Don't read too much into that. He survived and he was fortunate to survive, but the police were just making polite conversation. The bobby on the beat isn't in a position to make an objective meta analysis of crash types, circumstances and makes and models of cars or make recommendations that suggest they do. But they are able to find conversational ways of saying 'you were lucky there mate'.
Probably this.
Don't read too much into that
You're absolutely right there, it's a good point.
But despite that, this is one of those things that has gone from 'it'll never happen to us' to 'it really has happened to someone we love'', and suddenly crash safety is looming far larger in our choice of vehicles than it has in the past (hence the berlingo!). NCAP seems a sensible place to start, but I'm sure there are other things to consider. Not least 5 star supermini v 5 star family car, as noted above.
[url= https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7193/13897000737_cf11aa1a1f_z.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7193/13897000737_cf11aa1a1f_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/nb2L9Z ]Untitled[/url]
Leather, aircon, auto built like a brick shithouse, £1750.
A Volvo V70 is probably the answer. It's 5* rated and pretty large plus Volvo do major on safety as one of their main selling points. Definitely be a step up on the Berlingo in crash safety. Unfortunately, it's going to be a fairly ropey example for £3K!
built like a brick shithouse
You say that Kryton but the driver doesn't fair well at all in the NCAP front impact test:
http://www.euroncap.com/tests/bmw_3_series_2001/98.aspx
and only 4 star overall if it's >2001. Less if its pre 2001.
Not least 5 star supermini v 5 star family car, as noted above.
As you already suspect, with milage / economy not being a concern, for a fixed budget you'd possibly be better going a bit older and bigger over a bit newer and smaller. In two senses - one of being in a bigger, heavier box and being physically further from the corners of the car, but also because small economical cars hold their value better. You'd probably get a better car for your money by going big.
dooosuk - Member
built like a brick shithouse
You say that Kryton but the driver doesn't fair well at all in the NCAP front impact test:http://www.euroncap.com/tests/bmw_3_series_2001/98.aspx
and only 4 star overall if it's >2001. Less if its pre 2001.
Its '52. But anyway its still a lot of car for 2/3rds of the OP's budget. 3 litre btw 😈
I suppose there's also the primary/secondary safety thing to consider. My folks had a Volvo 240 back in the day, and although it was big and solid, with a reputation for being a safe car, it was quite scary to drive, and on occasion seemed more likely to contribute towards an accident than a more dynamic car.
That's some frankly shocking lack of logic with regard to what an average tells you. You could spend half your miles crawling in traffic jams and the other half doing 70 and get to that, and never travel at 36 mph at all (apart from momentarily while you accelerate away from the traffic jam).
Or I could (as does happen) travel mainly in urban areas and very rarely use motorways.
It wasn't logical of you to assume you knew where I drive. 😉
Logical choice is big, fairly new, high mileage and petrol.
but a 5 star rated supermini in a collision with a 5 star rated 4x4 aren't going to get equal shares of the crash
Quite. Also, bear in mind there's less of the supermini to hit, so those near misses if you were in a small car might've been hits in a big one. Also, is your swerve more likely to be effective if you are in a small nippy car? I think so but it's unclear if this will make a meaningful difference.
From the horse's (NCAP) mouth...
TLDR; a 5 star supermini is only 5 star if it hits another supermini....
Euro NCAP’s frontal impact test simulates a car crashing into another of similar mass and structure. In real life, when two cars collide the vehicle with the higher mass has an advantage over the lighter one. Generally speaking, vehicles with higher structures tend to fare better in accidents than those with lower structures. Therefore, ratings are comparable only between cars of similar mass and with broadly similar structures. Euro NCAP groups cars into the following structural categories: passenger car, MPV, off-roader, roadster and pickup. Within each of those categories, cars which are within 150kg of one another are considered comparable.
Its '52. But anyway its still a lot of car for 2/3rds of the OP's budget. 3 litre btw
I don't doubt it. I've had two E46 330Ci Sports myself but they don't meet the OPs safety requirements.
They're also not that big, so depending how much space the kids need it may fail on that criteria as well.
In real life, when two cars collide the vehicle with the higher mass has an advantage over the lighter one.
Also bear in mind you don't always hit another car...
Yeah, next time I have a crash, I'm gonna aim for pedestrians, I bet I'll win then 👿
No need for an argument.
He does say " or a saloon". You'd be surprised at what I've fitted in that, and I have 2 kids. Notwithstanding there are many bigger and safer cars....
No need for an argument.
I'm not arguing, I'm merely engaging in a discussion as to why your suggestion doesn't meet the requirements.
😀
Going back to your OP I had a 9-5 Aero Estate and still regret selling it 5 years on. Most comfortable car I've ever had by miles and sooo quick. 5 star rating to boot.
Loved that car...
Here's a fully loaded Aero with the Dame Edna lights open to offers I expect
Edit: Can't be bothered.
