Which Is The Most Dangerous Car?
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 02. 2020
- Be one of the first 500 people to sign up with this link and get 20% off your subscription with Brilliant.org! brilliant.org/realengineering/
New streaming platform: watchnebula.com/
Vlog channel: / @brianmcmanus
Patreon:
www.patreon.com/user?u=282505...
Facebook:
/ realengineering1
Instagram:
/ brianjamesmcmanus
Reddit:
/ realengineering
Twitter:
/ thebrianmcmanus
Discord:
/ discord
Get your Real Engineering shirts at: standard.tv/collections/real-...
Credits:
Writer/Narrator: Brian McManus
Editor: Stephanie Sammann (www.stephanie-sammann.com/)
Animator: Mike Ridolfi (www.moboxgraphics.com/)
Sound: Graham Haerther (haerther.net/)
Thumbnail: Simon Buckmaster / forgottentowel
References:
[1]www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwr...
[2] www.nhtsa.gov/research-data/f...
[3] www.iseecars.com/most-dangero...
[4]www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2017/MI...
[5]www.iihs.org/ratings/vehicle/...
[6] www.consumerreports.org/car-s...
[7] www.sciencedirect.com/topics/...
[8] www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3...
Thank you to AP Archive for access to their archival footage.
Music by Epidemic Sound: epidemicsound.com/creator
Songs:
You've Got Me Falling (Instrumental Version) - Blanches
Bloom - Dye O
Unruh - Moon Craters
Frozen in Time - Kikoru
Time Zones - Gavin Luke
Thank you to my patreon supporters: Adam Flohr, Henning Basma, Hank Green, William Leu, Tristan Edwards, Ian Dundore, John & Becki Johnston. Nevin Spoljaric, Jason Clark, Thomas Barth, Johnny MacDonald, Stephen Foland, Alfred Holzheu, Abdulrahman Abdulaziz Binghaith, Brent Higgins, Dexter Appleberry, Alex Pavek, Marko Hirsch, Mikkel Johansen, Hibiyi Mori. Viktor Józsa, Ron Hochsprung - Věda a technologie
10:24 The Honda decided to hit that 'person' anyways. It slowed down just enough to keep from killing, but still hit hard enough for injury. It wanted that 'person' to be alive and to tell other humans to fear Hondas.
talltomtube 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Shingo: *sweats profusely*
*Toyota keyfob detected*
*Disabling pedestrian safety...*
Suprised me. Thought that Mustangs had that feature.
I believe it's due to the way that test is run no human input is allowed until after impact or a full stop. I may be wrong tho.
You didnt answer the initial question: Is the cybertruck safe?
He didn't answer the question in the title either
Possible as long as your not a pedestrian.
Well, it will probably kill pedestrians at much lower speeds than other cars...
Oh, and the Cybertruck might also be a tad dangerous in frontal crashes if it has a reinforced bonnet: That thing won't crumple and might come through the windshield, decapitating the driver.
Probably because there isn't enough publicly information available to make a determination at this time.
There is no way to know without testing. Also, the consumer Cybertruck doesn't exist yet.
Should be titled “everything wrong with vehicle safety tests” 👍😊
Just imagine the chinese test for their homemade cars,,,Ex Geese.. on others youtube posts you can see tests made in russia or latin america for these cars. rate : 0... I just hoe these POS will never been sell in america,,,
Thats a good subject actually.
No, it should be, here's video 468 of why I hate America
American vehicle safety tests, not just safety tests
or maybe 12 min advertising for briliant :)
"Instead of jumping to conclusions, I decided to jump into research mode" Goddamn I wish more people were like that
Agreed, but these days people just say, “Oh I have no proof but I am right, and you are wrong. Please shut up.”
Like bruh…🤦♂️
10:24
Honda: I won't kill him but I will punish him and teach him to correct behavior!
Imagine cars that enforce the law by Running over people whenever the car detects a crime.
"Stupid bastard cant use the pavement"
Probably thought "Damn he isn't moving... Not a human then"
Don't tell me where to walk, teach hondas not to run over!
lmao
The moment I turn on the light in the car at night and my dad’s driving, that’s when the car becomes the most dangerous in the world
It actually does, because the moment you turn on the light he can't see shit out the front of the car.
@@zlozlozlo That's not true. I do this all the time when answering e-mail on my laptop while driving (Keyboard has no light).
@@FryingPan76 Doing WHAT while driving?!
@@rosslittlejohn1976 I know, that my handwriting is hard to read...
@@FryingPan76 haha
"America's fondness for trucks that wouldn't fit most European streets"
Believe me there's a lot of streets in the US as well where these don't fit but people decide to buy them anyways 🤦♂️
I love coming out of a store and finding massive SUVs and trucks have parked around me. Who wants to see? I love pulling out blind. 😡
@@mjc0961 , Good thing the massive SUVs and trucks aren't moving. They can't see you, either.
in Switzerland we have this
@@HydratedBeans What about older cars, which are still very heavy, but also very low?
In Europe we have the same problem. The more incompetent the drivers, the bigger their car. The result is that the normal cars have to cope with the stupid "the road is mine" drivers using more than their lane.
Question: Which car is the most dangerous?
Answer: "Here's why america sucks in regards to vehicle testing"
which answers the question. he can't get a definitive result because of the horrible vehicle testing
Just get a volvo, they're indestructible
@@411Adidas Agreed
@@411Adidas Almost. Don't drive faster than your angels can fly.
yes, sir amigo then he should title the video “why America’s vehicle safety test sucks”
Before even clicking on this video, I knew that the Mitsubishi mirage will hold a spot somewhere along here. Thanks Doug DeMuro.
I had to drive a rental mirage while my fiesta was in the shop getting a new front bumper (roadkill). It was total trash!!
Hello yobama
We have a Mitsubishi Mirage and I hate it now.
Thiissss
Or that it’s in the thumbnail?
Lovely video! I thought of some additions:
Don't forget that small cars like the Mirage are used as city-brawlers, which means low average speed, so more time spending driving whithout adding much mileage, in an environment thats most likely to provoke an accident. Big cruisers are mostly driving on a highway or, like trucks, in a rural environment, so they are less likely to hit other cars frontally or sideways on.
