I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Cars, Bikes, Airplanes, "bicycles" spelled correctly, Tools and Toys.
ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5419
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

And don't forget the 'Halo' in F1 cars which was widely panned as ugly and ineffective when it was brought out four or five years ago but since has saved the lives of several drivers including Lewis Hamilton and Romain Grosjean. It's mandatory now in F1 and Indy cars and some other species of motor racing. It almost certainly would have saved Ayrton Senna had it been in use in 1994.

Big RR
Posts: 14050
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Post by Big RR »

CP--I agree it's not simple, which is why these cases are so expensive to bring (expert testimony is expensive), but I have seen cases in the past that show that facing liability often prompts the manufacturers to make things better. I know there is a general belief that the manufacturers are ufaurly targeted, but I'll always recall one of the first tort cases I read where a young girl (infant pretty much) was horribly in pajamas clearly labelied as non falmmable, while the documents in the manufacturer sowed they knew the pajamas could be easily ignited and burn. I recall that every time I think there is an unfairness toward the manufacturer. Sure there are bad cases, but these happen on both sides. And we have seen some things, like ladders, get much safer.

Jarlaxle
Posts: 5370
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Post by Jarlaxle »

duplicate
Last edited by Jarlaxle on Thu Aug 25, 2022 4:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jarlaxle
Posts: 5370
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Post by Jarlaxle »

BoSoxGal wrote:
Wed Aug 24, 2022 5:22 pm
Okay that makes sense. But haven’t some of the design improvements in performance cars carried over to regular automobiles in limited fashion? I mean I think of the ad campaign we had in Montana ‘room to live’ which promotes seat belt use (sadly not common enough in Montana) and showing how passengers autos crumple all around the passenger cabin but leave the cabin largely intact with room to live, IF the passengers are buckled up and don’t get ejected or bounced around inside.

I’m thinking of Tiger Woods whose vehicle crashed and rolled at fairly high speed and he was okay other than very bad leg/foot fractures which whether they had led to amputation or full recovery as in his case, the vehicle still preserved life. I can’t recall the model of that vehicle but I think it was high end SUV? Some cars are better built than others obviously.
Pretty sure Woods was in an Escalade or a Yukon Denali.

Jarlaxle
Posts: 5370
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Post by Jarlaxle »

Crackpot wrote:
Wed Aug 24, 2022 5:35 pm
RR

Regarding the design It’s hard to say I have been in the business long enough to know it could well be poor design, but at the same time it’s hard to determine the exact failure conditions we are talking about. Due to the nature of the beast roof to A-pillar joins are tricky as there are big holes for glass which aren’t structural. You also have to keep the joint as narrow as possible so the driver has as little of thier visual field obstructed. Then with a half ton vehicle you add a much greater mass that joint has to handle in the event of roll over plus the possibility of dealing with an even greater mass due to a well strapped in load. The nature of the area is structurally weak and in general it is hard to get greater than enough structure for static rollover especially as gross vehicle weight goes up. Most vehicles combat these issues by making the vehicle less likely to roll over. It’s not a mistake that F1 vehicles don’t have roofs and instead protect
The drivers head by building up the area around the drivers head (outside the helmet) to protect the driver during rollover.

As I said there isn’t enough info given in this article to determine if this judgement is justified but I do know enough that such a determination is not simple.
Another issue on many trucks is the enormous door openings. Many modern pickups are essentially pillarless hardtop designs, with no true B-pillar. Extended cabs use rear doors that open back (rather than the crew-cab's regular door), making the whole area, from windshield to rear pillar, open. That is a BIG opening.

User avatar
Crackpot
Posts: 11266
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:59 am
Location: Michigan

Re: I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Post by Crackpot »

BoSoxGal wrote:
Wed Aug 24, 2022 5:22 pm
Okay that makes sense. But haven’t some of the design improvements in performance cars carried over to regular automobiles in limited fashion?
I don’t think I addressed this question at least not directly. The answer is yes safety improvements are constantly going both ways but not everything transfers. Everyday drivers aren’t going to be to keen on being lowered into a nearly indestructible open top roll cage that severely limits movement. And safety has progressed markedly over the years. Rollover ratings weren’t even a thing until the ‘90’s and improvements in pillar construction has come a long way over the years (used to be that more often than not any roll-over would be fatal) it’s those improvements along with lower roll over risk that allow for the “open cab designs” that Jarl is alluding to. Still it’s an unavoidably weak joint on a heavy vehicle that met the standards required for sale. It should be a high burden of proof to meet.
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.

Jarlaxle
Posts: 5370
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:21 am
Location: New England

Re: I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Post by Jarlaxle »

Roof strength standards are a big reason that hardtops were gone by the late 70s.

User avatar
Crackpot
Posts: 11266
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:59 am
Location: Michigan

Re: I'm no Ford apologist but this is just ridiculous

Post by Crackpot »


https://youtu.be/Zj8YB9ThPv4
Interesting video on F1 crashes and cost
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.

Post Reply