Drag Racing 1/4 Mile times 0-60 Dyno Fast Cars Muscle Cars

Small pickup rollover protection

IIHS news release • February 4, 2010 First time Institute ratings small pickups for rollover protection; only one model rates good in test that assures strength of roof ARLINGTON, VA — The Nissan Frontier has the strongest roof and the Chevrolet Colorado the weakest among 5 small pickup trucks, all 2010 models, that recently were tested for rollover protection by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The Frontier, also sold as the Suzuki Equator, is the only pickup in the group to earn the highest rating of good. The Ford Ranger is rated acceptable while the Dodge Dakota, Toyota Tacoma, and Colorado (also sold as the GMC Canyon) earn the second lowest rating of marginal. Full text of release at http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr020410.html


 


More Videos...


Micro and minicar roof strength test results
IIHS news release • August 20, 2009 Smart Fortwo rates good for roof strength; test is designed to assess & compare occupant protection in rollover crashes ARLINGTON, VA — The Smart Fortwo has the strongest roof and the Chevrolet Aveo has the weakest among 2009 micro and minicars recently tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The Smart earns the highest rating of good compared with acceptable for the Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Mini Cooper, and Toyota Yaris. The Aveo is rated marginal. Full text of release at http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr082009.html





Low-speed vehicle crash tests
IIHS news release • May 20, 2010 ARLINGTON, VA - Low-speed vehicles and minitrucks shouldn't share busy public roads with regular traffic More states are allowing a relatively new breed of vehicle on public roads, but crash tests by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety show why the mix of low-speed vehicles (LSVs) or minitrucks and regular traffic is a deadly combination. LSVs are designed for tooling around residential neighborhoods, and minitrucks are for hauling cargo off-road. While these vehicles have a lot of appeal as a way to reduce emissions and cut fuel use, they don't have to meet the basic safety standards that cars and pickups do, and they aren't designed to protect their occupants in crashes. Full text of release at http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr052010.html





Weak federal standard allows deadly car-into-truck crashes
IIHS news release • March 1, 2011 Underride guards on big rigs often fail in crashes; Institute petitions government for new standard ARLINGTON, VA — New crash tests and analysis by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety demonstrate that underride guards on tractor-trailers can fail in relatively low-speed crashes — with deadly consequences. The Institute is petitioning the federal government to require stronger underride guards that will remain in place during a crash and to mandate guards for more large trucks and trailers. Full text of release at http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr030111.html





New roof strength tests
IIHS news release • March 24, 2009 Roof strength is focus of new rating system; 4 of 12 small SUVs evaluated earn top marks ARLINGTON, VA — The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is launching a new roof strength rating system to help consumers pick vehicles that will help protect them in rollover crashes. Twelve small SUVs are the first to be put to the test. Only 4 earn the top rating of good. The Volkswagen Tiguan has the strongest rated roof, and the Kia Sportage has the weakest among the 2008-09 models evaluated. Full text of release at http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr032409.html





1979 Chevy Silverado K20 / GMC Pickup | Frontal Crash Test by NHTSA | CrashNet1
Chevrolet K20 Fleetside / GMC C/K Wideside Impact speed 30mph Head injury criteria(HIC):Driver-no data, Passenger-710 -- Thumbs up for the crash test dummies! Do you think this vehicle is safe? Do you like the test result? More crash tests coming up every week. Favorite this video and subscribe to CrashNet1! Subscribe: http://youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=ikea55 fb: http://www.facebook.com/CrashNet1 g+: http://plus.google.com/104919524738137564116 twitter http://twitter.com/CrashNet1 On the web: http://www.CrashNet1.com





