smart ,smart commercial, smart car, smart fortwo, MCC smart, open your mind, kaputt, unfall, crash, destroyed, safety,70 miles an hour agains a concrete wall, what will happen,
FokkerBoombass While that may be true, if the vehicle performs well in a crash of this magnitude, it should mean that in a survivable crash you will suffer less injury. The point is that the structure of the vehicle has good integrity for a small vehicle.
As Paramedics we are trained about the 3 collisions. 1 The collision of the vehicle from 70mph to 0, 2. The collision of the body also traveling at 70mph into restraints (if equipped) 3. The collision of the internal organs of the body traveling at 70 mph into the body's wall. It's the third collision that usually is fatal.
I've been driving smart for 15 years, it's already the second I buy. However, it is enough to read certain comments to understand that there are people much much more stupid than me.
If you watched till the end, and listened to what they said, they stated its a very small chance of someone surviving in either situation. While your point is accurate, its like a child yelling out the sky is blue, in the middle of a science class when theyre talking about how clouds work. Very obvious, no point in you stating it.
NO, they are using this to sell these death traps. Many people have survived a 70 mph crash in standard vehicles because the metal in the front of the car absorbs a lot of energy. No significant amount of that energy is absorbed by any part of this car. the human occupants absorb it. All that bend steel in a standard car crash took a lot of energy to bend it.
It's a very safe car, I haven't heard anyone complaining after being in a head on collision as a driver or passenger of a Smart. A key safety feature is that you can open it's doors after a crash, so you can ask the intact occupants to say something if they're not feeling alright. In fact, the internet is full of Smart drivers that tell their magical stories of how their Smart was hit by trucks at 40mph from behind, flung across the intersection and only suffering a mild headache. They even drove away in their smart while the truck was totaled.
You don't hear anyone complain because dead people usually don't talk lmao, these test are a bunch of bogus. If you want a reasonable chance of surviving a serious crash, don't drive in something with the mass of a scooter.
I saw a photo of a smart car between to gravel trucks, the only way you knew the care was between the two trucks were the front wheel sticking out. The cage was flatten as were the occupants. One other thing larger care are design to take the energy of the crash and absorbed it in the body of the car not the body of the occupant. A long front end means you have feet to absorb energy in tenths of and inch.
Look at the steering wheel after the concrete impact in Smart Car. That steering wheel so far up the seat that it could have crushed the driver rib cage into his heart. Safe? I do not think so
@@alexispadilla2606 Uh.. no. The steering wheel is bolted onto the steering column, which goes down to the rack and pinion. You could crush the rack and pinion and the steering wheel wouldn't move much, until you start bending the column mounts and pushing it through the firewall. And you'd only be able to do that if you had a solid steering column, which most are going to have 2 u-joints in them. So again, no, the steering wheel will not eject at you during a collision. Crushing your front wheels has nothing to do with the way the steering wheel is secured to the chassis.
@@datsun100a3 It's just common sense to me, it baffles me that people don't understand the basics of cars. You don't understand something you'll barrel 75mph down the highway (or 180kmh down the autobahn) and you dont know the first thing about it. Shouldn't you know at least something about the vehicle you're operating?
mines not got velvet in it... basically all i get is plastic, reinforced frame, smart forfour (no longer made in the UK) and some stuff on the door which looks like it was made from some recycled black jeans..
Robin McLean you going to face greater injury with this vehicle as there's basically no deceleration where would the larger vehicle you would have deceleration and the mass would not be guaranteed to be stopped cold like with this little car although they did not test the car to his max because I've seen two gigantically huge fat people probably weighing in at 400lb each driving one of these cars I wouldn't exactly call that smart cuz I was like that poor little car
If you **HONESTLY** believe that...I've got some nice beachfront property on the middle of the coastline of the Florida peninsula to sell ya... Promise it to be dry, only a few gators. Largest problem is that for most cars (and I DO mean this...), you're not likely to be surviving the impact from 70->0 like that. It's a delusion to think "crumple zones" are going to burn up enough energy to keep from the decel they talk about in the video from killing you **ANYWAY**. In the end, no car's going to going to be "safe" like you're shoveling there. NONE of them.
