China Car Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The one on top if the ford, and bottom is landwind. Its kinda hard to tell after this lol.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
That F150 hasn't been in production for three years, and the design dates back 10 years or so. The new one did much, much better in the same test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
772 Posts
It should be taken as a sign of how tough current crash test stadards are, not a sign of how crappy Ford vehicles perform in crash tests.

Look at Geely CK; it is built off Daewoo Lanos chassis which used to pass US crash test standard in the late 90s, but CK failed the current version of test and Geely is forced to redesign on their own.

It will be a major challenge for Chinese vehicles to even pass the US and EU crash and emissions test. The entry barriers into developed market are just too high for Chinese to overcome.

Chinese venders really need to have Japanese masters to teach them how to design and build proper vehicles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
gr8 said:


Here's the crash test of Opel Frontera - "father" of Lanwind. Not good results too. I didn't find more pictures yet (I saw more but I don't remember web-page), the result is nearly the same as Landwind - the "son".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
772 Posts
That's only 35 MPH. The current standard is 40 MPH, which increases the impact force by 31%.

Just remember that Isuzu Rodeo was an early 90's design and was never meant to pass 40 MPH tests.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
I can appreciate the value of progress, but on the other hand I started driving in 1988 using a car built in 1978. I didn't feel particularly afraid then, and I don't now.

My current car collection is as follows:

'77 porsche
'85 lotus (for sale if anyone wants one!)
'95 BMW
'95 lotus (new acquisition with 275 horsepower hehehehe)
'04 chery

of all these cars, only the BMW has an airbag.

So whilst I apreciate that if something doesn't meet current regulations it isn't allowed to be sold, I am not about to get too stressed if someone offers me a ride in a car that meets '90s regs but not the latest regs.

GF
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
fightingtorque said:
I can appreciate the value of progress, but on the other hand I started driving in 1988 using a car built in 1978. I didn't feel particularly afraid then, and I don't now.

My current car collection is as follows:

'77 porsche
'85 lotus (for sale if anyone wants one!)
'95 BMW
'95 lotus (new acquisition with 275 horsepower hehehehe)
'04 chery

of all these cars, only the BMW has an airbag.

So whilst I apreciate that if something doesn't meet current regulations it isn't allowed to be sold, I am not about to get too stressed if someone offers me a ride in a car that meets '90s regs but not the latest regs.

GF
whoa the 04 chery doesnt have a airbag ??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Real_I_Hate_China said:
That's only 35 MPH. The current standard is 40 MPH, which increases the impact force by 31%.

Just remember that Isuzu Rodeo was an early 90's design and was never meant to pass 40 MPH tests.
there we go again, crash test is not only about kinetic energy= mvsquared, theres alot to do with conservation of momentum, and mechanical energy, and metal bending shit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Then explain what you mean by that.

The test procedure of the 65km/h test is roughly the same as the 55km/h test. Only the impact speed is higher. Higher speed = more deformation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
oo4load said:
Then explain what you mean by that.

The test procedure of the 65km/h test is roughly the same as the 55km/h test. Only the impact speed is higher. Higher speed = more deformation.
no kidding more speed= worst crash all im saying is you dont just use the darn old kinetic energy formula and say theres 31% more energy. in otherwords ppl are just not as smart as they think they are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
It does not help to point out other manufacture's shortcomings, especially if they are an established brand, whose loyal customers would purchase there products even if they where flaming metal death traps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
772 Posts
F-150 was ok by 90's standard. Likewise Chinese cars are ok by 80's crash standard.

Unfortunately, we live in 2006, where none of Chinese cars can pass the crash test.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top