ADAC - Small convertibles in the rollover test
Somersault in the ADAC crash test center: convertibles fly with just under 50 kilometers per hour through the air and land upside down. The unfortunate result: Citroën C3 Pluriel, Mini Cooper and Peugeot 207 reveal - as well as in 2003 tested models of the middle class by Mazda, Opel and VW - a significant improvement. Convertibles are in fashion: They look chic and bring to motorists the Closer to Nature. But the missing roof earned him not only light and air, but in very rare case of a rollover also unpleasantly close contact with the earth. Reinforced windscreen frame and roll bar to prevent the worst. To check whether the rollover protection for the passengers really works, the ADAC crash test engineers have dropped three small current convertibles on the head. For the rollover we chose especially popular models: the extravagant Citroen C3 Pluriel, the trendy Mini Cooper and the neat little Peugeot 207 CC. The rollover protection systems of this four-seat open-air versions are designed differently. While Citroën only on the stability of the windshield frame (A-pillar) is that BMW engineers have her convertible standard added two fixed rollover bars and even two Peugeot automatically EXTENDING high guard. The rollover test, the ADAC engineers revealed again defects in occupant protection: the front occupants of convertibles are poorly protected when the A-pillars do not have the stability offered. Thus, the Citroën, are exposed in both the front and rear passengers a very high risk of injury, only get the ADAC "poor". The Mini conceded despite a stable windshield frame for the first row of seats, the ADAC-grade "fair" and a backbencher for "satisfactory". Of the very high outgoing automatic Überrollbügen the Peugeot benefited particularly the second row, which with the ADAC score pays "good", however, because it is the deformation joyful "A-pillar" for front only the predicate "sufficient". More safety in the convertible is not magic, however: In addition to the essential stability of the windscreen frame and a sufficiently high rear roll bar are seat belts with height adjustment and belt tensioner triggering rollover protection as a fundamental essential. To avoid arcing should be fitted every convertible also with the electronic stability control. Here the vehicle manufacturers are required. Individual result: Peugeot 207 CC: The fresh sequel to the popular best-selling 206 CC has been just over a year on the road. For occupant protection Peugeot automatically offers high EXTENDING roll bar, which benefit especially the backbenchers. In return, earned the Frenchman open the ADAC as "good", although the rear protection for taller people (from 1.75 meters) is still in need of improvement. Less sure of the seats in the front row because of the windshield frame (A-pillar) with about 11 centimeters most deformed compared to test competitors. Despite the rear roll bar so the front survival space is drastically reduced, so here is the occupant protection only with the ADAC grade of "satisfactory". In addition to all passengers is the lack of seat belt height adjustment unfavorable and only the ignition pretensioners for the dangerous sliding out counter of the straps. Individual result: Mini Cooper Convertible: The trendy classic rolls past seven years almost unchanged from the southern English band. The rollover protection is solid: A stable framework in conjunction with rear wheel, rigid roll bar offers the largest remaining survival space of all test subjects. Unfortunately, this success is created by unfavorable belts naught: In our test, the passenger slid sharply with the upper body from the belt and hit very hard on the road. This dangerous effect could be effectively reduced by a seat belt height adjustment and a belt tensioner. Even the rear passengers are only befriedend protected because the test was a brief head contact. The roll bars are also sized for riders from 1.75 meters too short. Individual result: Citroen C3 Pluriel: With an extravagant design and a clever roof mechanism allows the French car especially the hearts of fresh air loving women since mid-2003 beat. Less trouble the Citroën designers have invested in the occupant protection: An adequate rollover protection is absent when the Pluriel goes with recessed roof rails over the country. This means that the front and rear passengers exposed to a very high risk of injury for the passengers can be total only rated "poor". To be in the Citroen nevertheless better protected in the event of a rare rollover, you should not do without the detachable roof bars. Source and more info here: http://www.adac.de/infotestrat/tests/crash-test/cabrio_rollover/default.asp x?ComponentId=25850&SourcePageId=31799





Car Rollover - Behind the Scenes Stunt Feature
Check out this cool "behind the scenes" feature on a car rollover performed by stuntman Tom Harper (stunttom@gmail.com). This is normally called a cannon turn-over but Tom designed a system that uses a retractable arm that makes it safer for the surrounding cast and crew. It works great and creates a pretty violent wreck...which we capture with an on board camera so you can ride along with the stunt! Don't forget to subscribe and enjoy your drive. http://performancepicturevehicles.com/stunt.html





Extreme Traction-Control Test
As part of the 2008 PickupTrucks.com Half-Ton Shootout, PickupTrucks.com put six half-ton pickups from Chevrolet, Dodge, Ford, GMC, Nissan and Toyota through an extreme traction-control test that simulated icy road conditions to find out which trucks had the best traction control. For more information, visit PickupTrucks.com.





