Skip to main content

Add new comment

Matthew F (not verified)    August 17, 2012 - 1:56PM

This reminds me of a kind of "race for relevance" by IHS using the power of "statistics" to make a point seem bigger than it actually is. Could manufacturer's improve their ability to handle this kind of accident - probably. Is it the BEST use of their effort, cost, time, creativity? Probably not. Perhaps a better adaptive cruise/braking technology could virtually eliminate the problem, rather than redesign the body/frame once again. Some cars can almost entirely stop themselves from hitting a wall/car head-on. Perhaps we can extend that technology to the periphery?

If all you have is the ability to crash cars, then everything looks like a crash to you.

Perhaps the IHS has done it's job in improving crash safety and should instead have moved the bar in a new dimension: navigation, driver-assist technologies, pedestrian warning systems (a car could flash its lights or blow it's horn from 50 feet away automatically, for example). This just seems rather un-creative on their part.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Comments_filter

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <ul> <ol'> <code> <li> <i>
  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.