crash test, 4k/5k

[Ti Kan]

auditude at neta.com writes:
> What the heck is up with the crash test results for 4k's and 5k's on 
> http://www.crashtest.com?!  "Poor" ratings for the driver on both 
> cars, and a "poor" for the 4k passenger.
> I thought these were safe cars.  Aren't they?

They were some of the safest cars at the time they were introduced.
If you were to judge their crash performance based on today's standards,
then it's a whole different story.  Crash performance definitely has a
lot to do with unit body design and crash energy dissipation in various
parts, and with each new generation of new Audis they raise the bar
considerably, and so it goes for many other marques.  However, the biggest
boost to crash test results was the introduction of airbags and
self-tensioning seat belts.  The 1989 Audi 100, which is basically
the same as the 5Ks before it except for the addition of Procon-ten and
airbags, got 5-star ratings for both front passenger and driver in the US
government crash test.  That was the highest score for a passenger car in
the US at the time, exceeding even Volvo and Mercedes.  4Ks, of course,
never got airbags.  That said, the government or insurance institute crash
tests only test one particular crash scenario.  Real life accidents are
far more varied and complex, and even the old 80s Audis generally do well
compared to many other cars.

-Ti
01 S4 2.7 biturbo quattro
84 5000S 2.1 turbo
80 4000 2.0
96 A4 2.8 quattro (sold but not forgotten)
-- 
    ///  Ti Kan                Vorsprung durch Technik
   ///   AMB Research Laboratories, Sunnyvale, CA. USA
  ///    ti at amb.org
 //////  http://www.ibiblio.org/tkan/
///