Yaris vs. Camry - Yaris looses

[supmet]

Originally Posted by roxy1

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)

[roxy1]

Originally Posted by supmet

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:

[Tamago]

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.

why are you two arguing about this?

[roxy1]

Originally Posted by Tamago

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]

Originally Posted by roxy1

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 )

[supmet]

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.

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.

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.

Originally Posted by tamago

why are you two arguing about this?

are you new to the idea of internet forums?