Vehicles of Guru3D

Discussion in 'The Guru's Pub' started by -Ruin-, Sep 29, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tom F

    Tom F Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,821
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Saab 900
    This is definitely true - and probably a large part of the reason why American cars (still) have a dreadful reputation for build quality and reliability in Europe. They're huge cars built to a price. Something the size of a BMW 7 series built to cost the same as an entry level VW Golf will obviously have had corners cut somewhere along the way.

    Neither is wrong or right - they're just very different.
     
  2. Copey

    Copey Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,710
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    960 2GB
    That swift is not bad, i origionally wanted one but they dont do a turbo version so didnt end up getting one.
     
  3. mixalis9

    mixalis9 Master Guru

    Messages:
    317
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    gtx 1080 ti
    yea i also prefer the swift sport to be turbo but for a non turbo car 0-100 for 8.9 its good.. i installed a new exhaust system and new air filter and i love the sound. only downside its hard to find a tuning program for suzuki.. their original engine settings are difficult to change!
     
  4. Rich_Guy

    Rich_Guy Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,578
    Likes Received:
    600
    GPU:
    MSI 2070S X-Trio
    Get the **** in!!!, garage have just phoned, i pick me Rocco up next Friday :D
     

  5. humonculus1987

    humonculus1987 Banned

    Messages:
    484
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    evga GeForce GTX560 Ti
    LOL 8.9 seconds to 60 is NOT good. My old honda prelude with a tiny lil engine did it in like 7 seconds back in the late 90's.
     
  6. IcE

    IcE Don Snow Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,693
    Likes Received:
    73
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX 1070 Mini
    He said 0-100, not 0-60. Even my Minivan can do 0-60 in less than 7 seconds.
     
  7. Cartman372

    Cartman372 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,469
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    980 FTW
    I'm happy with my fullsize SUV that can do 0-60 in a bit under 10 seconds...

    Then again it does weigh about 2 tons...and has the aerodynamic properties of a brick
     
  8. FULMTL

    FULMTL Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,704
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    AOC 27"
  9. scheherazade

    scheherazade Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    fullHDs
    Big cruisers have a lot of sound insulation. Sometimes you can't even tell the engine is on.

    They also are sprung soft with soft dampers. Their weight helps them stay steady.
    (albeit this does kill their cornering ability.)

    They "flow" over the road, slowly pitching and rolling, but never jarring.
    You can glide over a speed bump like it's not even there.
    You can go over a pothole like it's not even there.

    -scheherazade
     
  10. scheherazade

    scheherazade Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    fullHDs
    That video also said that the passengers probably would have not survived.

    The small car provided little deceleration time (short nose).
    A longer car has more time to crumple, and spread the deceleration out over time.

    Also, I'd hate to lose my legs in that little smart.



    Anyways, it's a car vs a concrete wall.

    Car vs car, if everyone drove a small car, we'd all be safer.

    Materials are the same strength, small or large.
    Larger cars have more mass pushing on the material, causing it to deform more.

    If people crashed small car into small car, it'd be less destructive.

    -scheherazade
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2011

  11. kwak

    kwak Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,553
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Geforce 560 ti
    While the time taken to decelerate the car does have something to do with the crash safety of a car, its not just the length of the nose that matters. There are huge differences between the material used between different cars. The steel used in the cage of that smart is seriously tough, much stronger then what you will find on normal cars. also why it's not as light as you would imagine for such a small car. Therefore, while the smart may not have as much space to crumple, that doesn't mean that it doesn't absorb the energy from a crash.
    Just look at the crash tests from some of those chinese SUV's for example. If your reasoning is correct, they should be much safer then a smart in a crash, because they have a big nose, but i know what car i would rather be in.
     
  12. The Chosen 1

    The Chosen 1 Master Guru

    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    2x 6870 MSI TwinFrozer II
    Lol ... you don't need a 2 ton car for that behavior... my car is an old Golf III (1995) with very soft suspension ... weights less then a ton and has exactly that behavior ... I hate it. I want a car, not a boat. This kind of suspension is for old farts that hardly press the gas pedal. I have a friend with a VW Scirroco ... It can do corners that would make my car easily slide off the road...

    Would trade a sportier suspension for extreme comfort any day and judging from what most new Europeans cars have, so do most people.

    Also, my dad's Renault Mégane (normal car in Europe) has a diesel engine, weights 1200kg and you almost don't hear the engine when inside. And diesels make a lot of noise.
     
  13. scheherazade

    scheherazade Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    fullHDs
    The smart is well built, for sure.

    But regardless it can't give the driver back his legs [see crushed bottom in that video].

