Where did all this "stupid" car safety stuff come from?

[Aaronw]

I notice a lot of grumbling on this site about the effects of safety in auto design.

I ran across this article that shows where some of this came from.

http://ranwhenparked.net/2013/01/10/developing-the-death-proof-car-2/

In 1970 the US Department of Transportation started their Experimental Safety Vehicle Program, which was designed to get the auto makers to look into ways cars could be made safer.

While some of the ideas were impractical, the program did lead to many of todays common safety features like the 5 mph bumper, better control, side impact protection, air bags and anti-lock brakes.

A few of the more notable concepts (some practical, some not).

AMF (best known for sporting goods) included bumpers with 30" of travel.

MG developed a drunk proof car, the driver had to follow a series of colored lights to start the car.

Toyota included a radar to detect obstacles in the road.

VW had a system connected to the steering to help compensate for a cross wind.

Most of these ESCs have faded into obscurity, but Volvo's entry heavily influenced the design of their 240 series which they built from 1974 to 1993.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Aaronw

[pharoah]

Tucker had a lot of safety features built into his cars,and some people thought that made it sound like it was unsafe.

[Lunajammer]

My GF and I (children of the '60's) have discussed how the ride has changed. Back in the day full size cars glided like magic carpets but had tons of sway. Today almost all cars ride harder on a more firm suspension. I assume safety and more rigid control is the reason. I enjoy the firm control, like in my '96 Mustang, but miss the "cloud" ride in full size cars.

[High octane]

As even more DUMB drivers take to the streets year after year, our government and the auto makers feel that more safety features need to be added to the new cars currently being produced. They somehow overlook the fact that no matter how safe they make todays vehicles, it's not going to compensate for the stupidity of the drivers behind the steering wheels.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Improved crush performance in severe crashes and airbags have made the most significant statistical reductions in the highway death toll per million driver miles.

Air bags became necessary primarily because drivers refused to use seatbelts responsibly.

The 5mph bumper standard was reduced to 2.5 mph in 1982, and is now 2 mph, as the 5 mph version turned out to be much more costly to repair in higher-speed impacts, and the insurance companies didn't like that.

Vehicles now handle and stop better than ever before, but drivers are still mostly incompetent because the requirements for getting a license in this country are a joke.

Right now, an onboard cell-phone / text message disabler would have the greatest impact on saving lives and preventing accidents, particularly among younger drivers.

Of course, superior crash / crush performance and better all-around handling and braking are very good things, but our great leaders, in a misguided attempt to protect us from ourselves and eliminate ANY need for driving-proficiency or personal-responsibility behind the wheel, come up with idiot things like rear-view cameras and displays, which will be required on ALL cars as of 2018, will add more cost and complexity to EVERY car purchased new, and still will only save a tiny number of lives...assuming drivers actually LOOK at the damm display before backing over the grandchildren.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Agent G]

Improved crush performance in severe crashes and airbags have made the most significant statistical reductions in the highway death toll per million driver miles.

Air bags became necessary primarily because drivers refused to use seatbelts responsibly.

The 5mph bumper standard was reduced to 2.5 mph in 1982, and is now 2 mph, as the 5 mph version turned out to be much more costly to repair in higher-speed impacts, and the insurance companies didn't like that.

Vehicles now handle and stop better than ever before, but drivers are still mostly incompetent because the requirements for getting a license in this country are a joke.

Right now, an onboard cell-phone / text message disabler would have the greatest impact on saving lives and preventing accidents, particularly among younger drivers.

OMG yes, but not just younger drivers, everyone.

G

[Monty]

Vehicles now handle and stop better than ever before, but drivers are still mostly incompetent because the requirements for getting a license in this country are a joke.

Right now, an onboard cell-phone / text message disabler would have the greatest impact on saving lives and preventing accidents, particularly among younger drivers.

I remember talking to the German foreign exchange student in high school and being astounded by the time, effort and expense required to get a license there, especially when compared to the cakewalk setup we have here.

I'd love to see your disabler in place in cars, but I fear the self-important, must-be-connected-at-all-times crowd would get out the pitchforks and torches and hunt you down (assuming they could look up from their screens long enough to follow you)

[Hemified71]

As even more DUMB drivers take to the streets year after year, our government and the auto makers feel that more safety features need to be added to the new cars currently being produced. They somehow overlook the fact that no matter how safe they make todays vehicles, it's not going to compensate for the stupidity of the drivers behind the steering wheels.

Couldn't agree more! Despite all the efforts by all the car manufacturers, there is NO stopping the inanity of stupid drivers.... That is a whole different kettle of fish.

[Tom Geiger]

Improved crush performance in severe crashes and airbags have made the most significant statistical reductions in the highway death toll per million driver miles.

I've been saving this photo I took from a local news item for this kind of discussion. This small SUV was designed to absorb shock and protect the passengers. Front end folded up into itself. Yes, the body structure absorbed some energy (see roof) but both doors opened. Nobody was hurt in this crash.

It makes sense to make cars as safe as possible. After all, some of the stupid people are our friends and relatives.

