUPTV's Avatar
Full-Time IDIoT---DoH!!!
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,654
Likes: 16
From: DUMB ISLAND
typical american engineering philosohy:

"if it isnt a minivan, it doesnt need to be safe"





unbelieveable....almost even mind boggling imo


"
Wow. Both of these vehicles hit the exact same off-set barrier at 40mph. Now there's no question what would win in a head-on collesion between the two but then again the majority of accidents involve only a single car. All you have to do is look at the dummy's legs and you can get an idea of what would happen if you hit a wall in either car. The MINI had almost no intrusion which "indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained very well" - the F150 on the other hand had "Major collapse of the occupant compartment that left little survival space for the driver."
Im interested in how a company could create a modern vehicle that could perform so badly on this test. Furthermore Ford had lots of space to work with to make this a safe vehicle. For BMW/MINI to do the job in 1/4 the space is what engineering is all about.

Keep in mind also this is the best selling vehicle in the US. One would think that Ford, knowing this, would have put more effort into the engineering of this truck. It gets worse; this platform is also the basis of both the Ford Expedition and to some extent the Ford Excursion. Both are marketed to be tough, safe, go anywhere SUVs and are sold as family transportation
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 08:55 AM
  #3  
einsatz's Avatar
I miss my 03 CL-S :(
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,140
Likes: 445
From: Washington, DC
yikes
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 08:57 AM
  #4  
jimcol711's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 6,227
Likes: 0
From: Milwaukee, WI
thats fuckin sad man. that truck should NOT collapse like that. give me a break. kudos to MINI for being a safe vehicle in spite of its size, that F-150 is a POS for collapsing like that
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 08:58 AM
  #5  
Chaptorial's Avatar
Race Director
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 18,552
Likes: 4
From: Long Island, NY
Not good for the F-150:

Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 09:29 AM
  #6  
astro's Avatar
Community Architect
robb m.
25 Year Member
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 72,841
Likes: 660
From: ON
that is the previous generation of F150 don't forget.
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 09:30 AM
  #7  
brianlin87's Avatar
ASM I.S. Design FTW.
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,585
Likes: 4
From: The OC
^^ i thot the new F-150s were made w/ some new steel
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 09:36 AM
  #8  
F23A4's Avatar
Senior Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 18,017
Likes: 1,737
Originally posted by brianlin87
^^ i thot the new F-150s were made w/ some new steel
Dont expect any revelation in safety features for the new F150. F150 buyers are more focused on utility than safety.
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 09:43 AM
  #9  
dallison's Avatar
registered pw
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 38,859
Likes: 366
From: south central pa
"the information comes form a recent article in teh New yorker"

are we sure this wasnt written by a ac-l member??????
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 09:43 AM
  #10  
dallison's Avatar
registered pw
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 38,859
Likes: 366
From: south central pa
the new ford still blows
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 10:10 AM
  #11  
mrsteve's Avatar
Team Owner
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 36,474
Likes: 249
From: Leesburg, Virginia
Originally posted by dallison
"the information comes form a recent article in teh New yorker"

are we sure this wasnt written by a ac-l member??????
@ teh ghey writer
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 10:49 AM
  #12  
GINge!'s Avatar
Health's Angels
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,634
Likes: 2
From: Ottawa, Ontario
There's a bit of a delta in the momentum between a F150 and a mini at the moment of impact though.
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 10:58 AM
  #13  
CLpower's Avatar
teh Senior Instigator
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 44,094
Likes: 980
From: Huntington Beach, CA -> Ashburn, VA -> Raleigh, NC -> Walnut Creek, CA
it should also be noted the mini is one of the safest cars on the road
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 10:59 AM
  #14  
Shawn S's Avatar
Team Owner
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 20,014
Likes: 0
From: Hellertown, Pa. USA
Originally posted by F23A4
Dont expect any revelation in safety features for the new F150. F150 buyers are more focused on utility than safety.
NO WAY…. The new version of the F150 is MUCH improved over the one picture in this article.
In the Insurance Institute tests, it went from the WORST rating to their HIGHEST.
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 11:44 AM
  #15  
Pure Adrenaline's Avatar
Dragging knees in
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,434
Likes: 33
From: Seattle Area
The F-150's best defense against collision was its size and weight, not safety engineering. Same with GM.

