Yaris vs. Camry - Yaris looses [Archive] - Toyota Yaris Forums

supmet

06-14-2009, 04:51 PM

poor yaris.. what a waste lol

Exactly. Why waste money testing a one in a million accident. Both drivers would have to be asleep to not attempt ANY correction, and then still it is a slim chance to line up their forces perfectly opposite of each other. If either car had their course set 1 degree off of that test, the results would have been far less catastrophic.

Also, I don't feel like looking for camry vs 4000 lb vehicle collisions, but I don't think you're walking away from a head on with 7 series or a suburban with just a few bruises.

TheSilkySmooth

06-14-2009, 04:58 PM

this has been discussed before many times... small cars dont do well against heavy ones in these kinds of crashes... Camry isnt that heavy, maybe 3400lbs? Prob = a 50mph barrier crash.

Yaris Hilton

06-14-2009, 05:09 PM

No. The cars were both going 40 MPH, so if they were of equal mass it would be like an 80 MPH single vehicle collision. But because the Camry is ~1000 lbs heavier than the Yaris, they don't stop equally quickly. The Yaris is driven backward instead of coming to a halt, and therefore it's like a considerably faster barrier collision. 100 MPH, say.

The same physics apply with the Camry vs. a big Toyota pickup, or that pickup against a larger truck...

voodoo22

06-14-2009, 05:30 PM

I don't like seeing this, but if you get a Camry to feel safer, then where does it end? With everyone drive full sized rigs? I'll continue to remain alert and stick at or below speed limits and enjoy our Yaris.

roxy1

06-14-2009, 06:50 PM

Exactly. Why waste money testing a one in a million accident. Both drivers would have to be asleep to not attempt ANY correction.

sorry, but to call these types of crashes one in a million is a little ignorant.

drunk driving fatalities often occur very similar to this, where the drunk driver, without any notice to the oncoming car, veers across the center line. same goes for drowsy drivers, distracted drivers, etc...leaving the other driver little or no time to make any correction. those type of drunk driving fatalities were part of the impetus for these crash tests in europe. 100% identical. no, but these offset crash test come very close to simulating those types of crashes.

from the IIHS Status Report, 2007.

A disproportionate number of fatal
crashes occur on rural roads, and most
such crashes occur on two-lane roads. A
major problem on these roads involves
vehicles crossing the centerlines and striking
opposing traffic. Crashes like these
account for about 20 percent of all fatal
crashes on rural two-lane roads. Approximately
4,500 deaths occur annually in
such collisions.

we all have to face the fact if we are in a head on or offset collision at even a moderate speed we have a decent chance of either dying instantly or being crippled and/or brain damaged for life. there are very few cars we would collide with that would afford us the opportunity to fare better than that in a head on crash.

as a small car driver i have always been very cognizant of this and am very dilligent in driving with the attitude that every driver on the road could be an idiot.

supmet

06-14-2009, 08:38 PM

sorry, but to call these types of crashes one in a million is a little ignorant.

Wow a bunch of numbers that do nothing to show how often cars hit with exactly opposite forces, thanks!

Here is something from wiki that's actually useful:

# Head-on collision (123,000 crashes, only 2.0% of all US crashes, but 10.1% of US fatal crashes)

2% is low, but how many of those are exactly opposite vectors of each other?? 1% maybe? Probably less? I used 1 in a million before as an idiom, but it may not be far off.

TheSilkySmooth

06-14-2009, 08:54 PM

No. The cars were both going 40 MPH, so if they were of equal mass it would be like an 80 MPH single vehicle collision. You are incorrect here, Mr. Hilton. Simple physics, Newton's third law/conservation of momentum. If both vehicles weighed the same (Mass a=b) and they were traveling the same velocity and collided head on - this situation would be equivalent to a single vehicle collision into an immovable barrier (the Dozer in Vanishing Point?). What added to the structural damage is the 1/3 offset and the 1/2 tonne extra mass of the Camry. Without going through the calculus, I estimate a 50mph barrier collision. The Yaris damage in this trial isnt that much worse than vehicle structures 10 years ago; survivable but with injuries. Still ugly.

cleong

06-14-2009, 08:58 PM

In this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEvZt7wxovY) case, the Yaris wins.

