![[TC] Gaming Forums](https://forum.city-driving.co.uk/images/logo.gif "[TC] Gaming Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [TC] Gaming Forums (https://forum.city-driving.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Community Area (/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Off-Topic Chat (/forumdisplay.php?fid=15)
+---- Forum: Multimedia (/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+---- Thread: 120mph Crash Test (/showthread.php?tid=329)
RE: 120mph Crash Test - McGherkin - 2011-10-21 18:00
Always wondered what it would look like, now I know.
Nice fast way to go, but I'd rather not take someone with me.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Malibu - 2011-10-21 18:08
(2011-10-21 17:42)Turkey Wrote: Yep, Malibu is right.
2 of the same car hitting each other head on, both traveling at 60mph will create the same G-forces and damage on each car as 1 of those cars hitting a solid wall also at 60mph.
Although the closing speed is 120mph in the 1st scenario, the rate of deceleration is the same.
But of course, a head on crash with another car at 60 is likely to kill.
Of course if 2 different cars collide head on traveling at the same speed, but have a different mass and different strength to each-other, the rate of deceleration won't be the same for either car. One will come off better than hitting a solid wall and one worse.
Yeh, it does depend on which two cars collide. The impact will be devided over the two cars depending on their strength and mass.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Nammi - 2011-10-22 00:12
looking at the deformation of the cars:
if a car crashes into a wall it deformes obviously. the time it takes to deform is determined by the velocity and well the make of the car or:the distance of deformation - t = d/v -> d = t/v.
also when looking at the acceleration, which is the change of velocity by the time dv/dt
two cars hitting each other may have the double speed of one car hitting a wall (from one cars point of view) but also double the deformation area / lenght.
so the acceleration for each car will not change since t = 2d/2v and therefor constant. but the acceleration will be multiplied by the mass of each car which could result in an unequal crashforce with unequally heavy cars.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Crazy - 2011-10-22 02:16
GKA beat me to it. But yes 120mph crashes are different than two cars hitting head on at 60mph.
Really sickening to see that type of destruction.. wish LFS physics would take some of that video into account, then maybe people will think twice before speeding on the autobahn.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - BP - 2011-10-22 07:48
Ahh, you can buff that Focus right out.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Crille - 2011-10-22 15:08
Ye its fine, just check the rear wheels, not a prob at all.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Turkey - 2011-10-22 18:54
Lol. Yeah, just a few light scratches, nothing that would really affect it's value.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - McGherkin - 2011-10-22 20:13
'One careful owner, never driven hard, slight damage to front bumper. £2000'
RE: 120mph Crash Test - ZsoLT - 2011-10-22 21:18
(2011-10-22 20:13)McGherkin Wrote: 'One careful owner, never driven hard, slight damage to front bumper. £2000'
:DDDD
Btw. I liked the car before the crash. 3 door Focus, nice rims, etc.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Clockwork - 2011-10-23 01:24
It won't make me re-consider my speed. Less then 5% of accidents in the UK are caused by speed, they're caused by dangerous driving. So if you happen to plough into the back of someone standing still at 120mph, that's your own stupid fault for not reading the road properly
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Malibu - 2011-10-23 01:47
Did you get the 5% from actual statistics or did you just make that up?
And just because you drive with care doesn't mean others do, whether they do it on phrpose or just suck at driving. Not speeding can save lives, and if you can't acknowledge that then you're just ignorant. ;/
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Nammi - 2011-10-23 01:56
fact is, if you have a crash, no matter if its your dangerous driving or someone elses, then your speed will kill you!
RE: 120mph Crash Test - roadrunner - 2011-10-23 05:02
Yeah, i looked this one up after seeing a gif, and it's crazy. I did think it was interesting that it had the same result of the Mythbusters test, with the car ending up on it's nose.
I used to know a tow truck driver, and occasionally they make it to the scene of a crash before the cops do. He told me of a few crashes that were as brutal as this one. In one case, the car was unrecognizable, and was so destroyed they didn't put it on a rollback, they had to put the parts into a cargo truck one at a time. Turns out it was actually someone he knew, too, and he didn't find out till the next day. He said he was around the car and the dead person for at least a half an hour, and the crash was so bad he didn't know it was them.
