Specifically the 70s 911s and 80s 944s. Head-to-head with a Honda Accord, how would the occupants of each car fare? Would you rather be t-boned in a Ford Taurus or 944... if you wanted to live, that is?

Thanks,
Sixto
95 S420
91 300SE
87 300SDL
83 300SD

911's would crumple in a head on crash. You'd probably lose your legs from the knees down. Hrm... maybe if you put a bunch of cardboard boxes in the nose, yeah... that's it

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

almost all the 9 hundred series except the all wheel drive ones wreck from lifting off at speed in a hard coner ,they usally hit backwards. A dealer told me in Col.OH where I grew up that the first 5 930's that they sold three wrecked backwards one was stolen and not recovered and the one remaining was owned by a doctor and was well and happy.I had a 53 356 at the time and as it was so underpowered it was hard to get in trouble with except when playing on gravel..........
William Rogers........

I'm no fan of Porches, but they are BUILT. They have more spot welds per inch than any car we have ever taken apart. This was an early 90's 911, and the structual engineering seemed as good as any Benz we have worked on. Sorry, but Kias are positively the worst we've seen. Actually saw spot welds separate under a low speed impact,,,, not good.

__________________
95 SL500 Smoke Silver, Parchment 64K
07 E350 4matic Station Wagon White 34K
02 E320 4Matic Silver/grey 80K
05 F150 Silver 44K

Porsche cars are very safe for the size and style of the car. Also, consider the era. Any 1970's car, no matter the make, cannot compete with the lowliest car built today.

Now, back to Porsche. Ask Paul Frere about Porsche safety. He has in a 100mph+ collision in a road going 996-series 911. He suffered a broken leg, and that was it. Pretty impressive.

But, you need to ask yourself, why ask this question? A 911, of any vintage, is a performance car. Rely on it's active safety, and assume the risk of driving a small, light, fun car. It's well worth the trade off, in my books.

I was in the Honda dealership recently and saw a fellow shopping for his first bike. He kept trying to get the salesperson to tell him which bike was the "safest." Huh? It's a freakin' motorcycle. None of them are "safe." The reason I ride a motorcycle is that it is anything but safe. Go buy some tank-like SUV and sip your latte, poseur.

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

911's were first penned in 1963 and in production 1964. They did'nt change a whole lot throughout its long production. They were way over engineered to begin with. It's one of the stoutest sports cars ever made. As far as safe goes thats a pretty relative concept. Care should observed with any high performance vehicle.
The correct setting up of the suspension and attending some PCA driving schools and track events would go along way to keeping oneself in a safe state of mind.

That said I totalled an early 911 on a dark spring night when a pickup without lights pulled out in front me I lost control in some sand and I went on a short but very rough off road adventure at 80mph. Hit a couple of pinion trees. Compressed the car real well. I was able to crawl out of it with a slightly compressed vertebra. I dont think I would have fairred as well in a honda accord. The 911 is a very tough car.

__________________
Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan "press on" has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
Calvin Coolidge (1872 - 1933)

The Car In Choice ..to your Question would be the LATE 944 Since the Late 944s had airbags ...The Early 911s were safe for the 70s ...Also The 944s are balanced ok with the trans in the rear ...they Handled better than The 911s
The 911s are great cars If You Know How To drive...If your NOT a Good driver with Several Hours in type..They can and Do Bite back HARD!
I Have Owned Several
69 911S/77 911/77 930/87 930/ 89 Speedster/01 996TT
Couple of 928 S and a 914/6
My Favorite was The 914/6 with a 2.8 Twin Plug Motor/ Close gears /930 Brakes..It Felt Like My Go Kart!

The 944 is'nt a true porsche in the sense that it's final assembly took place in Ingolstat; the audi factory. The 944 engine and transaxle subassembly were assembled in Zuffenhausen where the true porsches came from.
The 914 (one of the worlds best handling cars) was originally designed to be a VW. All the 914's exept the 914-6 were built at the VW plant. The 914-6 got its final assembly in Zuffenhausen.

The nasty handling charracteristics of the 911 can be almost completely dialed out with correct suspension setup and tire combinations. My 67 is setup for the vintage racing and only has a trace of trailing throttle oversteer which actually makes it very quick in the corners when driven with some enthusiasum.

__________________
Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan "press on" has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
Calvin Coolidge (1872 - 1933)

On my 1987 911 Turbo, I didn't find trailing throttle oversteer the main problem. It was there, but fairly easy to modulate unless you had REALLY overcooked the corner, but at that point no car would have made it through anyway. The only handling demon the Turbo had was boost lag. The power could come on instantly and really unsettle the car if you were trying to get on the gas early in the exit.

I had a 1969 911S that could keep with cars with WAY more power on a road that was bent even slightly. I pine for it now, but don't miss buying Porsche-priced parts.

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

Personally I think that a Porsche would be a very safe car Compare a 70's 911 to a 90's Miata close to the same size which would you rather be in?
As for Porschse's going backwards into the trees from what I have read they use Semi rear trailing arms which cause the car to slide in turns but also cause the car to be very unpredicable.

But remember you're buying fewer parts! No hydro clutch, no radiator, primitive ignition, no power steering, suspension consists of 6 pieces, your climate control consists of a length of ducting...

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

I should have paid more attention to the setup guy instead of drinking beeer. I think it changes your tire camber angle for the positive, which is negative, as you go around a turn.

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

yes thats the way I understand it as well which makes the car corner better.
It's also what my i has

I can personally vouch for Porsches hitting things backwards. I planted the backend of my 914 solidly into a telephone pole after spinning it out one night. I did the standard no-no with them ie lifted in a turn. It did fold up nicely and nobody was hurt.

Thanks for the contributions. I was asking about safety from the standpoint of getting hit (t-boned, rear ended or having some moron come at me in the wrong lane) rather than form the standpoint of not knowing it's limitations.

Sixto
95 S420
91 300SE
87 300SDL
83 300SD