Reducing Rollover in 15 Passenger Vans
There is documented proof that the 15 passenger van can be one of the most dangerous vehicles on the road today in terms of rollover. Take a closer look at the 15 passenger van and see how Roadmaster's Active Suspension significantly enhances the safety of the vehicle. http://www.summitracing.com/redirect?banner=SocialYT1039





2014 Chevy Silverado 1500 / GMC Sierra 1500 (Crew Cab) | Frontal Crash Test by NHTSA | CrashNet1
2014 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 / GMC Sierra 1500 (Crew Cab) (4WD/RWD) Overall: 5 Stars Frontal: 5 Stars (Driver: 5 Stars, Passenger: 5 Stars) Side: 5 Stars (Driver: 5 Stars, Passenger: 5 Stars, Side Pole: 5 Stars) Rollover: 4 Stars Risk of rollover: 17.9 % NHTSA - New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), Frontal Test: Crash test dummies representing an average-sized adult male and a small-sized adult female are placed in the driver and front passenger seats, respectively, and are secured with seat belts. Vehicles are crashed into a fixed barrier at 35 mph (56.3km/h), which is equivalent to a head-on collision between two similar vehicles each moving at 35 mph. -- Thumbs up for the crash test dummies! Do you think this vehicle is safe? Do you like the test result? Favorite this video and subscribe to CrashNet1! More crash tests coming up every week. Subscribe: http://youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=ikea55 fb: http://www.facebook.com/CrashNet1 g+: http://plus.google.com/104919524738137564116 twitter http://twitter.com/CrashNet1 On the web: http://www.CrashNet1.com





2007 Ford Expedition | Dynamic Rollover Test by NHTSA | CrashNet1
This dynamic rollover crash test was conducted to investigate the dynamics of belted occupants during rollover crashes. This test was conducted with a modified 2007 Ford Expedition on the FMVSS 208 rollover cart moving at 48.1 km/h (29.9 mph), releasing the vehicle with its roll axis perpendicular to the direction of rollover cart motion, and first contacting the passenger's side. The vehicle was modified by replacing the rear seat with a modified front seat to simulate similar characteristics in both seating positions. The center console was also removed. The air bags were disabled for this test condition. The OEM belts and buckles were replaced in all positions. The driver and left rear seats were replaced with a seat with integrated 3-Point belts without pretensioners. The right front position was equipped with a motorized retractor and a pretension buckle system1. The pretensioner was fired manually at 300ms into the event and the motorized retractor was manually activated prior to launch. -- Thumbs up for the crash test dummies! Do you think this vehicle is safe? Do you like the test result? Favorite this video and subscribe to CrashNet1! More crash tests coming up every week. Subscribe: http://youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=ikea55 fb: http://www.facebook.com/CrashNet1 g+: http://plus.google.com/104919524738137564116 twitter http://twitter.com/CrashNet1 On the web: http://www.CrashNet1.com





Helmet Laws: Whose Freedom?
When motorcyclists crash, the results can be disastrous. This is especially true in the case of brain injuries. This video illustrates the consequences of riding without a helmet. 1991 | color | sound | 8 minutes To obtain a DVD copy, go to http://www.iihs.org/videos/default.html





Motorcycle antilock brakes - IIHS News
IIHS news release • March 31, 2010 Motorcycles with antilock brakes have fewer fatal crashes and lower insurance losses than bikes without antilocks ARLINGTON, VA — Antilock brakes for motorcycles are working as designed to reduce the chances of crashing, removing some of the risk that comes with riding on 2 wheels. A new study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety indicates that motorcycles with antilocks versus without are 37 percent less likely to be in fatal crashes per 10,000 registered vehicle years. Bolstering this finding is a separate analysis by the affiliated Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) of insurance claims filed for damage to motorcycles. Bike models with antilocks have 22 percent fewer claims for damage per insured vehicle year (a vehicle year is 1 vehicle insured for 1 year, 2 insured for 6 months, etc.) than the same models without antilocks. Two additional new reports by HLDI underscore the real-world benefits of helmet laws that apply to all riders and raise questions about the safety benefits of state-mandated training for young riders. A new Institute survey of riders examines rider views of antilocks, helmets, and helmet laws. Full text of release at http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr033110.html





1992 S-10 Rollover Test 1
This is an old 92 S-10 that i sold to a neighbor of mine. he worked for a Crash Test company and this is them rolling my truck!! Found it on my old harddrive and thought i'd put it up here! Enjoy.





