safest vehicle to drive

[Ace of Pop]

What abut a BOWLER,that looks tough.

[changsinghleo]

Safest vehicle? By far, it is the lowly SAMLOR! Always driven by slow moving old folk. Who would hit a Samlor? Too bad they aren't the only mode of transport available for fee. Of course the other would be bicycle for which there is no fee other than if rented. Get the dang cars off the road and the accident rate will drop to practically zero. And, the physical condition of all will improve, including the samlor passengers who get a bit of a workout just being jostled about.

[monkey4u]

Wonder if they'd let me drive a Sherman Tank on Hangdong Road to the City and back....just once or thrice a week?

I was going to suggest importing an Abrams tank.....gun optional!

The gun should be standard equipment just so you can clear the road 100 %

[SDM0712]

Good for you buddy. Go run along and purchase one.

That’s slightly different post to your original ! What you actually said was;

“Good for you buddy.

The topic is about Thailand and I guarantee you nobody here except the military will be allowed to have one in which you replied some pommy guy on TV said anybody could have because they have a civilian model..

Well guess what, not any pleb off the street can have one either.”

Perhaps you haven’t understood my most recent post before this, or maybe any of them, so see really no point in trying to reiterate any of them.

Having said that you have now gone from

“nobody can buy one (except the Military)” because “I build armoured vehicles for a living. I know who can and who cannot buy one”

to “Civilian does not mean the average joe off the street can buy one unless they can satisfy the licensing and permit requirements of their respective countries.”

And now all the way back to;

“I guarantee you nobody here except the military will be allowed to have one ”

Guarantee is a pretty strong word, are you also something to do with the Thai authority that decides what vehicles can be sold in Thailand? They don’t seem to have a problem with allowing Hummers (Humvee), but that’s another story and one I'm not going to get drawn into.

It amusing to note your amended post does away with terms like “ Guarantee” and you now finish with “Good for you buddy. Go run along and purchase one.”

Did you actually read what I wrote, at any stage did I suggest that anyone would actually want to buy one ? The complete opposite in fact !

SDM

Edited August 27, 2014 by SDM0712

[SDM0712]

What Spoonman meant was it isn't offered IN Thailand for the Thailand market.

Quite so, it would have to be imported. A good client of mine specialises in importing Minis to Thailand from Europe. I know its not quite the same thing, the Mini being German and a smaller, but the principle remains.

SDM

[sunshine51]

I drive a 1994 Land Rover Defender 110 TDi...about the only vehicles that may argue

with me are huge Nissan & Hino's to which I let em have their way. Mitsubishi Pajero's

are good also as are Ford & Chevy 4x4's. However if the OP doesn't want a truck I'd

have to say get a Volvo or check the following links below for ideas. In the end it's

going to be all about the money...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/picturegalleries/9837947/The-safest-cars-on-sale.html?frame=2467057

http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1093800_the-safest-cars-of-2014/page-2

http://www.crashtest.org/top-10-safest-cars

Then again...if the cars listed in the links are not quite up to par there is always this...please get

your best Russian accent going in your head...."It's Russian"...

BTR-80A

[ignis]

If you cannot own or drive a tank...... maybe the next best thing ? and a Toyota re-bodied here

at least it is over 2 tones so maybe other drivers would give some respect and try to miss you

http://www.siamnewcar.com/modeldetail.php?mid=157&carid=48

Edited August 27, 2014 by ignis

[transam]

Heres a question for all those perfect drivers...Why do manufacturers now fit side impact air bags...?

Simple really (if you want to think about it) - the driver that hits you may not be so perfect!

Simply a really aware driver doesn't get hit in the first place..Unfortunately the air bags save the moron who hit you so they get another shot at you at some later date.

I can't believe you wrote that......Your saying every one who is driving a car that gets a broadside or hit up the ass is a non competent driver...........

[WarpSpeed]

Yes... No reason what so ever to get broad sided that is completely under your control except in a very rare occasion when you may be prone at an intersection or something and another car comes out of control and you have no time or place to go. It is also very possible to avoid a rear ender, I did just that the other day for about the 10th or 12th time in my life. When you know you have to stop quickly or even just stopping you use your rear view to be sure the driver behind gets the point and if not? You roll forward as close as possible to giver them room to react while hitting your brake lights several times to wake them up seeing your lights flash, but in doing so you must judge their speed and if they aren't going to have enough room to stop still, you move to the side of the car in front or off the road if necessary and yes you have to be paying attention and aware to accomplish this..

Regardless, your post suggested the driver has no options but to take the hit and that's just nonsense in spite of your rolling eye icon. Tell me though? How are front or side airbags going to help you in a rear end collision anyway? You pick and choose what you think suits the debate but you pick one offs and hypothetical suppositions that rarely even occur and try to put them off as everyday incidents just for the sake of an argument. And still none of this relates to the original topic which I've already answered so I'm not responding to these nonsensical debates anymore. I said the fact is that a well built, car that has some ability to handle is safer then a truck or an SUV especially with an aware and skilled driver in it and that is really irrefutable.

Edited August 27, 2014 by WarpSpeed

[transam]

Yes... No reason what so ever to get broad sided that is completely under your control except in a very rare occasion when you may be prone at an intersection or something and another car comes out of control and you have no time or place to go. It is also very possible to avoid a rear ender, I did just that the other day for about the 10th or 12th time in my life. When you know you have to stop quickly or even just stopping you use your rear view to be sure the driver behind gets the point and if not? You roll forward as close as possible to giver them room to react while hitting your brake lights several times to wake them up seeing your lights flash, but in doing so you must judge their speed and if they aren't going to have enough room to stop still, you move to the side of the car in front or off the road if necessary and yes you have to be paying attention and aware to accomplish this.. Regardless, your post suggested the driver has no options but to take the hit and that's just nonsense in spite of your rolling eye icon. Tell me though? How are front or side airbags going to help you in a rear end collision anyway?

[WarpSpeed]

Top stuff, you're one class act, with that sort of response. I guess it's the best you can do and is par for the course where you're concerned so I should expect the same sort of driving responses as well, it's no wonder the concept goes right past you...

[keemapoot]

Really, you guys are starting to piss in the wind. The bottom of this matter is this, as said by Robert Deneiro's character in Ronin: I never walk into a place I don't know how to walk out of. My defensive driving instructor said something similar in high school which was excellent advice, always look for your exit in any potentially dangerous situation on the road. That means not following too closely, checking mirrors always, and checking medians and shoulders as exist points. That advice becomes second nature, and you do it every time, everywhere without thinking much if you are a truly excellent driver.

Now, the reality is that in modern traffic you can't always plan for and exit strategy, plain and simple. Sh*t happens, and you die. Period.

[transam]

Top stuff, you're one class act, with that sort of response. I guess it's the best you can do and is par for the course where you're concerned so I should expect the same sort of driving responses as well, it's no wonder the concept goes right past you...

I have been in the past a heavy goods vehicle driver that has seen lots of stuff on the road/motorways. Your assumption that EVERYONE could avoid being hit by something is ridiculous.

Try sitting in a traffic jam on a three lane highway and a ride is going to rear end you.

Where are YOU going to go......?............

Don't tell me, your rides have helicopter rotors that pop out the roof............

[Spoonman]

Good for you buddy. Go run along and purchase one.

That’s slightly different post to your original ! What you actually said was;

“Good for you buddy.

The topic is about Thailand and I guarantee you nobody here except the military will be allowed to have one in which you replied some pommy guy on TV said anybody could have because they have a civilian model..

Well guess what, not any pleb off the street can have one either.”

Perhaps you haven’t understood my most recent post before this, or maybe any of them, so see really no point in trying to reiterate any of them.

Having said that you have now gone from

“nobody can buy one (except the Military)” because “I build armoured vehicles for a living. I know who can and who cannot buy one”

to “Civilian does not mean the average joe off the street can buy one unless they can satisfy the licensing and permit requirements of their respective countries.”

And now all the way back to;

“I guarantee you nobody here except the military will be allowed to have one ”

Guarantee is a pretty strong word, are you also something to do with the Thai authority that decides what vehicles can be sold in Thailand? They don’t seem to have a problem with allowing Hummers (Humvee), but that’s another story and one I'm not going to get drawn into.

It amusing to note your amended post does away with terms like “ Guarantee” and you now finish with “Good for you buddy. Go run along and purchase one.”

Did you actually read what I wrote, at any stage did I suggest that anyone would actually want to buy one ? The complete opposite in fact !

SDM

You can run your mouth and keep twisting/dissecting what I said all you like the simple fact remains not anybody can buy one PERIOD.

The TV show guy is that was driving it is categorically wrong with his claim you can buy one by passing a background check.

Edited August 27, 2014 by Spoonman

[Ace of Pop]

Oh Dear. Mikes Avatar has taken over.

[SDM0712]

You can run your mouth and keep twisting/dissecting what I said all you like

Twisting? Dissecting?

In fact I have not twisted your words, I have not quoted them out of context to distort their meaning and I have not thus distorted their meaning. I have quoted them verbatim adding a linking word only. They are your own words and not mine or another.

The reality is that you have an opinion which is fine we all have them. However it is just that, an opinion and nothing more of someone who, I don't doubt, is involved in the manufacture of armoured vehicles. You are however I assume not part of any licensing body for Thailand, or I imagine any other country. You are probably correct that it would be difficult for a civilian to buy one, who knows, who really cares, certainly not me. The clip and suggestion that we could have one here meant to be funny.

It seems that you, like many here you are just spoiling for an argument. You could just have said “funny clip, but I'm pretty sure that you're never be able to buy one" and that would be the end of it. But no, thank you for turning something funny into something bitter.

Have a good day.

SDM

PS Running my mouth? I'm not even completely sure what this means.

[SDM0712]

........... I have personally rolled a 240DL 16 times along a highway and walked away from it..........

Oz

16 Times! Are you sure!

After the first time I'm surprised you didn't pick a different route !!

SDM

PS For anyone who can't tell, it's a joke. (Intimation being that this was done on 16 different occasions)

[Greg Nixon]

Yes a Sherman tank might have saved his life. I would like to drive a Sherman tank just to clip the vehicles who intentionally cross the clear lane markings. They do not know enough to slow down for obstructions in their lane but would rather endanger the passengers of the vehicle they are passing, their own lives and the lives of oncoming traffic. Defensive driving anyone?

[BSJ]

Why is it that this thread had humour written all over it but some of you guys get you knickers in a twist and suck all the humour out of it. Isn't the world bad enough already?

[SDM0712]

BSJ, thank you, thank you and once again thank you! SDM

[WarpSpeed]

Oh Dear. Mikes Avatar has taken over.

Hmm, maybe there's something in that? Especially since Mikes been nowhere to be seen since the OP.

[WarpSpeed]

........... I have personally rolled a 240DL 16 times along a highway and walked away from it..........

Oz

16 Times! Are you sure!

After the first time I'm surprised you didn't pick a different route !!

SDM

PS For anyone who can't tell, it's a joke. (Intimation being that this was done on 16 different occasions)

Plagiarist!! That was my yoke!

In all of this, one thing I have taken notice of is that at minimum the texting and phone use while driving problem there in Thailand is virtually non existent in comparison to here in the west, once that takes over? god forbid for all drivers there..

Edited August 27, 2014 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

Really, you guys are starting to piss in the wind. The bottom of this matter is this, as said by Robert Deneiro's character in Ronin: I never walk into a place I don't know how to walk out of. My defensive driving instructor said something similar in high school which was excellent advice, always look for your exit in any potentially dangerous situation on the road. That means not following too closely, checking mirrors always, and checking medians and shoulders as exist points. That advice becomes second nature, and you do it every time, everywhere without thinking much if you are a truly excellent driver.

Now, the reality is that in modern traffic you can't always plan for and exit strategy, plain and simple. Sh*t happens, and you die. Period.

I agree but I also take the captain Kirk approach in that I don't believe in a no win scenario however, by that I mean far more people die in "avoidable collisions" instead of "no way out collisions" if, by chance that day does come and it happens by vehicle, for me, first off likely it won't be on the street but more likely on the track and won't involve my family directly, but secondly there are thousands more ways one can die, if it is driving? Then it will have to be one massive F#$% up to kill me or any of my family and that's the point being made, can it happen? Yes, of course it can but with proper techniques and awareness it WILL be an unavoidable collision not many of the avoidable ones I see daily.