In the comments of that vid, people keep saying that it's an unrealistic test, but i think it's just an example. The same thing would happen if the car hit a bus at those speeds. The softness of the bus wouldn't likely have a difference at those speeds. you won't get less dead.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Turkey - 2011-10-23 10:20
I think Thomas did read that statistic, but I agree with your logic, Malibu.
I think, you're putting peoples life's at a greater risk if you decide to drive considerably faster than the general flow of traffic. Even if you're a great driver, it's not possible to be 100% sure about what other motorists will do next.
However, if you like to drive fast and are in an open area/place with good visibility and you can see there's no pedestrians, cyclists, or motorists, I think that's the best time to do it. Or if you can afford track days, racing experiences, karting etc, even better.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - McGherkin - 2011-10-23 12:39
Same as I always say. It's possible to speed, but speed safely, and when you're not putting anyone else at risk. Even better, get your kicks at a local club event. It's not hugely expensive, so why not?
RE: 120mph Crash Test - ZsoLT - 2011-10-23 13:19
(2011-10-23 01:47)Malibu Wrote: Did you get the 5% from actual statistics or did you just make that up?
And just because you drive with care doesn't mean others do, whether they do it on phrpose or just suck at driving. Not speeding can save lives, and if you can't acknowledge that then you're just ignorant. ;/
I always said speeding alone doesn't kill. You, or someone need to do some idiot things.
If You going with 120mph on nearly empty highway, You won't die. But if s1 don't use mirrors, and change lane in front of You...
An accident need 2 or more fault.
But true, if accident happen, the results will be better if the speeds was lower.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Clockwork - 2011-10-23 14:26
(2011-10-23 01:47)Malibu Wrote: Did you get the 5% from actual statistics or did you just make that up?
And just because you drive with care doesn't mean others do, whether they do it on phrpose or just suck at driving. Not speeding can save lives, and if you can't acknowledge that then you're just ignorant. ;/
From actual statistics. The majority of crashes involve speeding vehicles but speed wasn't the factor of the accident.
Granted doing 120MPH is stupid unless you're on a very empty motorway which you know very well, but there's nothing wrong with doing 100 on wide motorways. The whole idea of good driving is assessing the road and understanding what other drivers may potentially do, thus avoiding crashes from the stupid things which they do.
Yes reducing speed will of course reduce road deaths, but you should target the source of the problem (general stupid and dangerous driving) rather then a factor.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Malibu - 2011-10-23 14:32
(2011-10-23 14:26)Thomas Wrote:(2011-10-23 01:47)Malibu Wrote: Did you get the 5% from actual statistics or did you just make that up?The majority of crashes involve speeding vehicles but speed wasn't the factor of the accident.
And just because you drive with care doesn't mean others do, whether they do it on phrpose or just suck at driving. Not speeding can save lives, and if you can't acknowledge that then you're just ignorant. ;/
Well let's say if all these people weren't speeding, then what do you think would happen with the amount of casualties
And thinking of it, 5% is still a lot. Maybe not compared to alcoholism, but it's still a lot of accidents.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Clockwork - 2011-10-23 14:34
(2011-10-23 14:32)Malibu Wrote:(2011-10-23 14:26)Thomas Wrote:(2011-10-23 01:47)Malibu Wrote: Did you get the 5% from actual statistics or did you just make that up?The majority of crashes involve speeding vehicles but speed wasn't the factor of the accident.
And just because you drive with care doesn't mean others do, whether they do it on phrpose or just suck at driving. Not speeding can save lives, and if you can't acknowledge that then you're just ignorant. ;/
Well let's say if all these people weren't speeding, then what do you think would happen with the amount of casualties
And thinking of it, 5% is still a lot. Maybe not compared to alcoholism, but it's still a lot of accidents.
As I said, they would go down. But target the people using their phone whilst driving, playing with the radio whilst driving, or other distractions. That's the way to stop these accidents and stop the casualties, rather then just stopping the casualties.
RE: 120mph Crash Test - Malibu - 2011-10-23 14:43
Obviously they are the main cause, and that needs to stop aswell. But you will never get that number down to zero, which is why people also need to stop speeding, to keep the amount of casualties as low as possible. Both parties are wrong in such accidents.