Volvo 244 | 1979 | Frontal Crash Test
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 11. 2012
- 1979 Volvo 244 NCAP Frontal Crash Test
Vintage NHTSA footage
Impact Speed: 35mph
Thumbs up for the crash test dummies!
Many thanks for visiting our channel. CrashNet1 is a comprehensive crash test video database featuring a collection of over 1,500 vehicle crash tests. From classic automobiles to late-model vehicles and to newest cars/trucks/SUVs, crash test compilations are being uploaded here weekly. Favorite this video and subscribe to CrashNet1!
Subscribe: / crashnet1
FB: / crashnet1
G+: www.google.com/+CrashNet1
Twitter: / crashnet1
On the web: www.CrashNet1.com - Auta a dopravní prostředky
If I remember correctly there was some sort of screw-up in test preparation with this vehicle. Maybe I'm wrong but there seems to be something fishy about a Volvo 240 having HICs of near 1800 for each occupant in this test. That's a likelihood of severe to fatal injury. Every other 240 they tested from 1982 on to the early 1990s had HICs in the 600 range or lower, minor injury levels.
Maybe Volvo made some changes to the car between '79 and '82 but the design ran from 1975-1993 without a redesign.
If I remember correctly there was also a 45 mph barrier crash test on a 1975 Volvo 240 (that's 65% more kinetic energy than 35, and when you add in intrusion usually HICs end up at least twice as high at 45 than at 35) where the Volvo's HICs were 1624 and 2040. That's an average of 1832. In this 35 mph crash the HICs were 1782 and 1889. That's an average of 1836, virtually identical.
The Chevy Citation, for instance, saw its driver HIC skyrocket from 846 to 4,223 when the test speed was changed from 35 to 48 mph. Both were 1980 models. That's the difference between a minor concussion and something that would be fatal to even an NFL linebacker. At 40 the Citation's HIC was 1,041. The kinetic energy at 45 is a little over halfway between that of 40-48, but you have to remember the slope of the HIC vs speed increase is steeper as you approach 48, remember from 35-40 we gained 195 HIC, or 39 HIC/mph, whereas from 40-48 we gained 3,182 HIC, or 398 HIC/mph. Taking that 398 figure and adding it to the 40 mph test, we get a HIC of 3,031 at 45. In actuality, the slope probably increases as 48 is approached, so 47-48 will make a bigger difference than 40-41; therefore, I estimate a HIC of about 2,700 at 45 mph. This is a very ballpark figure.
So if the Citation went from 846 to ~2,700 (a 3.19x increase) when the test speed was changed from 35 to 45, why would the Volvo's DECLINE from 1,782 to 1,624? Remember the Volvo tested at 45 was a 1975 model, which is the same bodystyle but an earlier model than the '79 in this video tested at 35. If the HIC ratio of the Volvo from 35 to 45 stayed the same, the Volvo's 35 mph HIC would be 509.
509 to 1,624 and 846 to 2,700 have the same ratio.
Obviously all cars won't have the same HIC at 45 / HIC at 35 ratio, the Citation's was 3.19 but some cars might be 2 and some might be 5. But 1 seems out of the range of possibility: assuming tests are identical configuration (which those two were) the HIC should be higher with a substantially higher speed.
What that 509 number IS close to, however, is the actual HIC recorded on a test just like this one for the driver dummy in a 1982 Volvo 240, which was 550.
The mid-late '70s Volvo 240 may be one of those weird cars that has a "plateau" in dummy forces for a certain speed range. That '75 test may have had an under-reading dummy. But I think there's a strong possibility (but not a certainty) that the dummies in this test were over-reading or that there was some test prep malfunction. The results of this test may be perfectly valid. But they do seem a bit fishy.
May 29, 2017 5:56 am
IIRC, the bad performance in this test was what made Volvo change the seatbelt design on the 1981 model 240, maybe that can be one reason why it improved?
@Matthew Dawood Khaghani trust me old Volvo's are safer than most cheap ass Chinese cara
@Matthew Dawood Khaghani A car from the mid 90s doesn't have a chance against one. That's misinformation. Stop replying to me please, I have better things to do than to argue with someone on the internet all day. It's stressful and you're ignorant. Goodbye.
@Matthew Dawood Khaghani Either you're a really bad troll, or you're actually dumb enough to think a one-ton plastic turd has a chance against an extremely well built Mercedes that's so much ahead of its time that it's stronger than virtually anything made for the remainder of the 20th century...dumbass
@Henry Discipline you must not be aware the volvo was engineering their cars with offset frontal crash safety in mind long before any of the competition and long before the iihs was doing offset testing. other makes and models were ignoring the frontal offset and just crashing straight into walls, but not volvo. look it up...because it's true.
The blow to the head with the steering wheel may cause some significant injuries at this speed. Good frontal crumple zone but I would suspect internal head injuries for the driver. At 6:12 you can see the bent steering wheel rim.
The steering wheel is probably designed to bend that way as to absorb energy during impact.
Old car, not very safe
Good car!
solid car
Looks like dude who jumped broke his ankle
And to still get the doors open after what other car in 1979 could do that
He can only open the back doors. Mercedes w123.