Who has worse crash rating in your opinion?

Which one would you rather crash in?

  • The '96-'00 civic

    Votes: 4 66.7%

  • The '98'-'02 Corolla

    Votes: 2 33.3%
  • Total voters
    6

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

Status
Not open for further replies.
imzjustplayin said:
You guys are fucking childish, to say I shouldn't worry about these things is simply childish. You won't be singing that same tune 10-20yrs from now I'm sure of it, or well unless of course you have nothing to live for. I'm pretty sure for you guys you don't even consider crash test ratings, why else would you berate me for even considering this?
Click to expand...

No, you're the childish one, period.

We've told you fifty fucking times that if you want a safe car you're going to need to shell out some cash and spend more money on gas. There is no perfect car. If you want good fuel economy you're going to sacrifice some degree of safety. If you want safety then you're going to need to buy a newer, larger vehicle that sucks more gas. It's one or the other, make your choice.

Like I said, either of the two cars has acceptable crash test ratings for what they are (compact vehicles). If they're still not acceptable then SHUT THE FUCK UP AND BUY A LARGER CAR!!!!!

I'm done responding to you, goodbye...
 
I was just re-reading this and thought of one more thing I wanted to say...

You say that I'm childish and that I probably haven't even considered crash test ratings? Go and re-read my first response in this thread. I straight out said that I'd much prefer the safety of a giant SUV, but that I've considered it and I'm willing to compromise on the safety a bit for the benefit of fuel economy. In other words, I have indeed thought about this, and I made the decision that I'm willing to accept the risk in exchange for the benefits (I believe this is called an informed decision?), so don't tell me that I'm an irresponsible jackass who doesn't bother to think about anything I do beforehand...

You're the childish one here. I swear you haven't even read half of what we've said to you. You're so dead set in your ways that you probably just skip to the next comment after reading enough of it to realize it's a criticism (I'll consider myself extremely lucky if you even made it to this point). I'm sorry, but being unable to accept the negative opinions and suggestions along with the positive is a true sign of immaturity my friend. We tried to help you, and we were polite about it. Only when you came back asking the same stupid questions over and over and disregarding our answers did we respond in kind...

Here's the bottom line: What you're trying to do can't easily or cheaply be done. Fucking accept it. Live with the slightly increased risk or suck it up and buy a bigger, newer car. Either way, just shut the fuck up please. You're lowering the collective IQ around here every time you post...

DONE.
 
Last edited:
BrutalB83 said:
I was just re-reading this and thought of one more thing I wanted to say...

You say that I'm childish and that I probably haven't even considered crash test ratings? Go and re-read my first response in this thread. I straight out said that I'd much prefer the safety of a giant SUV, but that I've considered it and I'm willing to compromise on the safety a bit for the benefit of fuel economy. In other words, I have indeed thought about this, and I made the decision that I'm willing to accept the risk in exchange for the benefits (I believe this is called an informed decision?), so don't tell me that I'm an irresponsible jackass who doesn't bother to think about anything I do beforehand...
Click to expand...
I'm lowering the collective IQ around here because I'm asking for something that I feel is fairly reasonable? I'd be lowering the "collective IQ" if I was spreading FUD or misinformation, such as you've been doing yourself, not asking for tips/help/insight/whatever.

If you're so brilliant, tell me, how and WHY is it economically unfeasible to strengthen the civic? I'm not asking for a civic that can plow through a Toyota Land Cruiser and can shoot artillery shells out of the bonnet, or a civic that can act as a plane, submarine, race car, boat, and mobile home. Your angst would be partially justified if I was asking for the above but I'm NOT, what I'm asking for is what would need to be done in order to improve the crash test rating. Read this:IIHS-HLDI: Toyota Corolla
IIHS-HLDI: Toyota Corolla
"In the first test, forces on the right tibia were high enough to indicate the possibility of lower leg injury. This led Toyota to modify a portion of the padding underneath the carpeting on models produced after December, 2002. (Note: information about when a specific vehicle was manufactured is on the certification label typically affixed to the car on or near the driver door.) The Institute tested a second Corolla that had been retrofitted with the improved padding, and forces on the lower right leg were reduced so that significant injury was unlikely."

