Friend hit stop sign doing 40mph and no airbags deployed
11-03-08, 08:21 PM
#31
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
Only an idiot would say seat belts don't save lives. It would be helpful to read what was written before commenting like this.
11-03-08, 09:42 PM
#32
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently you'd all like to take issue with my stance. I'm not here to argue it. Reread what I wrote. There's a lot of reading into what I said going on here. I write at face value - I'm not a poet. Read it at face value.
If you want to believe airbags save lives, rock on. If you think the $30B we've spent on airbags over the last 10 years is worthwhile when IMHO all it has done is increase minimum cost and minimum weight of every vehicle sold in the US, rock on.
To answer some specifics - NO you can't hit your head on the windshield with your seatbelt on. If you could it would be completely and utterly useless. You can hit your head on the side window since seat belts in cars do a poor job of lateral control.
Using FARS to measure the efficacy of airbags is like choosing a group of terminal cancer patients for drug testing a cholesterol drug. Your sample pool is tainted. In order for a statistical analysis to be valid it needs to include ALL accident types, not just fatal accidents. Government statistical analyses of FARS indicate airbags are effective in restraining and reducing injury in unbelted car occupants. There is no significant statistical difference between belted occupants with or without airbags in fatal accidents. If you want to argue with the conclusions of a statistical analysis you would need to take it up with the study's author. She's taken loads of abuse from government sources because the government can't afford to admit it made a mistake and killed a few hundred children and small adults with airbags they mandated.
NO airbags are NOT optional, and removing or disabling them is a Federal offense.
The airbags didn't deploy in the wife's tC and rightly so. There was no sudden frontal impact. I did not in any way imply they should have deployed. And the assessment of the speed and severity of the accident is completely wrong. She was traveling 65 mph, swerved to miss a dog, and rolled the car when a wheel went off the pavement down a small berm and she tried to steer back onto the road without stopping. Predictably, the car rolled. It hit nothing solid other than a road sign. The car did precisely what I would expect and precisely what was required to keep her safe. Had she not released her seat belt while inverted she would only have had minor cuts and bruises from glass shards and the roll itself. I included the picture to do ONE thing - show where the sensors are mounted. NOTHING ELSE.
More on Mary C. Meyer's work here.
More reading for those who are interested. This piece is written by Leonard Evans.
An oldie but a goodie.
If you want to believe airbags save lives, rock on. If you think the $30B we've spent on airbags over the last 10 years is worthwhile when IMHO all it has done is increase minimum cost and minimum weight of every vehicle sold in the US, rock on.
To answer some specifics - NO you can't hit your head on the windshield with your seatbelt on. If you could it would be completely and utterly useless. You can hit your head on the side window since seat belts in cars do a poor job of lateral control.
Using FARS to measure the efficacy of airbags is like choosing a group of terminal cancer patients for drug testing a cholesterol drug. Your sample pool is tainted. In order for a statistical analysis to be valid it needs to include ALL accident types, not just fatal accidents. Government statistical analyses of FARS indicate airbags are effective in restraining and reducing injury in unbelted car occupants. There is no significant statistical difference between belted occupants with or without airbags in fatal accidents. If you want to argue with the conclusions of a statistical analysis you would need to take it up with the study's author. She's taken loads of abuse from government sources because the government can't afford to admit it made a mistake and killed a few hundred children and small adults with airbags they mandated.
NO airbags are NOT optional, and removing or disabling them is a Federal offense.
The airbags didn't deploy in the wife's tC and rightly so. There was no sudden frontal impact. I did not in any way imply they should have deployed. And the assessment of the speed and severity of the accident is completely wrong. She was traveling 65 mph, swerved to miss a dog, and rolled the car when a wheel went off the pavement down a small berm and she tried to steer back onto the road without stopping. Predictably, the car rolled. It hit nothing solid other than a road sign. The car did precisely what I would expect and precisely what was required to keep her safe. Had she not released her seat belt while inverted she would only have had minor cuts and bruises from glass shards and the roll itself. I included the picture to do ONE thing - show where the sensors are mounted. NOTHING ELSE.
More on Mary C. Meyer's work here.
