NBC Reports on PT crash test

[Ptrope]

^^

Yep, I'm still around, and thanks! I agree 100%. It's been my opinion for quite some time now that 95% of all traffic accidents are avoidable; most of them happen because at least one of the drivers involved was unprepared for a situation or was simply irresponsible. Too many drivers create and perpetuate their own distractions, usually with cell phones nowadays, or they make poor judgments, often involving alcohol - and people die as a result! I'd like to see the sort of simulated accident avoidance criteria you mention, along with much higher license costs corresponding to much more comprehensive and verifiable driver training programs. Airbags do not make safer drivers, and do not always save the lives of irresponsible drivers' victims. Rigorous driver training and discipline can do that.

Because I'm also a believer that it's not speed, but a lack of skill, that causes accidents, I'd also like to see progressive licensing that permits drivers with demonstrable skill to get a "high speed license," permitting them XX amount of MPH over posted highway (not urban) speed limits, and which would also require an RFID tag on their vehicle or on their person, so that law enforcement could use a receiver to check that they were qualified and licensed for such driving. Charge them a reasonable, but significant, licensing fee, and the states could not only collect a significant amount of revenue from people who they might not otherwise catch speeding, but they could also reduce costs for pursuing such drivers . Imagine getting a $100 fine from 2 out of 10 speeders, but getting a $200 license fee from 10 of 10 speeders while also having proof that they are not actually driving recklessly! And if they exceed their permitted variance (say it was 15 MPH over the limit), they would still be ticketable.

Of course, the insurance companies would never go for this, because even acknowledging that it was both practical and profitable would call into question the reasons they use for charging the rates they do.

[PT_Cuda]

Originally Posted by ptborder

yeah,my wife was freaked out. Oh well, she can drive her Tundra, I'll stick with the PT.

I will too.. I have seen way to many PT's crashed two of them in my house and we walked while much bigger cars that hit us went home on flatbeds. These are tough little cars, I will take real world data over a crash test anytime..

My first wreck.. No injuries


LiquidPT's bad one. He had his bell rung for sure was sore for a few days.
Pathfinder that went home on a hook.


PT that could have driven home but I didn't let do it.

[Pteazer]

PT Cuisers hold up fine in a wreck,I have been doing Body and paint since 1972 and have seen every type of crashed car including at least 50 cruisers.Now days no cars are totally safe since the metal is so thin you can dent them just bye leaning on them.The cruisers do real well in the real world and if you go to my sight in the info and news under pt stress test. you can see what happend when faye T boned a Jetta at about 35 mph and that was with an
old fiberglass front end .she drove away the Jetta did not.another time she was hit from behind by a full size chevy truck while stopped .we saved the car but the main thing was she was not hurt thanks to the high headrest in the cruiser.thats my 2 cents .allso I need that faster driver rule.Cheers Ray.

[totalfat]

Since many police agencies scale your fine relative to how much over the speed limit you were going they ought to factor in vehicle weight as well. I mean a sportbike doing 100 can still hurt someone, but more likely just gonna kill themselves. They should get a relatively small fine while someone in a 6000lb SUV weaving through traffic doing 85 should get a nice FAT ticket. 18-wheeler drivers are expected to be more responsible because of the potentially deadly weight of their vehicles.. Why not apply this thinking across the board?