It handles better, and can get you out of a dangerous situation instead of relying on its crash stars. Note how the Camry loses control, the Yaris is on the inside line of the Camry, and still retains enough control to brake in the same distance it takes the Camry to spin to a halt.

texkid

06-14-2009, 09:14 PM

Wow a bunch of numbers that do nothing to show how often cars hit with exactly opposite forces, thanks!

Here is something from wiki that's actually useful:

# Head-on collision (123,000 crashes, only 2.0% of all US crashes, but 10.1% of US fatal crashes)

2% is low, but how many of those are exactly opposite vectors of each other?? 1% maybe? Probably less? I used 1 in a million before as an idiom, but it may not be far off.

Well, look at the rate of crashed Yaris owners on this forum. We're up to 7, I believe? One of them ended up in the ICU. The number of yaris owners that post on this forum is a just a SMALL fraction of the total number of Yaris owners in the US from '06 to '09 models. Therefore, I bet there is some Yaris owner out there that did get into a really bad head on collision that we don't know about.

Besides, I would like for you to keep up that smug attitude if you were to have to explain to a mother how her child was the "1 in a million" that died in the collision.

Another thing is that when they test these types of accidents, they want to see how the car will handle in an absolute worst case scenario (e.g. head on collisions and t-bones).

TheSilkySmooth

06-14-2009, 09:24 PM

Here's a 60 MPH real offest crash viddy (VERY UGLY) between two cars considered to have good structures. I dont think I could walk away from this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fe3JpuVy4cA&feature=PlayList&p=3A7A0437E92DC48B&index=25

TheSilkySmooth

06-14-2009, 09:28 PM

I am not promoting heavier cars, I have driven sub-compacts for most of my life. They are maneuverable and can help a good driver AVOID an accident. Down with H2's, no Trailblaizers, No Yukons, No Ford Explorers, Expeditions, Excursions. etc! (I dont want them to hit me!)

leasaunce

06-14-2009, 09:34 PM

check out the headlight! weeee!

SilverBack

06-14-2009, 09:37 PM

See my comment on the first vid

SailDesign

06-14-2009, 09:51 PM

Here is something from wiki that's actually useful:

# Head-on collision (123,000 crashes, only 2.0% of all US crashes, but 10.1% of US fatal crashes)

So, using those numbers at face value, you are 5 times more likely to die in a head-on crash than in any other. Which is about what you would expect from the carnage in the video. One of the drivers, at least, would have died.

Sandwash

06-15-2009, 12:53 AM

Exactly. Why waste money testing a one in a million accident. Both drivers would have to be asleep to not attempt ANY correction, and then still it is a slim chance to line up their forces perfectly opposite of each other. If either car had their course set 1 degree off of that test, the results would have been far less catastrophic.

Also, I don't feel like looking for camry vs 4000 lb vehicle collisions, but I don't think you're walking away from a head on with 7 series or a suburban with just a few bruises.

Yes - thank you; there is risk to driving/living, and good news is that risk can be reduced via consciousness and action. Drive well/alert and chances are we'll likely live to life expectancy, at least.

Red Horse

06-15-2009, 03:34 AM

Toyota should move the Yaris driver seat in the center :)

roxy1

06-15-2009, 10:28 AM

Wow a bunch of numbers that do nothing to show how often cars hit with exactly opposite forces, thanks!

Here is something from wiki that's actually useful:

# Head-on collision................but 10.1% of US fatal crashes)

2% is low, but how many of those are exactly opposite vectors of each other?? .

sarcastic and smug all at once...are you sure you dont drive a prius?

so, one out of every 50 crashes is a head on collision. head on crashes are going to be quite often opposite vectors of each other.

you just cited information that contradicts your "1 in a million" idea. then you ask a question that my useless statistics already gave you the answer to. the head on crashes are precisely the crashes that make up a good chunk of the fatalities.

head on crashes may make up 2% of all crashes in the u.s. but the fact that head on crashes make up for 10% of fatal crashes is very disproportionate.

so, of the 40,000 fatal crashes per year in the U.S., 4000 of them are due to head on collisions.

trees make up another 8% of all fatal crashes, and certainly many of those are of the head on variety.