This thread is a perfect example of people who, instead of taking sound advice and applying it in their daily driving or at least let others decide on their own about what changes they may make, instead they have egotistically laughed at, dismissed and bemused about the free info provided in order to potentially save their own lives not to mention possibly someone even more dear to them in their family, at some point in a collision, that likely was completely avoidable and yet they have nothing to lose but yet still senselessly oppose even making the suggestion and indeed even arguing the advice being given.

It defies all logic and common sense just for the sake of an argument, when the techniques have been well proven time and again both empirically and through various studies, to work and save lives or serious injury, where is the loss to those who oppose the advice? The loss is in being wrong and how selfish and egotistical does one have to be to hold such a stance even if it could save them and their loved ones serious injury and maybe even their lives? Nonsensical does not fully describe the disillusion I feel.

Edited August 27, 2014 by WarpSpeed

[rotary]

Something big with allot of mass and decent safety kit...the top-spec Ford Ranger comes to mind...lots of mass and 6 airbags. All Nissan Teanas, even lowest spec, come with 6 airbags as well. I'm looking at the Teana. The Volvo XC-60 would be nice but over 3M baht is just too much.

I love the new Fords/Madzas. They are the best pick ups on the road by far but.............any pick up, and more so the HI-Rider types are a roll over hazard. Most goverments in western countries test vehicles overall and give them a STAR rating. I guess one could research all these goverment sites and try to figure out which of the better safety rated ones are sold in Thailand. Now just because the Ford XXXX or Nissan YYYYY is sold in say Europe and Thailand it does not mean they are the same exact model even if they look the same. This goes down to the spec on air bags, door crash reinforcement, etc. Different countries have different spec and it can be hard to figure out what is what. I bought a 2008 Ford Edge in the middle east then thought about shipping a few months later to North American. Ford ended up sending me the Cert of Conformity with lots of words & the official stamp but trying to tie specs together is not easy.

[Mike45]

Oh Dear. Mikes Avatar has taken over.

Hmm, maybe there's something in that? Especially since Mikes been nowhere to be seen since the OP.

Hey I've been here I just have been sitting back and taking it all in.

Driving isn't a sport for me. It's a way to transport my family from point A to Point B.

I've driven in the many countries while I've lived in them. I think I've become a better driver through the experience. I can however be a distracted driver.

I'm just trying to figure out which family vehicle would possibly reduce injuries to my family if we were in an accident while singing Itsy Bitsy Spider with my child. Regardless of who caused it or if it could have been avoided.

Warp... Your comments about larger vehicles not being more survivable goes against what I had thought. Can you provide a reference for that? I'd like to read more about it.

Thanks

[WarpSpeed]

No I can't nor would I go that far, you're just as capable of that as I am, I gave you the impetus to seek out your knowledge which was the basis of your thread but maybe to start with you can reference Ralph Nader for starters . However, can you remember the older cars that WERE built like tanks? Surprisingly they killed more people then they saved, you know why? They were too heavy and well built, the car survived well but the occupants of either vehicle not so much because they ended up taking all of the impact forces generated by the impact and then bouncing around the inside of the vehicle until the advent of safety belts helped followed by air bags but not so easily available in Thailand to the levels of the west.

Then Chrysler came out with the mini van and SOLD it on how much safer and convenient it was and sold millions on that pitch suddenly everyone wanted one, so others followed suit because people had forgotten how the technology had evolved (new generations and all) to make cars smaller, lighter and more impact absorbing, but that is not necessarily done as much with trucks, vans and SUV's but at some point of more weight and size you override the protective factor of a given vehicle and then that force is transferred to the occupants and no, the safety equipment does not necessarily protect them. Instead you get things like broken necks, and internal injuries from set belts etc. so it becomes a trade off.

Do you think the manufacturers are going to say they've been building questionably safe vehicles? Of course not reference Nader once again! It's their bread and butter they ride the concerned parent wave all the way to the bank and since they've now sold so many they've built a self serving prophecy that you must have something bigger to counter the other guys something bigger and wa la they're making money hand over fist while people over react to the need and in the mean time their are actually more deaths not fewer. The advent of these vehicles have completely sabotaged the original life saving premise of smaller & lighter with bigger crumple zones in cars in order to absorb impact away from the driver, again this premise first began with the R&D done in motorsports to help drivers not only survive but to walk away from accidents and applies in all cases regardless race cars or not.

