When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
It's one thing to buy a car and keep it for 10 years because you don't want to go through the hassle of buying another car and you just don't want car payments. But it's entirely another being in denial that newer cars are just better engineered. Just the safety features alone, the crash mitigation and engineering of crush zones that absorb the impact of the crash make new cars so much better and safer. I can't tell you how many times people have made right turns right or left turns in front of me and the warning/auto braking feature saved me from an accident. But hey man, I got this old flip phone and Blackberry back from the day if anyone wants it
The Accord would certainly be headed to the scrap yard if it hit/got hit by the W140, but the passengers would likely be fine. A lot of engineering improvements have happened in 20+ years. Passengers in the w140 would probably be feeling it more in the following days as the Accord would dissipate the force better with more crumple zones
No lol! The W140 would only be slowed, the accord would reverse direction entirely....
You can't cheat physical limitations and there is just too much of a weight difference. The accord would be dealing with crash energy far in excess of its barrier testing and the W140 would be dealing with forces far below. It would be a 25-30 mph barrier crash vs a 60 mph one. That's going to mess up the accord far more.
Are old cars really better? Or are they just what we're used to and as most people age they resist change?
I suspect a little of what you mentioned, as well as some people like to buy a car and keep them for awhile, as buying a new car can be a hassle, and even maybe an expense that some don't want. My daughter and wife are perfect examples, they don't like change
Are old cars really better? Or are they just what we're used to and as most people age they resist change?
New cars will almost always be better. I think what people dont like in newer cars is that it can be overcomplicated. Its great that new road cars can go 0-60 in 4s or even much faster, but then they might have to go through 2 or 3 layers of menus to turn on the heat on some cars. Or adaptive this, self driving that, super that and etc. Imagine having a fast modern car and I can just reach over a twist a button to turn the heat on. I know, its a novel concept.
Are old cars really better? Or are they just what we're used to and as most people age they resist change?
People sometimes resist change for good reason. Old cars, even with their acknowledged limitations compared to new ones, are often much more satisfying to drive, having a personality and character to them that simply doesn't exist any more with today's rolling-appliances. Part of it, too, was that not just the cars, but the roads themselves were more fun to drive on back then, being more picturesque and scenic from less development, and not just traffic-choked strips of pavement like they are today.
TPMS is a joke. It's not hard to take 30 seconds and check your tire pressure once or twice a week. The annoying light sets it off for me as to why this "feature" is a gimmick, one of the worst in history.
This is a pretty ridiculous thing to be so up in arms about, unless, of course, you are just trying to get a rise out of everyone....again.
No lol! The W140 would only be slowed, the accord would reverse direction entirely....
You can't cheat physical limitations and there is just too much of a weight difference. The accord would be dealing with crash energy far in excess of its barrier testing and the W140 would be dealing with forces far below. It would be a 25-30 mph barrier crash vs a 60 mph one. That's going to mess up the accord far more.
No one's saying the Accord is going to survive the crash, but if it's a head on crash between the two, the Accord is going to absorb and dissipate the damage better than the W140
Great post! I loved my old BlackBerry.... but I'd never be nostalgic for it over current technology....
I loved my BB as well, but the CEO at the time wouldn't let his go! Everybody had moved on to Android or iPhones, but we had to keep a BB Enterprise server running just for him! Finally I had to show him the costs of running a dedicated BB server just for him, and he finally relented and we got him a Samsung Galaxy. As far as I know, he still only uses the Galaxy's.
BTW, I didn't save that BB for nostalgia reasons. I'm just a packrat. It's been sitting in my work cabinet since 2010 LOL
No one's saying the Accord is going to survive the crash, but if it's a head on crash between the two, the Accord is going to absorb and dissipate the damage better than the W140
People who think the amount of damage a car sustains correlates to the likelihood of the passengers being injured don't understand physics. When a car deforms less than another car, it absorbs less crash forces into the structure of the car, and transmits more of those forces to the occupants.
The reason race cars fly apart in a crash is this reason.
In an accident, the car is all sacrifice for the safety of the passengers.
People who think the amount of damage a car sustains correlates to the likelihood of the passengers being injured don't understand physics. When a car deforms less than another car, it absorbs less crash forces into the structure of the car, and transmits more of those forces to the occupants.
The reason race cars fly apart in a crash is this reason.
In an accident, the car is all sacrifice for the safety of the passengers.
That's true to an extent, but if too much of the vehicle's structure buckles around you, even with belts and air bags, you have little or nothing left protecting you from disaster.
02-21-23, 10:01 AM
