Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:08:16 -0600
Reply-To: John Rodgers <inua@CHARTER.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: John Rodgers <inua@CHARTER.NET>
Subject: Re: 130Mph, or even 90 -- van safety
In-Reply-To: <20041208064014.71175.qmail@web53509.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
While crumple engineering definitely saves lives, I think it is
difficult for the general public to think in terms of how great it is
their $50,000 Super Turbo'ed Whatever with HiSpeed Mud Flaps crumples
so easily or to accept the fact that it does.
It is interesting what is going on in this regard. Has anyone noticed
the strong switch in many vehicles to plastic. It has been going on for
a while in bumpers, etc, but now full quarter panels, doors, rear
hatches, even full truck beds are showing up as all plastic.
My son, in anticipation of the changes coming, closed out his truck bed
liner business. Sure enough, not long after, the plastic pick'em'me'up
truck beds began showing up in ever increasing numbers. They don't need
spray in truck bed liners for protection against scuff and rust.
I feel relatively safe in my Vanagon for most driving, with the
exception of the"Head-on" situation. If that situation develops, I know
there is no satisfactory protection. So I drive very carefully, but I
recognize that there is always that approaching idiot that might
possibly cross over in front of me. Defensive driving, that's the ticket.
While in New Mexico, I had a near miss in that regard. On the road one
day from Santa Fe to Espanola, I was driving on a section of fourlane
running north and south. My two lanes going north were up on a slight
hill, and there was a sloped cut bank to the right. To my left was a
very wide several hundred feet - meridian or island and then the
southboud two lanes and beyond it a slope cut bank and up near the top
and over the top a stand of small pine trees 3 to 6 feet with some taller.
A speeding car in the southbound lane suddenly darted out on the the
island meridian towards my lane. It was really hauling butt ..... I
would guess somewhere near 80-100 mph. I kept trucking because I could
not tell where that thing was going and I wanted to get to a point where
the action was behind me, not coming at me. Well, that strategy didn't
work. The vehicle kept coming at me. I took my foot off the gas,
watching, trying to get some idea as to where this speeding idiot was
going to go. The car at this point was coming up the slope directly at
me, but I was slowing. In a split second, the vehicle was in my lane,
but in front of me crossing left to right. A split second later it
passed me by, missing me by about 6 feet. I saw in a flash two people in
the front seat fighting. It appeared they were fighting each other and
not necessarily for control of the wheel. The car sped past going up the
steep grassy slope to my right and at the top it turned and started back
down. This time I was well past and I watched this event from my rear
and side mirrors. The vehicle crossed the highway behind me, still at a
high rate of speed, but just in front of two other vehicles approaching
behind me. It then crossed the meridian again, crossed the southbound
lane again - this time in front of a line of approaching vehicles in
both southbound lanes, then up the slope of the far side and it
disappeared into the pine thicket at the top, small pines snapping off
and being thrown into the air and a cloud of dust being raised.
Cars on the other side of the highway were already stopping so I didn't.
If that car had hit me I would have been killed, plain and simple. Not
enough protection in the front end of the van. But, I feel I would have
had better prospects were there to be a different point of impact.
However, you never know.
Across the road from my shop in Alaska, was a gas station. We were out
of town on a highway, and it was a section where pent-up driver pressure
that built over a ten mile stretch of no passing - could be release, and
vehicle would speed up, sometime passing. Bad spot to turn in for gas.
An older couple was trying to turn in for gas, and was forced to stop in
the highway to await oncoming traffic before turning across the lane. A
woman, mother of 3, drunk, empty vodka bottle on the seat of her pickup
slammed into them from the rear, doing 80-90 mph. The back end of the
car was driven into the back seat, the back seat slamming the front
seat, pinning the driver - the old lady - against the steering wheel.
The old man was in the space between the seat and the dash. The car was
spun into the path of the fast traveling approaching vehicle in the
other land, and it stopped spinning when the oncoming pickup truck
slammed into the driver side, killing the old woman instantly. It was
horrible mess.
A family of ten lost their grandmother, three adult children lost their
mother, and a husband lost his lifelong spouse. And three small
children lost their mother and were put in foster care with the state
because their drunken mother, with several drunken driver convictions,
and drunken accident convictions, finally got a manslaughter conviction.
Like I said, you never know. But I feel safer in my Vanagon than I do in
any passenger car or SUV.One thing I have noticed - people appear to be
very willing to give my big red box a wide berth. And I'm glad! But I
still drive defensively.
Regards,
John Rodgers
88 GL Driver
Damon Campbell wrote:
>Not to derail this thread too far, but yes, i have,
>and that seems testament to the van *not* being safe.
>An infinitely rigid vehicle just transmits all the
>force into you. Also, those results allude to the
>volvo driver likely being killed in the accident.
>Ummm... great? Don't you think both drivers would be
>better off if both vehicles were volvos? Or do you
>think two vans smashing into each other would be the
>safest for the drivers? At least our airbags would
>save... oh darn.
>
>SUVs are horrible because they have taken a step back
>in safety technology - bypassing crumple zones and all
>that useless "engineering" stuff that goes into making
>a passenger vehicles safe (not mandated by the work
>truck guidelines those behemoths fall under).
>Relatively small impacts injure SUV drivers because
>there is no softening of the crash. Unfortunately,
>vanagons are closer to SUVs than volvos in this
>respect... and it pains me to say that.
>
>This safety liability is, in part, necessitated by the
>6" crumple zone our seating position has. Now, i
>think the german engineers did an excellent job with
>the design constraints they had, but that doesn't mean
>we are driving the safest vehicle out there. My
>personal belief, however, is that safety equipment is
>no substitute for a safe driver, which is why i am OK
>with driving my van. Of course, everyone thinks they
>are a good driver, so that point doesn't really count,
>i suppose.
>
>I am sure this is going to garner a few unfavorable
>responses, but take a step back and look at how our
>vans handle impacts vs. highly engineered automobiles
>designed to save the drivers (race cars, etc.). All
>that said, i've taken my van up to some pretty high
>speeds and felt quite comfortable with it :-).
>
>Be safe out there, and have fun!
>
>-damon
>
>
>--- Andrew Grebneff
><andrew.grebneff@STONEBOW.OTAGO.AC.NZ> wrote:
>
>
>>Van safety... ever looked at the Caravelle vs Volvo
>>website?
>>
>>
>
>
>=====
>'84 Westy (Sparky) w/2.3L WBX - New! With 25% fewer spun rod bearings!
>Vancouver, BC
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
>
>
>
| 
