[KyleL]

I wonder what they're going to do with the npp exhaust on the crash test car.


GM.....ill take it off your hands

[Heavymetal454]

[QUOTE=Zeke.Malvo;9111744]I've dealt with hundreds of traffic incidents, and those conditions (40 mph vs fixed object) are super rare unless, more often than not, the result of driving impaired (DUI). That, or the driver suffered a medical emergency where they likely died before impact and were unable to hit the breaks.

i guess I'm not understanding. Why does it matter if it's a tree or other object. Wouldn't two cars traveling at 20 mph have the same effect? As an aside if I'm parked and a car hits me at 40 I can't say I wasn't moving therefore the damage should have been less. Just trying to see the difference.

[SilverTurtle]

why couldn't they all have been red cars? totaled out a perfectly good hyper blue and plum crazy car... such a waste

[MLL67RSSS]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

This now famous video shows that clearly...

The thing that has always kind of bothered me about that test was the vintage car they chose to use. The '59 -'64 Chevy's were of the "X" frame design which for fairly obvious reasons was abandoned due to is inherent weaknesses. Wonder what the test would have looked like had they used an old car with a full perimeter frame.

[Zeke.Malvo]

[QUOTE=Heavymetal454;9112962]

Originally Posted by Zeke.Malvo

I've dealt with hundreds of traffic incidents, and those conditions (40 mph vs fixed object) are super rare unless, more often than not, the result of driving impaired (DUI). That, or the driver suffered a medical emergency where they likely died before impact and were unable to hit the breaks.

i guess I'm not understanding. Why does it matter if it's a tree or other object. Wouldn't two cars traveling at 20 mph have the same effect? As an aside if I'm parked and a car hits me at 40 I can't say I wasn't moving therefore the damage should have been less. Just trying to see the difference.

I'm saying it's rare on city streets to be involved in a collision like this unless you are DUI. Even if you substitute it as oncoming traffic, one or both drivers are likely to be DUI. But I do see it much more often with a fixed object than an oncoming car.

I don't understand your second argument/question. I don't see a realistic scenario where that would come to play. I can't think of any location in my city where you would be parked facing the wrong way in a 40+ zone. At that point it's much more likely to be a side swipe.

[SpookShow'84]

I know a guy with that EXACT '59 Chevy, down to the paint and everything. The first time I drove it I remember the dash being so beautiful, my next thought was, "man it would really suck to eat the dash in this thing". The car didn't have seatbelts. If I were to smack something in the Gen6 I feel a whole lot better and what the outcome will be.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by MLL67RSSS

The thing that has always kind of bothered me about that test was the vintage car they chose to use. The '59 -'64 Chevy's were of the "X" frame design which for fairly obvious reasons was abandoned due to is inherent weaknesses. Wonder what the test would have looked like had they used an old car with a full perimeter frame.

I'm not sure it would matter to the passenger compartment, very much. That was one of the biggest downfalls of the body-on-frame designs....any frame, really.

[SayHelloToMyLittleFriend]

How many in here even checked the IIHS ratings before buying their Camaro? Or would not buy one because it wasn't a TOP pick?

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by SayHelloToMyLittleFriend

How many in here even checked the IIHS ratings before buying their Camaro? Or would not buy one because it wasn't a TOP pick?

The issue is Camaro fans don't think about it........unless it was really bad. BUT those just looking for a nice 2.0t sporty coupe? They are more likely yo add this to their consideration list. And those folks? They don't come here.

[agl_bst]

Originally Posted by SayHelloToMyLittleFriend

How many in here even checked the IIHS ratings before buying their Camaro? Or would not buy one because it wasn't a TOP pick?

I actually checked for a rating but couldnt find one. I havent tried searching again though. Unless its terrible it isnt going to sway my purchase.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by BigRedViking

Even a minor accident can be fatal. Just look at what happened to Dale Earnhardt. That wreck didn't look serious, and compare it to the Richard Petty crash. Everything helps.

What? That was a horrific crash. Earnhardt t-boned the wall at nearly 200 mph, practically coming to a stop in an instant. Crashes don't really get much worse than that in motor racing.

[charlie46]

I believe the 2013 camaro gen 5 scored higher and earned a top safety pick in all categories than the 6 gen camaro.

[BigRedViking]

I didn't mean to undermine the severity of Dale Earnhardt's fatal crash. He was my favorite driver, and I was very sad to see him go. What I wanted to convey is that even minor accidents can be fatal, and that safety features can be the difference between life and death. When I purchased my 2016 Camaro I knew that it hadn't been safety rated, but I purchased it anyway. Because I believed that GM wouldn't produce an unsafe vehicle. Especially with the recent faulty ignition lawsuit, and switchblade key recall. I think emergency braking systems are a great idea because it's the panic situation, or the things that the driver doesn't see that can really be a life saver. The roof can be reinforced, and safety systems can be added. Maybe it's just something that GM is still developing.

[fastball]

Originally Posted by charlie46

I believe the 2013 camaro gen 5 scored higher and earned a top safety pick in all categories than the 6 gen camaro.

They've changed the rating system since then. Now it's harder to get the top safety pick because under the old system pretty much every car was getting the top ratings.