    Plus the less the car crushes, the harder you hit your seatbelt/wheel.

    There needs to be a balance.

    The problem with the smart is that it leaves so little room to crush, that you the driver have to soak up most of the energy into your belt/wheel (and legs - ouch).

    And the crap Chinese SUVs go off the [opposite] deep end, lots of crushing and no rigid body.

    -scheherazade
     
  14. scheherazade

    scheherazade Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    fullHDs
    I hate it too. Which is why I won't buy one.
    But people that are 'old farts at heart' just eat them up.

    -scheherazade
     
  15. Nbz

    Nbz Master Guru

    Messages:
    942
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Sapphire HD6850 1000/1150
    That smart car crash video is unrealistic.
    70Mph crash = over 120KM/h into a bloody concrete wall??
    I mean seriously? Car vs Car crashes would be a hell lot different so yea, its safe to assume that every car on the road has enough safety standards but obviously, some have more than others.
     

  16. kwak

    kwak Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,553
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Geforce 560 ti
    Yes, in that video it doesn't do good. but i wonder how many cars would do good in a 70mph crash test into a concrete barrier. The only car I have seen tested is the smart, there is no real way to know how other cars do in that test.
     
  17. IcE

    IcE Don Snow Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,693
    Likes Received:
    73
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX 1070 Mini
    What? They test another car in the same video right after the Smart.
     
  18. kwak

    kwak Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,553
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Geforce 560 ti
    Sorry, I didnt see it through to the end, please ignore that post. :leave:
     
  19. thatguy91

    thatguy91 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,644
    Likes Received:
    98
    GPU:
    XFX RX 480 RS 4 GB
  20. ElementalDragon

    ElementalDragon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,308
    Likes Received:
    7
    GPU:
    eVGA RTX 2070
    Being a Smart owner... i have to say you should probably look into some information about both the Smart, and about traffic accidents.

    For one... yes... that video was quite brutal, but also isn't really any form of actual crash safety test i've ever seen. Not to mention that in such a crash you'd be more likely to die from internal bleeding due to the basically 70mph-0mph deceleration in less than a second than you would be alive and worrying about the possible loss if your legs.

    Two, even the IIHS frontal offset crash they did with the Mercedes C-class i believe wasn't a required crash test... so much so that they actually call it a "non-standard frontal offset crash". I believe they said that the reason they call it as such is because that scenario happens in less than 1% of all traffic accidents.

    Three, Yes, there isn't much of a crumple zone.... but they have done some extra bits to help make the driver safe during a crash.... such as a seatbelt tension limiter, which gently eases up on the tension of the seatbelt in a crash to try to prevent injuring the chest with the seatbelt, and a collapsible steering wheel to give the driver extra room.

    Four... you're also looking at the deceleration from the crash into the concrete wall.... or any equal/heavier weight object, in what seems like a completely one-sided fashion. Yes, technically due to the Smart's small crumple zone, there is very little time between the initial impact, and the deceleration to 0mph. But even with the larger car crashing into the wall at 70mph, the deceleration is negligibly better at best. You'd still more than likely be dead from internal injury either way.

    Figured i'd find and download those pictures of the guy's Smart that was in an accident that i mentioned.... to show you the difference between a car hitting a brick wall that has no crumple whatsoever, and a car hitting any vehicle, which can also deform.

    Keep in mind... this wasn't a Smart hitting a Chevy Aveo or Toyota Fit or some crappy car like that.... this was a Smart hitting an SUV broadside at 50mph with no chance to hit the brakes.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    And the one you might find more surprising... in regards to your comment about there being no legs left....

    [​IMG]

    No noticable intrusion into the footwells.... or even into the cabin at all, really. That's the accident he walked away from without a scratch, opening the door as if nothing had happened. As far as i can tell, the only thing that really happened to the inside besides the airbags was the instrument cluster popping off.... which can be done by hand, too.... and was probably just jarred free during the impact. Extremely short wires, so it doesn't have any chance of going anywhere far. The mirror also seems to be on the passenger seat. As for the piece of black plastic on the passenger seat... i'm not exactly sure, but that kinda looks like it COULD BE part of the ventliation system for the heat/AC, above and in front of where the passenger's feet would be. But it kinda seems more likely that it was a chunk from under the "hood" of the car that snapped off and was thrown into the car so it wouldn't be lying on the street or something. kinda looks like it has some discoloration from some kind of dirt or dust. Doesn't look very shiny black to be something inside the car where nothing would come in contact with it.

    I may sound like i'm biased towards the Smart or something... but as he put it.... "you don't believe how safe it is until you're actually in an accident with it."
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2011
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page