Volvo do major on safety as one of their main selling points
Its brilliant isn't it - they don't even need to pay for advertising, people just say these things for them. Volvo don't make the safest cars, their rep for safety dates back to a time before NCAP when you could point to a square section tin bumper when everyone else had slim curved section bumpers and infer from that the whole car must be built like a tank. You need to look beyond manufacturers just sayin' stuff. Certainly if you were looking at a 10 or 15 year old volvos plenty of their contemporaries were safer
By the same measure VWs certainly aren't the most reliable cars and Duracell don't make the longest lasting batteries - in fact Duracell don't even make a battery at any price that outlasts a cheap ikea own-brand one.
another anecdote. My brother stacked his 2002 Volvo S60 - tyre blowout at speed on a corner, flipped over a hedge, rolled 4 or 5 times across a field, came to rest upside down. He opened the passenger door and crawled out. When the police came they took one look at the car and insisted on calling the ambulance, but he was fine, just a scratch from where his glasses broke.
(He went out and bought another S60).
Its brilliant isn't it - they don't even need to pay for advertising, people just say these things for them. Volvo don't make the safest cars, their rep for safety dates back to a time before NCAP when you could point to a square section tin bumper when everyone else had slim curved section bumpers and infer from that the whole car must be built like a tank. You need to look beyond manufacturers just sayin' stuff. Certainly if you were looking at a 10 or 15 year old volvos plenty of their contemporaries were safer
True, but still 5* rating for the V70, even the older version. V40 and V60 were both rated best in class too, so there is some truth to the marketing.
I have just bought a V70 D5.
53 plate 142K , £1400. Needed a full set of tyres but its pretty sound.
Weighs in at around 2 tons and has airbags galore. Cabin feels a safe place to be . A pillars are substantial and head movement is essential at junctions.
Not as big as the Passat it replaced , but if I was to have a head on I know where I would rather be , and its not german.
Steering feel is great , but turning circle is an issue ( think van , not car )
Just done a 200 mile brim to brim eco test and wrung 60.4mpg out of it, driving Miss Daisy in full eco mode.
HiD headlamps are awesome on dark wet mornings too
Mr PV...long time no chat!
I had a Berlingo...was excellent when I rolled it several times down a very steep hill...the people space was all sound but the rest of it was all bashed, dented and squashed. Don't write it off as it seems to be well made for protecting the people space.
The crash wasn't the same as another vehicle colliding but I skelped enough trees and ground to show it was well supported where it was needing to be.
Get another 900 turbo...let the 5 second delay and then turbo speed get you out of trouble! 😉
Is that Beemer the one that rips the drivetrain out the car due to power/torque?
To OP
I understand how you feel, we were involved in a fatal (for the other party) crash (other party at fault and could not be avoided by us). Just around the corner from our own home, in a 30mph zone (doing 25mph) in the city we got hit nearly head on by a car coming the other way (from around a blind corner) at between 60-80mph. Other driver (drunk, no licence) lost control when they clipped the curb and died at the scene. Husband in a wheel chair for 3 months, but myself and 18mth and 3 YO sons walked away. The large car (Vauxhall omega) and the kids correctly fitted car seats saved our lives. My previous car was a 1986 Renault 5!! We would have been toast in that.
Can't stress the importance of correctly fitted, good quality car seats enough, your current seats may not be a good fit in a new car.
If children are under 4, check this out:
Rear facing car seats for kids up to 4 YO, 5 x safer! You only get one chance to get it right.....
Simone
Ha! Hi Richard - I remember your accident. Why does everyone with a berlingo story involve it rolling down hills, through fields, or along motorways?! I'd rather the thing stayed rubber side down to begin with 😉
I reckon we may end up with a saab 93 or even a mondeo. My old independent saab guy will probably be able to source me a decent one. You don't seem to get much A4 or passat for the money. The berlingo doesn't inspire confidence to be honest. Awesome for general practicality and tip runs, however! And the sliding doors are brilliant.
I used to love the comedy turbo lag on my old 1982 8V 900. I remember 'enjoying' that car across rannoch moor and on the A835 inverness-ullapool rd. But I was young and reckless then. Now I'm just worried that someone who is still young and reckless may cross paths with me 😐
Given the choice between a crash in an A6 or a small flimsy super mini I would take the A6 of similar vintage any day.
But size /mass is not always a bonus , big 4x 4 crew cab pick ups look horrific in the tests
The Mondeo or Saab looks like a good choice. All else equal big cars are safer than small ones.
This video explains why and has good footage of big V small car crash tests.
Last time I looked there was no correlation between occupant fatality and vehicle size either way. So whatever advantages conferred by large size were cancelled out by the disadvantages.
Saabs are great apart from running costs my last one was doing 18mpg:(
How much is the berlingo going for 😉
I'd recommend having a look at the insurance institute for highway safety reports, which has specific cars / driver fatality rates.
it's US based but highlights that there are benefits to size and that big suv's tend to roll etc is an outmoded view as designs have evolved significantly
Irc ive cut up many cars over the years and removed many casualties and a lot of fatals. The car really doesn't seem to make much of a difference in all honesty
^^^This^^^
Most modern cars are well designed but in a big accident you're in the lap of the gods.