One big safety issue in the desingn of a car is missing in this video: Pedestrian-safety, probably the most likely reason the Cybertruck will not get released as it is right now.
I don't want to get hit by an unyielding metalblock with a sharp edge on the hight of my neck.
Was thinking about that too without some special tech the pedestriansaftey should be pretty poor.
The thing with the Mitsubishi is, while i agree that it might be driven mostly in city traffic as you wrote, that also means lower speeds which ususally means less injuries in accidents. But the statisctic he found said that it had the most fatalities of vehicle occupants. So people inside the car died in accidents. That is quite unusual for urban accidents.
@@nirfz Yes, urban areas actually have a lower death/injury rate than suburban or rural areas, not more. The very high density of intersections actually helps you because of the slower speed. The mirage probably does very poorly because most americans live in suburban areas where they need to drive at higher speeds and with lots of larger trucks. The urban environment still has pick-ups, but they are much less common. (SUVs are common everywhere now, but tend to be smaller driven less aggressively)
Also keep in mind that the mirage is one of the cheapest, if not THE cheapest, car sold in america. The most urban areas of this country are also some of the most expensive places to live. Of course urban areas also have better public transit, so the people buying a mirage are probably more likely living in suburban or rural areas, despite it being a "City car". American cities are still very spacious and if someone wants a car best suited for the city they are probably looking at a compact crossover or a sedan. You really don't need a car as tiny as the mirage in america, even in the densest parts of the city.
I appreciate your contribution to this conversation
@@raceman9586 True, my thought about why especially this car could be the "most lethal", circles around something you wrote: the cheapest car sold. Who buys the cheapest car? It might not be the same in the US as where i am from, but cheap often times means beginners. ->Drivers between 16 and 25. This age-frame covers the most "endagered/dangerous group" of drivers. The risk awareness as well as routine/experience on average are low.
While most new drivers i have seen got old used cars to start with, there were some who got a new cheap car as a gift from their parents.
This is eye-opening. My mom has always complained about cars not being designed with women in mind. I thought this largely was just due to size: she's 5'2", so she doesn't have the reach required to do a lot of things comfortably. On the other hand, I, as a 5'10" man, am still short enough to fit in the back seat of many larger coupes but tall enough to not have to reach for anything. I didn't realize, however, that other physical differences are ignored, such as bone density and (probably) physical strength, not to mention seat belts fitting my flat chest and never-to-be-full-of-fetus abdomen much better. The differences are much deeper than I realized.
Then start your own car company that panders to every single group that wants to victim-hood themselves. Let me know when you get started so I can short the stock!
@@yourgooglemeister6745 how is not wanting to die in a car crash victim-hood? this is a serious matter
In fact they should only do it with female dummies, since they are more prone to accidents. these tests should have the baseline as the person who gets worse injured. Otherwise its just to say they have good scores.
@@patriciafaria5681 read my comment again before you virtue signal. So what you are saying is tests and their eventual products should be based on individuals? Well actually what you are saying is tests should be based on smaller mass women. F-it when larger mass men die. Who cares about them? Got it.
There should not only be an average dummy, but a small and a large and a fat and a thin one, so that 90-95% of people are covered. And separate tests that allow for labels like “safe for pregnant women” and “safe for people over 2 m”.
@@MartijnterHaar precisly
10:12
Subaru: Tries to stop, stops.
Mitsubishi: Tries to stop, can't.
Honda: Tries to stop. Stops. Accelerates again to hit the pedestrian anyways
Honda realizes that humans are no use to it and continues to run over them
Honda: "What I braked "
Honda pulled a Tony Stewart
The most dangerous car is of course the Reliant Robin.
Most countries dont even classify it as a car. :o
Only if it's involved in a crash, the driver is the main problem. A Reliant Robin is less likely to be driven aggressively . It would be interesting to see some stats on this.
Idk it might literally just be the ford pinto
Interesting
Even the Stig would crash.
>Head hits A-Pilar
>4 Star Safety Rating
Excuse me WHAAAAAAT?!
Welcome to America
Well there have been a few cars where the A-pillar practically crushed the drivers head between it and the seat, so I'd say that's still an improvement!
Most of the world has terrible safety standards. Tesla’s are rated perfect, but they fail to mention the frequent fires and explosions Tesla’s go through after crashes.
The head hitting the pillar was for the small overlap crash test (1/4 of the front of the car hits the barrier). That small overlap crash was conducted by the IIHS and it was rated a "Poor" result for that test. When the video mentions the car scored a 4, they were talking about the NHTSA and NCAP tests, which are DIFFERENT tests from the IIHS, and they do not perform the small overlap crash (each company does a different set of tests), so they did not see that same result.
Also, overall crash result is based on several combined tests, so while it may have failed in one area, other areas (ie. full frontal crash, roof strength, side crash, etc.) may have helped pull up the score to a 4 out of 5. When buying a car, it's best to check crash results from different organizations, since they all test different things and several of the tests do not overlap.
That was in Euro n cap where it doesn’t use frontal offset
I suspect the Mirage (and a few other compact cars) have high casualty rates for several factors, including
- they're often driven in cities (more traffic, more accidents per mile);
- they're often driven by learner drivers (more accidents per mile); and
- they're often hit by heavier cars (in which case, it's the heavier car that's less safe).
There will be genuine drawbacks too - eg a lower budget may mean lower-quality materials - and naturally if the Mirage is literally top of the table, it's also done worse than the other compacts. Still, I suspect a lot of the casualty rate is down to how compacts are used, rather than how safe they are inherently.
Insurance companies (or Google) have the data for a real like-for-like analysis...
Another problem is that a mirage can only be seen off in the distance!
Sensible analysis. The dude in video thinks he is smart enough!
Smaller cars have smaller crumple zones so less chance for impact absorption, give the compact car another two feet of bonnet and it would fare better, but it would no longer be compact!!.
agreed 100%. the safety tests don’t account for things like who’s more likely to be in the car and where the cars are driven, which are definitely important and incredibly relevant to the rating of safety.
It's a mix of both.
Many economy cars skimp out on safety features und use less rigid materials for body and chassis to be cheaper, they often have underpowered engines that make it much harder to evade dangerous situations, if you need to quickly accelerate to get out of the way and of course they're often driven by beginners or people who don't enjoy driving at all (no wonder with these cars) and thus don't put enough effort in their driving.
