Don't know if anyone else saw the crash test that top gear magazine ran shown on BBC news but OMFG :eek:

You would be better off in the old estelle than this enviro car!

G-Wiz alert as the electric car fails safety tests | News | This is London

Autocar - Electric cars: shocking in a crash

Celebrity green car is declared unsafe-News-UK-Science-TimesOnline

This is also interesting readinng regarding leccy cars as a whole:

Eco Worrier - Times Online - WBLG: Is anyone convinced by electric cars?

Don't suppose anyone has a link to the video do they as I can't find one at yet.

Yeh i saw the crash test on the tv :eek:

Will the cars not be allowed to be used on the road now they have failed the safety tests?

Frankly a car like this is going to offer no more safety protection than riding Motorbike. It surprises me that the Smart Car meets relevant safety standards let alone a car as small as this but to make it safer would add significant weight and therefore limit battery life, catch 22 imho.

As a footnote about electric cars in general I can see no REAL future in them, certainly not in my lifetime, imho.

they are getting away with the lack of safety due to it being called a 4 wheeled motorised vehicle

scary video footage , i thought the spokesman for the company was a bit naive when he was spouting figures of 10mph average speed for the vehicle in London , its not the average speed he needs to be worrying about , its the Chelsea tractor coming the other way at 40mph

You can make an F1 car ultra light weight and still have an ultra strong safety cage, sure the rest of the car turns to scrap, but the driver is intact.

I am sure the same or similar technology could be used to make the main structure of the car rigid and so what if the body panels all rip off in a crash.

If a 4x4 hit one of these rather than it hitting a deformable structure, then I think there would only be dust left.

I think they lack of safety is more down to cost and profits rather than the tech not being available.

Frankly a car like this is going to offer no more safety protection than riding Motorbike. It surprises me that the Smart Car meets relevant safety standards let alone a car as small as this but to make it safer would add significant weight and therefore limit battery life, catch 22 imho.

As a footnote about electric cars in general I can see no REAL future in them, certainly not in my lifetime, imho.

Have to say steve, IMHO the motorbike would be safer as at least you would be thrown clear of the impact.

Agree with you that electric cars don't have a significant future, or at least when going on battery power and charging.

The technology is undoubtedly available to build a strong lightweight 'small car' but the costs would be astronomical and therefore not viable.

WTF would anyone drive one anyway? The electric car is less environmentally sound than your average small petrol or diesel car.

You have to generate the electricity from predominantly fossil fuels. There is a conversion loss turning coal / gas into electricity. You then have to transmit the electricity to the point where the car is charged. So you have transmission losses. You have to charge lead / acid batteries where you get both charge and retrieval losses. You then have to tow around very heavy batteries, propelling the weight of these is probably using 80% of the energy left after all the other losses.

Taken as a system, it is unlikely that more than 10% of the energy in the original coal ends up moving the passenger around. Very poor. Then there are the environmental aspects of lead acid batteries.

Chris

Oh and almost forgot, most importantly, you look like a tw @ t driving one.

Oh and almost forgot, most importantly, you look like a tw @ t driving one.

Aw, that's naughty - and probably very true

You in a vindictive frame of mind tonight

Aw, that's naughty - and probably very true

You in a vindictive frame of mind tonight

Me? Never! Just think what I could have said.

Chris

Me? Never! Just think what I could have said.

Chris

Yeah, I've read just a few of your posts :P

I'd never buy one, but seeing that crash, i think a sheet of A4 would offer more protection.

It surprises me that the Smart Car meets relevant safety standards

Clever engineering - you're inside a very sturdy metal cage for starters, impact is absorbed through the wheels/wheelbase, engine is in the back under the floor so doesn't get pushed into the cabin in a frontal, the rears of the seats have thick steel on the back of them to protect from protrusion in rear impacts, the seats are offset to prevent them being pushed into each other, plenty of airbags, etc.

The fact it achieves higher NCAP ratings than some SUVs speaks volumes IMHO...

That G-Wiz look pretty terrible, though I doubt it'd be any worse than any other cheap outdated small car (Perodua, etc.).

Rob.

Clever engineering - you're inside a very sturdy metal cage for starters, impact is absorbed through the wheels/wheelbase, engine is in the back under the floor so doesn't get pushed into the cabin in a frontal, the rears of the seats have thick steel on the back of them to protect from protrusion in rear impacts, the seats are offset to prevent them being pushed into each other, plenty of airbags, etc.