More reading for those who are interested. This piece is written by Leonard Evans.
An oldie but a goodie.
Interesting reads about the airbag studies anyways.
11-04-08, 06:28 AM
#33
Lexus Champion
11-04-08, 03:52 PM
#34
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
For someone who doesn't want to argue it you sure spend a lot of time defending your stance, yet you never address the key concerns to the flaws of her research. I'm not saying the original FARS study is correct, but what I am saying is Meyer's is clearly flawed. Several fundamental pieces of information are completely left out, and if you think airbags are killers based on one statistical analysis and refuse to accept any sensible reasoning then you are clearly an unreasonable individual. You're entitled to your own opinion, but I sure feel sorry for someone who won't accept any other ideas.
Interesting reads about the airbag studies anyways.
Interesting reads about the airbag studies anyways.
Discussion of “Who Wants Airbags?”
Charles J. Kahane, PhD, National Center for Statistics and Analysis, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
I would not recommend using the Crashworthiness Data System (CDS) of the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) for analyzing the fatality-reducing effectiveness of air bags, because a much larger data file—the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), a census of the nation’s traffic fatalities since 1975—is available for that purpose. The relatively small number of fatality cases on CDS and the high sampling error of statistics generated in this type of analysis make it difficult to obtain statistically meaningful, let alone precise estimates of fatality reduction.
The best available estimates of fatality reduction by air bags are still the ones based on analyses of FARS, specifically the estimates in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Fifth/Sixth Report to Congress—Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems and Their Use. Analyses of that type have shown, over the years, a consistent and statistically significant 12 percent overall fatality reduction for air bags.
That said, I think the authors have selected the right statistical methods (including the use of SUDAAN for computing sampling errors) for their data and their analysis goals, and have clearly explained how their analyses work and how the results should be interpreted.
Reference
Fifth/Sixth Report to Congress—Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems and Their Use, NHTSA Report No. DOT HS 809 442, Washington, DC, 2001, pp. 6–11.
Charles J. Kahane, PhD, National Center for Statistics and Analysis, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
I would not recommend using the Crashworthiness Data System (CDS) of the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) for analyzing the fatality-reducing effectiveness of air bags, because a much larger data file—the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), a census of the nation’s traffic fatalities since 1975—is available for that purpose. The relatively small number of fatality cases on CDS and the high sampling error of statistics generated in this type of analysis make it difficult to obtain statistically meaningful, let alone precise estimates of fatality reduction.
The best available estimates of fatality reduction by air bags are still the ones based on analyses of FARS, specifically the estimates in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Fifth/Sixth Report to Congress—Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems and Their Use. Analyses of that type have shown, over the years, a consistent and statistically significant 12 percent overall fatality reduction for air bags.
That said, I think the authors have selected the right statistical methods (including the use of SUDAAN for computing sampling errors) for their data and their analysis goals, and have clearly explained how their analyses work and how the results should be interpreted.
Reference
Fifth/Sixth Report to Congress—Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Systems and Their Use, NHTSA Report No. DOT HS 809 442, Washington, DC, 2001, pp. 6–11.
Maybe you are the unreasonable one since you fail to grasp what is written, and fail to grasp why the NHTSA can't back down from the requirement for airbags.
And just for the record, this is how dangerous the airbags in the front of the IS-F are - note the cautions directly from Lexus in the factory service manual for deploying an airbag before disposal to prevent inadvertent airbag deployment (resulting in injury to anyone too close)
Last edited by lobuxracer; 11-04-08 at 04:03 PM.
11-05-08, 12:50 AM
#35
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok So I ask again if they are so dangerous why are there 12 in the IS-F?
What's left out? The same NHTSA statistical analysts who use FARS and claim airbags are life saving reviewed Meyers work and said her only error was not using FARS. See last page.
Sure, I'm an unreasonable person because you say so. Why are you so convinced my point, which I've supported with references, is invalid?
Maybe you are the unreasonable one since you fail to grasp what is written, and fail to grasp why the NHTSA can't back down from the requirement for airbags.