It is this kind of adjustment and what not that leads me to believe that only small changes are needed in order for a substantial improvement in crash test performance. However, this is most likely not the case for the civic, nonetheless I believe that it would be possible to improve the safety of the civic. What other explanation can there be for intrusion into the footwell of the '96 civic over the '01 civic except for poor reinforcement of the firewall or the crumpling of the "passenger area" in the '95 crash test due to a lack of strong reinforcement.

Honda and just about any other company tries to use the fewest, cheapest parts they can get away with, with the '90s crash tests being 40% offset and not just a flat wall like they were before, the passenger area compacts in the offset tests unlike in the older "wall" tests. When honda designed this car, they had the "wall" or non offset crash tests in mind, so they use less material than was neccessary for an offset crash test.

Here is a perfect example illustrating my theory:
Non Offset crash:YouTube - Honda Civic crashtest (1995)
Notice how the passenger area does NOT buckle? Looks good to me!

Oh but wait..
Offset Crash:YouTube - Honda Civic old model crash test (DEATH TRAP)
Notice how the passenger area DOES buckle? Looks awful to me!

Knowing that the engineers did not have offset crashes in mind when designing the civic, it is completely understandable as to why the '95 civic performs as it does. Why else would the '96 perform so significantly better if it wasn't for the fact that by the time the '96 was released, offset crash tests were standard fare. Also keep in mind that the '95 is really a '92 model, I'm just calling it a '95 because that's what my original thread was concerning.

I should also mention that the "jobs" would be done by myself, and not by a hired shop as any work by any shop would make it prohibitively expensive and not economically feasible.

Also the front end crash test ratings are NOT comparable amongst different classes of cars. So just because you get a 5 star civic or camry or vulva or whatever, it doesn't mean that it will fair better in an accident with a 1 star rated SUV, this is something I've already considered.
 
What misinformation have I spread? Please let me know because I certainly would like to correct it.

Anyway, like I've told you fifty times already, none of us here are automotive safety engineers, we're just people that like to hop up our econo cars and have a little fun with them. It may very well be possible that you can improve the 92-95 Civic's safety factor, I don't know. Do you know why I don't know? BECAUSE I'M NOT AN AUTOMOTIVE SAFETY ENGINEER, AND NO ONE ELSE ON THIS SITE IS EITHER!!!!!

All we can tell you is what we know, and all we know is that you can reinforce a car for racing purposes through means of a roll cage, spot welding, tube framing, etc. And those things are expensive unless you can do them yourself. That's all we know, ok? There very well may be other, less intrusive ways of doing it that are more cost effective, but we're not going to be able to tell you what those ways are. For that, you're going to need to contact an actual automotive safety engineer, which I've already told you to do multiple times...

Seriously, I don't understand why you're still here. What you're trying to do isn't what the people on this site do. We don't have the answers you want, you don't like and/or consider any of the answers we give you, and you generally seem to think we're a bunch of irresponsible idiots.

So once again, I ask you, why are you still here???
 
BrutalB83 said:
What misinformation have I spread? Please let me know because I certainly would like to correct it.

Anyway, like I've told you fifty times already, none of us here are automotive safety engineers, we're just people that like to hop up our econo cars and have a little fun with them. It may very well be possible that you can improve the 92-95 Civic's safety factor, I don't know. Do you know why I don't know? BECAUSE I'M NOT AN AUTOMOTIVE SAFETY ENGINEER, AND NO ONE ELSE ON THIS SITE IS EITHER!!!!!

All we can tell you is what we know, and all we know is that you can reinforce a car for racing purposes through means of a roll cage, spot welding, tube framing, etc. And those things are expensive unless you can do them yourself. That's all we know, ok? There very well may be other, less intrusive ways of doing it that are more cost effective, but we're not going to be able to tell you what those ways are. For that, you're going to need to contact an actual automotive safety engineer, which I've already told you to do multiple times...

Seriously, I don't understand why you're still here. What you're trying to do isn't what the people on this site do. We don't have the answers you want, you don't like and/or consider any of the answers we give you, and you generally seem to think we're a bunch of irresponsible idiots.

So once again, I ask you, why are you still here???
Click to expand...
See, now that is a valid answer. If you had stuck with that in the first place, there would be no flaming and I wouldn't be negative 16 points on my rep. How it's suppose to go is I post a thread, others post what they know, I respond and it goes from there. If you had simply said that "I don't know" but here is what I do know "" that would have been fine, though if you have nothing useful to add except to say "you're a stubborn idiot", then don't post, it's really that simple. This post isn't directed at just you but at blanco as well.
 