The fact it achieves higher NCAP ratings than some SUVs speaks volumes IMHO...

That G-Wiz look pretty terrible, though I doubt it'd be any worse than any other cheap outdated small car (Perodua, etc.).

Rob.

I agree Rob. After having been in 70mph crash in a smart, i can say they are very well designed. The car hit the central reservation at 70, bounced off (plastic absorbed most of the energy), and came to rest back on the hard shoulder. The front subframe, alloy and bodywork took nearly all of the impact and the car was repaired.

Apparently the new smart is designed to gain another ENCAP star.

Anyone see the 5th gear test where they smashed a Smart into an immovable object at 70mph? The doors still opened etc.

Same test in a Corsa & there was nothing left :eek:

Them there Tridion safety cells are solid - you can tell that just by driving the roadie with the roof bars off, there's absolutely no scuttle shake whatsoever.

Yeh i saw the crash test on the tv :eek:

Will the cars not be allowed to be used on the road now they have failed the safety tests?

There are minimum standars they have to reach before they can go on sale here.

On another note... I see that the Renault Clio is not allowed to be used on driving tests unless it's had a full check, as the bonnets have been opening on them at speed.

It's been on Watchdog loads of times, and Renault blamed the owners for poor maintainance, even though the design of such a critical part was frankly SHOCKING!!!!

Just to add to what Chris was saying about transmission efficiencies, about 3 units of electricity are generated for every one that actually reaches a consumer, the transmission losses are that high.

On another note... I see that the Renault Clio is not allowed to be used on driving tests unless it's had a full check, as the bonnets have been opening on them at speed.

It's been on Watchdog loads of times, and Renault blamed the owners for poor maintainance, even though the design of such a critical part was frankly SHOCKING!!!!

I saw one of those Watchdog reports, and was really annoyed, not just with Renault, but with the presenter for not asking something like "What undocumented maintenance does a Renault Clio bonnet lock require than no other car seems to require?"

Just to add to what Chris was saying about transmission efficiencies, about 3 units of electricity are generated for every one that actually reaches a consumer, the transmission losses are that high.

Indeed they are so high that using superconducting cables and keeping them suitably chilled would in fact be cheaper than using the current cables :eek:

Tis all well and good having a very rigid structure in a small car (e.g.smart etc), and yes, they may not deform in a head on collision, but if the vehicle does not deform, then the impact is far quicker (no crumple time), so the decelleration is faster, and thus forces are far higher. The car may survive more intact, but slow a driver down that fast, even if none of the car hits them, and injuries will be extensive. Internal trauma, wiplash, brain damage (as it bounces round the skull!). Possibly more so than if the car crumpled, and some injuries were sustained due to cabin intrusion.

Phil

Tis all well and good having a very rigid structure in a small car (e.g.smart etc), and yes, they may not deform in a head on collision, but if the vehicle does not deform, then the impact is far quicker (no crumple time), so the decelleration is faster, and thus forces are far higher.

True. However, the smart *does* have crumple zones and the means of dispersing energy (through the wheelbase, bodywork, ancilliaries, etc). The rigid steel frame is part of controlling the crumple zone, and preventing deformation of the passenger compartment...

Rob.

Tis all well and good having a very rigid structure in a small car (e.g.smart etc), and yes, they may not deform in a head on collision, but if the vehicle does not deform, then the impact is far quicker (no crumple time), so the decelleration is faster, and thus forces are far higher. The car may survive more intact, but slow a driver down that fast, even if none of the car hits them, and injuries will be extensive. Internal trauma, wiplash, brain damage (as it bounces round the skull!). Possibly more so than if the car crumpled, and some injuries were sustained due to cabin intrusion.

Phil

I think in this case you would be better off the structure hardly deforming at all then being hit by another car and deforming in this way. This thing didn't deform in a controlled way, it fell to pieces. By looks of it the dashboard would have cut the driver's and passenger's legs off, never mind the steering wheel smashing the drivers skull.

LINK TO TOPGEAR ARTICLE WHICH CONTAINS THE VIDEO, THANKYOU

LINK TO TOPGEAR ARTICLE WHICH CONTAINS THE VIDEO, THANKYOU

No need to shout.....

However you are the man :bowdown1: