>For a long time, adult NHSTA and IIHS tests used a 1970s 50%-ile male dummy, which is 5'9" and 171lbs. ... >For reference, in 2019, the average weight of a U.S. adult male was 198 lbs and the average weight of a U.S. adult female was 171 lbs. So the average mass of the American male has increased 15% in 50 years! No data on whether he is taller, but I'd bet the BMI has gone up.
Referencing the same line, I remember seeing another article on HN somewhat recently about the downside to taking averages of a human to fit specs since the "average"(mathematical mean of measurements) human never existed in reality. Something about fitting pilots to a cockpit?
How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
81–90 of 352 posts
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#82The article reminds me of a story from a friend that was an engineer at a major water heater company. Modern electric water heaters are already fairly efficient, but every model gets tested by the government to be given an efficiency rating. The test consists of replacing the anode with a rod that has a series of temperature probes to measure the water at different levels in the water heater. Since water would form l…
Serious question, how is this different from what VW did? There was a lot of talk about complicit engineers vs. shady management in that discussion. Did this ever make it to production?
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#83The whole car safety topic is very confusing. Car accidents is top1-top2 death reason in US for people in 20-40 age group [1]. Probably less in Europe but still one of the leading ones. I was thinking about how I can make myself safer. Which car brand/model is better? Which seat is better for passenger? How much riskier it is to drive during the night? In the rain? How dangerous is it to overtake on road with 1 lane…
You're right that there aren't meaningfully significant differences between car brands. Driving itself is just very dangerous. Other forms of transportation like buses, trains, and airplanes are orders of magnitude safer.[0] If you want to make yourself safer, avoid driving as much as possible. [0] https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics...
For almost everyone 18-40 year old, driving less is one of the healthiest decisions you can make.
A little nitpick: Motorcycling, cycling, and walking are all significantly worse than traveling by car.
If this interests you, it's possible to find a lot more interesting research by searching for "microlife" and "micromort".
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only safe way to drive an F1 car is with remote control.
No, you could also safely drive an F1 car from the driver’s seat by limiting your speed to 40 km/h.
I doubt a normal driver would be able to drive a F1 at any speed. Just keeping it below 40 km/h would be impossible.
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#85The article reminds me of a story from a friend that was an engineer at a major water heater company. Modern electric water heaters are already fairly efficient, but every model gets tested by the government to be given an efficiency rating. The test consists of replacing the anode with a rod that has a series of temperature probes to measure the water at different levels in the water heater. Since water would form l…
Serious question, how is this different from what VW did? There was a lot of talk about complicit engineers vs. shady management in that discussion. Did this ever make it to production?
VW actively detected if the car was on a treadmill testing setup and electronically changed the engine parameters to make it run cleaner.
The water heater was designed with the test in mind but functions the same regardless.
VW was clearly cheating whereas the water heater is taking advantage of known deficiencies in the test (is that cheating?).
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#86Does anyone know of a way to objectively compare safety ratings between different eras of cars? The standards for safety ratings change periodically, and great strides have been made in safety. I'm curious how much risk I'd remove by upgrading from a 2010 to a 2015 or 2018. Driver death data [1] mentioned below may be the best source, just curious if there are any others. Also, [2] is a really interesting crash test…
> https://youtu.be/IVEjsvip8kc
Starting at 1:30, there's a 1998 vs 2015 Corolla. Manufacturers only started taking the small overlap frontal test seriously in 2015 (it was introduced in 2012). If you can afford not to, you really don't want to be driving a car older than that. The safety improvements that have been made in the last 10 years alone make a new car worth it.
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Drive the largest vehicle you can. When in a collision the momentum is converted to crushing force, you want to be in the less-crushable vehicle. Hey this may be an unpopular choice, but it is the one with the biggest safety impact! And that was the question.
Correction: you want to be in the vehicle with the most crushable distance of material. That way the force is spread out more over time and there's less going through your body at any moment.
Given enough mass, you won't experience any noticeable deceleration during a collision! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWToJxKYRSc
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me of the fact that my grandmother who recently passed away at 96 refused to make left turns. She stopped driving years ago, but before she did, my father would always help her find a way to get to the pharmacy, the grocery store, church, and family and friends houses making only right turns. Sometimes she went miles out of her way.
Your grandmother was onto something. UPS does the same thing: https://www.businessinsider.com/ups-efficiency-secret-our-tr...
They make lefts, but they do routing in advance and heavily prioritize routing using right turns. There is no hard and fast "zero left turns" routing policy or driver policy.
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#89The whole car safety topic is very confusing. Car accidents is top1-top2 death reason in US for people in 20-40 age group [1]. Probably less in Europe but still one of the leading ones. I was thinking about how I can make myself safer. Which car brand/model is better? Which seat is better for passenger? How much riskier it is to drive during the night? In the rain? How dangerous is it to overtake on road with 1 lane…
The way to make yourself safer is to move to one of the few American cities and towns with walking and transit-oriented development. Seriously! You'll spend a fewer hours in the car risking car accident death. A family can easily downsize to one car or less. You'll also spend more time getting light exercise by walking to the bus/train, walking to the store, walking for enjoyment. You'll also save from no longer buyi…
Unfortunately, we will also have to start taking into account pathogen transmission risk on public transport.
If you have a larger family and a limited budget, suburbs are the best of both worlds.
Also cars are quite reasonable unless you want new ones before their useful life is exhausted. A modern car will usually last 25+ years, which is more than many homes before they need major renovation (new roof, windows, etc. in the US).
Re: How well do cars do in crash tests they're not optimized for?
#90The article reminds me of a story from a friend that was an engineer at a major water heater company. Modern electric water heaters are already fairly efficient, but every model gets tested by the government to be given an efficiency rating. The test consists of replacing the anode with a rod that has a series of temperature probes to measure the water at different levels in the water heater. Since water would form l…
Serious question, how is this different from what VW did? There was a lot of talk about complicit engineers vs. shady management in that discussion. Did this ever make it to production?
The big difference with VW is that they put in a mechanism that detects the test and completely changed the behavior of the car for the test.