Huge cost of mismatched bumpers
IIHS news release • December 2, 2010 Huge cost of mismatched bumpers: When bumpers on cars and SUVs don't line up (and many of them don't), low-speed collisions produce more damage and higher repair costs ARLINGTON, VA — Bumpers are the first line of defense against costly damage in everyday low-speed crashes. Bumpers on cars are designed to match up with each other in collisions, but a long-standing gap in federal regulations exempts SUVs from the same rules. New Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash tests demonstrate the results: SUV bumpers that don't line up with those on cars can lead to huge repair bills in what should be minor collisions in stop-and-go traffic. Full text of release at: http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr120210.html





Which car is faster? Which Car is Faster?




Similar 1/4 mile timeslips to browse:

1956 Chevrolet Pickup : 9.000 @ 149.000
Al Lyda, Engine: Chev 565 CI, Tires: goodyear


1972 Nissan PICKUP : 9.300 @ 144.000
Ronald Folck, Engine: l6, Turbos: 1


1972 Nissan PICKUP : 9.300 @ 144.000
ronald folck, Engine: nissan L-6, Turbos: turbonetics


1927 Datsun Pickup LS1800: 9.376 @ 149.600
Jesse Baumbach, Engine: CA18DET, Turbos: Garrett T25


1971 Datsun Pickup PL521: 10.022 @ 131.500
Nick Caffarel, Engine: 2.5 rb25det, Turbos: t3/t4 .63 ar AGP Tires: 15x10.5x28


1968 Datsun Pickup : 10.120 @ 130.240
hank, Engine: 383 stroker, Supercharger: no Turbos: no Tires: 26x4-15, 32x14-15


1985 Nissan PICKUP 720 doublecab: 10.150 @ 137.340
434, Engine: SBC 434ci, Supercharger: none Turbos: none Tires: M/T


1966 Ford Pickup f-100: 10.390 @ 128.060
John A. Mikeska, Engine: 466 Ford, Supercharger: n/a Turbos: n/a Tires: Goodyear


1985 Nissan PICKUP 720 doublecab: 10.520 @ 129.780
434, Engine: SBC 434 ci, Supercharger: none Turbos: none Tires: M/T


1987 Toyota Pickup : 11.260 @ 120.180
Brandon Stevens, Engine: 357ci sb chevy, Tires: m/t 29x15.5 and skinnys up front


1951 Chevrolet Pickup Step Side: 11.265 @ 114.670
Mark Acton, Engine: 350 chevy, Supercharger: no Turbos: no Tires: MT 33-15-15 rear


1993 Toyota Pickup : 11.340 @ 123.000
Dave G, Engine: Toyota 22r, Turbos: Turbonetics 60-1 Tires: MT ET streets 28x11.50x15


1999 Chevrolet Pickup : 11.359 @ 117.070
Moze Collins, Engine: 6.0l, Supercharger: N/A Turbos: 82mm Tires: Continental Cross Contact UHP


2002 Chevrolet Pickup Silverado: 11.478 @ 118.960
C.J. Quinton, Engine: 408, Supercharger: Procharger D1SC Tires: Yokohama


1950 Chevrolet Pickup 3100: 11.602 @ 114.910
Ron Plender, Engine: 292 CID inline 6 cylinder,


1950 Chevrolet Pickup 3100: 11.720 @ 113.110
Ron Plender, Engine: 292 CID inline 6 cylinder, Tires: MT 29.5 X 9


1993 Toyota Pickup : 11.800 @ 120.000
Dave G, Engine: LC Engineering Stage Five, Turbos: Turbonetics 60-1 Tires: Mickey Thomspon Et streets 28x11.50x15


1955 Ford Pickup F100: 11.990 @ 132.000
GLENN, Engine: 377 STROKER,


1988 Toyota Pickup Hilux: 12.075 @ 110.750
Robert Conquer, Engine: 22R, Tires: Mickey Thompson E.T. Drag 26 x 8 x 14


1969 Datsun Pickup : 12.200 @ 115.000
Larry West, Engine: hi-perf. 350, Tires: p275/50/15


 


©2014 DragTimes - Disclaimer