The old Volvo 240? Crash design has come a long way
And here are the grisly pictures to prove it!
This caused a minor uproar on the Brickboard. http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/02003.htm Want to see something really scary, though? Look at the Chevy Astro. http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/96024.htm http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fr...96024_1_29.jpg Note: The MB E-Class did quite well, especially the 2000 and later models. As did the M-Class. -Sam |
Aw man, it just HAD to be a DIESEL that they wrecked,
|
That astro van looks far much worse than that fatal car accident I witnessed on Valentine's day involving a Ford Bronco:eek:
|
How'd you find that? Browsing the IIHS website, you can't even pull up the '83 test results from the menus... if they have other old cars up there, I'd love to see the results..
|
I wonder
Which is a safer car? The Benz W123 or the Volvo 240 series? That'd be an interesting comparison. I'd think the Benz (slightly heavier) but maybe I am a bit biased? :D
|
Re: I wonder
Quote:
|
I Wonder
Its interesting that they used a Diesel 240, but would the results be the same for a Gas?, since the Diesel is a straight 6 not a 4, this must have some effect on the front impact with less room for absorbtion than a 4.
I also remember watching a documentary once, about Volvo safety and how they would send out a factory team to crash sites involving a Volvo to research it. I wonder if they still do that?. |
Quote:
For the record, I never liked the 240 series much anyways, except in wagon form with the intercooled Turbo and 4-speed manual with o/D. Here's a test of an MB E-class a couple generations newer than the W123. http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/97005.htm Note how much it improved in the 2000 update. http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/00027.htm Quote:
The diesel is something like 6 inches longer than the gas 4. I wonder if that had something to do with the impact protection. -Sam |
Comparison Volvo 240 <--> W 123?
The W 123 would be the winner. The structure of the Volvo was too stiff, the front end wouldn't absorb the impact as the Mercedes does. Anothe aspect is the material choosed for the interior. Mercedes choosed better materials which wouldn't splinter as the plastic in the Volvo does. The Volvo was a great car, no question. But a lot of it safe reputation came from the drivers, which tend to have been the calmer ones. But the W 123 would be the safer car in pretty much all aspects. Kind regards Eberhard |
Re: The old Volvo 240? Crash design has come a long way
Quote:
Go look at the Honda Civic: http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle%5Fratings/ce/html/00031.htm It is one hulluva safe little car. I'd take a new Honda anything over a W123 any day if safety was my only buying factor. Was the W123 or W126 the king in it's day? Maybe. Probably. Likely. How would they stack up today? Well, 20-30 years of development really has left them in the dust. |
Quote:
Well, sure, they're fairly simple and reliable old cars, but those are their greatest advantages. They aren't that safe, and I'd much rather wreck into a 240 in a new Mini Cooper or Audi A4 (both cars which placed VERY highly on offset crash testing). The 240 went out of production in 1993 because "it couldn't meet US side impact standards" for one reason. Sure, they were good back then, but.... -Sam |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:26 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website