But no amount of quality engineering and safety features can negate the disadvantage in weight that these cars have in a crash. Which is the paradox of small cars: they're more prone to heavy impacts, because they're small and light, but if you blame that on small cars and say they're less safe because of that, then the logical conclusion would be that everyone should buy the biggest heaviest cars "for safety", which would quickly lead to cars getting bigger and heavier and traffic would get less and less safe for anyone who is not driving a car as cars steadily turn into trucks and then into freaking tanks!
10:12
Subaru: NOOOOOOO!!! You can't just kill the human!
Mitsubishi: haha, human go brrrrrrrrrr
Stop.
@@miniena7774 What is wrong.
I mean they did create planes made for suicidal operations so...
@@Justin-yt7pi so.... what?
@@mariusvanc The Kamikaze planes were made by Mitsubishi and Kawasaki, so yeah. Hence the quality, I guess.
My answer: People like driving Mitsubishis off of cliffs.
Rename it the Mitsubishi Lemming
To be fair, that is gravity's fault.
With a car like that I can see why
I wonder what the average age of Mirage drivers are. My elderly mom has one and I often see older drivers behind the wheel of them. They are small, cheap, easy to drive cars.
@@kamX-rz4uy I believe that is also a major factor in the high mortality rate of the Mirage. Real Engineer mentioned woman has 47% higher serious injury rate. The Mirage's feminine design is clearly aiming toward woman/elder people. I don't think it's a very popular car design among men. It's surprising he never mentioned this aspect.
The female dummy part is actually pretty interesting, considering that you expect the Mirage to be driven by teenage girls.
Why not just make the dummies really weak and fragile, then you could use them as the benchmark. Now no car gets above 1 star, cause the dummy explodes when you accelerate.
Seriously, you can only go so far before you reach a point of "no car will ever be safe enough, just forget this newer shit and go back to the way things were so we can build cars again"
@@mousepointer12 no, that's not it at all.
Using purposely crippled dummies will not yield any useful data as it is not representative of the population at large. The issue being outlined in the video is that current crash testing is unrepresentative of half of the population.
Remember: physically "weak" and "strong" can't be plotted on a straight line. Women might withstand some impacts better than others, and their mortality/injury rate relative to men probably varies wildly depending on the type of accident.
These agency's jobs is to quantify the risks a car will pose to their occupants, and use that data to rank the vehicles on the market relative to each other. You can't do that without a representative dummy, and saying "you shouldn't drive because it's dangerous" is not within their job descriptions.
probably not, 75 % of deaths are men, budgets are limited, the results may not change much, and if extra money were allocated there maybe more useful ways to spend it ... if females behave much the same as men, then old people, or kids, or rear end collissions etc may be more usegul than feeding the gender machine.
@@quitecapable these companies earn millions and yet they can't afford to make a female crash test dummy.. c'mon..
@Toora Varun why?
The first thing that needs to be fixed is driver education.
& the depth of driving tests. i was able to pass my road test after 6 hours of practice tops
When I took the road test, it was literally "check your lights and go around the block that the DMV was sat on"
10:16 i hate it when people randomly walk across the street without looking left and right
I can't imagine what mindset those people have, when they are not afraid to walk in front of a 2 or more ton moving vehicle without looking.
i hate it when cardrivers just bend off crossing cycle lanes having green light without looking over their shoulders. in every party of traffic participants, there is stupid people. but there's only one party being deadly to others if behaving wrongly: cardrivers. everyone else only risks their own lives, because of.. cars' existance. without cars, no one would have to worry about anyone's daydreaming.
Another factor could be how cheap the Mirage is to buy, allowing new and younger drivers to get ahold of it, while Tesla’s are much more expensive and are thus bought by older people, who probably have more experience behind the wheel.
True. Like to see someone who understands statistics and how complex the picture can be. For example the US Presidency is the most dangerous legal job in the world (10% chance of being assasinated in a job that lasts 8 years or less)
Statistically less safe than any military, law enforcment, coal mining, and most criminal gangs.
Thats a good point, true for almost any small hatchback
Also, over a certain price threshold, expensive cars have an unreasonable amount of crash prevention and mitigation systems as well as systems that support better driving.
More expensive cars have blind spot warnings, corner cameras, auto brakes, night vision, lane assists and even pedestrian detection.
*owns a 2018 Mirage*
*chuckles* "I'm in danger! :D"
What about smart cars
Watch fifth gears crash test on it. It it is actually very survivable
Bro come to Pakistan see our cars
@@imadinosaur3140 Smart Cars are actually pretty safe
@@imadinosaur3140 smart cars handle a crash test better than most cars 👍😉
None of these tests consider high speed crashes , double the speed requirement (35mph) is commonly seen in American streets , 70+ is extremely common on our highways and crashes so why don’t they test at the higher speeds
because crashes at 60 plus mph are considered low probability of survival crashes anyway. to make a car that has a reasonable chance for the occupants to survive a high speed crash would result in vehicles costing 100 thousand dollars and the U.S. economy which depends on people getting to work and stores via personal vehicles would be destroyed.
@@pepperwood8811 explain how nascars etc crash at 225 mph and are usually fine as long as it was a roll
@@Andrew-hh3ol One, NASCAR cars are quite expensive which was my main point. Second, race cars use technology that would make them impractical as commuter vehicles: no doors, no side windows, a film on the lexan windshield that must be peeled off and replaced after every race, drivers literally strapped into a seat that wraps around them and held by a five point harness which requires a crew members assistance to attach. Their neck is literally strapped down and prevented from moving freely by something called the HANS system. Then there is the stuff apart from the car. They wear a flame retardant suit that is hot and cumbersome and a full face helmet. The walls at the racetracks have something called 'softwalls' at key areas which are materials specially designed to safely absorb car impact energy. Lastly, racecar drivers are incredibly skilled at driving. They have natural talent coupled with years of practice learning driving techniques that are beyond the capability of the vast majority of regular drivers. So that's how to explain NASCAR, if you think that is practical and economical for the commuting public then okay.
