Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
I don't have ABS on my motorcycle, although its a thing now, but I would never have a bike without a slipper clutch, I would lock that rear wheel so damn often.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Certainly the most lively car I owned was a 1985 mk2 golf gti, but unlike your polo, it also stuck to the road very well, which was handy as the brake pedal could drop on the rare occasion (likely a bubble). It also had manual winders, and no power steering at all, so very good road feel.
My next car, a mk4 astra, was also pretty basic (when they tout the technological advantages of a fly by wire throttle you know where you are..) and also had no ABS.. but the brake feel remains the best I've had in a car to date. You knew when slip was occurring and it was so easy to modulate to rotate the wheels again - in snow it was quite nippy as a result! - but the downside was noticeable in emergency reactions and shock factors - if you have to jump on the brakes there isn't as much time for the feel-feedback loop and ABS would definitely be missed. It also had lovely feelsome hydro-assisted steering, which aided the snow efforts, but meant when it occasionally started failing at the end of life you had to muscle around not just the wheels, but also fight the redundant mechanism. At least it was doable.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
/\ Astra Mk4 was a superb chassis.. I agree about the brake feel too.
it shows that chassis dev did improve, because I had loads of Mk3 Astra's (not as good as Mk4) but aso had a Mk3 Rally car and I sorted that ..finally. Mk 2 was dire.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Xlucine
Every new bike bigger than 125cc has to have it fitted now, it's the law!
*Looks over at motorcycle.
Sees it's a 1992 model that was designed in 1978, and was better than a 2014 model with ABS.
Wonders what the problem is.
Shrugs shoulders and goes off for a blatt.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
don't crash it :crazy: I've had the misfortune to bin a 19 year old Polo (granted it was only about 2 when it died). It isn't pretty at all, and hurt more than it had any right to. I was VERY lucky to walk away from that one.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tumble
don't crash it :crazy: I've had the misfortune to bin a 19 year old Polo (granted it was only about 2 when it died). It isn't pretty at all, and hurt more than it had any right to. I was VERY lucky to walk away from that one.
I'm glad someone else mentioned this. It really can't be stated enough how much vehicle safety has improved over the last 20 years. I was in a serious car accident on Friday afternoon. I was stationary, hit from behind (she was texting) and pushed in to oncoming traffic. Two massive 30mph impacts that destroyed both ends of the brand new Ford I was driving (rental car). I cut my finger on some glass forcing my door open, but that was the only injury. I shudder to think about what would remain of an older car in a similar accident.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
I was just sick a little bit watching that :(
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tumble
I was just sick a little bit watching that :(
Really scary bit is the dummy's head sliding off the airbag into the side window on the Rover. :(
Interesting that the damage to the target was higher for the newer car, possibly because of the higher mass, so conversely it could be argued that it would do more damage to a less well protected car, so in a collision between the two cars shown, the Rover might be expected to come off much more badly than in the test, and the newer car suffer less damage.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
For what it's worth, the 1997 Polo actually had a better NCAP score than the Rover, but that comparison video makes the point extremely well.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Rover 100 is an easy target, it's much worse than all other cars of the era and was pulled from sale soon after the original crash tests came out
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Here's the Polo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alR7mVgxo7g
You are absolutely right, that for something as serious as this, we should avoid any question of bias. The Polo does significantly better than the Rover, and significantly worse than the modern Honda Jazz.
Zak, please take this as it is meant, a good natured desire for you to be safe and happy in all things. Some people have a passion for classic vehicles, others race cars, or motorcycles, etc. That's a choice, and I respect that. I ride motorcycles, and one day may well look toward a classic vehicle. But that is and has to be an informed choice!
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Xlucine
Rover 100 is an easy target, it's much worse than all other cars of the era and was pulled from sale soon after the original crash tests came out
Scary part is the Rover 100 I used to occasionally drive the ABS was an utter liability, if you hit a pothole or drain cover whilst breaking it would just stop breaking. There was a T junction near where I worked where it was prone to happening, sending you merrily into the traffic on the main road.
... and yet, the 100 was still probably a big improvement over the original Mini. I got rid of my 1974 mini partly because I was fed up of hearing people tell me they knew someone who lost their legs in an accident in one.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Quote:
Originally Posted by
peterb
Interesting that the damage to the target was higher for the newer car, possibly because of the higher mass, so conversely it could be argued that it would do more damage to a less well protected car, so in a collision between the two cars shown, the Rover might be expected to come off much more badly than in the test, and the newer car suffer less damage.
I'm not sure the target was more damaged - it looks like the force has been spread over a larger area, but the rover penetrates deeper. Of course, that's one of the main reasons modern cars are safer.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TeePee
I'm glad someone else mentioned this. It really can't be stated enough how much vehicle safety has improved over the last 20 years. I was in a serious car accident on Friday afternoon. I was stationary, hit from behind (she was texting) and pushed in to oncoming traffic. Two massive 30mph impacts that destroyed both ends of the brand new Ford I was driving (rental car). I cut my finger on some glass forcing my door open, but that was the only injury. I shudder to think about what would remain of an older car in a similar accident.
Modern cars are pretty awesome in that respect - I crashed mine at about 50 mph and suffered only airbag and seatbelt bruises.
Re: 20 years car development - huge leaps and small backward steps
Quote:
Originally Posted by
peterb
Really scary bit is the dummy's head sliding off the airbag into the side window on the Rover. :(
Interesting that the damage to the target was higher for the newer car, possibly because of the higher mass, so conversely it could be argued that it would do more damage to a less well protected car, so in a collision between the two cars shown, the Rover might be expected to come off much more badly than in the test, and the newer car suffer less damage.
There\'s also the physics of it. In a collision between the Rover and the Jazz, the Rover ends up going backwards, while the Jazz continues forward. Conservation of momentum is a thing! That means significantly more G forces experienced by the Rover driver.
