[s-cars] Teen cars

[LL - NY]

One thing not being taken into account (boron steel, non-withstanding) is
design. Saab used a similar, for the lack of a better term, perimeter frame
on the 99/900 series. It's a rather complicated section tubular frame that
surrounds the sides of the passenger compartment, very similar to what the
Impreza "perimeter frame (which is the boron steel section), but it's of
rather heavy section tubing on the Saab (I was able to inspect it when doing
body work on the car). WHAT boron steel (and other higher tech materials)
allows for is to make the perimeter frame considerably lighter than the
likely heavier similar design/construction framework on the Subaru. As I
recall, the failings of the Saab 99 series (up until about '78, when they
finally installed a proper collapsing steering column) was in frontal
barrier crashes, where Saab's attempt to "hinge away" the steering column
didn't quite work in barrier tests. Seemed to work better in more "real
world" situations.  My point is side penetration of the 99/900 would be MUCH
better than a CGT or 4K, from my estimations, as a former mechanical
engineer, and I think passenger compartment *integrity* would be reasonably
contemporary. *Survivability*, without the impact mediators such as side
airbags and curtain airbags, as with any vehicle without them, would be less
than contemporary, however, as our bodies would still flop around (greatest
issue, head and neck injuries) inside the mostly intact passenger cell.
Hell, that's even an issue with the UrS, (mAC) however, in vehicle/vehicle
crashes, mass will always win, which is why Mini still looses (no matter how
well it does in single car crashes) when it takes on a 'Sclade. Still, the
slicability of the CGT/4K (and it's corresponding lightweight, I think they,
even in quattro form, are outweighed by a Mini) pretty well regulates it to
be comparatively less safe in terms of crashability, assuming an accident
can't be avoided.

LL - NY

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:07 AM, erikaddy at yahoo.com <erikaddy at yahoo.com>wrote:

> Not a leap at all.  The construction in a mini will destroy the late 70s
> tech in the cgt (or any other car from that era).
>
> I wasn't suggesting a mini for a teen, I just used that for illustration as
> it is a small car available in the US.  You were mentioning the construction
> of the cgt in terms of safety and I'm saying almost any 2000+ car makes a
> cgt look like a death trap.
>
> Erik Addy
> Sent from a mobile device.
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: qshipq at aol.com
> Date: Wed, Dec 9, 2009 00:10
> Subject: [s-cars] Teen cars
> To: <erikaddy at yahoo.com>, <s-car-list at audifans.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> http://audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
> http://www.audifans.com/kb/List_information
>