@@pepperwood8811 it’s easy to mass produce roll cages and we wouldn’t need a hans system because the vast majority of crashes are 80> mph Hans only makes a difference with several rolls statistically it’s all about making a car slightly cheaper having a car survive a 70 mph crash besides aesthetics is definitely plausible
@@Andrew-hh3ol Roll cages perform the same duty as crumple zones and reinforced A pillars. They use roll cages in racing because that system works better as long as the driver is very securely strapped down and wears a helmet. In a commuter car where people are not nearly as strapped down, crumple zones work better. If you put roll cages in commuter cars and didn't strap all the passengers down and make them wear helmets, they would be killed by the roll bars. Also, roll cages mean no doors. The HANS systems doesn't, "only make a difference with several rolls." It is to prevent the rapid movement of the head which results from the rapid de-acceleration of a car during a crash when the body is strapped down i.e. during these high speed crashes you are talking about. Why didn't you bother to address any of the other issues I brought up? You DON'T think the fact that the walls of racetracks having a special energy absorbing material in them is relevant to the survival of nascar drivers?
"Testing is an essential part of the learning process it helps us identify gaps in our knowledge"
Very well said🔥💯
RIP '59 Chevy Bel Air. You were too good for this world
thermitebanana I know. I hate to think how many were wasted on stuff like that. 😢 lol
@@nolansprojects2840 i read theories that the particular bel air they used has a rusted out frame or something.
@@frysco5927 There are theories that Elvis is still alive, so some reliable evidence would be needed.
@@frysco5927 I appreciate you trying to make me feel better about it. lol, but would't the cars having rusted out frames highly affect the test?
Its a necessary sacrifice for car safety, id shed a tear but not cry a lake.
The biggest impact you see here, is the car industry lobby on legislation.
Can we get a politician that is against lobbyists. Even AOC took money from Californian wealth
@@randomuser5443 Bernie?
bjmben88 lol
Siem De Cleyn
Democracy dollars would reduce corruption in politics by a factor of 8 to 1. #Yang2024
@@bjmben88 hahahahaha
10:22 I could miss the pedestrian if I wanted to ....changed my mind... nudge
Driver should be aware by then, if not, needs to take some lessons lol
There’s a pretty famous car in Turkey, nicknamed Şahin (falcon) which literally breaks down to 2-3 parts in a small crash. Like imagine another car hits your door, you’re still in your seat but the back part of your car is in another place, the front part of it is sliding in front of your eyes and the seats you’re sitting in is probably flying to oblivion
Thought you may be exaggerating. Looked up crash pics. Holy crap. That is absolutely horrifying. The very worst I've ever seen.
I love the honda at 10:23 where it’s like “oh no! I gotta stop! I’m gonna hit someo-.... wait, not that’s just a fake person. Screw you! *poke*”
I want him alive, but mangled. - CEO of Honda
Love it
10:21 what the duck? it let the brakes off to hit him.😂
The cars are becoming sentient man
Car was clearly mad on the pedestrian for not stepping aside in panic, so it nudged him...
I think it was slowmo
@@captaincoleslaw174 It could've been the transition from high speed auto braking to low speed auto braking.
Looks like the ABS system wasnt working properly in that car!!
10:25 The Honda decided to push him over to teach him to not j-walk
Him : the most dangerous car might be cyber truck
Me : no , it's a 1900's car
There are other factors in the mirage results.
According to the advertising industry survey, Mirage drivers are almost all under 23, female and not interested in cars (aka people who would be very likely to crash or take uncalculated risks)
More men crash then females. Specifically young men.
Women tend to be in mild, mostly cosmetic fender benders, while men tend to fuck their shit up in gnarly accidents. As long as the stereotpye holds up, a woman in a mirage will be relatively fine.
@@erikkurschner3017 But the statistics suggest otherwise. And thats an over-simplification because it only accounts for accidents where the driver of the Mirage was at fault. Many will have been caused by drivers of other vehicles, and as the video author mentioned, the Mirage is at a disadvantage in the US where so many people drive silly huge trucks and SUVs. What do you think is going to happen when an F-150 driver runs a red light and t-bones a Mirage....? Complete obliteration.
@@soundseeker63 I just realised how huge US trucks are when I suddenly saw one upclose and I was like damn, now I see the stereotype, especially because it was a RAM.
@@elpatrico2562 the rest of the world uses smaller trucks?? If so I had no idea
I'm surprised the Mustang wasn't in the top 14 at the start due to having crowd magnets in the front.
Old boring joke.
@@justenzo6342
Old? Yes
Boring? Not at all
@@justanmr2973 Right. It's just boring the it's over..
If pedestrian injuries and deaths were factored in it probably would be! But I believe those results only took account of occupant safety.
Well technically they aren't fatal. Maybe a list of most casualties with one swing lol.
So, driving to work the other day in a 65 MPH speed zone in some pretty nasty fog, the "animals" were out, tailgating, speeding, and lane weaving, even with really really poor visibility. So, you can make the cars safer, but you can't fix stupid.
(Fire trucks cleaning up the accident sites tended to slow traffic in several places....)
Nice video. Being a car guy, though, this is very old news - I’ve been wondering for years why particularly the Americans have done nothing to update their testing procedures. My point is: don’t expect it to change anytime soon.
For reference, Folksam in Sweden publishes vehicle safety reports based on data from real accidents, which I find to be an interesting approach.
As he said, IIHS is the best crash tester, and they're based in the US, no?
Could a lot of the deaths per vehicle be also largely influenced by the demographic that drives them? How many of the people driving small cars like the Mitsubishi Mirage are elderly for example, as opposed to others.
but you shouldnt need skill to survive a crash. Beginner Drivers or Elderly People should be able to crash however they want and still survive unharmed.
by that i mean, the safety of the car shouldnt rely on the drivers skills.
@@PointlessDrummer Maybe so, but this was about amount of deaths per X miles driven, if elderly crash more often then that skews the results.
The physical condition of the driver does. A fall a 30 year old can laugh off may break a 70 year olds hip. In a crash this could kill the old driver when the younger one gets out. Even man verses woman can change stats. Women are shorter and lighter on average vrs men. Different seat positions could also be more dangerous than others.
@@timothydoyle9635 fair enough. Didnt think about that
My first thought when I saw the unsafest car was "that looks like an old person car". Perhaps that could explain why is statistically higher when it comes to injury. 1) Old people will be more likely to be in an accident and 2) will be more likely to be injured in a car accident than a younger (and more durable) person would be in that same accident.
Nah....we old guys like big, comfortable and quiet cruisers that are easy to get in and out of. Back in the good old days it was Buicks and Caddies. Now, it's SUVs...my favorite is the huge and comfy Lincoln Navigator.
The Mirage is also one of the cheapest cars, so it appeals to anyone with limited funds. That disproportionately represents people on fixed-incomes such as retirees, and people that are young and have part-time jobs or low incomes. Both of those categories also feature drivers that may not drive particularly well.
Yep, looks like a car for Gannies
Check the accident numbers by age. I think young and inexperienced drivers do actually crash more.
I used to have a job in automotive safety (automation features such as automatic emergency braking and adaptive cruise control) though left it due to frustrations with lack of innovation and ethics.
Thanks for bringing this to more people's attention.
NCAP HAS REJECTED MARUTI SO MANY TIMES THAT IT HAS STOPPED SENDING CARS THERE FOR TESTING. STILL PEOPLE BUY THEM
yes its one of the weakest cars in the world
This video actually is not great. You raised so many questions and did not answer them.
1. Why is the mirage so dangerous?
2. Is the Tesla truck more or less safe than other Tesla?
3. Why did they change thier crash strategy with the truck?
The mirage is dangerous because a lot of the cars on the road in the US are much bigger than it
Yes, and worse. The evidence may be that the occupants of the mirage are the most vulnerable but we should distinguish between occupants being vulnerable and how "dangerous" the vehicle is. If not, then push-bikes should be outlawed for being dangerous and we should all drive tanks.
I have to agree, this video was below the usual standard.
The cybertruck bit was forced in to just make a jab at it and was entirely unrelated to anything.
It only covered the US system while the majority of cars are sold globally and have to pass and be rated by various systems. NCAP was mentioned at the end which is used by many more countries and is a lot better as well as being a constantly evolving rating. For example, it is now impossible to achieve the highest rating without an auto-brake system. It also tests with female and child dummies.
It felt like just a way to complain about the american testing system in the guise of science except without any sort of conclusion.
He is talking about how hard and how many variables you have to consider when answering these questions.
I think the point of this video is that there are so many variables when it comes to determining the safety of a vehicle, yet there are not nearly enough tests being conducted. In other words, it's impossible to answer that question because there is surprisingly little data on the matter.
Instead of jumping to conclusions, jump to science!
This is the real engineering channel, not practical engineering channel, gonna skip to the end
No its a mars Rover, 20minutes delay
I think we have something in common
@@Shubham_Bahirat I believe so
@@MrSkitlesFiddles I use that icon for discord...
I ended up here because I love this Channel and coincidentally I drive a 2014 Mitsubishi Mirage for pizza delivery; the thumbnail caught my attention
7:28 "Women have 47% higher chance of serious injury in a crash" In my observation, they also have a significantly higher chance of having the shoulder belt _behind them_ during normal driving. Presumably this also translates to conditions in a crash. I suggest it would be worth looking into _why!?_ I can't imagine it's due to being more risk tolerant than men, given that in basically all studies I'm aware of it's the other way around.
Not being female, I lack any personal experience with shoulder belts and breasts, but I imagine that there would be some discomfort there encouraging this behavior. Making seat belts comfortable enough to _wear correctly_ would be a great step.
Yeah, but that 47% is a figure I choose not to take at face value seeing as this video has it's typical liberal 'bent'. It's all about pointing to how the United States owns too large vehicles [which COULD have caused the Mirage to be less safe than how it was rated], doesn't think about women, doesn't provide safer stuff [like Europe], and has a great need for a car to do all kinds of monitoring/driving because we need to be SMARTER and safer. I disregard Real Engineering's opinions and just try and learn how far we've come in metallurgy and product design due to that snippet of the 1959 vs 202X. And as for the "woman's rights in auto safety" 'issue', the only real variable is airbag expansion rate versus driver/occupant weight versus distance between airbag and driver. Oh, how to discover a not-sexist formula!
funny thing is that im more comfortable with a seat belt than without one.
@@f1rst_pancake - Yup, he is pretty blue, but at least trying to be factual. As I wrote in another comment, he talked about how the government regulation should be amended, because the market solutions are so much better. I would say then the government regulation should be abolished and market ones should be used instead :)
Preach. Breasts push the diagonal strap up to handily cut into the neck. It would be less of a problem if the inertial reel end of the belt was lower, so the belt would sit flat over the shoulder. but it's usually somewhere up around the ear or above. And I'm fairly tall for a woman. Combine short and breasts, and the diagonal belt is a literal pain.
@@f1rst_pancake Do you really not see that all you've done in your comment is point out some things he said that you don't like for ...reasons..., provided no real points that dispute the things that you didn't like, said you disregard everything he says because you don't like his political opinions and then to top it off implied that somehow YOU are the fact based person in here despite all that?
When I looked into ncap ratings the main thing I tool away was a 4 star small car is much less safe than a 4 star rated medium sized car.
NCAP star ratings have never meant all that much since they always move the goalposts as cars get safer. Add to that the fact that if a car doesn't have automatic braking it loses a star, then they are more or less meaningless now. The occupant safety ratings might be okay, but I don't know if they have moved the goalposts there too.
My point is that they shouldn't have put an arbitrary cap on the amount of safety one can have.
@@C.I... Exactly! They should have just added stars as cars got safer.
@@bimblinghill
How many stars do you want modern cars to have.
@@Robert-cu9bm IDK. 69 sounds like a good number of stars.
@@Robert-cu9bm A car that just meets 5 stars is classified just as safe as a Tesla which easily gets 5 stars.
A Tesla could get 8 stars.
They should ditch the Stars and just use a number and not out of 10.
But a number based on a set standard of tests which can easily scale
Like PC benchmark tests.
Just a thought, but the Mirage being one of the most affordable cars on the US market, a lot of buyers will be younger less experienced drivers who got a Mirage as their first car.
It feels like human factor is also part of the equation here, not just the crash test methods.
You're absolutely right. Plus, the Mitsubishi Mirage is one of the most common fleet cars in the United States, commonly used as rentals or delivery vehicles
Another quality content. I like vehicle and aviation videos.
The best part in this video is when you talk about KEARR safety
They definitely should test for higher speeds, like a test at 45 mph and a test at 75 mph, for crashes in towns and crashes on the highway
That was my first thought when I saw them hit the door with the hammer. Since they only hit the door, my current theory is that the doors and side are thick to resist side impacts, and the front and back are thinner to create a crumple zone.
Mostly what's going on is that Tesla are going to sell this as a truck, which in the US don't need to meet passenger car crash safety regulations. This is also why the F150 pickup is such as good seller in the US - it's much cheaper for the amount of vehicle you get because it doesn't have to meet the same economy or safety regulations. I don't think there's anything definite yet (Given there are no safety tests results at all for the Tesla truck, but there's a pretty good chance it can't be sold in Europe at all because it's depending on the crumple zone of everything it hits and it's superior weight to keep it's occupants alive at the expense of everyone else on the road.
If manufacturers and governments really wanted to reduce driver/passenger deaths in cars in the most cost effective way possible, they'd make crash helmets mandatory, but that might remind people just how dangerous the speeds cars can travel at actually are and maybe make people rethink car dependency in the first place.
@@peglor Hell. The whole safety blackhole falls apart when different vehicles collide. In reality, the safest setup would be a 5 point harness, neckbrace, helmet, and tubular roll cage.
@@peglor if I'm not mistaken F250 and RAM 2500 and higher are classified as commercial and don't have to report their MPG, but Ford F150 and RAM 1500 do and they have like amazing 26 mpg on the highway. I drive 2019 1500 RAM classic and I got 27mpg just by setting cruise control on 70mph for 2 hours. I had air-resistant cargo too, so it could be even lower.
The steep angle of the front panel would make me think it's effectively thicker than the side panels (consider how tanks use angled armour plating), though it could still be engineered to crumple despite this.
Me actually driving every day a 90's kei truck on highways on my way to work:
*Chuckles* "I'm in danger!"
But driving that let you save a lot of money better spent on your very own guardian angel. So evens out really
Living in danger, haha!
The crumple zones on those are literally your knees.
Hi there. Kinda jealous TBH. my '14 Mirage is too big.
What doesn't kill you makes you stronger?
You drive a mighty boy?
What a great insightful video as usual. This particularly stood out as a video of interest as we’ve just purchased a VW Tiguan to improve safety.
The most dangerous car is the one which has the most dangerous driver in it
.
This video was far more interesting than I originally expected.
6:15 This clip really put a lot in perspective when it comes to vehicle safety, for me. Damn...
"Among other atomical differences" you heard him boys, we're going nuclear. Ready up!
jihadthat777 Scott Manley crossover incoming
Eat bananas.
oof ouch owie my radiation exposure
So every time somebody crashes it will be a tiny Chernobyl. Great, sounds like fun.
Which Is The Most Dangerous Car?
*Maruti Suzuki* : Please allow me to introduce myself.
That cloud of rust when that vintage car impacted.
Could the death per miles on that big dataset be from the demographic of the owners? Of course newer less experienced drivers would choose cheaper cars, and drivers of sports cars would drive a bit more 'care free' than most, so I think that's why the crash test rating and the deaths per mile traveled don't line up all the time.
LazerLord10
100%
That's definitely a potential factor, Mirages are some of the cheapest cars on the US market.
old people might drive a mirage also and they are more likely to die in a crash
I love your skyblock videos!
It's an obvious question with an obvious answer. Don't ask stupid things.
Sometimes the transition to the sponsor is too smooth and makes me feel like the whole video was an add🤣
That list of most deaths highlights a major issue. Cars like the Mirage and Honda Fit are topping the charts not because they are dangerous cars, but because they stand the worst chance of surviving a crash with a giant SUV or pickup truck. This shows that the cars that actually cause the most deaths and injuries to all road users are not penalized for it. If anything, this penalizes smaller cars that would do less damage to other cars or pedestrians, despite them being objectively safer for all road users. This is one of the many reasons why large SUVs and Trucks are so deadly.
2:38 dat Supra tho
*The Most Dangerous Car:*
1. The ones that Isekais Anime Protagonists
truck-kun~
Not particularly dangerous for the driver though.
@@AstolfoGayming i mean, we never do see what happens to the drivers after the isakai
A Suzuki Container Truck
Corey Taylor there's a manga about a guy who drives a truck to isekai people
Q: How dangerous is the new cybertruck?
A: Don't buy a Mirage.
Edit: Oh My GoSh!1!1!11! sO mAnY lIkEs!/!?////!?/1/ ArNt I qUrKy FoR sAyInG tHiS???/ GIVE ME LIKES, FEED THE BEAST!
If Cybrtruck will be launched looking as it was demoed, I'll bet it'll get 3 stars, because it will kill pedestrians on impact.
Math be like.
@@MK-je7kz Pedestrian impact safety with pedestrians in mind is not shown here, afaik not tested nor considered in US-Testing, and that answers the Cybertruck Safety.
It relies on the accident opponents crumple zones and human flesh and bones for it's safety rather than it's own.
Not really a car traveling at 40mph at a direct hit to a person will most likely kill them. The cyber truck won't be any different. But Tesla has advanced collision avoidance systems in place to prevent that from happening which is what makes Tesla cars so much safer than most vehicles
@@MK-je7kz Don't worry, it won't be. What they showed off was just 10 year old Elon's wet dream. They showed off a truck that is so incredibly illegal, it will look like a US import of a 70's British sports car - completely uglified with afterthought compliant bumpers.
3:21 - You did not take into account, for the whole duration of the video, the lethal Takata airbags, like the ones in the Nissan Versa, and other cars.
for anyone that’s confused: a few years ago, takata airbags were recalled in certain year/makes/models because the airbags were sending shrapnel into the passenger compartment when the airbags deployed. and faulty foil seals allowed moisture to leak into the ammonium nitrate that was used as a propellant to inflate the airbags, which could have decreased the force of the airbags when deployed
The engineering of cars safety has significantly improved over the years. But one fundamental problem remains: they design the cars to protect the passengers-the people in the cars-but not the people outside of them. This significantly affects our relationship with transportation. Since safety increases inside cars and decreases outside of them, it makes it way more dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists. You only need to look at the numbers to see how this has gone up. This in turn creates a negative feedback loop where people are driving more because of their safety, which makes it more dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists, which makes more people drive even more, and so on and so forth. This reminds me of one of Batman's infamous lines: "I'm willing to put my life on the line to do what I have to. But it has to be mine, no one else's". I need transportation to get from A to B; it is essential to everyone's life. But if it comes at the cost of other people's lives, then I'm not accepting it.
