I'm not sure it ever would, because to crush the car that's hit a wall, you need a mass pushing it.

It's the mass of the rear of the car travelling at 120mph, that causes the steel to bend when one end of it is doing 120mph and the other 0mph.

As such the back will never be totally decimated by crushing as there is nothing behind it to crush it.

Of course if you hit it hard enough, I guess you could shatter the cars structure and blow it into little pieces.

Well in that instance the car is being pushed from the front into a solid object at the rear.

That's the equivalent of being rear ended by a lorry into another lorry or a concrete wall etc.

As such it's that force on two sides that makes it totally gone and is a different test to the first one.

Either way, yes it does look like you can shatter the structure of a car and send it all over the place.

Oh and that second stage of the rocket was awesome

I'm not so sure.

The MK I focus was considered a safe car in it's day. The results would be very similar with a MK IV golf or pretty much any other car of that age.

I mean crashing into another car not a solid wall would be different

+1. I wouldn't really think there is much chance of surviving a head on crash at at much over 50. And I drive faster than that everyday.

Yeah same here, on anything national speed limit in anything other then the rain in doing over 60

For ever action there is an equal and opposite reation.

This does not however mean that a head on crash with 2 cars doing 50mph = hitting immovable obect at 100mpg. Why?

because both car have crumple zones that absorb and disapte energy.

Not that I am about to try - it would still be exreemly messy!

I drove down a road the other day just wide enough for one car, signed as national limit with lots of blind corners. The cars I nearly hit because they were doing 60+, whilst I was bricking it at 30!

I "learned " to drive (after passing my test) on roads like that -gives you a greater perception of stopping distance and forward anticipation ,certainly hones your reflexes and COAST skills. But still in the summer we got stacks of home county visitors that thought brakes stoped you instantly .

DRIVE SAFELY EVERYONE!

DRIVE SAFELY EVERYONE!

+1

A bit of T-cut and elbow grease, the car will be fine! :p

Having been involved in a head on crash 2 months after passing my test (not my fault btw) I can vouch it is not a nice experiance but its one hell of a wake up call, if every new driver experianced this the roads would be a safer place

It has made me a better driver in the long run as i know the damage cars can do and 12 years on i can still see the transits headlights that i hit

Didn't they do a test some years ago with a Laguna hitting a tree at 40mph?

For whatever reason I find that Laguna test a lot of daunting as that seems much more realistic, hitting a bit of ice sliding off the road and into a tree.

Always been told, if your going to hit something, make sure its not a tree! lol

Always been told, if your going to hit something, make sure its not a tree! lol

Your right. I hit a tree (which was no wider than my arm) in my old beamer.

Needed new wing and both driver's side doors repaired.

Bloody things are solid.

I did go and chop it down after that as it was on my parent's in law's private road and was growing into the road. To much for a rear wheel drive car to avoid on the ice.

Your right. I hit a tree (which was no wider than my arm) in my old beamer.

Needed new wing and both driver's side doors repaired.

Bloody things are solid.

I did go and chop it down after that as it was on my parent's in law's private road and was growing into the road. To much for a rear wheel drive car to avoid on the ice.

they do have thier uses though! my mates crashed his focus, ironically the same one as in the clip with me as passenger, on a really bad twisty road, we hit a verge that lauched us into the air and dived straight into a ditch, if it was not for them trees we would of carried on the down the hill, which went on for a good 60 foot and a bloody steep angle

Poor trees, you can't blame a tree for an accident :'(

She's female, they can blame anything and anyone

She's female, they can blame anything and anyone

Dam right!!

From Mythbusters

Two cars crashing into each other at 50 mph will result in the same damage (for each car) as a single car hitting a wall at 50 mph.

confirmed

In their small scale tests, the Mythbusters compressed clay at 1x and 2x speeds. Their results showed that two objects hitting each other at 1x speed will cause 1x damage. In their full scale tests, the Mythbusters crashed two cars into a wall at 50 and 100 mph as references. They then had two cars going at 50 mph collide into each other. After surveying the results, it was clear that the two cars suffered damage identical to the car that crashed into the wall at 50 mph. The Mythbusters explained that was possible through Newton’s third law of motion. Although the total force was doubled by having two cars, that force also had to be divided between both cars during the crash.

Still dont want to be the one to try it out though.

I was going to say this, but got beaten too it.

Not sure if it has been posted elsewhere in the thread, but here's the video of the above.

I almost had a head-on with a tractor at 60ish the other day as it came round a corner partly on my side of the road. Made me glad for the big brakes and agility on the Mazda, and does make you think you're not invincible, regardless of fault (not saying I wasn't completely to blame, I could have been going slower. . .).

Edited 6 November, 201114 yr by TriggerFish