TheSamba.com :: View topic

Tue Jun 24, 2014 10:55 am

Ouch!!! So Glad you are ok! but so Hard to see that T3 destroyed. VW did VERY well in the safety in the T3

Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:16 pm

Syncro's driver suffering just from a knee pain and black circles on his eyes.

He took the photo's right after the accident.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:24 pm

Bmw's driver to hospital due to heavy injuries.

Vanagon's passengers went home with light injuries.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:28 pm

Bmw's passengers died.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:32 pm

Vanagon's old woman driver injected out the car. (No seat belt?).

Tue Aug 04, 2015 2:39 pm

Tests, tests, tests....

"Zwei Kollisionsversuche mit der Front eines VW Transporters T3 (ab Bj. 1979) gegen die Front eines stehenden Pkw (Überdeckung 100%). Die Versuche wurden mit 60,3 km/h und mit 73 km/h gefahren. Die Masse des Transporters lag mit 1655 kg im ersten Versuch über der des zweiten Versuchs (1560 kg). Im Versuch 1 wies der gecrashte Pkw eine Masse von 1240 kg auf, im Versuch 2 1535 kg. Auch ein VW Campingbus der Fa. Westfalia (größere Masse) wurde verwendet. Die bleibenden Verformungen der Pkws waren ca. 4-5 mal größer. Die Struktur des Vorderwagens des VW Transporters hinterhalb des Frontblechs ist auf (dem leider sehr dunkel geratenen) "

Google translation:

"Two attempts collision with the front of a VW Transporter T3 (ab Bj. 1979) against the front of a stationary car (coverage 100%). The tests were run 60.3 km / h, 73 km / h. The mass of the transporter amounted to 1655 kg in the first test on the second attempt (1560 kg). in the experiment 1 the crashed car a VW camper van the company had a mass of 1240 kg, 1535 kg in experiment 2. also. Westfalia (greater mass) was used. the permanent deformation of the cars were about 4-5 times greater. the structure of the front end of the VW transporter semi behind the front plate can be seen on "

Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:01 pm

dixoncj wrote: So I queried a spokesperson for the IIHS named Russ Rader on Vanagon Safety versus modern vehicles.

Here is his reply.

Quote: Hi Chris,

To make the comparison between today's rates based on one million registered vehicles and the earlier reported rates per 10,000 registrations you can just multiply the old rate by 100. So for the Vanagon the 1991 rate of .6 deaths per 10,000 would be 60 deaths per million using the modern calculation.

You can compare to modern vehicles in the most recent death rates report from 2011 here: http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4605.pdf

Vehicles are much, much safer today than they were in 1991. The Vanagon had a very low death rate compared to other vehicles on the road in 1991. But compared with today's safest vehicles, given vast improvements in crashworthiness engineering plus standard front and side airbags, electronic stability control, and other advances, the Vanagon would be considered worse than average. You'll see in the charts in the latest 2011 report that vehicles with the lowest death rates had fewer than 22 deaths per million registered vehicles.

If you have any other questions let me know.

So now you know -more.

Talking about death rates in SUVs, from the above report,

we can see an interesting factor, which makes its appearance in previous reports, too:

the 4wd models, of the same car, have, (about), 30% lower rates.

So the 60 of the 2wd Vanagon, may be, (just a thought), 42.

And as an owner and driver of both, 2wd & Syncro, in the past, for more than 10 years, I am persuaded that the difference is even bigger, because Syncro is many times more predictable and stable than 2wd, with body reinforcements, subchassis under unibody, when is sitting higher, simultaneously.

Taking this in account, the 35 years old design, without airbags, abs, etc, front engine compartment, etc., etc., is not worse than nowdays cars average, has a tremendous potential for improvements, and this is the reason why it is a lesson in polytechnic schools around the world for a vehicle's passive, (and active), safety.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:23 pm

most SUVs do not meet passenger car safety standards, so that affects your conclusion

Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:25 pm

Merian wrote: most SUVs do not meet passenger car safety standards, so that affects your conclusion

Please read the report and you will see that this is not true anymore.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:47 pm

my post is correct as written - most SUVs on the road are not new enough to meet passenger car stds. for safety

a more fundamental problem with your conclusion is that it only deals with passive safety AFTER an accident - active safety involves the superior ability of many passenger cars to avoid a crash rel. to a Vanagon

Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:54 pm

Merian wrote: my post is correct as written - most SUVs on the road are not new enough to meet passenger car stds. for safety

In any case, the point is that the 4wd cars, talking for those which can use this characteristic not only off road but on road too, are with lower death rates from their 2wd brothers, in all years IIHS reports.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:58 pm

Merian wrote:
a more fundamental problem with your conclusion is that it only deals with passive safety AFTER an accident - active safety involves the superior ability of many passenger cars to avoid a crash rel. to a Vanagon

In IIHS rates, there are two contributing factors: passive and active safety.