Dont buy a Mirage? Was that the answer? Feel this went off rails from what I expected
The reason the Mirage is the worst is it is the least expensive vehicle one can buy in America. Naturally, corners are going to be cut.
@@mikemorr100 My theory this is that car is an entry level car for new and inexperienced drivers because it is so cheap, driver skill may play a factor.
The type of people you see driving mirages (and other small cars like the versa) and how they are driven doesn't shock me at all with the driver fatalities.
I think mirage is created for asian country where the traffic most of the time is bumper to bumper, i own a mirage and tbh it's one great little car. And yes i live in one of the Asian countries, Indonesia
my theory is that no one actually buys a Mirage, the only ones on the road are rentals so people drive em like maniacs.
I really want to see the low-polygon-count truck's EuroNCAP test result. Specifically the car vs pedestrian test. They gonna have to rename it the Murder-truck.
Google "Tesla Autopilot"
knowyourmeme.com/memes/truck-kun --> Elon's way of making new anime
Johntech the autopilot can still fail, and you can’t/won’t use it in every situation. Hence the car still needs to be as safe as it can be for a pedestrian/cyclist when it does come into collision with a pedestrian/cyclist. “Autopilot” means jack shit in that case. Tesla’s still DO crash, regardless of their superior safety systems
@@StratosTitan Evidence is short on Teslas crash safety systems actually being superior to those every other manufacturer also has in their cars. Autonomous braking, lane departure warning and blind spot monitoring are available at the very least as options in just about everything and yet other cars still have to meet pedestrian crash regulations too? Autonomous driving is very dangerous as Tesla aren't willing to take responsibility for the mistakes it makes but it works well enough that drivers can get away with not looking where they're going for long enough periods that overall the risk is higher. Until full no steering wheel autonomy is available, and even Elon Musk has admitted that's a lot harder than he thought when he started trying to do it, anything that takes the driver's attention off actually driving - the worst and most common examples being touch screen interfaces, where there's no tactile feedback, so you have to look to make sure your finger is in the right place instead of just feeling for the button is a massive safety downgrade.
Wow this video was far more intuitive than I thought good job man
Basic physics: if you choose the smallest car, than every other larger car is likely to dish out more damage to your car. So, in a small car, your risk is exponentially higher. Think, demolition derby, and choose accordingly.
The most dangerous car is russian car "Oka", it has the second name "Death capsule".
Oka is pretty much an earlier take on Tata Nano, only made from actual metal. I doubt it will be any worse.
In Russia you don't crash car -- car crash *you*.
Oka plane is very safe
@@mihan2d acually bajaj qute is d most dangerous car in russia,in india it is listed as quad cycle,but russian govt gave it car title
@ Alex
te most dangerous car is the one you are riding without wearing seat-belts. Think of a jogger's speed and him hitting a wall. This is only 10 mph - and not healthy at all.
Real Engeneering rants about US safety inspection for 20 minutes
its "inspection" but Yeah, something to think about next time you enter an iron coffin.
This video let me down
@@lhagiduty It should, fix the system. It's like the coronavirus, we thought we knew what we knew until we were brought down off the high horse.
Fun fact: the ratings for wet tire traction are based on locked tires despite all cars since 2000 being legally required to have ABS in the USA.
It's why the Michelin Cross Climate gets a B rating (the worst rating for some reason) despite having superior rain traction to pretty much every other tire.
One question to sort out: safest for whom? A lightweight car is probably very safe to be hit by, moderately safe to crash into a tree, and extremely unsafe to go head-on with another vehicle in. Big cars are safer for the individual but not the collective.
from what I remember hearing about car design from a engineer talking to a mother who lost her son in a crash, when she asked why couldn't the car have been made to withstand such a crash. It's that you really can't design cars to be safe and practical for certain situations . Like a compact car getting hit by a ford f150 going like 50 mph, the people inside the compact are almost always going to die. Or just making a car reliably safe in a crash at highway speeds, like it hits a wall or something that would stop it fast. it's why most testing is done around speeds and situations you'd find in cities and residential areas. Not to mention often pitting the car against itself or similar sized vehicles, since after a certain point you just find the heavy vehicles just annihilate the light ones. Plus gotta take in account that most accidents are preventable since they are the fault of the driver or a driver involved. And well you can't design against stupid, since easier you make something the more powerful stupid will become.
Yeah, there's always limits.
If Anyone thinks there aren't, consider what happens to most any car if a truck (by which I mean a semi, not a ute/pickup) hits it.
Now imagine trying that again only this time hitting it with a train.
for that matter, imagine asking why we can't design aircraft to survive hitting the ground at arbitrary speeds.
Speed is a particular issue.
E = 1/2mv^2 and all.
Getting something to survive a collision at twice the speed is asking to make it 4 times as strong.
Pretty big ask, really.
In addition: Let's assume you could design the perfectly safe car. It is literally perfect, since you will survive any crash. The downside is it costs about 10x the price of comparible (but "normally" safe) models. Would the broad population buy this? I don't think so. Even the people able to afford it, probably wouldn't buy it, because they'd think "really bad accidents only happen to other people". So in short: Even if it was possible, it would probably not be the no. 1 car for everyone...
That's the fun bit. We, the engineers are responsible to take this as a real issue with maximum possible thresholds and innovate on it. There's no end.
So it’s Tesla Truck bad ( even though it doesn’t exist yet ) Ford Truck , yeah it kills people but that’s just the laws of nature.
I studied car design and everything humans produce will be an exerciser in compromise. An M-A1 tank would be safe, but not practical efficient or remotely affordable. Almost all car fatalities are caused by human error, yet so many "real drivers" hate the idea of giving the wheel over to autonomous cars.
No one's gonna cry about that cherry 1959 bel-aire getting destroyed?
Probably not since we all just witnessed it kill it's occupants in a mock accident.
@@Justin-nx3pw a lot of classic cars are death traps, but I'd daily drive one if I could. That car was beautiful
It's Chevy not cherry
Who cares there are so many of them in this world.
