Fortuna-Harrier

[katabeachbum]

You really don't know what we are talking about do you?

you r stating monocoque vehicles in the west are made by "men in white coates checking the machinery". I disagree, so do millions of auto industry employees.

Unfortunately the US auto industry salaries for those not wearing white coates, is a major problem for these manufactorers to achive profit

[sillyman99]

Built on a Chassis from the Hilux, does that mean they are virtually indestructible too ?

My Fortuner takes me across my Farms in all conditions with no hesitation at all, it's got great torque, I pulled a 2WD pick up out of a ditch on a real muddy track with no effort whatsoever, on the open road it goes very well, I can check into a 5 Star hotel and not feel conspicuous or out of place pulling up in a Fortuner.

I also have a new Honda City, and that feels like its on Rails compared to my Fortuner when hammering round a corner, but the interior space and high driving position of the Fortuner makes me not even bother to drive the City much at all, don't get me wrong, it's a nice little motor with great economy, but to me, it's the Gf's ride.

For an all round motor for Thailand capable of tackling the many different road surfaces and conditions found in Thailand, a Fortuner is hard to beat.

I was going to buy a 2.4 Accord recently, I really like the interior and the layout, but when I thought hard about it, what can I do in an Accord that I can't do in a Fortuner, and what can I do in a Fortuner that I can't do in an Accord, I just hung on to the Fortuner. If I lived in the City only, the Accord may have been my choice.

Being based on the legendary Hilux frame is complimentary actually.

[Spoonman]

Being based on the legendary Hilux frame is complimentary actually.

Not its not, the moment you turn your back to it it will kill you and eat your children (if you read between the lines of Deerals posts).

[soundman]

Posts have been removed for flaming.

Please keep it civil.

[katabeachbum]

If you have worked on crash-tests youwill have sen the direct hit testing into a solid object.

The weight here is greater than anyvehicle ever to be thrown at ti.

Ask yourself in a 20, 30 40 etc mphcollision which vehicle would you prefer to be in?

A Jazz

A vigo or

a Volvo 40 tonner?

It doesn't matter which is theheaviest!

The "fact" is you'd probably bebest off in the Jazz.

As most road accidents don't involvehitting a huge unmoveable object straight on then you have to thinkmore about the behaviour of your vehicle after a collision

Are you purely selfish?

Do you mind killing everyone in theother vehicle and around you....well the law in most countries hasregulations to limit the collateral damage a vehicle can cause –these are construction weight and height limits etc to try and ensurethat vehicles are the same height etc.

Unfortunately pickups and in othercountries, SUVs are outside a lot of these regulations and continueto be a menace to other motorists.

The occupants however rare lulled intoa false sense of security by the size of their vehicle. Usually aftera collision cars will continue on, maybe rolling or what ever –inside the passenger compartment things become crucial.

In UK many years ago they had a "weara seat belt" ad that really brought it all home very simply.

Jimmy Saville – the presenter – putan egg n an egg carton and shock it, he then put the egg in a shoebox and shook it, opened it and asked if this could be you without aseat belt.

Unless strapped in the occupants flyaround and collide with each other – imagine repeatedlyhead-butting you own child to death – what you collide with in theinterior is also important as the vehicle is battered, are theoccupants exposed to sharp edges etc?

Do the seats stay fastened? Does thepassenger compartment remain attached to the chassis? What aboutglass? Air bags may have initially restrained you but with continuedmovement they are no longer of use. Whiplash, head-butted by the rearpassengers who wasn't belted in, skull and spinal injuries fromflying around the interior – all this has been considered in modernsedan design, but a pickup is a COMMERCIAL vehicle developed OUTSIDEthese regulations and although companies are now improving hem, as Isaid before you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Thesevehicles are basically very OLD in design a relic of the past thatdeveloping nations have found very useful in providing cheaptransport to a bourgeoning market.

But please just because it has electricwindows, don't assume it is a safe as your family sedan.

In the real world we dont crash into a solid object

In LOS a head on crash will most likely be with a 2 ton pickup or larger/more heavy, since they are simply more present on the roads.

in crash tests 2 airbag Jazz can score 5 stars in to solid object at 55 kmh, but crashing into more heavy and higher vehicles at higher speeds, safety is not on par with a 2 airbag Vigo/Fortuner/Range Rover. The jazz comes out non existing, while the larger vehicles deformation zones and passanger cage may be able to protect its passengers.

Best facts on real world crashing seems to be Swedish Folksams files.

[MoonRiverOasis]

Being based on the legendary Hilux frame is complimentary actually.

Not its not, the moment you turn your back to it it will kill you and eat your children (if you read between the lines of Deerals posts).

lol

[MoonRiverOasis]

In the real world we dont crash into a solid object

In LOS a head on crash will most likely be with a 2 ton pickup or larger/more heavy, since they are simply more present on the roads.

in crash tests 2 airbag Jazz can score 5 stars in to solid object at 55 kmh, but crashing into more heavy and higher vehicles at higher speeds, safety is not on par with a 2 airbag Vigo/Fortuner/Range Rover. The jazz comes out non existing, while the larger vehicles deformation zones and passanger cage may be able to protect its passengers.

Best facts on real world crashing seems to be Swedish Folksams files.

Agreed - all new vehicles have good to excellent single-vehicle crash performance, be they a monocoque or ladder chassis. The reality is that most accidents are multiple vehicle, and that's where the focus of analysis needs to lie. In Thailand, B and C segment passenger cars make up just 10% to 50% of the traffic (depending on province) so everyone has an increased likelihood of coming to grief with something that weighs > 1600 KG. This skews the playing field substantially.

I really don't have the time to go through previous posts here point-by-point, so will just post some videos instead. Feel free to debate it out and come to your own conclusions

Frontal impact tests:

Ladder frame chassis appears to have excellent energy absorption with less cabin deformation to me

2010 Camry Hybrid

2005 Toyota Hilux:

[MoonRiverOasis]

2005 Toyota Yaris:

Multiple vehicle tests:

I wouldn't want to be in the smaller vehicle in any of these..

[MoonRiverOasis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaBuy1T69kQ

[katabeachbum]

In the real world we dont crash into a solid object

In LOS a head on crash will most likely be with a 2 ton pickup or larger/more heavy, since they are simply more present on the roads.

in crash tests 2 airbag Jazz can score 5 stars in to solid object at 55 kmh, but crashing into more heavy and higher vehicles at higher speeds, safety is not on par with a 2 airbag Vigo/Fortuner/Range Rover. The jazz comes out non existing, while the larger vehicles deformation zones and passanger cage may be able to protect its passengers.

Best facts on real world crashing seems to be Swedish Folksams files.

Agreed - all new vehicles have good to excellent single-vehicle crash performance, be they a monocoque or ladder chassis. The reality is that most accidents are multiple vehicle, and that's where the focus of analysis needs to lie. In Thailand, B and C segment passenger cars make up just 10% to 50% of the traffic (depending on province) so everyone has an increased likelihood of coming to grief with something that weighs > 1600 KG. This skews the playing field substantially.

I really don't have the time to go through previous posts here point-by-point, so will just post some videos instead. Feel free to debate it out and come to your own conclusions

Frontal impact tests:

Ladder frame chassis appears to have excellent energy absorption with less cabin deformation to me

Scary to see how much passenger cage (roof,floor, doorsills) and doors are damaged on the monocoque Camry Hybrid

While all energy is absorbed in deformation zones only on Vigo on frame/chassie, leaving cage almost undamaged. Vigo probably has higher HIC values, but prefered over being smashed or stuck in Camrys cage

[Deeral]

The Fortuner is essentially a pickup truck - a variation on the Vigo/innova and shares their chassis.........with some mods to the rear suspension which helps to get a shorter wheel-base.

I thought the MU7 was basically a pickup truck, not any other. If your talking about it has a chassis well some cars do too but the Fortuner has coil spring suspension all round, like most cars.

No the Fortuner is by any other name a Vigo - it is essentially the same vehicle. toyota developed the Fortuner/Vigo/Innova range as a vehicle particularly suited to the developing Asian market.

THe Everest, Pajero, Isuzu are just an SUV variant on the respective companies' pickups.

ThaiRung do a version on the Isuzu.

Most saloons or sedans in europe and Japan are monocoque construction as are the higher priced SUVs - consequently, due to the nature of their construction that pickups are cheaper to make and are intrinsically less safe that sedans etc.

I understand what you say but not that long ago cars had chassis. Doesn't mean to say these cars were unsafe as you imply. Myself l would have a chassis motor any day of the week.

BTW - the last volume production car in UK with a chassis that I can think of was the Triumph Herald!

[Spoonman]

BTW - the last volume production car in UK with a chassis that I can think of was the Triumph Herald!

Land Rover Defender is still being built, Its cousin the Discovery up until recently was a chassis car as well, it is now a semi chassis along with the Rangie Sport.

[katabeachbum]

BTW - the last volume production car in UK with a chassis that I can think of was the Triumph Herald!

Land Rover Defender is still being built, Its cousin the Discovery up until recently was a chassis car as well, it is now a semi chassis along with the Rangie Sport.

and Range Rover dropped the 110" frame/chassie just a few years ago

[MoonRiverOasis]

While all energy is absorbed in deformation zones only on Vigo on frame/chassie, leaving cage almost undamaged. Vigo probably has higher HIC values, but prefered over being smashed or stuck in Camrys cage

Here's some HIC scores for popular Thai vehicles:

64km/hr frontal offset crash - driver/passenger - note that 600 or less is considered a good result, 1000 is brain dead.

