This is why the Camaro is so heavy...

[DeathChill]

Hey I was almost right!

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by squat

Dude, get a f**king clue before you go spewing misinformation around the web. Since you don't seem to know jack about safety ratings and didn't bother to look any of the information up, I did it for you. Sit back and learn.

This information is taken from safercar.gov:



This means that no, you are in fact wrong about a 4 star rating for the VW Bug being as safe as the 4 star rating on the Camaro. If you even think about it for a few minutes you'd realize that a car the size of a bed that weighs in at around 2k (probably) won't be nearly as safe as a 4k lb car.

Weight has a lot to do with the safety of your vehicle. The Bel Air that crumpled like a sissy doesn't prove weight has nothing to do with safety. Cars back then were designed without safety in mind. Of course the vehicle is going to fold up when it isn't reinforced in critical areas (it has a wrap around front window for christ sake).

Some physics for you: Force = mass x acceleration

This means that a 2k lb car traveling at 35 mph has half the force of a 4k car traveling at 35 mph. (Yes, you want force to be in your favor when you get into an accident).

Today every vehicle has reinforced frame and airbags everywhere. And I can promise you that you'd rather be in my 06 Ram Megacab than your Camaro if you were to get into an accident.

In summation: I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Basically.

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

None of this explains WHY the camaro is so heavy, and lighter cars are scoring the same and better on crash tests...

Cars are only compared to those in the same weight class, so those lighter cars did NOT score better than the Camaro, actually they were never compared to the Camaro. For someone trying to prove people wrong all the time, you might want to work on those reading comprehension skills prior to posting...

Originally Posted by Coldpants

None of what you said is true. Safety tests are standardized. A 4star for one car is the same as a 4 star for any car.

Wrong, a 5000 lb truck with 5 stars is completely different than a Honda civic with 5 stars. Believe me, the truck will win.

[BackinBlackSS/RS]

Originally Posted by squat

Dude, get a f**king clue before you go spewing misinformation around the web. Since you don't seem to know jack about safety ratings and didn't bother to look any of the information up, I did it for you. Sit back and learn.

This information is taken from safercar.gov:



This means that no, you are in fact wrong about a 4 star rating for the VW Bug being as safe as the 4 star rating on the Camaro. If you even think about it for a few minutes you'd realize that a car the size of a bed that weighs in at around 2k (probably) won't be nearly as safe as a 4k lb car.

Weight has a lot to do with the safety of your vehicle. The Bel Air that crumpled like a sissy doesn't prove weight has nothing to do with safety. Cars back then were designed without safety in mind. Of course the vehicle is going to fold up when it isn't reinforced in critical areas (it has a wrap around front window for christ sake).

Some physics for you: Force = mass x acceleration

This means that a 2k lb car traveling at 35 mph has half the force of a 4k car traveling at 35 mph. (Yes, you want force to be in your favor when you get into an accident).

Today every vehicle has reinforced frame and airbags everywhere. And I can promise you that you'd rather be in my 06 Ram Megacab than your Camaro if you were to get into an accident.

In summation: I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Very nice.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by squat

Dude, get a f**king clue before you go spewing misinformation around the web. Since you don't seem to know jack about safety ratings and didn't bother to look any of the information up, I did it for you. Sit back and learn.

This information is taken from safercar.gov:



This means that no, you are in fact wrong about a 4 star rating for the VW Bug being as safe as the 4 star rating on the Camaro. If you even think about it for a few minutes you'd realize that a car the size of a bed that weighs in at around 2k (probably) won't be nearly as safe as a 4k lb car.

Weight has a lot to do with the safety of your vehicle. The Bel Air that crumpled like a sissy doesn't prove weight has nothing to do with safety. Cars back then were designed without safety in mind. Of course the vehicle is going to fold up when it isn't reinforced in critical areas (it has a wrap around front window for christ sake).

Some physics for you: Force = mass x acceleration

This means that a 2k lb car traveling at 35 mph has half the force of a 4k car traveling at 35 mph. (Yes, you want force to be in your favor when you get into an accident).

Today every vehicle has reinforced frame and airbags everywhere. And I can promise you that you'd rather be in my 06 Ram Megacab than your Camaro if you were to get into an accident.

In summation: I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Excellent points...perhaps a little harsh in the beginning


Every vehicle's crash test ratings are against itself. So it must withstand only the weight/force of itself hitting a stationary wall...put it in a crash with another car...the story changes. NHSTA crash test ratings do NOT tell the whole story on a vehicle's safety. (that's why they're one of the last things I look at when buying a car)

[coolman]

Originally Posted by sen10l

You mean like the 3800lb M3? Which car are you talking about that has the same HP for around the same money?

This thread is just a segue to show the advances in safety which make a car heavier in general. All modern mid-sized sedans which are the same size as the Camaro weigh roughly the same, so I don't know which lighter car you could be possibly imagining. Compact sedans, by the way, universally fail the side impact tests according to one of the recognized safety-testing bodies (unless they have a side airbag).

