I want to buy a new car

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,077
If you are really concerned about safety:
Buy the car. Find a serious welder, and have him install a roll cage, ala nascar.

Racing Nomex seats, 5 or 6 point harness, etc.

My view on 1/4 mile times:

The new cars are really good because they are using fantastic, sticky tires. I looked at the Mustang and Tramsformer and both are about .95 G's on the test pad, lateral. That's AMAZING. These cars are pigs. They weigh 500 pounds more then the 3500 pound Nascar limit.

Also, they have refined the suspensions to handle the horsepower without hop.

Also don't forget gearing. Both of the tests had high 3's for rear end ratios, and 6 speeds. With as much horsepower as these cars have, and revs, they can do about two gears and be through the 1/4 mile.

What is telling is the revs at 70. The mustang is setup to pretty much idle, meaning no gas guzzler tax, and great highway mileage.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,707
Location
Michigan
If you are really concerned about safety:
Buy the car. Find a serious welder, and have him install a roll cage, ala nascar.
That is a really bad idea. You do not want a roll cage in a daily driver unless you're always wearing a helmet. Without the helmet the roll cage poses a considerable safety risk to your head (from hitting it).
 

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,243
Location
SC
Yup, and you should have a neck or helmet restraint on the helmet to prevent whiplash injury from all the extra weight on your head. Plus with all the airbags coming out of seats and headliners today it would be nearly impossible to build a cage that didn't interfere with them.

Similar advice is you shouldn't use a five point harness in a car without a roll cage, in the event of a roll and crushing the roof our seat belts allow you to fall sideways but a five point harness would hold you in place and crush your spine.

Picked up in the pits at lemons racing.
 

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,243
Location
SC
I didn't participate but it's a blast just to see. Check it out.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,077
Whatever. My mustang had a roll cage in it. We used Scheel racing seats that held you in place with a little more edge then these:
http://image.superstreetonline.com/f/9269126+w750+st0/130_0801_06_z+nissan_350z+recaro_racing_seats.jpg
http://www.elephantmotorsports.com/images/get/152/.jpg
The seat on the left looks like the model I had, but it was blue:
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSTCUSZaGCSNX-FUR7oSiDLdHPb5Nb7zVN8clrNsmuNw9v-MjNpLTx1s1e5

The passenger seat WAS the scheel seat on the right.
http://i439.photobucket.com/albums/qq111/racingswim2006/Black Scheel seats/IMG_4724.jpg
Again, no danger of your head hitting the cage. The cage provided a mounting point for the 5 point harness, and between the belts and the sides of the seats, you were held firmly in place.
GREAT setup. Only drawback is the edges of the drivers seat wore a bit sooner then I would have liked. Nomex.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,077

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,243
Location
SC
Your cage didn't have a bar going along the top of the door and following the A pillar down to the dashboard and floor? If I didn't I can see how that wouldn't get in the way.
 

DrunkenBastard

Storage is cool
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
671
Location
on the floor
I'm not particularly happy about defending Mercedes, but they're entitled to say that. They've spent far, far more on vehicle safety research than any of these independent crash testers.

You have to remember: these are only simple synthetic tests that attempt to model a broad range of collision scenarios. The test in question is a poor representation of what happens when you clip an oncoming vehicle's corner, and I can't see many people managing to hit a tree or pole with the front left corner of their car on a left-hand-drive road.

More reliable information can be gleaned from analyzing large numbers of actual accidents, but this is extremely time-consuming. Manufacturers with a good holistic approach to crash safety tend to do well in this kind of analysis. And of course, bigger cars tend to do better than smaller cars - something these synthetic tests don't show at all.

Another problem is that the synthetic tests are conducted at low speeds. This is good to identify potential serious injuries in everyday urban shunts, but is no indicator of survivability in higher energy collisions, or for that matter rollovers.
"A 2009 institute study of newer vehicles that performed well in front crash tests found that small-overlap-type crashes accounted for 20 to 25 percent of fatalities, with similar findings for serious injuries.

Mr. Lund said that the main crush-zone structures are generally found in the middle 50 percent of the car — an area struck in the previous frontal crash tests. But those structures do not typically extend to the car’s outer edges, which means that in a small-offset crash a wheel can be forced back into the footwell, resulting in serious, debilitating leg and foot injuries.

The Volvo S60 had only a few inches of intrusion, the institute reported, because its reinforced upper rails and a steel cross member below the instrument panel helped to keep the car’s “safety cage” intact. Since the late 1980s, Volvo has been performing its own small-overlap tests while developing new vehicles."

Clearly the small overlap type crash is the cause of significant loss of life/serious injuries. It would presumably occur when oncoming traffic intrudes into your lane, but not to the extent that they have a classic full head-on. I've nearly experienced this myself when a nutter who wasn't paying attention came over the blind crest of a hill, heading straight towards me. He corrected in time and I was already as far right as possible, but another half second and he would have hit the drivers side in a small overlap type crash and I would no doubt be a statistic (given I was going 55MPH and he was going at least that fast, and I have no illusions how well a Hyundai Elantra would fare).

Clearly given Volvo's results it is possible to design a car that works well in multiple types of crashes.

In the US insurance rates tend to be very weighted in terms of how many traffic tickets you get, alongside retarded shit like credit score.

As for me, no chance of a brand new Volvo so I'm parking the Elantra in the driveway (won't pass inspection without costly exhaust work) and switching the wife and kids to a used 1996 Chevy Surburban 4*4 :) this way the dog can get the cargo area, with each of the kids also getting their own row of seating. Mileage will drop from 30-35mpg to closer to 15 (4600 pounds and 5.7l V8 versus 2500 pounds and 2.4l online 4), but given everyone can travel in the one vehicle as opposed to 2 now its almost a zero net running cost difference. Insurance rate is also far less.
 

mubs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
4,908
Location
Somewhere in time.
I would believe that there are more small overlap type crashes than full head-ons. The full head-ons would be more dangerous more of the time, but with the small overlaps, it would depend on the extent of overlap. A lot of these result in major damage to the vehicle sides but little injury to the driver (as attested by the 20-25% stat DB quoted) because in most of these situations, one or both drivers will swerve enough to avoid a major small overlap.
 

