China Car Forums banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
773 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
·
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
·
1,056 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
·
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
·
450 Posts
Admin said:
whoa the 04 chery doesnt have a airbag ??
depends on the spec you choose. I didn't think it was important to have one. so far so good, which did include rear ending a truck once!
 

· 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.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top