This is why the Camaro is so heavy...

[BackinBlackSS/RS]

Originally Posted by Coldpants

Really? Then you sit in my Buick and I will hit you with my friends beetle and we will see who ends up better. Common sense is not actual sense. The physics of a crash is not simple. In a car like that Bel Air or my Buick if you hit something the car sustains little damage. But the kinetic energy of the car (and being heaver this car will have much more of it) has to go somewhere. It goes into the softest thing which is you. Also without crumple zones and airbags your body will be subject to much more force a=dv/dt. If mass was the major factor in surviving a car crash indy cars should be huge hulking monsters and until the 60's they were. Until they began to understand the physics of a crash. Those cars shatter on impact taking some of the force of the impact with each piece saving the driver.

Car safety systems are designed to do three things.
To increase the time of the collision to reduce the force of the impact by increasing dt. Airbags, bumpers, crumple zones. To stabilize the body so that it decelerates with the cars new lower acceleration. Seatbelts. Last they carry the force of the impact away from the occupants. The cabin or safety cage and weak points designed to separate in extreme collisions.

[THUMPER20X]

Maybe if someone wants to drive my 57chev ill drive the Camaro and we can do a head on and no more fighting lol.

[coolman]

Originally Posted by THUMPER20X

Maybe if someone wants to drive my 57chev ill drive the Camaro and we can do a head on and no more fighting lol.

You don't need us. Just drive one into a wall at 55 and then drive the other one into a wall a 55 and see how you make out. So, you have a chance at completing the test , you should drive the camaro first. LOL

[10RallySS]

but if you do that make sure you donate that buck for some poor sap....

[THUMPER20X]

Originally Posted by coolman

You don't need us. Just drive one into a wall at 55 and then drive the other one into a wall a 55 and see how you make out. So, you have a chance at completing the test , you should drive the camaro first. LOL

Ok so the 57 didnt fare well.................. Anyone need some good rear 57 1/4s ?

[THUMPER20X]

Originally Posted by 10RallySS

but if you do that make sure you donate that buck for some poor sap....

I will.................because im really gonna do it lol.

[KarFan]

Weight has nothing to do with crash testing.

The Camaro gets only 4 Star driver and passenger frontal crash test ratings. The Camaro has a curb weight from 3750 - 3915lbs.

The Malibu seen in this test gets 5 Star driver and passenger frontal crash test ratings. The Malibu's curb weight is from 3415 - 3649lbs.

http://www.safercar.gov/

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by KarFan

Weight has nothing to do with crash testing.

The Camaro gets only 4 Star driver and passenger frontal crash test ratings. The Camaro has a curb weight from 3750 - 3915lbs.

The Malibu seen in this test gets 5 Star driver and passenger frontal crash test ratings. The Malibu's curb weight is from 3415 - 3649lbs.

http://www.safercar.gov/

Weight has a lot to do with it; ask the engineers on the Camaro why they had to install B-pillars on the car. You are comparing vehicles of different sizes, engine layouts seating arrangements, doors, etc, etc, etc. Not very accurate...

[KarFan]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Weight has a lot to do with it; ask the engineers on the Camaro why they had to install B-pillars on the car. You are comparing vehicles of different sizes, engine layouts seating arrangements, doors, etc, etc, etc. Not very accurate...

The point is that curb weight has nothing to do with crash ratings. As I pointed out the lighter Malibu seen in this test gets a better rating. Different cars yes but crash worthiness is designed and engineered into the vehicle not accomplished by just adding heavier components.

The Camaro is heavy because it's based on RWD sedan architecture. Zeta was designed with heavy components to handle more than one sedan layout sold around the world with IRS and powerful V8 engines. However Zeta being a sedan was also designed to have a B-pillar. The B-pillar wasn’t added to the Camaro it was kept from Zeta. Despite the styling departments desire to remove it from the Camaro it had to stay because of structural regidity designed into Zeta. I’m sure the B-pillar does help in side and rollover crash testing as the Camaro gets 5-star for both but that’s because it was designed into the Zeta platform not added or able to be removed.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by KarFan

The point is that curb weight has nothing to do with crash ratings. As I pointed out the lighter Malibu seen in this test gets a better rating. Different cars yes but crash worthiness is designed and engineered into the vehicle not accomplished by just adding heavier components.

But it does, I think your point is wrong. You're stretching to make that conclusion. Given two otherwise identical cars, heavier/different/stronger components can improve crash ratings...at the cost of weight, or $$$....

The tests are also relative for each vehicle.

EDIT: Unless you're saying "you can't look at two cars' curb weight, and conclude the heavier car is safer". If that's the case, then it was lost in translation, and I agree with you.

Originally Posted by KarFan

The Camaro is heavy because it's based on RWD sedan architecture. Zeta was designed with heavy components to handle more than one sedan layout sold around the world with IRS and powerful V8 engines. However Zeta being a sedan was also designed to have a B-pillar. The B-pillar wasn’t added to the Camaro it was kept from Zeta. Despite the styling departments desire to remove it from the Camaro it had to stay because of structural regidity designed into Zeta. I’m sure the B-pillar does help in side and rollover crash testing as the Camaro gets 5-star for both but that’s because it was designed into the Zeta platform not added or able to be removed.