Have another look at that video you earlier referenced, does that seem like it was a devastating impact? Obviously it was but do some math, physics to be more specific, it was much more violent due in part to the weight of the vehicles involved. Again this is why I've always said that the best vehicle is a compromise, a nice mid-sized car with the best safety features available and the ability to avoid or lessen the impact in the first place with an alert driver and responsive handling.

One last point of a little known secret most don;t know about, your car shuts off when the airbags are deployed as they don't want you out of control heading for a secondary collision when your eyes are filled with the talc that came off the bags or the bags themselves still in your face blocking your vision and then getting killed because of this. You then loose brakes and steering so you are now completely out of control if you had ANY chance of saving yourself from further impact. It's also true that your bags are deflating/ed at that point and any further impacts would leave you exposed to injury without them in place. Me, I'll take a car that I can still steer and drive after an impact as they can be deployed on a very minor incident which then potentially becomes a major one after the fact. Anyway I'm done with this, I've made more then enough salient points and it grows tiresome repeating them. Good luck with your decision..

Edited August 27, 2014 by WarpSpeed

[Showbags]

I'm buying a vw kombi van....safest vehicle out there and with my super incredible magic like driving skills......I only need a quarter of a second to dodge a 30 car pile up...that includes trucks tipping over from overhead passes and shipping containers falling off atu turns.

[dominique355]

Has been stated already. It depends on the crash involved. If rolling over, i'd prefer to be in a swift than a ranger or similar. If head-on then the opposite. If we are comparing Japanese cars there really is no safest in my opinion. The crash type, impact point are very different. Motorcycle helmets vary but may win the same safety rating award. a 5 star sharp helmet may receive 5 stars for side impact while the other the front.

Yep truth in this though the physics involved in a head on collision still say that the body inside the vehicle is going to suffer higher impact forces due to the mass of the vehicle, something often over looked while listening to the salesman.. And as you mention not only are you likely to have less injury in a rollover in a car but you're also less likely to even have a roll over in the first place.

The mass of the car in which you are sitting when it crashes has not much to do withe speed of the body inside. What happens is that the vehicle has to come to a full stop when it crashes, say in a wall. The stopping distance is the crumple zone. The bigger the crumple zone the more energy it can absorb through deformation.

Of course a heavier car has more mass and thus more kinetic energy. But more important is the speed at which it hits the wall and the stopping distance.

And the better the crumple zone, i.e. the more energy it can absorb, the lower the negative acceleration (g forces) for the body (hopefully firmly attached to the car with per-tensioned safety belts). In simple words, the car hitting an obstacle with say 54 km/h (15 m/s) has to come to a stand still after 50 cm (deformation of the rumple zone), if the obstacle does not have any deformation itself.

Modern, expensive cars tend to have a saver construction and a good crumple zone while the passenger compartment is stiff (so that the passenger is protected and can open the door after the crash.

The often heard belief that a pick-up truck is saver because of its mass and massive construction is therefore wrong. The old fashioned chassis of these trucks does not deform much under a crash. So the pick-up truck hitting the same obstacle at the same 54 km/h or 15 m/s has only maybe 15cm of deformation and thus only 15 cm to come to a full stop. Result: much high g forces on the body, often lethal ones.

We should choose cars with a good rating in the NCAP crash test. 5 stars, if possible.

[Ace of Pop]

I would climb from my Safest Vehicle and get hit by a Bus, you lot worry too much. In everyday practice i lean towards Warpy Logic , dozy prats catch it first due to no training.

[Zeegator]

In theory the safer vehicle to drive is the one with the greater mass and efficient crumple zones during a collision.

I prefer to drive a car that is larger then the average car so my choice is something weighing +2000 kgs preferably of european origin.

Most accidents in Thailand involve motorcyles and pickups so statistically speaking the odds are in my favor.

Even though I love those Harley's and Bugatti's I avoid motorcycles at all costs as I prefer metal covering my hide then my hide covering metal.

"Even though I love those Harley's and Bugatti's I avoid motorcycles..."

You're right, those Bugatti motorcycles are potential deathtraps.