And just for the record, this is how dangerous the airbags in the front of the IS-F are - note the cautions directly from Lexus in the factory service manual for deploying an airbag before disposal to prevent inadvertent airbag deployment (resulting in injury to anyone too close)
Sure, I'm an unreasonable person because you say so. Why are you so convinced my point, which I've supported with references, is invalid?
Maybe you are the unreasonable one since you fail to grasp what is written, and fail to grasp why the NHTSA can't back down from the requirement for airbags.
And just for the record, this is how dangerous the airbags in the front of the IS-F are - note the cautions directly from Lexus in the factory service manual for deploying an airbag before disposal to prevent inadvertent airbag deployment (resulting in injury to anyone too close)
By your theory if 2 can be deadly then wouldn't 12 amount to suicide? If that is the case then why did they put so many in our cars?
UPDATE: I tried to log onto NHTSA's Website to check how the IS-F rated and their site was down. But I did find out all of this wonderful information about the rating system used to test safety of vehicles:
When manufacturers get a 5-star crash rating for one of their models, the klieg lights and publicity klaxon get thorough workouts. Those tiny ten-sided polygons have gotten to mean so much to consumers that it's not unusual for a carmaker to drop a few hundred large on prime time commercial space and 60-point text to convey the message. Well, not to deflate anyone's... airbag... but Airbag Solutions has broken down the test methodology and what the results mean in real-world cases. It in no way demeans the quality of the rating system or the work done by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, as well as similar tests performed by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, but it does show that ultimately the ratings apply to a narrower set of circumstances than one might have thought. For instance, crash test dummies replicate effects only for adults -- babies, kids, and teenagers don't count. If you're in a crash at more than 40 mph, or if you hit a car with a weight differential of more than 250 lbs, the rating scale doesn't apply. One would assume that a 5-star car at 38 mph would still be better in a crash at 70 mph than a 3-star car, but there's a lot of gray area around the well-defined boundaries of the protocols.
[Source: Airbag Solutions]
“5 Stars”...How Safe Is That?
What exactly does the government “5 Star Crash Rating” mean? You won’t believe the answer!! If you’re in an accident, these ratings may not help you.
Almost every car company proudly displays their “5 Star Safety Crash Rating”, each manufacturer boasting their cars are safer than the others. But what does it all mean to you? How do they determine safety and how do they come up with a star program? Does a vehicle with a less than 5 star rating really mean it’s not safe to drive?
Let me begin to explain what they are all talking about. The ratings are determined by crash dummies, wired with sensors, placed in vehicles front and rear seats, and crashed into barriers to simulate an accident. But before we get into the particulars, let’s first understand the parameters.
1. The tests are conducted at speeds of 35 to 38.5 mph. Wait a minute.....35-38.5 mph? Who drives 35-38.5 mph. when the rest of the world is traveling at 45-75 mph? The government safety ratings do not cover anything over 38.5 mph. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety raises the bar though...they test at 40mph; a full 1 1⁄2 mile per hour faster...zoom, zoom.
2. Crash dummies only simulate full size adults, not teens, not children, not infants. Aren’t teenagers, children and infants passengers too? Why don’t they count in the ‘rating’ system?The crash dummies are wearing seat belts in all cases, front and rear seats...(everyone in vehicles always wears their seat belts, don’t they?).
3. The crash dummies are wired to measure injuries to head, neck, chest, pelvis, legs and feet, but all these findings are not included in the rating. The ratings only measure head and chest injuries for frontal crashes and head injuries only for side crashes (evidently, other injuries are not serious enough to count in a government study).
4. Impact assumptions are for similar vehicles, differing no more than 250 lbs. This means if you are driving a small, full size or luxury car and you hit an SUV or a minivan...the rating doesn’t count (and it certainly doesn’t count if you happen to hit a tractor trailer...those crashes might change the star ratings).
5. Finally, the rating is only referring to injuries that require immediate hospitalization or are life-threatening.
How about rear-end crashes, what are the ratings for that? Well, here’s what the government says about that:
“NHTSA’s New Car Assessment Program has a limited budget and must
concentrate its ratings on front and side-impact crashes which every year are
responsible for the highest percentage of deaths and serious injuries.”
Here is a summary of the ratings we so proudly hold valuable...
