Safety concerns and crash data for Class A's?

[lss177]

So, looking at a Class A, but concerned about the crash safety of the driver/passenger cell of a Class A. With no passive restraints (air bags) and no formal crash testing, it's tough to convince the wife that we should go Class A instead of Class C.

Is there any data that shows that any particular Class A manufacturer is "better" than others when it comes to the "safety cell" for driver/passenger?

Fyi, we're looking at late-model gas coaches, 32 feet or so.

[4x4van]

Not long ago, there was a terrible accident, in Florida I think, in which an elderly gentleman in a large class A drove the wrong direction on the freeway and hit an SUV head-on. Both girls in the SUV were killed while the elderly gent (and his wife) walked away. As was said earlier in this thread, the class A occupants were "above" the main impact point. So there is some truth to that idea, and in this case the higher "crash-worthiness" of the SUV was irrelevant.

In a rollover... neither (A nor C) will fare well, although the C may do a bit better. In a head-on...I think I like my chances in my A at least as well as in my previous C, perhaps moreso. If crash-worthiness is a significant factor in your RV choice, then I suggest you get a late model truck and a trailer, either bumper pull or 5er.

[camperdave]

path1 wrote:

The Recreation Vehicle Industry Association had this to say about our research:

"NHTSA (The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) hasn't crash tested finished motor homes because they are fundamentally safe-- there simply haven't been enough deaths to warrant the cost of purchasing and testing these types of vehicles."

This sums it up for me too. further crash testing and safety measures would be increased cost for a tiny benefit.

It's how we end up with things like mandatory rear view cameras, TPMS and noise makers in EV's lol.

[path1]

...

[Mr_Mark1]

A while back someone pointed out the disadvantage of having airbags in a coach. It made sense to me. Also, the steering wheel is more in a flat position, not really angled towards the driver like a car.

If you are in an accident in a coach, you don't stop on a dime like a car would. The large heavy coach will keep moving probably for at least 100 ft. (depends on the accident). If an airbag system were to deploy, you could lose control as you can't see and/or you might not be able keep your hands on the steering wheel. Can you imagine how big of an airbag would be on a coach?

The most important thing is to be buckled in and keep flying objects battened down.

One of the best safety features that we have on our coach is the Prevost Aware System. It will warns the driver if the car in front is going slower than you, it will apply the retarder (heavily) if I don't slow down.

We have a beam in the center of the windshield. Although a Pana-View windshield is nice, I feel the beam will keep the integrity of the coach intact.

Safe driving is your best friend but there are certainly things out of our control, luck has a lot to do with it.

Good luck,
MM.

[wanderingaimles]

I know it was a cost consideration as much as anything else, but, didn't the front of A's get weaker when they removed the additional framing for front doors?
M'lady has concerns over not having a door there for egress, And the lack of more than one exit concerns her. (and no, climbing out a window six+ feet above the ground doesn't allay that fear)

[way2roll]

It is a legitimate and genuine concern. If you are going to make crash worthiness part of your criteria don't look at a class A - unless it's a Prevost or converted bus. Despite the lack of crash testing, in the event of a roll over or side impact the house will do very little to protect occupants - probably worse and simply collapse. I think the "safest" drivable Rv would be a Super C. You get the advantage of height, plus a large diesel engine in front of you. Not cheap and not as readily available but they are out there. As others have stated it's not just the crash itself and the RV, it's the tons of stuff in the RV that become missiles - dishes, cabinets, microwave, TV's. You are driving an apartment, imagine crashing an apartment - with up to 100 gallons of fuel and propane on board.

[ferndaleflyer]

If I worried that much about it I would just walk away, and hope no one runs over me. If I would have worried about everything that could hurt or kill me I would have never left the house----but then again it could fall in or have a plane hit it. Its a big world out there, don't be afraid to enjoy it....

[dougrainer]

dons2346 wrote:
Don't think so. At one time Winnebago would show a drop test where the coach was held upside down and then dropped on its roof. Don't know what that proved.

NOTHING! That was a Winne test/stunt from the late 70's early 80's. The Winne/Itasca's had a steel tube frame behind the drivers cockpit and in the rear a few feet forward from the rear. They inverted the Motorhome on a crane and then "dropped" it on its roof. The "box" kind of stayed intact. The problem is, NOBODY has an accident that your Motorhome inverts in mid air and lands flat on its top. Most Motorhome serious accidents the Motorhome rolls over on its side and the structure supports cannot keep the Motorhome from collapsing like an accordion. Doug

[JaxDad]

If you question the safety of a Class A don’t ever study the construction of school buses.

[js218]

One of the reasons I went with a super C on a class 8 truck chassis, just feel more secure when driving down the road.

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

🙂 Hi, A few class "A's" like the one my brother owns has a fiber glass front end in-which the included front bumper is no more than a decoration. A few small pieces of angle iron holds the fiber glass fascia about a foot in front of the frame rails and radiator. I believe that a bicycle would crush this front end. The only thing that most class "A's" have going for them is the height of the driver and passengers from the ground.

[DrewE]

RVs in general are not very crashworthy. In a serious collision, there is lots of stuff that's not too well secured that will come flying (even if the cabinets etc. all remain attached, their contents probably won't). The body structure of most is none too strong, either, at least in the house portion. Frankly, I wouldn't care to be in any motorhome in a serious crash if given the choice--I guess I would prefer one to a motorcycle, but that's about all.

If colliding with a car, extra mass is an advantage for you (but not for the car). If colliding with an equally massive vehicle or a fixed object, that advantage disappears.

RVs don't have a terrible safety record mainly because they are generally driven reasonably safely, by attentive drivers, and in particular are not usually driven by teens and other beginning drivers or by intoxicated drivers. They also are more commonly driven on safer roads (rural/limited access highways rather than city streets).

[timmac]

Newer class C would have a better protection in a crash because the van chassis has to pass a Gov crash test where as the class A does not.

There is a 3rd option, the super class C, they sit up higher like a class A but with better crash results but still no Gov crash tested.

[Executive45]

I pondered the same thing until I relooked at my physics book. Class A's sit higher than most vehicles. The bumper and assemblies are what's going to take the hit. In my case, there's this huge genset that will move most vehicles out of the way. Now if I hit a tree, that's something else altogether. In a head on crash between a Class A and a Class C, those passive restraints aren't going to do you much good.....for what it's worth...then again, I've been moving these Class A's for over 40 years and haven't had a crash yet. You tend to drive the Class A a lot differently. The other thing to consider, too, is the passive restraints aren't going to do much for stopping all that 'junk' behind you that you've crammed into every nook and cranny. Think TVs Fridge, sofa etc. etc......Dennis

[dons2346]

Don't think so. At one time Winnebago would show a drop test where the coach was held upside down and then dropped on its roof. Don't know what that proved.