I had an accident on a high way with my 1998 Toyota camry ( I wasn't wearing seat belt) on speed of about 80 km/h when I lost control over the car and crashed into the concrete the car is so strong and i was lucky to hit my head only to the driving weal. my friend hitted his head to the glass and we lost concessions for a while. he got his face cut close to his eye and his skull a little damge
My mum was in a big crash about 9 years ago. She was driving a Ford Ka (small runabout) as her Vauxhall Astra Estate was in for service. Another driver oncoming lost control (wasn't concentrating) and hit her at 60mph head on (120 mph combined speed). She had: 4 broken ribs, de-gloved left leg (clutch pedal took about 5 inches x 1.5 inches of tissue out), collapsed left lung, both feet broken, broken left hip, broken left knee, broken left tibia in 2 places, broken left fibula in 2 places, broken right fibula in 1 place, massive bruising everywhere. Essentially, the dashboard pushed her legs so far back that it shattered the bones, and the steering wheel broke her ribs which punctured her lung. They had to cut her out of the car and fly her to hospital. I will never forget the phone call nor my rush to the hospital, to see her lying in emergency department, totally spaced out on drugs. We all thought she wouldn't make it. But thanks to the NHS and some amazing surgeons they put her back together again. She was in hospital for the best part of 4 months and then (and still is) in considerable pain. Nearly 10 years later, she can manage to walk maybe a half mile per day, maximum. The rest of the time she uses a wheelchair. But she's alive - and she is driving again. She remembers nothing of the accident. All that from one person's inattention. That driver? She broke her leg, and later surrendered her driving licence. She was given a suspended sentence for driving without due care and attention - i.e. she didn't go to prison.
I had similar experience years ago. My car (Acura Legend) was rear ended by a Ford Taurus on the freeway at 80+ miles per hour. My car was stuck in traffic(not moving) and was hit by the Ford Taurus (much heavier car than mine) was coming in at 80+ per hour, lost control and rear ended my car. Half of my car was gone. I walked away without a scratch. The reason was that I stepped firmly on the brake with my hands firmed on the steering wheel than let go of the brakes when I felt the gforce was too much and and of course brake again when the car was out control. I believe my quick reflects saved my life. I also learned that you should not put the long pointed umbrella in the trunk because my umbrella worked like a spear and went through my front passenger seat. Luckily I had no passenger at the time.
The manufacturer automatically assumes you will require hand-operated controls for throttle and brakes when you order a second Smart Car to replace the wrecked one.
Ah, the car which uses your legs as its crumple zone. Very clever engineering and very eco friendly, using an organic crumple zone, why hasn't someone else thought of that earlier.
you'll probably die in any car if you hit a wall at 70mph. it doesn't matter if you're in an S Class or in a fiat 500. the instant deceleration will damage all of your internal organs and probably stop your heart. (usually the ribs break and puncture everything).
The cab of the car is still intact, however the user would be instantly killed by the inertia of the car hitting the wall. Also because the car doesn't have a large enough crumble space the force that the user would intake would be drastically larger than normal.
+zapcan59 Can you provide undisputable proof of this claim, such unedited video (video from a dash camera, for example) or non-doctored images of the damage, a copy of the police accident report and a copy of the insurance claim detailing the damage done to the vehicle?
Christopher0184 bro wtf relax you triggerd snowflake. Its a JOKE. YOU KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE? Or shall i provide evidence, examples facts and witnesses to explain what a joke is
Also the rigid frame saves the smart car making it "safer" but most cars have softer frames to absorb shock something that has been proven over decades of testing and actual driving to save lives. Meanwhile the metal smart frame dosnt give, so the force will go somewhere else (a.k.a. you). Also the smart car just looks bad. I'd never buy one.
Still will die from the impact . I mean just look at the dash and steering column. The driver will die from internal injuries. Smart cars are not safe.