The Jimmy/Blazer snapped its roof in half at highway speed collisions.
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 01:40 PM
  #16  
SiGGy's Avatar
Thread Starter
Moderator Alumnus
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 2
From: Lenexa, KS
If some people took the time to read the article in it's entirety. They would have read the last paragraph which states Ford has made changes to the new F150 to meet safety regulations.
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 03:01 PM
  #17  
mystikk's Avatar
failhard.
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,546
Likes: 10
From: Alaska
Those rims don't look like F-150...Looks more like Chevy Silverado? I could be wrong. =/

Newbie herre btw, say hi to A-CL's first Alaskan member.
Reply
Old May 27, 2004 | 05:00 PM
  #18  
mantis23's Avatar
Moderator Alumnus
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 17,856
Likes: 0
From: Carrollton, Texas
and I was just about to ask if that was the 04 f150...well, I hope they increased the structural integrity of the newer model
Reply
Old May 28, 2004 | 08:47 AM
  #19  
DarkSithCL's Avatar
Be Strong AND Courageous!
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 9,305
Likes: 43
From: Joshua 1:1-9
Quess I need to really research these trucks and cars before puttting my kids in one when they start driving...
Reply
Old May 28, 2004 | 09:41 AM
  #20  
kaih's Avatar
Instructor
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area, CA
Take a mouse and an elephant. Have them charge one another. Elephant destroys mouse. Drop both off a 3 story building. Mouse lives, elephant stew. The 150 has more mass and energy to deal with when you run it into solid concrete wall.
Reply
Old May 28, 2004 | 09:48 AM
  #21  
kevin79925's Avatar
Drifting
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,879
Likes: 1
From: Houston
Reply
Old May 28, 2004 | 02:12 PM
  #22  
nandowong's Avatar
Work safe avatar bish :D
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,056
Likes: 0
From: Avon Park/Gainesville FL
Reply
Old May 28, 2004 | 11:24 PM
  #23  
aciurczak's Avatar
Advanced
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area, CA
What Kaih said, exactly.

Tell me what kind of accident I'm going to have, and I'll tell you what vehicle I'd prefer to drive. If it is a one-car accident vs. an immovable wall, I'd prefer the absolute lightest car that is built reasonable well. If it is with another vehicle, I'd want the biggest Hummer with a snowplow in front. All pickup trucks would look similar to the picture posted above, but certainly there is some room for improvement.

F=MA works pretty much everywhere, so something that weighs 5000 lbs instead of 2500 lbs has to deal with twice as much force given the same acceleration (deceleration). It's not like they can put in metal that is twice as strong, and it's not like they can make the hood 7 feet long to make the crush space twice as long (to provide equal protection to a car half the weight with 3.5 feet of crush space)
Reply
Old May 30, 2004 | 07:10 AM
  #24  
clorich's Avatar
Pro
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
From: Spring Hill, FL
^^^


But then again, I saw the result of a head-on '98 Accord vs. Expedition. The accord driver was getting some bandages in the back of the ambulance and the Expedition driver was getting airlifted.
Reply
Old May 30, 2004 | 02:11 PM
  #25  
dfv3.2CL-S's Avatar
Burning Brakes
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 991
Likes: 8
From: Dallas area
Just remember one thing, the smaller the car the more rigid the chasis and safety cage, which leads to more intense and severe strains/sprain (whiplash) injury to the occupant of the small car. The simple reason for this is that the cage/crumpel zones do not absorp the majority of the g's forces upon the impact and everything or majority of the forces will be transfered to the person.

Remember Consumer Report several years ago they rated the VW Bettle as one of the safest car on the road due too integrity of passanger cabin.
Reply
Old May 30, 2004 | 02:47 PM
  #26  
madj80's Avatar
Instructor
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
From: Denver, CO
Now the question is, will the MINI survive an FX4 running over it? How about overhead airbags?
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CL-S progression 01
Car Parts for Sale
65
Jan 26, 2016 04:15 PM
InFaMouSLink
Car Parts for Sale
3
Oct 30, 2015 09:43 AM
detailersdomain
Wash & Wax
3
Oct 9, 2015 10:13 PM
brboy
2G RL (2005-2012)
5
Oct 5, 2015 11:34 AM
95oRANGEcRUSH
Car Talk
35
Sep 25, 2015 12:50 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:07 AM.