Edited April 6, 2015 by Tom Geiger

[Rob Hall]

Looks like an old 4Runner..

[pharoah]

Yes,it amases me how many people still don't wear seat belts. A lot of times they're younger drivers , but NOT always.

And on another note,I know it's not quite relevant to being a safe driver -is the people who run from the police when they try to pull the perps over. Sometimes for a minor infraction. It almost always ends up in a wreck,and sometimes innocent people get hurt.

99% of drivers today can't parallel park,let alone drive a car at 100 mph.

[Greg Myers]

[Scott Colmer]

OMG yes, but not just younger drivers, everyone.

G

Yep. I drive a city street to and from work. No more than 20 minutes. Almost every day I am behind or in front of a texter. Could be any age or sex and sometimes there are other people in the car. They weave, they lag behind the flow of traffic, they miss lights. If there was a volunteer texter narc force, I would join.

[Quick GMC]

there are so many safety features that don't get attention, that people don't know about that have a HUGE impact.

• Ford developed a system that "bends" light as you turn around corners. It directs the beams in the direction you turn the steering wheel and advances the angle so you can see better when you are turning corners.

• Mercedes developed a system that is used in most high end cars today. The ABS and brake system is tied in with the windshield wipers. There is a light refraction sensor behind the rear view mirror. hen a water drop lands on or immediately around the sensor, it sense the light refraction in the water droplet. This gives the info to set off the windshield wipers. the more often it senses the refraction, the faster it pulses the wiper motor. BUT, it also sends th same info to the brake module, which in turn lightly pulses the brake calipers. It doesn't do it enough for you to notice, but this acts to squeegee the rotors clean of water to keep them dry and warm (friction) in the event you need to slam on the brakes while it's raining

• Jaguar developed a system that was introduced in the 2004 XJ. It is called Panic Brake Assist. There is somewhat of a vacuum booster for the brake system, but what it does is when the computer senses 95% ( I could be off, maybe 97%) brake pedal application (DBW, drive by wire, no brake cable) it opens a valve and dumps all the vacuum from the intake manifold into the booster and it the brakes get nasty. This reduce the 60-0 stopping distance from 260 to 170 feet (Exact numbers could be slightly different). This is the difference between life and death. It took nearly 100 feet off the stopping distance.

We got to test this when I was at factory training. Stand on the brake pedal and the rear of the car will stand up and the car comes to a stop in an insanely short amount of time without a peep from the tires.

[chunkypeanutbutter]

To be fair, Citröen first did the turning beams thing first with the SM's turning headlights.

[Quick GMC]

To be fair, Citröen first did the turning beams thing first with the SM's turning headlights.

I never even knew about that. Pretty cool.

[OneTrickPony]

The center headlight on the Tucker was linked to steer with the front wheels. That was in 1947.

[chunkypeanutbutter]

Whoa! I stand corrected.

[Toner283]

To be fair, Citröen first did the turning beams thing first with the SM's turning headlights.

What year of Citroen? Tucker had a headlight that turned with the wheels in 1948 and some of the higher end cars of the 30's had driving lights that also turned with the wheels (Duesenberg iirc). And the driving lights on some of the high end cars were almost as big as the regular headlights on the mass produced cheaper cars.

The center headlight on the Tucker was linked to steer with the front wheels. That was in 1947.

I was typing as you posted. lol.

[PeeBee]

I don't believe Duesenberg ever had pivoting headlights. Ruxton had them.

[GLMFAA1]

How about the net between the radiator and front bumper way back in the 1920's to catch the errant pedestrian.

Caught this the other day, As far as I know there is only one roll down window on the drivers side of a Chevy Astro, Those are 2x4x8's sticking out the driver's window.

Even safety devices will not save some drivers from their stupidity

As a life long EMT it is interesting how safety devices have helped and hindered EMS in extrication and patient handeling at accidents

greg

[Ace-Garageguy]

there are so many safety features that don't get attention, that people don't know about that have a HUGE impact.

• Ford developed a system that "bends" light as you turn around corners. It directs the beams in the direction you turn the steering wheel and advances the angle so you can see better when you are turning corners.

• Mercedes developed a system that is used in most high end cars today. The ABS and brake system is tied in with the windshield wipers. There is a light refraction sensor behind the rear view mirror. hen a water drop lands on or immediately around the sensor, it sense the light refraction in the water droplet. This gives the info to set off the windshield wipers. the more often it senses the refraction, the faster it pulses the wiper motor. BUT, it also sends th same info to the brake module, which in turn lightly pulses the brake calipers. It doesn't do it enough for you to notice, but this acts to squeegee the rotors clean of water to keep them dry and warm (friction) in the event you need to slam on the brakes while it's raining

• Jaguar developed a system that was introduced in the 2004 XJ. It is called Panic Brake Assist. There is somewhat of a vacuum booster for the brake system, but what it does is when the computer senses 95% ( I could be off, maybe 97%) brake pedal application (DBW, drive by wire, no brake cable) it opens a valve and dumps all the vacuum from the intake manifold into the booster and it the brakes get nasty. This reduce the 60-0 stopping distance from 260 to 170 feet (Exact numbers could be slightly different). This is the difference between life and death. It took nearly 100 feet off the stopping distance.

We got to test this when I was at factory training. Stand on the brake pedal and the rear of the car will stand up and the car comes to a stop in an insanely short amount of time without a peep from the tires.

While these are all neato keen feats of technology, their having a "huge impact" is debatable, from my own perspective anyway. I've been driving over 50 years, much of the time in very high performance and/or evil handling vehicles...none of which were equipped with any of these bells and whistles...and so far, I haven't hit anything. Knock on wood.

Vastly improved crash/crush performance (absorbing energy with the vehicle structure's progressive collapse) and airbags (protecting the occupants from impact with objects and surfaces inside the vehicle, and managing the decelerative forces on heads to reduce secondary brain injuries) have indeed had a "huge" impact.

Far as some of the other "safety" systems go, I will always feel they are compensating for inattentive, unskilled drivers who shouldn't really be operating vehicles anyway.

If you slow down in the rain, allow plenty of space between you and the next vehicle, actually have some clue as to how control a vehicle (beyond standing on the brakes and blowing the horn in an emergency situation), match your speed to the weather, traffic and road conditions in general, and above all...PAY ATTENTION...then radar/computer controlled brakes and complex "accident avoidance systems" are entirely unnecessary.

All the "safety" stuff sends a message that taking personal responsibility for intelligently driving your vehicle is not required, and that the technology will save you when you do something really really stupid.

The old phrase I've heard over and over and over..."the car wrecked"...says it all.

[Ace-Garageguy]

I don't believe Duesenberg ever had pivoting headlights. Ruxton had them.

I have installed what I was told (by supposed vintage car experts) were accurate reproductions of 1930s aftermarket steering-driving-lights, connected via linkage to the vehicle's tie rod, on 1930s Duesenbergs.

Apparently these systems were available to retrofit way back then, if not available from the manufacturer.

[Art Anderson]

To be fair, Citröen first did the turning beams thing first with the SM's turning headlights.

Uh, to be really fair, neither Citroen, Ford, nor even Tucker were the first to have turning driving lamps up front! The "Pilot-Ray" system was available as far back as the

late 'teens (or a century ago), and was an option on many luxury cars (the lower "driving lights" on every Monogram Duesenberg kit represent Pilot Ray lights, but the kits lack the complete linkage) into the middle 1930's. Pilot Ray lights were swiveling, connected to each other by a small tie rod, and then linked to the steering linkage on the car itself, and swiveled side-to-side as the car was steered in any direction--pointing the light where the car was going, exactly.

Trouble was (and Tucker would have had to face this as well), prior to USDOT all automobile lighting specifications were under the control of the individual states, with many state laws prohibiting the use of more than 2 headlights, even a few states specifying that headlights must remain fixed in a forward position permanently. It's hard to imagine now, but the sealed beam headlight was developed by GE several years before they were allowed to be installed on American cars (it took an interstate compact by all the then-48 US states to allow that to happen for the 1940 model year).

As for Tucker and their "safety" features, perhaps most notable was the installation of "pop-out" windshield panes, with their "safety chamber" being highly touted (you were supposed to tuck yourself quickly under the instrument panel in the event of an impending head-on collision (remember, Tucker was a rear-engined car), but it's not likely that would have saved many lives

It's hard to imagine now, but it wasn't until the introduction of Ford's Model A for 1928 that laminated safety glass came into use in a mass-production car, and yet that was limited on the Model A to just the windshield (Ford added safety glass to the side and rear windows for 1932). Prior to that, ordinary plate glass was used across the industry, with countless severe injuries as the result (some luxury cars had "wired" glass (such as you see in many putblic buildings still), but that was extremely expensive to manufacture--and still is).

And this list could go on, and on, of course.

Art

[Ace-Garageguy]

The "Pilot-Ray" system was available as far back as the late 'teens (or a century ago), and was an option on many luxury cars (the lower "driving lights" on every Monogram Duesenberg kit represent Pilot Ray lights, but the kits lack the complete linkage) into the middle 1930's. Pilot Ray lights were swiveling, connected to each other by a small tie rod, and then linked to the steering linkage on the car itself, and swiveled side-to-side as the car was steered in any direction--pointing the light where the car was going, exactly.

...prior to USDOT all automobile lighting specifications were under the control of the individual states, with many state laws prohibiting the use of more than 2 headlights, even a few states specifying that headlights must remain fixed in a forward position permanently. It's hard to imagine now, but the sealed beam headlight was developed by GE several years before they were allowed to be installed on American cars (it took an interstate compact by all the then-48 US states to allow that to happen for the 1940 model year).

Art

Pilot Ray...exactly what I used to install on the big expensive "real" classics when I was in the resto end of the biz.

Far as the sealed beam thing goes, because the Fed regs specified "sealed beam" headlamps once they were finally adopted, the vastly superior separate-bulb halogen lamps the Europeans were using were illegal here for many years.

I have been ticketed eons ago for running Lucas, Cibie and Marchal halogens on my own cars when they were still verboten.