Nihsel101 Not going to help. Ram a truck into a concrete wall and you'll still have the trash beat out of you by the steering column, dashboard, etc. However, against a soft and squishy little tin can car, your truck would hardly feel it, so I understand you there. Moral of the story - don't run full speed head on into concrete.
Thats true but also laws of physic come into play when a car or suv goes from 70 mph to 0. The Force of impact will be greater than what the human can survive in. Just look at Paul Walker's crash when Rodas crash the Carrera GT from 100+ to 0 towards a tree. Zero chance of survivability. Some claims say Walker was alive for 60 secs but he was unconscious during that time frame.
Nihsel101 Also a good point. Doesn't matter what you're in, coming to a dead stop at 70mph is hard to survive. But just saying, I'd rather be in that smart car than my 1970 Olds in just about every other kind of accident. Much more likely to survive in the Smart.
Now, do the exact same test again..only this time..ensure the car hits the wall PRECISELY head on evenly aka when the wall is exactly perpendicular to the road, because in this test it was at an angle.
I would have like to have seen the crashes done with crash test dummies. I think that there was a high chance that the driver would have been thrown out of the smart car.
Why would anyone want to drive this piece of crap? Not only is it unsafe, it looks horrendous. Want to save the environment? Save money? Then take public transport instead of driving this crap.
Why the hell do you think its not safe? If you crash into a wall with a heavy machine your car have to dissipate a lot more kinetic energy than if you weight a lot less, why do you think those cars pass NCAP tests?
Look at the overhead view at 0:44 -- they tell you to look at the windshield, but look at the floor, which meets the seat. G'bye, legs! And at 3:42, the effect is also seen, along with the "generous" clearance between the steering wheel and the seat back. But no one expects to survive a direct run into a concrete wall at 70mph.
a smart car is still a death trap... You legs would be destroyed, and even with the special seatbelt features, your collar bone would probably be broken, which leaves a chance of you not being able to breathe.
Even just the force of getting slammed into the seats and have the seat belt squash you would be enough to cause damage even going at 70mph I was in a crash at 75mph we smashed into a car in front then a car behind hit us to find out in front of us Their was a 7 car pile up it just happens so quickly but a smart car would be squashed in a front and rear end crash.
Actually it was never destroyed the legs would’ve been broken, maybe fruited, but nothing got into the leg area, now if something strange like the left half being curved, maybe you would have more trouble, but other than that it’s one of the safest subcompact cars it’s size
They should market Smart Cars as "One Stop Chop Drops." Regrettably, the seat belt lops its riders in 2 or 3 sections, but the upside is the entire remains of the car and its occupants drop nicely into a burial plot; saving your loved ones from the unwanted expense of junkyard and funeral home services.
If all cars were small like that it wouldn't be so bad, but you couldn't get me into one with all of the big cars it would have to go up against. No way would I want to be in an accident in one of those little boxes unless I had a death wish.
Problem with these cars is that they are footballs. If struck from the side with any force, they role for a log time. If struck from the read sufficiently, they will fly through the air for a field goal. The car may survive, but I'm not sure that the occupant will be so lucky.
This car is fantastic until you get hit by anything larger that a skateboard. Maybe a good alternative to a golf cart in an over 55 community. Even if you survived the crash, you’re likely to suffer extreme damage to your lower extremities. Sorry, not for me!
@Deaf And Destruction - I hear ya. I’ve always thought about getting a motorcycle until I visited my buddy in the hospital. Even with his helmet on and good protective clothing, he got pretty messed up when someone blew a light and hit him at about 35 mph.
I would drive one if they pay me. Heck I would drive one for the rest of my life and paycheck is a bonus a for driving it. What not to like? I get a free car and easy money.
Arif Azmi, First of all there not going to pay you, second is you have to buy it and pay for that piece of shit death trap when it breaks down. STILL WANT ONE???????? DIDN'T THINK SO. L O L
When I was a kid, in about 1964 I saw the results of a 1957 Pontiac Sedan that hit a '62 Chevy Wagon head-on, where both cars were going about 55 mph and neither left more than a few feet of skids. That big old Pontiac had its V8 in the center of the front bench seat pointed skywards. Those big old cars "felt safe" but in reality a Smart Car is safer than a '58 Cadillac. Sort of counterintuitive but true...