I don't know how I can say it any different. None of this is about hp. When they test a car for safety they could care less about hp. I never said anything about power. Besides, That's a malibu in the vid, not a camaro so none of this makes any sense anyhow. Plus, your argument about power doesn't hold up unless your talking about the ss camaro. The lt is slower than a lot of cars in it wieght class. But, like I said you guys are bringing up power in a safey thread which makes no sense. Nobody including me, is saying the camaro isn't powerful in the ss form. I'm just saying their are cars that have to hold to the same safety standards as the camaro that are lighter so don't use that as an excuse for it being heavy. If you want to look at from your perspective then look at the corvette. It's lighter and more powerful and has to meet today safety standards.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by coolman

I'm just saying their are cars that have to hold to the same safety standards as the camaro that are lighter so don't use that as an excuse for it being heavy.

Safety is not the only reason it's heavy...VERY FEW cars cart around a 4-5 star crash rating, V6/V8, RWD, IRS, and mid-sized coupe dimensions. But of those that do...Camaro is right in line with its weight. Believe it.

Originally Posted by coolman

f you want to look at from your perspective then look at the corvette. It's lighter and more powerful and has to meet today safety standards.

True; what are the Corvette's crash test ratings, again?

p.s. this is a trick question...............

[coolman]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Safety is not the only reason it's heavy...VERY FEW cars cart around a 4-5 star crash rating, V6/V8, RWD, IRS, and mid-sized coupe dimensions. But of those that do...Camaro is right in line with its weight. Believe it.


True; what are the Corvette's crash test ratings, again?

p.s. this is a trick question...............

I know everything your saying and agree. All I was trying to say, is the op made a thread that made it look like he was saying, the camaro is so heavy do today's safety standards. but, what I was trying to say is,( and that's what you just said) that's not the only reason for it being heavier.

As far as the corvette's safety rating, I don't know. My point was that it's lighter, more powerful and meet's today safety standards.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by coolman

I know everything your saying and agree. All I was trying to say, is the op made a thread that made it look like he was saying, the camaro is so heavy do today's safety standards. but, what I was trying to say is,( and that's what you just said) that's not the only reason for it being heavier.

As far as the corvette's safety rating, I don't know. My point was that it's lighter, more powerful and meet's today safety standards.

This is what I want to get across. The safety standards are set by the government. GM may have gone above these standards, thus making the car even safer. Rather than trying to just barely make a car safe enough to pass the test, GM designed a car that will protect its inhabitants more than the competition. They have truly engineered a great machine rather than just a machine that has great components. The engine is fast, and the driver is safe. The tradeoff is weight, and that weight isn't even that bad. The Camaro is still the fastest car of the American pony cars, and let's not even bother comparing it to the likes of the Genesis, the Accord, or the Altima. The Camaro wins in races and in accidents.

[5thGenOwner]

Originally Posted by BackinBlackSS/RS

Yep, I mean common sense tells you that your less save in a smaller car. I don't care what it's safety rating is.

I want to see a VW beetle vs. a Hummer!

[coolman]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

This is what I want to get across. The safety standards are set by the government. GM may have gone above these standards, thus making the car even safer. Rather than trying to just barely make a car safe enough to pass the test, GM designed a car that will protect its inhabitants more than the competition. They have truly engineered a great machine rather than just a machine that has great components. The engine is fast, and the driver is safe. The tradeoff is weight, and that weight isn't even that bad. The Camaro is still the fastest car of the American pony cars, and let's not even bother comparing it to the likes of the Genesis, the Accord, or the Altima. The Camaro wins in races and in accidents.

None of which you just said pertains to the op's thread at all. We're comparing malibus to 59 chevy's. Which like I said many post ago has nothing to do with how much power or how heavy the camaro is. You don't have to get so defensive. I'm on your side. I agree with everything you said ,but none of that is what the thread is about.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by coolman

As far as the corvette's safety rating, I don't know. My point was that it's lighter, more powerful and meet's today safety standards.

Right. And what I was attempting to get at is that to "meet" the standards, you need a 1-star rating, for example...the Corvette's ratings aren't published anywhere...

Then there's always the $50k 2-seater thing...

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by coolman

None of which you just said pertains to the op's thread at all. We're comparing malibus to 59 chevy's. Which like I said many post ago has nothing to do with how much power or how heavy the camaro is. You don't have to get so defensive. I'm on your side. I agree with everything you said ,but none of that is what the thread is about.

That's also correct. I'm just approaching the whole issue of safety as it appears on the thread.

Comparing a modern car to its 50-year-old counterpart is not a fair comparison. Obviously, this crash did not contribute to future safety measures, either car's rating, or even arbitrary research. This was for show. It shows that the front of a new Malibu absorbs more impact than the front of an old Malibu. There are various reasons for this, including improved structural frame and suspension design, a heavier front end, a heavier overall body, and a different engine bay both in design and in component. The original post suggests that the new car is heavier and therefore safer. Without making the direct connection, I will merely state that safer cars generally weigh more than the same car with less safety components. For instance, a car without side air bags will weigh less than the same car with side air bags. A car without a modern bumper may have an inferior bumper with less mass. I'll agree that a car that is safer may weigh more. I'll also agree that the Camaro probably weighs more because it is a safe car and that it could have weighed less without the same safety standards.

[coolman]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Right. And what I was attempting to get at is that to "meet" the standards, you need a 1-star rating, for example...the Corvette's ratings aren't published anywhere...

Then there's always the $50k 2-seater thing...

This is just a question not an argument, how is it allowed to be on american streets if it doesn't pass some sort of safety standard?

I knew someone would bring up the $50k 2-seater thing.