so, clearly more than 1 in 50 crashes are of the head on variety. to argue about how precisely offset the crashes are is not productive. a head on crash in any car has a disproportionate chance of ending in a fatality compared to all crashes, and having it happen in a yaris wont make those odds better.

however, the point that driving a smaller, more nimble car can help one avoid crashes in the first place is valid, so there are advantages to a car like the yaris that crash tests, of course, cannot measure.

roxy1

06-15-2009, 10:31 AM

Toyota should move the Yaris driver seat in the center :)

...and to the back seat. just need a steering wheel that telescopes 4 feet.

supmet

06-15-2009, 12:57 PM

so, one out of every 50 crashes is a head on collision.

so, clearly more than 1 in 50 crashes are of the head on variety.

I don't argue with people that forget where they are going by the end of their own paragraph.(or people that consider trees head on collisions)

Tamago

06-15-2009, 01:17 PM

driving lessons are a better way to spend your money than buying a heavier car :)

a majority of accidents happen when the driver of one or both vehicles is screwing around "not" driving.. radio, makeup, smoking, reading, talking on the phone.... it's just a shame when the irresponsible driver takes out the guy who was paying attention but couldn't react quickly enough

POORSHA

06-15-2009, 01:48 PM

Hate to mention it, but there was a video of a smart vs mercedes. The smart did ok.

Tamago

06-15-2009, 01:55 PM

Hate to mention it, but there was a video of a smart vs mercedes. The smart did ok.

the smart has always done well. no surprise there.

supmet

06-15-2009, 01:59 PM

the smart has always done well. no surprise there.

The smart did ok. What about the passengers? I'm still a firm believer in the necessity of crumple zones.

There's a video of the smart running into a concrete barrier, and then the guy is like "oh look how well built the smart is! the passenger door still opens!". Everyone would have died in that car.

Tamago

06-15-2009, 02:01 PM

The smart

There's a video of the smart running into a concrete barrier, and then the guy is like "oh look how well built the smart is! the passenger door still opens!". Everyone would have died in that car.

please name ANY car where the passengers would survive an 70mph head on impact. and don't take that video out of context. the commentator stated in the video that no one would have made it out alive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJnWSUhjp0g

supmet

06-15-2009, 02:04 PM

please name ANY car where the passengers would survive an 70mph head on impact.

I googled 70 mph collision, and this was the first link that wasn't about the smart test :eek:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Strange-News/Puppy-Survives-70mph-Car-Collision-In-Cozze-Southern-Italy/Article/200811315153872

roxy1

06-15-2009, 02:38 PM

I don't argue with people that forget where they are going by the end of their own paragraph.(or people that consider trees head on collisions)

reading is a skill. since some frontal collisions with trees and other solid barriers are obviously head on collisions, and car on car head on collisions make up for 1 in 50 of crashes, then obviously more than 1 in 50 crashes are of the head on variety.

physics will clearly show that hitting a tree head on will impart more damage than two cars hitting each other going 25 mph.

the abilities of a car to withstand these types of crash tests has relevance in the context of any type of head on collision regardless of the object.

they are not "wasting their money testing a 1 in a million accident"

sorry you dont consider these types of crashes as head on collisions. i do:

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb313/roxy84_photos/large_crash.jpg

Tamago

06-15-2009, 02:46 PM

TheRealEnth

06-15-2009, 02:49 PM

cars crash.. people die.... dont worry about statistics.... just try to be a good driver.... if someone else was the bad driver and u got f**ked over.. then thats life.... end it

roxy1

06-15-2009, 03:11 PM

why are you two arguing about this?

you are right. i wasted a good six minutes of my life rebutting a statement that was ludicrous in the first place. from now on i will let ignorant statements stand on their own.

i should have known better then to get dragged down.

shame on me

Tamago

06-15-2009, 03:13 PM

you are right. i wasted a good six minutes of my life rebutting a statement that was ludicrous in the first place. from now on i will let ignorant statements stand on their own.

i should have known better then to get dragged down.

shame on me

the shame is all yours! (by the way i do this too, all the time :cry:)

roxy1

06-15-2009, 03:18 PM

The smart did ok. What about the passengers? I'm still a firm believer in the necessity of crumple zones.

There's a video of the smart running into a concrete barrier, and then the guy is like "oh look how well built the smart is! the passenger door still opens!". Everyone would have died in that car.

ill make nice and agree with supmet on this. deceleration plays havoc with internal organs of the body and head. while the cage of the smart might keep the interior of the car intact, the deceleration would have to be made worse by lack of much in the way of a crumple zone.

Tamago

06-15-2009, 03:23 PM

ill make nice and agree with supmet on this. deceleration plays havoc with internal organs of the body and head. while the cage of the smart might keep the interior of the car intact, the deceleration would have to be made worse by lack of much in the way of a crumple zone.

i'd rather die with my legs intact than live with my lower body crushed by the dash/steering column.

living without legs is not living.

Yaris Hilton

06-15-2009, 03:28 PM

You are incorrect here, Mr. Hilton. Simple physics, Newton's third law/conservation of momentum. If both vehicles weighed the same (Mass a=b) and they were traveling the same velocity and collided head on - this situation would be equivalent to a single vehicle collision into an immovable barrier (the Dozer in Vanishing Point?). What added to the structural damage is the 1/3 offset and the 1/2 tonne extra mass of the Camry. Without going through the calculus, I estimate a 50mph barrier collision. The Yaris damage in this trial isnt that much worse than vehicle structures 10 years ago; survivable but with injuries. Still ugly.

You are totally incorrect, from start to finish.

Tamago

06-15-2009, 03:34 PM

You are totally incorrect, from start to finish.

hahahahaha PWND

silkysmooth, give this a try. run into a wall at 10mph

then run into a buddy who's also running 10mph at you

let us know which one hurts more

supmet

06-15-2009, 04:49 PM

reading is a skill. since some frontal collisions with trees and other solid barriers are obviously head on collisions, and car on car head on collisions make up for 1 in 50 of crashes, then obviously more than 1 in 50 crashes are of the head on variety.

And that has what context to me talking about 2 cars hitting head on, with perfectly oppositely aligned forces. That is the ONLY thing my original post was about - any real world situation, someone will attempt correction, giving a tangent to the force, rather than having it crumple the entire vehicle from being perfectly aligned. You chose to start talking about trees and crap, which is pretty much when I stopped trying to understand what you were talking about.

physics will clearly show that hitting a tree head on will impart more damage than two cars hitting each other going 25 mph.

A car going how fast hitting the tree? And lets just pull some more random numbers out of nowhere to confuse the situation more.

the abilities of a car to withstand these types of crash tests has relevance in the context of any type of head on collision regardless of the object.

Sort of true, but more useful data could be obtained from more realistic tests.

why are you two arguing about this?

are you new to the idea of internet forums?

Zaphod

06-15-2009, 05:13 PM

cars crash.. people die.... dont worry about statistics.... just try to be a good driver.... if someone else was the bad driver and u got f**ked over.. then thats life.... end it
Neverway! You should embrace the roadrage and play chicken with oncoming traffic on the highway like there's no tomorrow.:burnrubber:

TheSilkySmooth

06-15-2009, 10:26 PM

You are totally incorrect, from start to finish. Back to school, the whole lot of you! You guys probably think a ten pound weight falls faster than a 3 pound weight. Flat-earthers ...

SailDesign

06-15-2009, 10:31 PM

Back to school, the whole lot of you! You guys probably think a ten pound weight falls faster than a 3 pound weight. Flat-earthers ...

I'll bet my 10-pound cannon ball falls faster than your 3-pound pillow. :biggrin:

Tamago

06-15-2009, 10:37 PM

Back to school, the whole lot of you! You guys probably think a ten pound weight falls faster than a 3 pound weight. Flat-earthers ...

we're not talking about acceleration here dude, just simple math

TheSilkySmooth

06-15-2009, 10:37 PM

Maybe there is ONE eductaed individual out there.
Q: Given the Law of conservation of Energy(And the First law of Thermodynamics), when two cars collide head on and stop moving, what happens to the Kinetic Energy?

supmet

06-15-2009, 10:38 PM

eductaed

I'm gonna pee my pants :bellyroll:

TheSilkySmooth

06-15-2009, 10:41 PM

we're not talking about acceleration here dude, just simple math Math? We are solving a physics Equation, you must know the Physical Laws of Nature before you can proceed.

I have no hope for the World anymore; Idiocracy Rules!

TheSilkySmooth

06-15-2009, 10:42 PM

I'm gonna pee my pants :bellyroll: Hey, that's LATIN:redface:

TheSilkySmooth

06-15-2009, 10:43 PM

I'll bet my 10-pound cannon ball falls faster than your 3-pound pillow. :biggrin: Wont bet you on that one:wink:

mikenacarato

06-15-2009, 10:46 PM

you know...to this day...i dont think ive seen silkysmooth post one thing that makes sense and is a correct statement

1NZYaris1

06-15-2009, 11:11 PM

hahahahaha PWND

silkysmooth, give this a try. run into a wall at 10mph

then run into a buddy who's also running 10mph at you

let us know which one hurts more

I can answer that one , :biggrin: i suffered a serious head injury 2.5yr's ago
from doing just that , except it was a steel beam :redface:, and accordding to the doctors , and speacialist's it's worse than a 100mph crash.
three contusion's and neck and shoulder damage , 3 operations
last one 8 weeks ago and another in 5 weeks .
if you are worried about getting hurt stay of the roads :thumbsup:
and i am yet to return too work

Twistoffate0817

06-16-2009, 09:16 PM

Of course the yaris would get more damaged...

highwaypass

06-16-2009, 10:31 PM

brother vs bigger brother :biggrin:

Yaris Hilton

06-17-2009, 05:06 AM

You are incorrect here, Mr. Hilton. Simple physics, Newton's third law/conservation of momentum. If both vehicles weighed the same (Mass a=b) and they were traveling the same velocity and collided head on - this situation would be equivalent to a single vehicle collision into an immovable barrier (the Dozer in Vanishing Point?).

You know, I think you're right about the two equal mass cars slamming into each other exactly head on being just about like one of them slamming into an immovable fixed barrier at the same speed. I was thinking of one of them slamming into a similar stationary one at double the speed, which would also be equivalent. Sorry!

voodoo22

06-17-2009, 08:08 AM

brother vs bigger brother :biggrin:

...but I'm bigger than my big brother:biggrin:

TheSilkySmooth

06-20-2009, 04:13 PM

kinetic energy is transferred...where?to the car thats why it is mangled and not you. go back about 50years and have a head on collision in one of the caddies, the car will have a scratch....you will be tomato paste... simple The answer is HEAT energy.

TheSilkySmooth

06-20-2009, 04:15 PM

you know...to this day...i dont think ive seen silkysmooth post one thing that makes sense and is a correct statement
Oh, thats just a North vs. South thing. I DO like bar-B-Que, though.

TheSilkySmooth

06-20-2009, 04:24 PM

You know, I think you're right about the two equal mass cars slamming into each other exactly head on being just about like one of them slamming into an immovable fixed barrier at the same speed. I was thinking of one of them slamming into a similar stationary one at double the speed, which would also be equivalent. Sorry! Thanks, Mr Hilton :) I Appreciate that, muchly!
Short story, I had a fist fight when I was a kid with my best friend playing poker over what card was higher value, King or Queen. I incorrectly thought Queen and vehemently defended my misguided "fact". I was wrong, and feel bad about that fight to this day. I'm sure I'll be wrong here and there, but I try to be carefull when I'm guessing or supposing, I'll say that, and not pose my opinions as facts. Sorta like at University where you have to footnote your references.

Now for fun, here is a picture of a Ford F150 extended cab into a "soft" offset barrier at 40 MPH, that the Yaris passed with GOOD rating. The Ford did POOR.

TheSilkySmooth

06-20-2009, 04:25 PM

How bout a Saab that did poor - aint they supposed to be a Safe car like Volvo?

TheSilkySmooth

06-20-2009, 04:29 PM

Heres the 07 Yaris. Rating GOOD.

From IIHS.org:

"The Institute began frontal offset crash testing in 1995. In the Institute's 40 mph offset test, 40 percent of the total width of each vehicle strikes a barrier on the driver side. The barrier's deformable face is made of aluminum honeycomb, which makes the forces in the test similar to those involved in a frontal offset crash between two vehicles of the same weight, each going just less than 40 mph."

ellenbetty

06-20-2009, 06:29 PM

[QUOTE=roxy1;335609]
we all have to face the fact if we are in a head on or offset collision at even a moderate speed we have a decent chance of either dying instantly or being crippled and/or brain damaged for life. there are very few cars we would collide with that would afford us the opportunity to fare better than that in a head on crash./QUOTE]

I thought this web site was for owners of the Yaris. So unless you own a Yaris, as well as the vehicle you talk about owning, and have a constructive thing to save to reduce the risk of being killed during a head on accident while driving a Yaris, why are you wasting space on this web site? I traded in a Ford Ranger, as a down payment, to buy my second 2007 Yaris 3 door hatchback, (yes I am making two car payments on 2 Yarises, that how good I think the design of the Yaris 3 door liftback is.). I have been rear ended, in a Horizon, by a Ford F350, by a driver who expected me to run a red light on a interstate off ramp. The rear end of the Horizon was crushed in. Other than a shoulder bruise, which took 3 months to heal, I walked away from the accident. I think the Yaris 3 door hatchback is the best designed automobile I have owned or have seen. Driving a Yaris is a lot safer than riding a bicycle on the road. I know what it is like to be rear ended, while riding a bicycle, by a van. 6 weeks in the hospital. One year out patient doing spinal rehabilitation. 2 1/2 years vocational rehabilitation.

TheSilkySmooth

06-20-2009, 08:31 PM

we all have to face the fact if we are in a head on or offset collision at even a moderate speed we have a decent chance of either dying instantly or being crippled and/or brain damaged for life. there are very few cars we would collide with that would afford us the opportunity to fare better than that in a head on crash.

I thought this web site was for owners of the Yaris. So unless you own a Yaris, as well as the vehicle you talk about owning, and have a constructive thing to save to reduce the risk of being killed during a head on accident while driving a Yaris, why are you wasting space on this web site? I traded in a Ford Ranger, as a down payment, to buy my second 2007 Yaris 3 door hatchback, (yes I am making two car payments on 2 Yarises, that how good I think the design of the Yaris 3 door liftback is.). I have been rear ended, in a Horizon, by a Ford F350, by a driver who expected me to run a red light on a interstate off ramp. The rear end of the Horizon was crushed in. Other than a shoulder bruise, which took 3 months to heal, I walked away from the accident. I think the Yaris 3 door hatchback is the best designed automobile I have owned or have seen. Driving a Yaris is a lot safer than riding a bicycle on the road. I know what it is like to be rear ended, while riding a bicycle, by a van. 6 weeks in the hospital. One year out patient doing spinal rehabilitation. 2 1/2 years vocational rehabilitation. Sorry to hear about your accidents, but sometimes you have to ignore signals to avoid being hit in the rear. If someone behind you cant stop - get out of the way, where possible. I drove into some bushes in front of a restaurant ( exit - stage right!) to avoid being rear-ended on a state highway in unexpected stopped traffic around a blind curve- the guy hit the person in front of me instead(while I was hiding in the bushes). I always have one eye in the rear view mirror, especially if im stopped in a precarious spot. Save me a few times, and saved motorcyclist behind me a few times too.:thumbup:

roxy1

06-20-2009, 09:42 PM

I thought this web site was for owners of the Yaris. So unless you own a Yaris, as well as the vehicle you talk about owning, and have a constructive thing to save to reduce the risk of being killed during a head on accident while driving a Yaris, why are you wasting space on this web site? .

wow. that seemed rather rude, and considering that was your second post since joining seven months ago it makes a poor impression. how could you post complaining about "having a constructive thing to say to reduce the risk of being killed in a head on accident while driving a yaris" and then contribute nothing of the sort in the rest of your post?? in one of my posts i stated :"however, the point that driving a smaller, more nimble car can help one avoid crashes in the first place is valid, so there are advantages to a car like the yaris that crash tests, of course, cannot measure. "

i did own a 2007 yaris hatchback 5 speed for over a year, so i am very familiar with the car. i traded for my corolla for a few reasons, but i have debated for some time about a yaris hatchback as a second car now. i like to keep up with whats going on with the yaris. nobody needs to own a yaris to be a member here. there are several reasons why a non owner might want to frequent this sight. it is a terrific sight despite the rare rude post, and unless we have moved to China, i think i have every right to post here (and maybe even contribute something once in a while) whenever the mood strikes me.

GeneW

06-20-2009, 10:18 PM