120 MPH Crash Test...

**yellow_2002_germany** · 10-23-11, 06:10 PM

Ran across this article on a British News Site...

World's fastest ever crash test: Car smashes into wall at 120mph (a speed most family runarounds can hit) | Mail Online

**Hib Halverson** · 10-23-11, 06:20 PM

Buncha morons if you ask me.

I can understand why they are so amazed and in awe of the results of a 120 mph barrier collision.

I mean....if they had any more than half-a-brain, what other possible outcome could they have expected?

**NORTY** · 10-24-11, 11:47 AM

I found it fascinating. Watching the car's crumple zones work (even at this tremendous energy level) is always something we can learn from. Sure they're designed to work at much less energy, but they worked somewhat, even @ 120. A speed they were clearly not designed to handle.

Are/were they "morons?" I would say no, as scientists conduct experiments outside the typical performance parameters all the time. This is how we learn. It seemed to me that proper safety precautions were observed for this experiment, and I didn't notice anyone acting "stupidly."

While this test is unusual, I think there may be some value in it, providing total analysis is performed. I don't find it necessary to "test" all cars as this particular scenario rarely happens, but sacrificing a couple cars and maybe a truck (lorry) or 2 wouldn't be the end of the world either.

Can you imagine testing a motorcycle @ 120 into a wall? Talk about messy!

**Mac** · 10-25-11, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by NORTY

I found it fascinating. Watching the car's crumple zones work (even at this tremendous energy level) is always something we can learn from. Sure they're designed to work at much less energy, but they worked somewhat, even @ 120. A speed they were clearly not designed to handle.

Are/were they "morons?" I would say no, as scientists conduct experiments outside the typical performance parameters all the time. This is how we learn. It seemed to me that proper safety precautions were observed for this experiment, and I didn't notice anyone acting "stupidly."

While this test is unusual, I think there may be some value in it, providing total analysis is performed. I don't find it necessary to "test" all cars as this particular scenario rarely happens, but sacrificing a couple cars and maybe a truck (lorry) or 2 wouldn't be the end of the world either.

Can you imagine testing a motorcycle @ 120 into a wall? Talk about messy!

I doubt the host will be doing any analysis but hopefully the scientists will... although with no sensors, the analysis would all be based on watching the high-speed footage and measuring/analyzing/examining the wreck.

Didn't Mythbusters do a similar crash into an immovable object along with crashing a couple of cars together at speed, basically trying to prove/disprove the difference between crashing two cars meeting head-on at X speed versus one car meeting wall at 2X speed? I think readers disagreed with Jamie's assertion that the physics made the damage equal or something like that.

-Mac

**Hib Halverson** · 10-25-11, 12:49 PM

I guess some missed my point.

The "morons" are the media and spectators who seemed astonished at the results of the test.

Like...what were they expecting other than scrap metal?

**Mac** · 10-25-11, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Hib Halverson

I guess some missed my point.

The "morons" are the media and spectators who seemed astonished at the results of the test.

Like...what were they expecting other than scrap metal?

Dramatic music, perhaps? Actors aren't noted for a firm grasp of reality.

-Mac