Side Impact /Pole Impact protection

Gdetrailer wrote:
Umm.. My BIL many years ago WRAPPED a 70s' Chevy Nova around a pole when he lost control (well above 70 MPH), ran off the road broadside right smack into a pole.

HE LIVED to tell about it, never even went to the hospital either..

And YES, the car hit the pole in the CENTER of the drivers door.

Striking a pole will impart much more energy into one single point that a CAR (a car impact in a "T bone" imparts energy over a larger amount of area than what a pole would).

I will say it again, I guess Australia is catching up on the safety thing..

However, even with improvements you will still be behind.. Pretty much ALL cars built for US sales now days also have side curtain airbags..

I was involved in a collision at work years ago and totaled my cruiser into a tree at about 40-50 mph and I wasn't wearing my seatbelt. I lived to talk about it and I didn't go to the hospital either. On the other hand I have investigated similar collisions that had serious physical injury to occupants. One success story does not mean its not worthwhile to make safer vehicles.

Catching a pole in the side of a car will do a lot of damage to an occupant. Making the car safer is a GOOD idea. Now, I don't understand all the technical mumbo jumbo in the article, nor do I know whether or not these requirements are more stringent than we have on our side of the pond. I don't have a problem with better side reinforcement on vehicles. A lot of the bad collisions involve side impact. Making the vehicle better suited to sustain side impact damage sounds like a GOOD thing to me.

I certainly hope this doesn't add significantly to the cost of a new vehicle, but I think we can agree that airbags made vehicles safer... seatbelts made vehicles safer... crumple zones made vehicles safer...