Opel Omega torn apart in crash test

BrianD3

Just saw this crash test video where an Opel Omega estate is propelled sideways into a pole and is split in two. The speed is 98 km/h (61 mph). That is a very fast speed for a side impact test - but I'd say when people see cars with similar damage after real life crashes with poles, trees etc. many would estimate the impact speed as way higher than 98 km/h

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QsKZWYYjfE#t=03m23s

A more modern design than the Omega would be barely any better if subjected to such a test. The EuroNCAP pole test is carried out at just 29 km/h (18 mph)

Atlantic Dawn

I suppose they have to balance the amount of crashed side on with head on and build the car with crumple zones and base it on the most likely crash scenario as being head on. I know these side on crashes happen but I'd imagine they are a tiny percentage of overall fatalaties.

Plug

Scary stuff all right, heres a pic of an RS4 after crashing into a tree. This is one car not two. He managed to walk away!

BrianD3

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I suppose they have to balance the amount of crashed side on with head on and build the car with crumple zones and base it on the most likely crash scenario as being head on. I know these side on crashes happen but I'd imagine they are a tiny percentage of overall fatalaties.

Agreed. It would be virtually impossible to make such a crash survivable. Even in the unlikely event that the car could be made strong enough, the deceleration for the occupants would be way too much.

I believe this crash would be fatal even in a modern rally car with full cage, racing harnesses, helmets, HANS device etc.

BrianD3

From another angle, Omega crash starts at about 17 secs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrgW09mcakM

Alanstrainor

BrianD3 wrote: »

Agreed. It would be virtually impossible to make such a crash survivable. Even in the unlikely event that the car could be made strong enough, the deceleration for the occupants would be way too much.

I believe this crash would be fatal even in a modern rally car with full cage, racing harnesses, helmets, HANS device etc.

Mhmmm, inertia sucks.

peasant

I find that bit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QsKZWYYjfE#t=01m15s

just as scary ...and a lot more likely to happen

-Corkie-

I hit a limestone pier sideways with a 96 corolla van in 96. Needless to say the pier survived..:o. Thats why I would never drive a small or light car again.

Edit im supprised how badly the omega tore apart.

Absurdum

peasant wrote: »

I find that bit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QsKZWYYjfE#t=01m15s

just as scary ...and a lot more likely to happen

I thought that was shocking too, imagine a child seat in the back

The Daihatsu Copen looked like it held up well in the rear-impact one at 2:20

Guy:Incognito

Jesus Opel are well stingy with their standard spec, those wheels are tiny......

BrianD3

-Corkie- wrote: »

I hit a limestone pier sideways with a 96 corolla van in 96. Needless to say the pier survived..:o. Thats why I would never drive a small or light car again.

Edit im supprised how badly the omega tore apart.

In a crash with a solid object, particularly if it's a side impact, it's unlikely that being in a big heavy car will help. Heavy car = more kinetic energy to dissipate. If the object breaks/moves as a result of this increased energy that will help. But objects such as trees and stone pillars usually don't budge no matter what hits them.

-Corkie-

BrianD3 wrote: »

In a crash with a solid object, particularly if it's a side impact, it's unlikely that being in a big heavy car will help. Heavy car = more kinetic energy to dissipate. If the object breaks/moves as a result of this increased energy that will help. But objects such as trees and stone pillars usually don't budge no matter what hits them.

Hmmm I always like to think the opposite. I wouldnt like to prove you right either.;)

Grimreaper666

I think the problem here is the poles tbh, they should be designed to break up on impact, you have some hope hitting a brick wall or even a tree in most case but the idea of a steel pole embedded in concrete beggars belief in this day and age with all their health and safety.

Plug

Grimreaper666 wrote: »

I think the problem here is the poles tbh, they should be designed to break up on impact, you have some hope hitting a brick wall or even a tree in most case but the idea of a steel pole embedded in concrete beggars belief in this day and age with all their health and safety.

I've seen a different design of poles for road signs etc and they are test proven to be a hell of a lot safer than the normal ones. The thing is they are too expensive so they might not be popular at all.

r3nu4l

Absurdum wrote: »

I thought that was shocking too, imagine a child seat in the back

Exactly my thoughts!

BrianD3

Absurdum wrote: »

I thought that was shocking too, imagine a child seat in the back

If you think that's bad check out these ones. In fairness the cars that get rear ended in these videos were unsafe even by the (low) standards of their day. Modern cars would be better but still vulnerable if hit at these speeds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvXoY3Rbmxw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQPca-aTlL0

mickdw

Plug wrote: »

Scary stuff all right, heres a pic of an RS4 after crashing into a tree. This is one car not two. He managed to walk away!

RS6 surely:)

Guy:Incognito

mickdw wrote: »

RS6 surely:)

2 Rs3's now