CougTek

Serial computer killer
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,692
Location
Québec, Québec
Hmmm. Apparently, the ATS requires super gas instead of regular. Hyundai achieves 274hp on a turbo 2.0L 4-cylinder engine with regular gas. So the ATS will be considerably more expensive to drive. Disappointing.
 

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,243
Location
SC
Maybe it could be tweaked. My car is running a 93 octane map but I can switch down when I want. Requires some third party tools though.
 

sdbardwick

Storage is cool
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
562
Location
North San Diego County
More, sure but I don't know about considerably more. The price premium between regular and super has actually decreased here in So Cal; back in 2004 the delta from regular to super was $0.20 per gallon with regular at $1.60 gallon and super $1.79 (+10 cents per grade). Now it is $4.10 vs $4.30 (still +10 cents per grade). 1.79/1.6=1.1175; 4.3/4.1=1.048.
So from about a 12% premium surcharge to about a 5% premium premium.
 
Last edited:

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
Are you sure the Hyundai only requires regular gas? I thought all the high-compression turbos required premium. And I'll second sdbardwick; it isn't that much more. I think people often overestimate the impact of fuel prices in their lives; IIRC, gas itself is only about 50% of the cost of operating a car, so you are looking at a 2.5% increase.
 

sdbardwick

Storage is cool
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
562
Location
North San Diego County
Hmmm. Apparently, the ATS requires super gas instead of regular. Hyundai achieves 274hp on a turbo 2.0L 4-cylinder engine with regular gas. So the ATS will be considerably more expensive to drive. Disappointing.
Running on regular gets you 260hp; you need premium to get 274hp.
The (naturally aspirated) V6 loses 4hp and 3lb/ft going from premium to regular.
 

CougTek

Serial computer killer
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,692
Location
Québec, Québec
I noticed the premium versus regular on the ATS and Hyundai using Ford's comparative web engine. They put 274hp with regular gas for the Hyundai, but they may well be wrong.

Does premium polutes less than regular?
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
Worse than that, it is very hard to even find the "good stuff" out here. Luckily Laguna Seca Raceway is only a few miles away and will happily sell you 100 Octane in exchange for and arm and a leg.
 

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,243
Location
SC
I have a Racing Mart with 103 in my town but I have no idea what it costs because the web lookup doesn't go beyond premium. I don't bother because I can get 93 almost anywhere here.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
91 is the best a normal gas station will sell you. Everything else is at the track, but you can just roll up and pay >$10/gal for the top-end stuff.
 

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,243
Location
SC
Yeah I know, sort of like those stretches in the Midwest where 85 is regular.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,856
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Up until 2008, you were able to buy 100 RON (98 RON with 5% ethanol) at some Shell stations in Oz. Apparently, you can still buy it from a boutique chain.

Many gas (petrol) stations will sell you 98 RON for about 16c/liter (60c/US gallon) more than the standard 91 RON fuel. Most also have 95 RON for about 10c/liter (38c/gallon) more than a currently typical price (including taxes) of $1.50/liter ($5.70/gallon) for 91 RON. E10 is about 3c/liter cheaper and ranges from 91 RON (Caltex) to 94 RON (Shell).

In Cougtek's part of the world, it looks like premium fuel can attract a premium of maybe 14c/liter (53c/gallon), so it's going to be a bigger deal for him than someone in the US.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,096
Location
USA
91 is the best a normal gas station will sell you. Everything else is at the track, but you can just roll up and pay >$10/gal for the top-end stuff.
Yeah I know, sort of like those stretches in the Midwest where 85 is regular.
Most of the stations around where I live offer the 87, 89, and 93. In the past I had seen Sunoco offer a 94, but I don't see that any more (or maybe I'm just not getting to Sunoco as often as I use to). Rarely do I see a 91 any more around me. The places I do see it are in the state of Vermont and that's the highest they offered in the area I was traveling.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,096
Location
USA
Maybe it could be tweaked. My car is running a 93 octane map but I can switch down when I want. Requires some third party tools though.
I've seen cars do this automatically in limited amounts without a fuel remap. with reduced octane and knock detection but it wasn't worth it. There is a reduction in efficiency meaning anything you saved using the less expensive fuel option you lost in reduced gas mileage. My last car knocked even with 93 octane. If Cougtek can't handle the added cost of a car requiring higher octane, it's likely not the right car for him to be hacking a fuel mapping.
 

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,243
Location
SC
I think anything with a turbo these days is going to have comprehensive knock sensors and the ability to control it. I don't think there is any danger now but gas mileage and power take a noticeable hit when I run something like 87. I'm just referring to third party tuner maps to make the most out of what you can get your hands on, should have been more clear.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,096
Location
USA
It does sound like a beast. I find it really hard to believe it'll get 26 MPG but I realize someone considering that kind of vehicle really won't care. Here are some fun videos....

[video=youtube;MhLOC-yyTFc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MhLOC-yyTFc#![/video]

[video=youtube;oT0r6xQJU_4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oT0r6xQJU_4[/video]
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,096
Location
USA
According to the Head 2 Head dyno results, the S8 is underrated by a decent amount. That 1/4 mile run looked super fast for a car that heavy.
 

Clocker

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
3,552
Location
USA
If the sound is real in the video, the Ferrari sounds absolutely intoxicating.
 
Top