For frontal crash ratings
5 stars
= 10 percent or less chance of serious injury
4 stars
= 11 percent to 20 percent chance of serious injury
3 stars
= 21 percent to 35 percent chance of serious injury
2 stars
= 36 percent to 45 percent chance of serious injury
1 star
= 46 percent or greater chance of serious injury
For side crash ratings
5 stars
= 5 percent or less chance of serious injury
4 stars
= 6 percent to 10 percent chance of serious injury
3 stars
= 11 percent to 20 percent chance of serious injury
2 stars
= 21 percent to 25 percent chance of serious injury
1 star
= 26 percent or greater chance of serious injury
...and here’s what this all means to you.
1) If you happen to be in a crash faster than 38.5 mph, forget about the rating scales altogether!
2) If you are a teen, child or infant sitting anywhere in the car, forget about the rating scale altogether!
3) If you hit any vehicle that is larger, smaller, or not almost exactly what you are driving, forget about the rating scale altogether!
4) If you are not wearing your seat belt, forget about the rating scale altogether!
5) If someone at the accident scene says “you look fine”, forget about the rating scale altogether!
6) If you happen to be driving a “5 Star Rated” vehicle at 32 mph, hit a car head-on exactly like yours and are
wearing your seat belt, according to the ratings you still have a 1 in 10 chance of being killed!
7) Lastly, if you are driving a “1 Star Rated” vehicle (I don’t know of any) and are in the same accident, you still have a 50-50 chance of surviving.
It seems that we have a rating system that sounds good, seems like a good measurement of safety, and should provide us with adequate information regarding the dangers of an accident. But for goodness sake, our rating systems barely work for restaurants and do nothing for the motion picture or record industry. How can we think, even for a moment, that it will save our life?
On one hand, airbags and seat belts have certainly saved people from serious injury. But on the other hand, the truth is we have created a “Star System” offering incredible false security; a means of telling ourselves that we are totally protected should we get into an accident, when in fact we are barely protected at best. The truth is we are not driving around in a “bubble of airbag safety” by any means. Regardless of the safety rating of any vehicle we must drive as if our life depended on it! It does!!
Unibody construction, seat belts, side impact bars in our doors, front, side, knee airbags and curtains, shock absorbing bumpers and crumple zones are all good ideas. But we must be fundamentally aware that none of these safety items will save us if we are driving at normal speeds, and an oncoming vehicle crosses into our lane.
Driving on today’s roads, with speed limits up to 75 mph is a serious and life threatening event. We need to depend on ourselves, not on a rating system.
So the next time you hear about a “5 Star Rated” vehicle, ask yourself “How safe is that?”.
This was taken from http://theautoworld.blogspot.com/2007/07/star.html
Last edited by tastemydus; 11-05-08 at 01:36 AM. Reason: addition
11-05-08, 03:02 AM
#36
Lexus Champion
And just for the record, this is how dangerous the airbags in the front of the IS-F are - note the cautions directly from Lexus in the factory service manual for deploying an airbag before disposal to prevent inadvertent airbag deployment (resulting in injury to anyone too close)
Anything is dangerous in an idiots hand. Any basis for your argument just went out the window IMO.
11-06-08, 02:13 AM
#37
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lol
LOL, And that is your logic? Comming from the place with one of the higest rate of litigation. What do you expect them to write down on the instruction label? These kind of warnings have to be written down now b/c of the very small percentage of idiots who do absolutely stupid things sue companies for there own dumbass mistakes.
Anything is dangerous in an idiots hand. Any basis for your argument just went out the window IMO.
Anything is dangerous in an idiots hand. Any basis for your argument just went out the window IMO.
you are funny
11-06-08, 10:02 AM
#38
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
LOL, And that is your logic? Comming from the place with one of the higest rate of litigation. What do you expect them to write down on the instruction label? These kind of warnings have to be written down now b/c of the very small percentage of idiots who do absolutely stupid things sue companies for there own dumbass mistakes.
Anything is dangerous in an idiots hand. Any basis for your argument just went out the window IMO.
Anything is dangerous in an idiots hand. Any basis for your argument just went out the window IMO.
