WAY off topic but,
I dont think thats true, I think its the same if both cars are the same weight. Where did you get that info?
Yes it’s true, you need to google the research beind it. Two cars colliding head on have crumple zones that absorb massive amounts of energy, if the vehicles are different weights or are travelling at different speeds the energy absorbed by each vehicle is different but from studies show that it is approximately 4 times less violent on the occupants than if the car hit a stationary un movable object.I dont think thats true, I think its the same if both cars are the same weight. Where did you get that info?
I hit a pole once but it moved slightly I guess. No injuries luckily, seems better to hit something head on than be hit from the side. I braced for impact with both arms and both legs and didnt get any injuries at all other than an airbag burn and sore wrist. I actually went to the gym the next day and did a normal workout :
The driver side headlight flew about 70 feet across the median , across 2 lanes, then into a ditch. I was going about 50 after no lift shifting 1-2 and blowing the tires off with 630 rwhp.
I now leave stability control on lol.
I did google it and only found stuff saying its the same as hitting a solid wall if the other car weighs the same, so if you have a source for your claim I would like to see that.
There’s heaps of stuff on the physics of car crashes and how kinetic energy affects each type. Exponentially more violent for occupants hitting a wall the another car head on.
All the information I can find on this says that is not true and its the same as a solid object if the other car weighs the same.
I think the point was that older peopled died at a higher rate than younger age categories for every vehicle type based on that study/data. I doubt that particular statistic would have changed much, even though cars are obviously much safer now than they used to be. They are safer for everyone, so the ratios between old and young deaths would probably remain about the same.
I have no idea if it's true or not, but from a physics standpoint, hitting another car head-on effectively doubles the crush distance (since both cars are likely to have crumple zones), reducing rapid deceleration by half. The factor that doesn't make sense to me is that speed (assuming both cars are traveling the same speed) is also doubled, and speed has a higher impact on energy than mass does (speed is squared, mass is linear). So, the crumple zones get twice as long, but the speed is also twice as fast bringing much more energy to the crash. I'm not convinced about the "4x more violent hitting stationary object" stat mentioned either. I'd be interested to see some real data or a study to back that claim.
The crush distance inside each car is not doubled. Assuming two cars are identical, hit perfectly in line and are both travelling the same speed, you can draw a line between them at the collision point and know that the line doesn't move. So, from the standpoint of each car, IMO it's identical to hitting a stationary wall in that situation.
Good points, you're right about the impact crush distance. My mistake.