VIDEO: smart fortwo crash test leaks out of IIHS
The IIHS has put the 2008 smart fortwo through its frontal offset crash test, and the video is on YouTube even though the IIHS hasn't released its results yet. For everyone who points out the benefits of the smart's miniscule size, there are a number of others who say they wouldn't want to go up against a normal American car in a smart. Even the NHTSA had some concerns when it tested the fortwo's crashworthiness. Based on the video after the jump, however, it looks like the smart acquits itself quite well with no deformation of the A-pillar and not even a crack in the windshield. We'll have to wait for the IIHS to give its final, official word, however. Sure, we wouldn't want to be driving a smart fortwo in an accident... but that's only because we don't want to be in an accident. Follow the jump to watch the video for yourself.
[Source: YouTube]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Gregg 11:02AM (4/29/2008)
What is does show is that it is a tad safer than several other (much bigger) subcompacts.
Reply
Dan 1:09PM (4/29/2008)
No, it doesn't. You can't meaningfully compare barrier tests between vehicles of greatly dissimilar weight.
Gregg 1:29PM (4/29/2008)
So would you rather be in an Accent or Aveo in a crash than a smart? I wouldn't.
Xcountryflyer 1:29PM (4/29/2008)
I don't know why anyone is worried about a barrier test. If I recall, these barrier tests are equivalent of hitting a car of the same size. It's a problem, when the car you're hitting is a Hummer H2.
black 1:58PM (4/29/2008)
@ Xcountryflyer
Whether you hit a small barrier, or a military tank, you will experience the same magnitude of forces, if the speed is the same. I guess you haven't heard of Newton's third law?
Disgruntled Goat 2:48PM (4/29/2008)
So I guess if I hit a barrier or a Siamese cat going 40 then the forces will be the same?
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Craig 3:32PM (4/29/2008)
So the Siamese cat comment, the barrier is a good representation of hitting a stationary object that STAYS stationary (and dense) at impact. The cat doesn't qualify as it's not as dense as a car nor will it obstruct the forces of inertia to any great degree. Hitting a Aveo or an Excursion would have different results, mainly in the area of impact distribution (an Aveo would have more mass lower). Also, an Aveo would move more upon impact and therefore lessen the force of the crash. But they're they're both very solid and large objects, as is the barrier used in these tests.
Also - this test it's really a good indication of a collision of two cars at speed (front on). Just of one moving car hitting a stationary one.
Dan 4:29PM (4/29/2008)
Provided the passenger cage holds up and you are not crushed to death by deforming structure, most serious injuries in an accident are caused by rapid acceleration pulling your internal tissues apart and knocking your brain against your skull.
An 1800 lb billiard ball (we'll label it "Smart") struck by another moving object s going to experience significantly greater acceleration than a 2600 lb billiard ball labelled "Accent"
physics4dummies 4:32PM (4/29/2008)
Some of these posts are hilarious...
A barrier crash is roughly the equivalent of hitting the same size vehicle traveling toward you at the same speed (in this case 40 mph). If you hit the barrier, you go from 40 mph to 0 mph (the barrier doesn't move). If you hit another car of identical mass going 40, you go from 40 mph to 0 mph, as does the other car. So, don't compare the smart to tests for anything more massive, because they are all simulating hitting something more massive than a smart.
Frank 11:08AM (4/29/2008)
Next test: Ford Excursion v Smart ...
Reply
Seoultrain 11:10AM (4/29/2008)
Yeah, I'd be curious about that. This is basically a head on crash between 2 smarts at this speed. Make one of them an average or large vehicle and the momentum change for the smart would be a lot greater.
nagmashot 11:13AM (4/29/2008)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnVNUvixWUQ
any questions..?
benzaholic 11:18AM (4/29/2008)
Consider the following choices:
Ford Excursion versus smart fortwo,
Ford Excursion versus Golf/Rabbit,
Excursion versus Yaris,
Excursion versus Civic,
Excursion versus Corolla,
Excursion versus Focus,
Excursion versus Cobalt.
If you're not in the Excursion, which small car would you prefer?
I suspect the smart would hold up better than many other cars in that matchup.
Mike K 11:32AM (4/29/2008)
Impressive video E-Class vs FourTwo.
I would like to see a side impact with a large vehicle. SUV hitting the side of a Smart would go a long way to convince me that it's really ready for the American road.
jamie 11:34AM (4/29/2008)
Amazing!
Check out the related links after the video. They crash a 4-2 into a Mercedes and another at high speed in the rain. Awesome structure in that tiny car.
Russell 11:42AM (4/29/2008)
@nagmashot
With non existent crumple zones the passengers in the Smart are exposed to much greater G-force than the ones in the Benz.
That impact made me cringe, watch it and see how fast Smart stops and pushed back by a heavier car.
Nothing against Smart, just basic physics.
R 1:06PM (4/29/2008)
Er...the front crumpled, did it not?
nagmashot 2:01PM (4/29/2008)
@Russel
the smart has large airbags to slow down the passengers... the g-force working on the passengers in the offset frontall crash are not better or worse than in any other vehicle..I have seen many full size SUV/truck with worse passenger results..
Euro NCAP rating for a 2007 smart WITHOUT side airbags.. in many nations the optional side airbags are standart..
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/smart_fortwo_2007/303.aspx
compare that to a 2002 Suzuki Grand Vitara
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/suzuki_grand_vitara_2002/143.aspx
2008 Nissan Navara (improved after catastrophic first 2008 test!)
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/nissan_navara_2008_2/319.aspx
CarbonBlack 2:30PM (4/29/2008)
Don't know if someone already made a link to this, but I'llpost it anyway.
fithgears test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s&feature=related
tablephone 5:07PM (4/29/2008)
Nagmashot
After watching the following video, the questions popping into my head are quite frightening...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZs1QuHerTU&NR=1
And who's the one claiming knowledge on the third laws of physics?