I dont think you understand what crumple zones are, those solid chassis will drive all that pressure straight into you rather than absorbing it, smart cars are extremely unsafe.
Yeah right.... Give me a strong old school car any day to go up with these toy cars today...and let's see who come out with a broken neck or a few bruises...most of been the smart car doing the thinking for you ol head...
Y'all act like its a bad thing to find your V8 on the bench seat. When that happens to me, I just whip out a wrench and change those pesky rear sparkplugs I could never quite reach. Thanks, karma! Say there, good buddy.... any chance you'd be willing to help me pull my head back through the windshield? Oh you're too kind. Yeah, just get a good grip on that windshield wiper and apply steady pressure on my forehead with your shoe. (Awe, looks like I might have gone a tad too far with the humor again.)
Are we to purchase vehicles for their ability to withstand concrete wall hits? Lighter overall vehicles on the road would actually be safer in car to car collisions.
crapfield500 Obviously I am not saying that numskull. Facetious much? Do you realize how bad a semi to semi collision still is? There is no cockpit design that can withstand that amount of mass in motion.
UncleSiam heres a direct quote from your post "Lighter overall vehicles on the road would actually be safer in car to car collision" Thats exactly what you said. IDIOT
It would have been nice to know the G forces on the occupants in both cases. It doesn't look like either would have survived (which this video stated), but knowing the G's would be useful added information. Mythbusters do a lot of crashes and nearly always measured G's on a dummy inside, as does of course official car crash testing.
"Added information...?" There was information? I think we already knew that concrete is more durable than a car and that cars make a lot of noise when they hit it.
Staged collisions are not real life situations. I have personally been on-scene as a first-responder at two "Smart Car' accidents which caused the deaths of 3 people. The first; a freeway accident where a Smart Car was struck by a Ford F-250 which veered into the right lane striking the Smart Car travelling at 60 mph causing the Smart Car to lose control, roll-over killing a man and his wife. The second was on a local highway where a young woman in a Smart Car made a left turn, misjudging oncoming traffic distance and was struck in the drivers side by a Toyota Camry killing her. The impact was at only 50 mph. The Toyota appeared repairable. These cars are death traps, and I would never let a loved one travel in one of these cars.
I'd like to see it do 70mph with 600lb of anything in it! the only thing it'll hit at 70 with that load would be the bottom of the mineshaft it fell down
Ian Molesworth Uh... most SUVs can tow 1000lbs EASY and that's towing capacity, not carrying capacity. Even Cars carry a pretty heavy load. Don't know about a smart car though.
This test does not accurately portray what would happen at a 70 mph impact. Notice the concrete barrier is not perpendicular to the road, it is angled. Thus, a large portion of the energy is dissipated across greater time, than a collision dead on into a concrete barrier. The test misrepresents what would actually happen.
Kyle Pave But if you were to lose control on a highway and hit the concrete barriers, which is what is being portrayed, odds are you would not be perpendicular to the barriers.
+Kyle Pave You are correct that some of the force due to the impact is dissipated at a different rate. But how much? Instead of a 90 degree angle for a true head-on, let's say that is a 80 degree angle. The effective speed hitting the concrete barrier head on would then be 70 * sin (80 degrees) = 68.9 MPH.
Yer an idiot. How many accidents happen at 70mph straight into a brick wall, barrier & etc.? Statistics probably say less then 1 half of a percent of all real world accidents l would bet. A more realistic test would of been 60mph into a USA telephone pole or a hefty tree even. I personally would of liked to see it hit a Ford F150 or another brand full size truck at highway speeds corner to corner on the driver side head on.
I've been driving smart for 15 years, it's already the second I buy. However, it is enough to read certain comments to understand that there are people much much more stupid than me.