Passenger cars:

• Toyota Camry Hybrid - 269/185
• Toyota Corolla - 212/257
• Toyota Yaris - 602/262
• Honda Accord - 400/366
• Honda City - 180/183
• Honda Civic - 243/235
• Honda Jazz - 313/387

Pickups:

• Toyota Hilux / Fortuner - 535/424
• Mitsubishi Triton / Pajero Sport - 426/409
• Nissan Navara - 405/528
• Mazda BT-50 / Ford Ranger / Everest - 200/266
• Isuzu D-Max / Chev Colorado / MU-7 / Thairung - 819/656

What these numbers don't show though is that in the Navara, BT-50/Ranger/Everest and D-Max/Colorado/MU-7/Thairung, you don't have any lower legs left! (all 0 points for lower legs body region score). Hilux/Fortuner and Triton/Pajero score about mid-point for lower-legs.

[steelepulse]

>>Here's some HIC scores for popular Thai vehicles:

64km/hr frontal offset crash - driver/passenger - note that 600 or less is considered a good result, 1000 is brain dead.

Any idea of how the Euro cars stack up? i.e. Audi, BMW, Citroen,Mercedes,Volvo etc.

[MoonRiverOasis]

>>Here's some HIC scores for popular Thai vehicles:

64km/hr frontal offset crash - driver/passenger - note that 600 or less is considered a good result, 1000 is brain dead.

Any idea of how the Euro cars stack up? i.e. Audi, BMW, Citroen,Mercedes,Volvo etc.

Yes, but the results are totally model-specific, and I don't have the time to do a full database dump here Pick a few models of interest if you like and I'll respond tomorrow.

Perhaps we should start a new thread on this? It seems to be a topic that comes up regularly here, and there's a lot of disinformation, old/outdated info, and some old wive's tales out there on it

[Deeral]

BTW - the last volume production car in UK with a chassis that I can think of was the Triumph Herald!

Land Rover Defender is still being built, Its cousin the Discovery up until recently was a chassis car as well, it is now a semi chassis along with the Rangie Sport.

and Range Rover dropped the 110" frame/chassie just a few years ago

I can't believe you posted that!

THe point I'm making is about the differences between Pick ups and saloonsTHe Land Rovers - which I worked on are pickup style construction.

The later models are incredibly expensive and a huge amount of work has been done to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. You are actually not making a point.

[Deeral]

It's good to see people taking n interest in car safety for a change..now what you need to do is take all this info and learn to interpret it.

I have taken years of experience in this sort of thing and have a good understanding of what is going on here.You ned to do more than download this stuff - some of which was actually produced by people I work with.

When you understand it fully come back and try to make some sensible conclusions

[steelepulse]

>>I have taken years of experience in this sort of thing and have a good understanding of what is going on here.You ned to do more than download this stuff - some of which was actually produced by people I work with.

When you understand it fully come back and try to make some sensible conclusions

Sounds like a good thing you're offering there deerall. You understand it, so your conclusions would help all of us lay persons out here understand things simply and succinctly .

>> New Thread

Good idea MRO. The info I was wondering about would be for the common Euro cars that are here which would be the 3,5 and to a lesser extent 7 series, C,E and S class, and the odd Audi and Volvo if those last two sell enough to warrant finding the info.

[katabeachbum]

BTW - the last volume production car in UK with a chassis that I can think of was the Triumph Herald!

Land Rover Defender is still being built, Its cousin the Discovery up until recently was a chassis car as well, it is now a semi chassis along with the Rangie Sport.

and Range Rover dropped the 110" frame/chassie just a few years ago

I can't believe you posted that!

THe point I'm making is about the differences between Pick ups and saloonsTHe Land Rovers - which I worked on are pickup style construction.

The later models are incredibly expensive and a huge amount of work has been done to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. You are actually not making a point.

since you read it, you need to believe it;)

there still are cars around, even UK made, on frames/chassie, and some of them as light as Defender

smaller saloons dont need frames at a GVWR of 2,2 ton (2200 kg) or less

most vehicles above 3 ton (3000kg) still need a frame/chassie

and as proven in MRO presented crash tests, vehicles build on frame/chassie can be safer than monocoques, active and passive

even a manufactorer like VW, who has been building cars, vans and pickups without frame/chassie for 6 decades, choose frame/chassie for their recently presented pickup and the T4/T5 pickup

[Deeral]

The monocoque construction concept was an American idea that was taken up in Europe (Andre Citroen) but did not hold much favor in the US where they preferred to stay with chassis-based design and all its inherent flaws.

You keep referring to SUVs and pickups that is what I'm saying!

[Deeral]

Katabeachbum.

