Dangerous parts for sale on the Samba?

[skills@eurocarsplus]

[Wasted youth]

Regarding bus safety, raygreenwood said: ....but safety or near safety....or comparative safety should never even enter the conversation.

Hmmm....I would venture to say that a 1973 model year bus has far more features that improve its safety over that of a pre-1968 bus.

[raygreenwood]

[timvw7476]

between the lack of stability control,ABS,airbags,power steering, telescopic
bumpers etc, every part that allows anyone to keep a bay on the road can
be deemed "dangerous" , i suspect the expiration date of every vehicle is
to be found in it's engineering.

[ChrisFred]

[matt94gt]

[Wildthings]

Back in the 80's I knew a lot of people who owned Saabs. Safety was one of the big selling points for many of them. I also knew way more people who wrecked Saabs than any other vehicle. One friend rolled multiple times in a short construction zone because he lost control in the loose gravel. Others lost control on snow covered roads and climbed guard rail or ended up in ditches. What they were doing was driving faster than conditions merited and getting into trouble because of it.

The number of people I have known who own VW's far outnumbers the number of Saab owners I know, but I have known very few who ended up in wrecks and those were mostly in their teens or early twenties at the time.

I would hazard a guess that a VW bus cruising at 60 is just about as safe as the best newer car driving along at 80. In a head on situation the high sitting bus might well compromise the crumple zone on a newer vehicle giving the bus's occupant a comparable edge.

It would be interesting to see if all the Bays and Splities with Raby engines and Vanagons with Subies and such end up having a higher injury and mortality rate than stock Transporters do.

[DougB]

[udidwht]

[Bleyseng]

[borninabus]

[udidwht]

[raygreenwood]

Dudes....you guys are mistaking and now mixing chassis survivability with occupant safety....not even remotely the same thing. If it were....the original post would be meaningless.

I mean...in this train of thought...who gives a shit if you shear a leg off on the solid steel parcel shelf if the bus lives to drive another day?

Some of this same train of thought is why many still do not understand the role of an airbag...which is NOT to keep your limp ass in the car. In fact....in most cases....the airbag is well in the middle of its deflation cycle as your kneecaps pass the steering wheel on your way through the windshield if you neglected to wear a seat belt.

The fact that a bus hitting a modern car does more damage to the modern car...is irrelevant to passenger safety...or who walked away with less injuries.

The modern car is designed to crumple as noted. This is precisely the main reason why the 5 mph crash damage legislation was suspended (or never really ratified) in Canada and was laughed at in Germany, Europe in general and most other places.

Its soooo simple to make a bumper that will survive a small fender bender to keep insurance repair costs down....but virtually impossible if you are actually making the car safe for occupants.

is that just for your vehicles 5mph?
Or is it your vehicles 5mph and another vehicles 5 mph...which is 10 mph?
Or how do you violate/overcome inertia...your 5000 lb+ of vehicle, occupants and crap at 5 mph against an immobile object?....bumper survives...but everything behind it accordions to keep you from becoming a projectile.

Bumper is pristine....car is 9" shorter. Kind of makes the 5mph crash bumper and safety cell technology incompatible.

So all manufacturers pretty much ignore it now and its not enforced.

So why does it need to be this way?...back to the airbag.

The airbag is designed to decelerate your sack of potatoes ass in about 2/100's of a second so that instant deceleration from the seat belt and inertial reel system does not let your guts smash up against your ribcage...or your brain slosh up against your skull.

Thousands of people..before airbags ....came away from a minor accident without a visible scratch...and literally died hours later from internal bleeding and organ damage....no shit.
Thats what airbags are for....and thats the inertia you have to worry about.

No....Im not buying that a bus is more survivable than a modern car.

Oh...I used to own a Saab 900 for years. I have worked on many Saab's.
Wonderful cars in so many ways. Mine went well over 350k miles....most do (up until about 1999 when to much GM started going into them). A lot has to do with the nikisil type coating in the cylinders.

But I fully agree. When in good shape..they handle quite well. Deceptively well.

The reason why people wreck so many is that they last soooo long. When they get up in miles...they must have new ball joints, new complete A-arms by 175K miles (factory bulletin as they are prone to cracking)...and new A-arms are still readily available with bushings for less than $85 each.

And the upper control arm bushings are virtually impossible to replace without lifting the engine up 8-10 inches with a hoist. Poor design for maintenance. Most 3rd and 4th owners know nothing of these issues.

the upper control arm bushings are actually the most dangerous handling issue.

When the front end gets sloppy because of these three items...the car is so smooth that its hard to feel this issue.
The rear trailing beam suspension with Panhard rod...is not capable of controlling the rear if the front is not under proper directional and vibrational control .
Most people who wreck these cars do so on slightly wet pavement going through a curve at highway speed.
Most who actually die in these vehicles...die because they have no seat belt on and no airbag system. Ray

[khalimadeath]

Kinda off topic but I dont think a lot of our sellers on here are very bright. I inquired about a set of wiper arms and the seller. Kept asking me dumb questions I had already answered almost like an automated system. I said I was paypal ready. All the guy had to do was forward his PP info and price I would have payed him. Instead he stopped responding after I got frustrated with his responses.

[notchboy]

There is nothing quite more entertaining than watchin folks herd cats

_________________

[Millennium Falcon]

I think buses are able to drive away from more head on collisions only because the engine is in the back. But you can not drive away if your legs are chopped off below your knees by a parcel tray.
_________________
"Don't worry, she'll hold together . . . You hear me, baby? Hold together!" -Han to the Falcon

1972 White Campmobile
1700 cc Type IV
Dual Solex 34 PDSIT2/3

[Lionhart94010]

RE topic…

I’m sure the two aforementioned package trays would have made the recent accident below worse, and although as a person that has built a company from scratch and applaud the wish to have a business of your own, I wonder what liability the sellers would have if the surviving victims decided to sue them for selling them an unsafe product… I/we built an “S” corporation it limited our liability to the assets of the company; but I doubt the sellers of the unsafe package trays have protected themselves from the possibility of losing every ting they own

Driver trapped for 30 minutes

PS Re subtopic-

It is in this sort of accident that I think perhaps a Hurst type Roo Bar could reduce the intrusion into the drivers compartment, however that would not help as Ray has poignantly described:

[raygreenwood]

Yes.....and that nice photographic illustration does does reinforce your original point. Point taken. In the face of this whole thread....thinking about it....every little thing you can do to make a bus safer is good.

Its not a safe vehicle in the modern driving world. But.....neither is any other pastime worth doing so dont let it stop you!
Ray

[Alex6373]

Yes and let's put in a safari window kit!

[Alex6373]