Vanagon Syncro is a marvelous car in both, for some very specific reasons.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 4:18 pm

Take f.ex. it's hidden front spoiler, which stabilizes it in high speeds, in such an extend that "car and driver" compares to a, (80's), 911 Porsche and finds that T3 is less unstable in cross winds although it's volume is many times bigger.

1.60 Μ2

Tue Aug 04, 2015 4:30 pm

Tue Aug 04, 2015 4:35 pm

Οr, 50-50% weight distribution, loaded or unloaded, which even best cars have big difficulty to achieve.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 4:36 pm

dixoncj wrote:
To make the comparison between today's rates based on one million registered vehicles and the earlier reported rates per 10,000 registrations you can just multiply the old rate by 100. So for the Vanagon the 1991 rate of .6 deaths per 10,000 would be 60 deaths per million using the modern calculation.f[/url]

One thing that you need to take into account comparing death and injury rates for newer cars with those of older cars is that the roads have gotten significantly safer over the decades. When I first started driving there were a lot of one lane bridges on US and state highways. You pretty much had to run the guantlet while cruising these many roads. Today roads typically have much better shoulders, the lanes are wider, the bridges are wider, there is not an oily smear down the middle of the lanes from the draft tubes, curves have been straightened, guardrails built, grades recut, the list goes on and on.

When I lived in West Virginia years ago, a lot of the roads I drove had just a single strip of pavement down the middle of the road with a gravel shoulder to either side. You are going one way and the coal truck is coming the other. If you yield too soon he may not yield at all forcing you into the ditch and if you don't yield the game is over. Nasty game, I played it many times a day though I sure wouldn't want to do it any more though.

Tue Aug 04, 2015 4:41 pm

Or it's Swiss accuracy front suspension, safe for more than 200 km/h,

which others have, ehmmm, some...difficulties to achieve, (death wobble):

ABC NEWS
http://abc7news.com/archive/8547340/

"Hi Guys,

Wobble at 50MPH+ when it's cold. Seen it before, fixed it all, nothing works.

Car: 2003 Mercedes G500

Thanks for taking the time to read my post. First of all, I've seen and read all the threads in regards to the 50MPH "death wobble" that some of us seem to be experiencing on our Gs, and I have it. It's weird and I'll try my best to explain what it is and what I've done to fix it.

1) between 50mph-60mph when driving, if I hit a bump and/or i slightly turn the steering wheel, the car shakes violently - I feel like I'm going to die. This appears to only happen when it is cold outside.

2) this happens on both OEM wheels and aftermarket wheels

Steps I've done to fix the problem:

1) alignment & wheel balance

2) bought new tires

3) bought new rims after I thought the wheels were bent

4) changed inner and outer tie rod ends

5) the other tie rod bar thing (name escapes me, the one the steering damper is connected to)

6) change steering damper from "upgraded w463" to the "bilstein" solution

7) taken it to 10+ shops all of which cannot even feel it (it only happens when it's cold, and I'm in Florida so it's only in the evening/night right now

What else could I be missing? I'm at a loss here, I don't know what it could be. A million people seem to have this issue, I have the EXACT same issue as the others with the same wobble, however, changing the stabilizer bar did not solve it for me, nor did any of the listed above."
[/url]

A 35 years older Vanagon, has a much better active safety...
(And there are a lot more about the same topic).

Tue Aug 04, 2015 5:07 pm

[/youtube]

Wed Aug 05, 2015 12:57 am

In fact, after many years of research, I haven't found a single deadly accident, (for the occupants), with a Syncro.

This doesn't mean that I am proposing that does not exist on an international basis.

After decades of car's life on the globe, under extreme driving conditions, there must be a lot.

If you know something, please post it here.

But, in order to be evaluated, please, (if possible), post all the relative informations, the vehicles involved, (if any), velocities, if seat belts used, e.t.c..

Wed Aug 05, 2015 1:09 am

A unique photo: a Syncro's crash test.

(It's sub chassis is just visible)