Primary safety is more important - try and avoid the accident in the first place, or at least shed as much speed as you can.
So - good quality tyres with plenty of tread and well serviced brakes are more likely to save you than an encap rating.
Consider advanced driving courses as well, no matter how long you've been driving you'll learn loads.
MY EXPERIENCE- The safest car for me is the one where I have great steering-feel, can feel where a wheel is slipping/losing grip, can catch and recover loss of grip and can pin-point each corner/place exactly and know how it will react.
For me- No over-damped VW and most Toyota's and Honda's are outside of this.
You can't control what other drivers do. Only what you do. Buy the car to your needs OP- space you need, uses and on test drive one- no point buying a 10yr old car if you've no idea how it feels/if you feel confident. You can't control any other factor(s) in life.
Lol @ hora. Cos all accidents are caused when we are pushing the limits of grip and need steering feedback.. you tool 🙄
try and avoid the accident in the first place
Wow really? I'd honestly never thought of that!
The car does make a difference. That's why road deaths have been falling for years despite lots more traffic. However, most modern cars are good, so the best thing you can do after the blatantly obvious ie not crash (thanks for that) is buy a modern car that's looked after.
Molgrips is it nothing to do with speed limits. Seat belts. Better training ? Figures can be manipulated to say what ever the writer wants. Im talking from my experience having attended many many car crashes. Airbags have made big impact but everyone has them these days. But other than that not a great deal its luck of the draw it seems
Ive been to a little clio rolled many times down the motorway and hit by alsorts driver got himself out on the other hand been to a big flash honda got clipped and went into a hedge all 4 occupants were dead
If your numbers up its up
"That's why road deaths have been falling for years despite lots more traffic. "
you dont seethe correlation between more traffic = slower speeds = less chance of death ? i notice the difference even in the 10 years ive been driving.
used to be able to drive everywhere at the speed limit - now even outside of peak times you be lucky to do 50 on a NSL single carridgeway due to traffic.
MY EXPERIENCE- The safest car for me is the one where I have great steering-feel, can feel where a wheel is slipping/losing grip, can catch and recover loss of grip and can pin-point each corner/place exactly and know how it will react.
Sounds like theres a problem with the nut that holds the steering wheel
Lol @ hora. Cos all accidents are caused when we are pushing the limits of grip and need steering feedback.. you tool
(Sorry I'm not going to get into childishness)
Being involved in a RTC can involve either the other parties fault, your fault or a combination of the two.
With that in mind you can ensure that you feel confident and comfortable with the car that you are driving, its in good mechanical condition with matching tyres and well serviced/inspected regularly.
i.e. you do everything you can to ensure that you are a safe driver and not a risk to yourself or others.
I've driven cars where I've really not felt comfortable or confident with. I'm sure us aggressive driving God males can at least admit to this last line.
Being involved in a RTC
Yes.. but this thread isn't about being involved in a crash, it's about what happens to you IF a crash actually happens.
you dont seethe correlation between more traffic = slower speeds = less chance of death ?
Yes, but what about more miles = more chance of death? This isn't my own conclusion, btw - this is widely discussed.
Are you saying car safety features have no effect?
OP: I'd be looking at a post 2000 volvo V70 (if you wanted an estate).
I think it says somwhere on the NCAP website that the difference between a 1 star and a 5 star equates to about a 30% lower chance of fatality (or possibly killed/seriously injured occupants).
Now I'm not saying I'd like to find myself or (more so) my children in the 30% if I had a one star car, but it might be more worthwhile just thinking about your driving (yes sometimes someone else causes a totally unavoidable accident accident and you have no control, but this is rare) and possibly taking extra training, which I imagine would be more effective. Or do both of course.
Big old Saab 9-5 would fit your wishes though. Go for it, you know you want to.
[b]*Anecdotal*[/b]
Someone I knew was driving a mk1 Mini many years ago and drove under an articulated lorry.
The car was found down the road with the roof ripped off and the driver in the footwell of the back seat. Fortunately for him he wasn't wearing a seatbelt or he'd have probably had his head ripped off. As it was he was pretty much uninjured (until he got home and his dad got hold of him).
So it goes to show- if he was driving a modern and much bigger (even 'small' modern cars are huge compared to old Minis) the outcome could have been much more serious as he'd have driven into it rather than under...
Irc ive cut up many cars over the years and removed many casualties and a lot of fatals. The car really doesn't seem to make much of a difference in all honesty
So a head on crash between a mini and a mondeo would not be safer for the Mondeo occupants?
These are American stats but the laws of physics are the same here.
Crash statistics confirm this. The death rate in 1-3-year-old minicars in multiple-vehicle crashes during 2007 was almost twice as high as the rate in very large cars.
If a crash actually happens it depends where the other car hits, at what point, at the engine block? Offset? towards the wheel arch? Door? rear? etc etc etc etc. It also depends what else you hit after being hit. Airbag fires, deflates then you hit something else.
You CANT control external forces or people or events or outcome. All modern cars are much for much. Its only if you bought a Chinese market car you should overly focus on the car you actually buy.
