[urq] 80's Audi were Below average in NHTSA crash test . Audi A4bumpers are well rated

[Fred Munro]

Correct, Ingo, the UrS4 had airbags and the Pro-Con-Ten system. In the UrS6
the Pro-Con-Ten was replaced by explosive seatbelt reels.

The cables did not push the engine forward, Steven. In a collision, rearward
movement of the transmission tightened the cables, retracting the seatbelts
to remove slack and pulling the steering column and wheel forward into the
dash to move it away from the driver.

I owned two Audis with Pro-Con-Ten; my '91 200q and my '94 S4. It is a good
safety system. I suspect it's elimination had more to do with cost than
safety, although drivers side airbags fill one original design function of
Pro-Con-Ten (keeping the driver from bouncing off the steering wheel).

Fred Munro
'97 S6

-----Original Message-----
From: quattro-bounces at audifans.com
[mailto:quattro-bounces at audifans.com]On Behalf Of Ingo Rautenberg
Sent: August 17, 2007 5:31 PM
To: steven j
Cc: urq list; Tony Hoffman; Quattro List
Subject: Re: [urq] 80's Audi were Below average in NHTSA crash test .
Audi A4bumpers are well rated


Actually, they were also on the V8 and with airbags.  Plus I believe
the Ur S-cars also had it...

On Aug 17, 2007, at 5:05 PM, steven j wrote:

> I've been looking at the NHTSA crash tests since they
> came out in about 1979.   The 1985-ish Audi 5000 got a
> horrible crash rating.  With the steering rack on the
> firewall and that 5cyl going to the bumper the
> steering wheel was pushed back in a crash delivering a
> punch to the drivers head.  The 4000's tested at the
> time were just the 4cyls - and the results weren't as
> bad as the 5000, probably because the missing cylinder
> allowed  an extra 5 inches before it started pushing
> the steering rack back.  One would imagine a 5cyl in
> the type 85 would be worse than the 5000 crash test.
> Of course if you have an offset crash - and the engine
> doesn't get pushed back - the car is probably fine.
> For around 1989 Audi introduced PRO-CON-TEN in the 100
> and 200 where cables push the engine forward in a
> crash and those cars cut driver head injury to low
> levels.
>
> I think when airbags came the pro-con-ten cables might
> not have been installed, but they were on the 100/200
> only.   Feel free to correct me on details.
>
>
>
>
> --- Ed Kellock <ekellock at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ISTR that the 4k series cars were one of the highest
>> rated chassis of
>> their time in crashworthiness.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> On 8/16/07, LL - NY <larrycleung at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Having seen some of the Type 85's in the wrecking
>> yard, I'd venture a guess
>>> that
>>> you didn't go "straight in" in your accident. The
>> 4K's passenger compartment
>>> seems to buckle in a header, at least based upon
>> empirical forensic analysis
>>> at the wrecking yard, I think you were lucky.
>>>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ______________Ready for the edge of your seat?
> Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
> http://tv.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Audifans urq mailing list
> Send posts to: mailto:urq at audifans.com
> Manage your list connection: http://www.audifans.com/mailman/
> listinfo/urq
> Have an urq question?  Check the Audifans Knowledgebase!
> http://www.audifans.com/twiki/bin/view/Audi/UrQuattro
> Have an urq answer? ... Please help others by adding to the KB ...
> all contributions welcome!

_______________________________________________
quattro mailing list
quattro at audifans.com
http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/quattro
---
Watch this space for ads :)