11-06-08, 06:00 PM
#39
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's left out? The same NHTSA statistical analysts who use FARS and claim airbags are life saving reviewed Meyers work and said her only error was not using FARS. See last page.
Sure, I'm an unreasonable person because you say so. Why are you so convinced my point, which I've supported with references, is invalid?
Maybe you are the unreasonable one since you fail to grasp what is written, and fail to grasp why the NHTSA can't back down from the requirement for airbags.
Sure, I'm an unreasonable person because you say so. Why are you so convinced my point, which I've supported with references, is invalid?
Maybe you are the unreasonable one since you fail to grasp what is written, and fail to grasp why the NHTSA can't back down from the requirement for airbags.
I'm not saying your point is invalid, I'm saying your hard and fast rule that all airbags are bad is flawed, and I haven't seen any REAL evidence to back it up. Just one statistical analysis with serious holes.
In the world of statistical research, one study NEVER equals a final answer. Many studies must be conducted by independant researchers. When people buy off on one study, we run into many problems which has proven itself time and again.
11-06-08, 06:12 PM
#40
Lexus Champion
The evidence you have produced flawed, thats all I am saying . Like the statement about airbags being more likely to kill taken off statistics in non-fatal car accidents, how do you figure that they will cause more deaths if there are none? Please answer that for me. The quote from the article.
This is what seems to be happening with airbags. In a severe accident, airbags can save lives. However, they are inherently dangerous and pose a risk to the occupant. Our analyses show that in lower-speed crashes, the occupant is significantly more likely to die with an airbag than without. This effect is not seen in the analysis using FARS, because this database does not contain information about low-speed crashes without deaths.
11-08-08, 06:14 AM
#41
Lexus Test Driver
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 1,111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lobuxracer.......NO airbags are NOT optional, and removing or disabling them is a Federal offense.
.............. Then why do they have an on off button for passengers on some models?
.............. Then why do they have an on off button for passengers on some models?
11-08-08, 07:16 AM
#42
Pole Position
Kids/Lighter passengers in the seat. They have been found to cause serious damage to lighter bodies (or if they hit car seats in the front) so they allow you to turn them off. Secondary use is if the seat isn't being used less collateral damage to not deploy the airbag in an accident.
03-13-09, 08:19 PM
#43
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: FL-561,352
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just bumped into this thread by accident while searching for something else. Figured i'd share these pics. This was from a family member's car (Nissan Armada). They were stopped at a light when a Dodge Ram 1500 Quad Cab hit them at 60+MPH (no braking, anything). The Armada was hit so hard it was launched into the air and thrown almost 20-30 ft into the median (no skid marks, it literally "jumped" across an empty turning lane of traffic). Anyway, the impact triggered all of the curtain airbags because the truck though it was going to roll (I presume), and fortunately it didnt (landed flat). The side airbags (seat) and front airbags did NOT deploy.
(Notice - no front airbag deployments):
And "the ram":
(Notice - no front airbag deployments):
And "the ram":
03-14-09, 12:18 AM
#44
Pole Position
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sugarland, Texas
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kids/Lighter passengers in the seat. They have been found to cause serious damage to lighter bodies (or if they hit car seats in the front) so they allow you to turn them off. Secondary use is if the seat isn't being used less collateral damage to not deploy the airbag in an accident.
also to the big annoying question that has been asked here repeatedly about why there arent any rear sensors in cars, let me ask you this... have you ever been on a rollercoaster before? Now imagine that sensation times 10. You really think an airbag, front or side, will help you with anything? That's what seatbelts, pretentioners, and head restraints are for. And before you ask for any proof, or anything silly, I was involved in a hit and run while the dude was doing 75mph. Trust me, an airbag won't do anything, unless mass, which means you, tries to go through the front window, because you had a frontal impact. Now i noticed the date on the thread and it has been a while. Good time to ask how your friend is doing. Hope he's doing better.
03-14-09, 01:49 AM
#45
Lexus Connoisseur
For the Armada, since it did not have any frontal type of impact, there would be no reason for the front seat and front airbags to deploy. The frontal air bag sensors did not get impacted, therefore it will not deploy.