Last edited:
Obviously you aren't going to find the help you want here, try hondatech We are not crash engineers, try asking on a site where they deal with this stuff. I wouldn't take advice from random people on the net on how to make my car take a crash better.

This thread sucks
 
Jeef said:
Obviously you aren't going to find the help you want here, try hondatech We are not crash engineers, try asking on a site where they deal with this stuff. I wouldn't take advice from random people on the net on how to make my car take a crash better.

This thread sucks
Click to expand...
I obviously gave this site more credit than it deserved. Though it did teach me something, when an arrogant "know-it-all" comes across something they do not understand, instead of humbling themselves, they show their true colors, that they're really just stupid arrogant fucks who can't be trusted.
 
imzjustplayin said:
I obviously gave this site more credit than it deserved. Though it did teach me something, when an arrogant "know-it-all" comes across something they do not understand, instead of humbling themselves, they show their true colors, that they're really just stupid arrogant fucks who can't be trusted.
Click to expand...
heres something you need to learn in life. for any situation.

it's not what you say, but how you say it.

/thread
 
With this we are not being dicks, we are telling you the truth. Most of us don't know anything about adding stuff to cars to make it safer for the street. Without proper research you will probably get hurt worse. We are telling you there isn't much you can do. Go to the library, buy some books, or talk to experts in the field. With safety I don't fuck around so I wouldn't do anything without talking to some experts.
 
Blanco said:
These are the answers you refused to listen to.
1) It can not be done cheaply.
2 It can not be done by you.
3 It is not practical for a street car.
4) If you're this concerned about safety, give up your dream of owning a Civic and buy something safer.
5) If you're intent, go talk to someone who builds tube frames and/or a structural engineer.

Had you not tried to say "oh, but there is a way, you're just too stupid to know what it is", you wouldn't be in the hot water you're currently in.
Click to expand...

:werd:

Many of us did try to politely explain these things to you. You kept ignoring the answers and saying "well I just don't see why it's that hard and why it can't be done cheaply." Your stubbornness contributed greatly to all of this.

You've been arrogant in a way as well. Rather than listening to anything that we said, you just kept saying "well I don't believe that, I think there's an easy way to do it." You didn't put any stock in what we were saying from the very get go, you just assumed we were wrong. Tell me why we're supposed to respect you when you didn't respect us from the very start?

You've also continuously ignored a very valid point that I and others have been making from the very beginning. What you're doing is trying to realize an ideal. Ideals are nice to have, but by their very definition they're usually something that you won't actually achieve. Instead, you make some compromises in order to get as close to your ideal as possible.

Your ideal car is a 95 Civic chassis (because you like the looks), with a 50 mpg engine (because you like the mileage), that's as safe or safer than the newer 01-05 Civic chassis (because safety is important to you), and you want all of this for fairly cheap (who wouldn't?). That's your ideal. It's a nice ideal, but will you realize it? Probably not. So it's time to be realistic about it and decide where you can compromise...
 
92civicb18b1 said:
kid, you're still playing your "know-it-all" role. Just GTFO
Click to expand...

You seem to be confused, "know-it-all" isn't the same as mature. I'm more mature but not necessarily more knowledgeable than the two arrogant fucks I've been flamed by. These two are "know-it-alls", I on the otherhand are obviously NOT a "know-it-all" because if I was, why the hell would I ever have a thread with a question in the title? A 'know-it-all" is just that, know-it-all, there is no hidden meaning, it's pretty obvious. They're know-it-alls because they feel they have the answer, and the answer is that I'm an idiot and I should basically "humble myself" yet they're classic cases of people who offer others humble pie yet refuse to have any themselves.
 
Blanco just proved a point for me.

Dude, your parents should have raised you better, you're an arrogant little bitch who has no idea what he's talking about
 
I don't consider myself a know-it-all, not by any means. If anything I say here is wrong than I certainly hope that someone will point it out to me and set me straight. That's one of the ways you learn, by listening to what experienced people are telling you, and then following that up with research.

And just to be perfectly fair, I politely told you several times that what you're asking really isn't what we deal with on this site. I told you that you're asking questions of a structural nature which really should be directed towards an automotive engineer rather than performance enthusiasts. It was only when you ignored the polite and patient responses and kept insisting that it could easily be done did the flaming begin...
 
There has been enough. I locked the other thread too. There isn't much more to be said than there already has.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top