Quote:
Originally Posted by roxy1
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roxy1
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roxy1
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.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tamago
why are you two arguing about this?
|
are you new to the idea of internet forums?