Zeta is not strictly a sedan architecture. It was designed from the beginning to carry sedans, coupes, wagons, and possibly even a CUV-style vehicle of varying sizes from Mid to Large. It is incredibly versatile, and because of this versatility, you're right...it weighs more than a coupe-only chassis. But is also saves money in production and engineering costs thanks to its changeling-design.

The team attempted to make a true hardtop coupe, just like the concept. But it wouldn't hold up to rollover regs, so they decided to incorporate a B-pillar as opposed to the researched alternative of heavier/stronger/costlier roof rails. It wasn't simply because "Zeta had to have it". My point with that statement, however, was not to discuss the nature of Zeta. But rather, that the B-pillars were added weight to achieve higher safety ratings.

[Reefblue42]

Not to get off post, but that Nissan commercial was pretty good too!!!

[squat]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

But it does, I think your point is wrong. You're stretching to make that conclusion. Given two otherwise identical cars, heavier/different/stronger components can improve crash ratings...at the cost of weight, or $$$....

The tests are also relative for each vehicle.

EDIT: Unless you're saying "you can't look at two cars' curb weight, and conclude the heavier car is safer". If that's the case, then it was lost in translation, and I agree with you.


Zeta is not strictly a sedan architecture. It was designed from the beginning to carry sedans, coupes, wagons, and possibly even a CUV-style vehicle of varying sizes from Mid to Large. It is incredibly versatile, and because of this versatility, you're right...it weighs more than a coupe-only chassis. But is also saves money in production and engineering costs thanks to its changeling-design.

The team attempted to make a true hardtop coupe, just like the concept. But it wouldn't hold up to rollover regs, so they decided to incorporate a B-pillar as opposed to the researched alternative of heavier/stronger/costlier roof rails. It wasn't simply because "Zeta had to have it". My point with that statement, however, was not to discuss the nature of Zeta. But rather, that the B-pillars were added weight to achieve higher safety ratings.

I don't think he's saying that lighter cars are as safe as heavier cars (all safety equipment equal the heavier car is safer). I think he's just saying that the crash test rating for the car doesn't automatically go up with weight - since the malibu has a 5 star rating and is lighter.

It can get this rating while being lighter because the test is only valid for cars of equal weight. This is how the VW bug can get a 4 star rating while being a lot lot smaller and lighter than the Camaro.

[superstockcam]

Great post! I had an employee have a crash nearly like it, luckily they only sideswiped at 45 mph. It really shows the energy in a collision like that. With technology though it appears that the old addage of weight and momentum can be overcome somewhat with "crumple zone" technology. thanks for sharing!
________
PRILOSEC SETTLEMENT

[KarFan]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

But it does, I think your point is wrong. You're stretching to make that conclusion. Given two otherwise identical cars, heavier/different/stronger components can improve crash ratings...at the cost of weight, or $$$....

The tests are also relative for each vehicle.

EDIT: Unless you're saying "you can't look at two cars' curb weight, and conclude the heavier car is safer". If that's the case, then it was lost in translation, and I agree with you.


Zeta is not strictly a sedan architecture. It was designed from the beginning to carry sedans, coupes, wagons, and possibly even a CUV-style vehicle of varying sizes from Mid to Large. It is incredibly versatile, and because of this versatility, you're right...it weighs more than a coupe-only chassis. But is also saves money in production and engineering costs thanks to its changeling-design.

The team attempted to make a true hardtop coupe, just like the concept. But it wouldn't hold up to rollover regs, so they decided to incorporate a B-pillar as opposed to the researched alternative of heavier/stronger/costlier roof rails. It wasn't simply because "Zeta had to have it". My point with that statement, however, was not to discuss the nature of Zeta. But rather, that the B-pillars were added weight to achieve higher safety ratings.

I'm not stretching anything to make any conclusion for myself.

The curb weight of a vehicle has no relevance to it's crash worthiness. A heavier vehicle doesn't mean it will get 5 Star ratings all around. Crash worthiness is designed and engineered into a vehicle so that a SmartCar and a Hummer can both get high marks for crash ratings. I think we both agree on that. The Camaro while heavy for its size doesn't get 5 Star front crash test ratings. That has nothing to do with the curb weight of the car or its use of heavy components. It's a failure of design and engineering.

The Camaro is heavy because it's based on the Zeta platform and thus built to support a large GM V8 RWD with IRS 4 door sedans. Zeta was used because it was the easiest and cheapest RWD architecture GM had/has available to underpin the car. Zeta was far from the best choice to underpin a 2+2 Camaro coupe but the F-body is long dead and cost and development time were of the essence.

Zeta was designed as a sedan first and foremost. That sedan architecture was developed with a structural member from the top of the beltline to the roof. (B-pillar) On Zeta sedans that is where the front door latches to the greenhouse shell and where the rear door is hinged.

Zeta was developed with the structural support from the beltline to the roof to maintain its structural rigidity. That rigidity is also inclusive of rollover and side impact protection.

The Camaro being developed on Zeta had to have this B-pillar to maintain the structural rigidity and meet the increasingly more stringent side impact and rollover crash ratings of which the Camaro gets 5 Stars. The Camaro team tried to get rid of the B-pillar more than add it in. This is because Zeta was developed to have the added structure of the B-pillar. The loss of structural rigidity, side impact and rollover protection were too much of a sacrifice to simply remove it for styling. Zeta was never developed to be a pillar less coupe.