Jay Leno was asked if he’s scared driving unsafe antique cars. He responded that he’s more scared in a bland modern car because people notice the classics and generally you don’t hit what you’re looking at.
Thankyou for this vlog and channel.
Another overlooked area of safety is seat back failures. In crashes involving certain rear end collisions, the front seat backs can collapse causing the front seat occupants to slip out of their restraints and can cause injuries to them and the rear seat passengers. Sadly, because children are typically the passengers in the rear, and are most vulnerable to injuries, some are badly injured. Certain US lawmakers have been trying to force the manufacturers to put emphasis on the design and testing of the seat backs, but little progress has been made. My recommendation for selecting a used or new vehicle to purchase is to google 'seatback failure lawsuit' and include the year make and model of the vehicle. The search results may surprise you. Example: 'seat back failure lawsuit 2002 Lexus ES300'
This is one of your absolute best videos yet. You raise awareness to a huge issue that the average consumer wouldn't know otherwise. As a city transportation engineer, i focus on roadway safety a lot. I think this video does a lot of good and I think you did an incredible job.
7:56 Windows XP will never die
i bet the use of Windows XP in crucial tasks will last another decade
Dude even Putin uses XP (for real).
Ancient operating systems are still being used in embedded systems. Think Windows 3.1x or OS/2 Warp. These are often still in use for critical applications, for example operating heavy machinery. If it works, don't fix it, I guess.
1:12 i wish more people would think this way
10:16 Wow, I never thought a pedestrian's leg could completely come off and spin into the air.
"Hello and, again, welcome to the Aperture Science computer-aided enrichment center." "Testing is an essential part of the learning process."
The cake is a lie.
Damn GLaDOS is everywhere
10:17 The mitsubishi just doesn't care, it thinks it's playing football
Perhaps, instead of rating safety with a star system, they just say how high among all cars a car ranks. If there's, say, 600 different cars sold in the US, the window sticker on a Tesla Model S would say Safety: #1 out of 600, on a Mitsubishi Mirage would say Safety: #600 out of 600, and on something like a Toyota Camry would say Safety: #58 out of 600.
The most unsafe car is the Smart Car, in any environment, IIHS directly called them “coffins on wheels” and they have never passed a single crash test, it’s own weight or bigger
3:45 this test crash was based on an irl crash that happened
therealgoody can you please not be a dick m.czcams.com/video/dgrrOhuRxzg/video.html
Lmao dumbass. This type of crash happens all the time.
FusionGaming That type of accident happens all the time, dumbass. Everyone knows this.
@@brotendo They're also why roundabouts so seriously improve intersection safety.
@@Quintinohthree Good point and another consideration to take in when looking at motor vehicle fatalities over the decades. Better signs, signals, traffic flow design, etc.
When a CyberTruck roast turns into a roast of the IIHS.
When does he do this? I hope you mean the NHTSA.
I drive pickups and a Volvo. I've tried to cover the safety issue as well as possible.
Excellent! I didn’t know how outdated the standard test is.
10:21 poor dummy.....that honda car is cruel
It literally let off the brakes just to hit it wtf 😂😂😂
The video editing makes it look like the woman at 10:28 saw that and said "great, I'll take that one."
As far as I know, the cars safety is assessed within it's weight class, hence why a Mirage gets 4 stars.....
I am retired first responder and have responded to literally hundreds of vehicle crashes. I can say, from my experience the chance of surviving a head on crash at 55 in a car of any is unlikely. I have seen people killed in crashes as slow as 35 MPH. If a person hit a large tree or unmoving object at highway speed chances of surviving are low. I have seen several car vs full size truck crashes where everyone in the car is killed and the people in the truck are un-injured. Good rule of thumb larger the vehicle you are in the more likely you are to survive a crash.
Side note, for some reason dogs seem to never get killed in car crashes...it's so odd to pull up to a crash scene with dead and or dying people, smash cars and dogs just walking around the wreckage. It's one of those things I never could understand.
Some car makers make the car good enough to pass each test. But reality is no test.
My guess: Ford Pinto; 5mph rear impact, goes up In flames Immediately
Helped along with a firework from GM.
Yeah, that whole Pinto thing was not nearly as bad as it's usually made out to be. Safety-wise, it was actually very typical for that class of vehicles at the time, and the infamous video of one going up in flames was a test where the fuel tank was intentionally set off by a charge. The scandal was really due to how Ford handled it.
@@SynchronizorVideos I mean, at least it wasn't like mustangs of similar years where gas would spew up into the cabin.
@@SynchronizorVideos you know the whole story, not many people do. The bigger problem for buyers was the car was a POS (the vega was worse) with the engine lasting about 60k miles.
Man, I didn't know there were so many replays with different angles of this simulated life of mine.
10:30
camaro's tire : aight imma head out
As always, the biggest roadblock is the bureaucracy and not the companies
No crash test dummies have been harmed in the making of this video. Maybe.
Your results may vary.
What about truck kun
Ain't that right, Buster?
No femail dummies
the one in the 70s car is toast. Thats for sure!
"Don't bend when hit with a sledgehammer"
That's not a sledgehammer. That's a rubber mallet.
@@fayenotfaye it's a deadblow hammer.
A rubber mallet full of sand.
@@fayenotfaye Were you the one holding it?
Otherwise you have to prove it.
@@fayenotfaye I didn't need to hold it. I saw (and heard) what it was.
Prove it wasn't rubber.
@@fayenotfaye No, i don't need to. I am not the one making dubious claims here.
It’s a 14 lb dead blow sledgehammer. I have owned one for 10 years....
I like that somebody actually took the time to create a pedestrian dummy that completely unnecessarily swings its legs back and forth as the track moves it along.
Video was a huge eye-opener. I bought a Spark after watching the IIHS video. The Spark aced the small overlap collision...doing much, much better than many cars twice its size. I bought it feeling pretty invincible. This video completely change my mind.
If I get hit by an F150 or similar size vehicle, my tiny Spark is going to collapse like an aluminum soda can...because of the sheer weight and inertia of the other vehicle. Feeling a lot less safe. Thank you for the education (and the truth)!
Buying A car because it succeeded 1 safety test really wasn't A smart thing to do.