![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
AMA Supersport
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Richmond, Tx
Moto: '10 Tuono Factory
Posts: 4,569
|
![]()
UM no, i think they hit the car/truck w/ the same sled (truck sized). cars generally get a passing grade whereas these trucks didn't, but got a "poor" instead, even w/ side airbags.
__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ 2014 GROM! 181cc of FURY 2010 Aprilia Tuono Factory - SOLD 2009 SFV Gladius - SOLD 2008 Hayabusa - SOLD. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
SFL Expatriate #2
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Moto: CBR1000
Posts: 2,043
|
![]() Quote:
That's what I get for waking up a 3:00am to catch a flight... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
WSB Champion
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Anaheim, CA
Moto: 2009 Kawi ZX6R
Posts: 5,570
|
![]() Quote:
The problem isn't that the truck isn't stronger than cars, but rather the trucks do not move at all. Watch a car get hit from the side and it will move a foot, which in turn dissapates some of the energy.
__________________
Train Hard Ron Paul - 2012 Mark of Excellence GM |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
WERA White Plate
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Renton, WA
Moto: Ninja 650R
Posts: 1,920
|
![]()
What I got was that they hit the truck with a "car" and it passed. More structure in the rocker panel means it's stronger. Then they hit the truck with a "truck" and it didn't do so well.
A "truck" would hit a car higher in the door, where there's less structure. (higher even than the "truck" hitting the truck) It follows that a car would be worse off in a collision between a truck and a car.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | ||
Ride Like an Asshole
Join Date: Feb 2008
Moto: nothing...
Posts: 11,254
|
![]() Quote:
![]() No... Ridgeline FTMFW. ![]() Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
WERA White Plate
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Renton, WA
Moto: Ninja 650R
Posts: 1,920
|
![]()
It's definitely not perfect, but you need some kind of testing- otherwise you have nothing but marketing gimmicks. A lot like helmets. BSI, Snell, DOT, ECE... Who's right?
__________________
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Ride Like an Asshole
Join Date: Feb 2008
Moto: nothing...
Posts: 11,254
|
![]()
Not debating right, wrong, needed or not needed... Just saying this points out the weakness in the test.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 | |
Elitist
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Moto: Gix 750
Posts: 11,351
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Who gives a fuck if they are "less safe" than Snell/DOT |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Is this thing on?
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ashe Co, NC (Near Boone)
Moto: '01, 929RR
Posts: 398
|
![]()
I want to be a crash test dummy!
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 | |
Guys... where *are* we?
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South Carolina
Moto: SV650 Interstate, CX500 rat-bobber, whatever else runs.
Posts: 784
|
![]() Quote:
I think the main issue for the trucks is the center beam dividing the front and back halves of the cab. It's a long piece of metal, and since they're trying to keep it as slim as possible to shorten the overall cab length while providing a large opening, it's fairly narrow. I remember similar tests a few years back, done on extended-cab trucks with suicide rear doors and NO center column... they were really ugly ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|