And crashes between vehicles of different sizes/weights don't occur in your world ?
Probably a bit more in mine than in yours, as I answer 911 here, and dispatch the CHP.
Or perhaps you think that the excruciating pain, lifelong disability and death in motor vehicle collisions is something that can't be effectively addressed by imaginative engineering?
I know that the folly of airbags generates a goodly deal of your hyperbolically-elucidated injuries. Meanwhile, passenger cars are left with Volvo's joke of a lazy man's harness, trusting those hideous face bombs to hold you from the wheel or dash -neither of which you'd ever touch from inside a decent harness- while deafening and blinding you for the second and third impacts.
Lets forget about safety developments we all take for granted that came from crash testing like vehicle crumple zones,
safety cells,
seat belts,
airbags,
belt tensioners,
anti-whiplash head restraints,
curtain airbags,
child safety seats,
because,---- to quote a well known phrase ------
SH** HAPPENS.
Odd that most of those things are missing from vehicles built to withstand inevitable crashes, isn't it?
Sorry got to disagree. I'm not in favour of staging crashes simply for spectacle which is maybe what your talking about?? but the test collision on the video was obviously a careful experiment from which some valuable and perhaps some "uncomfortable " data emerged.
At this point in the development of the motorcar, there is no mystery about how to construct a cabin that will be reasonably safe for its occupants. Yes, pooh occurs, and that's why the Mercedes shift knob assumed the shape it had- there were three incidents that Mercedes knew of in the year previous its introduction (1970?) in which occupants had been killed by the shifter penetrating the occupant's eye socket and continuing into their brain. The revised Mercedes shift knob wouldn't pass through a human orbit.
Crash testing -and particularly that showing a Smart walloping a barrier at eighty, or an SUV plowing through a compact, or the Queen Mary running up the docks and over a freight train- is merely little boys playing with noisy toys. It has no purpose, other than to point out that physics can't be designed into change. Big will almost always win. Of course, if that compact has a roof rack, and it conspires to arrange one of its rails through the windshield of the SUV and through the driver's head, I suppose the SUV was the more "dangerous" of those two in that collision.
Crash testing is something for insurance companies to rationalize their fee schedules, and to produce scary footage to persuade mothers to buy cars shaped like refrigerator cartons.
But our disagreeing is not a bad thing for anyone.