I know this sounds a bit rude, but I guessing you are/were a mechanic or Car trader - as your knowledge seems to indicate an interest in vehicles.however here's a summery of my position for you.....What we have here is an unstructuredargument that is way off course.

First let me reiterate my proposal.

The Pick up trucks are inherently lesssafe than sedans/saloons.

Facts or what som posters refer to asfacts are on their own meaningless.

Facts only have meaning if they areincorporated into a theory.

Now this theory is based on a raft ofevidence.

What some people have done is introducea ream of "information* - not actually facts – they are statsgleaned from Google.

Now this LOOKs very impressive ….unlessyou take a serious view of the subject.

My simple thesis is based on a RAFT ofstats and info over several years.

Now I take it that you disagree with mytheory. However if this IS the case, then I must respectfully suggestthat you propose a counter theory.

What you have here is a largecollection of STATS (US Head injuries by NHTSA of the US) thatconcern only one part of my argument and a small part at that – ONEaspect of passive safety on a group of vehicles in one country - andnot even Thailand at that. (you don't even mention Active safety.

Now before you can draw any criticallyvalid conclusions you would have firstly to analyse these figures,set them in the context of this thread and then put forward yourproposal in summation.

However I can see one or two flaws here– firstly you have only started to address one tiny part of myargument and actually not in a very satisfactory manner. Secondly Idon't think you are up to putting forward a well thought out andreasoned argument to support you stance – which itself isn't veryclear.

This means that you are going to floodthis thread with meaningless and poorly interpreted stats in the hopethat somewhere along the line they might look like a valid argument.

This is an exercise I'm no longerprepared to get involved in. I'm certainly not going to enter a knockof knock tennis contest over these figures – which BTW – havehuge flaws in relation to my argument. - the main one being theydon't actually contradict any part of my proposal.

However if you think you can constructa reasoned and valid theory to counter mine – by all means have a go,

[Spoonman]

Are you drunk or is english not your native tongue Deeral as I found that exceptionally hard to read.

[Deeral]

Spoonman - it is YOU who are finding it hard to read, is it not? So who is most likely drunk?

PS - the spacing/format is not mine - my computer and writing program have occasional compatibility problems with TV.If I edit it, it will become a series of lines and arrows.You may have noticed this on some other posts of mine.

Probably because I'm not using any of Biil Gates' stuff!

[Deeral]

<deleted> transam just read my explanation in the post immediately above!

[Spoonman]

Spoonman - it is YOU who are finding it hard to read, is it not? So who is most likely drunk?

Defo nothing to do with me, your writing style and format is atrocious.

PS - the spacing/format is not mine - my computer and writing program have occasional compatibility problems with TV.If I edit it, it will become a series of lines and arrows.You may have noticed this on some other posts of mine.

Probably because I'm not using any of Biil Gates' stuff!

Maybe upgrade to the software that has a decent backbone under it, kinda like a pickup !!!

[Deeral]

actually it has a solid aluminum chassis!

[katabeachbum]

My very simple theory on why most vehicles on frame/chassie in LOS has better occupants safety than most monocoques, in LOS traffic crashing with vehicles above 2 ton

Interior offers similar protection, only 2 airbags, seatbelts and seats of same quality, paded/covered surfaces, same distance to dash/ windshield/ sides. all glass laminated. Ford/Mazda exception here, with handbrake position

Deformation zones are longer and stronger, thus larger impact needed to reach occupants. The stronger deformation zones and higher weight of vehicle provides higher HIC values, but as long as they are acceptable, it also avoids smasing the occupants

Occupants cage is stronger, thus needing stronger impact to collaps. Some are much stronger (Toyota, Mitsu)

Seating position is higher

I do not consider active safety here, since most accidents in LOS are drivers error/traffic behavior. but If I did, Fortuner 4x4 VSC provides better active safety than most LOS monocoques. VSC/ESP has now become mandatory on all cars in EU as the single most important way of increasing active safety, before features like ABS. There is no theory behind this desission, its stats from accidents and crash tests. Still almost unavailable on monocoque cars in LOS

I also do not consider pedestrian safety, if we did we should all ride motorcycles and ban cars/trucks.

BTW, Deeral, your assumptions are wrong, I am absolutely not a mecanic;)

Theory is fine, but first of all experience tells what kind of vehicle is needed to survive a crash. The larger vehicle usually wins.

bikes are more dangerous than cars. small monocoque cars are more dangerous for occupants than large vehicles on frame/chassie. in general. in LOS traffic.

[Deeral]

actually it has a solid aluminum chassis!

There you go, should have gone for the independent suspension jobby, all your internals are getting a rough ride.

It has independent suspension of all parts - just like the Triumph Herald!

[John 1]

This thread is now so much dribble it was about Fortuner- Harrier should be closed