CT200h engine photo !
06-30-10, 06:13 PM
#4
Moderator
Very interesting. No lift supports for the hood? Engine bay looks real tight...
Trending Topics
07-01-10, 04:42 AM
#8
Not sure if this is a good or bad thing...low weight equals being on the receiving end of a car crash. Honda Fit is very well design for car crash, yet it failed miserably when it crashed against an Accord. The weight issue is one of the concerns i had when shopping for the Prius vs. something heavier like the Camry Hybrid/HS250 because in TX, highways are ruled by big trucks and SUVs.
07-15-10, 05:20 AM
#9
Not sure if this is a good or bad thing...low weight equals being on the receiving end of a car crash. Honda Fit is very well design for car crash, yet it failed miserably when it crashed against an Accord. The weight issue is one of the concerns i had when shopping for the Prius vs. something heavier like the Camry Hybrid/HS250 because in TX, highways are ruled by big trucks and SUVs.
There are a lot of design factors to figure into that prediction. It can be a good 'general' statement but not always true. In 1995 I was traveling through a green light in my new Acura Integra at about 40mph. The trip was interrupted by a large 4 dr Lincoln (much bigger and almost twice the weight) whose driver was on the cell phone. Both cars were destroyed (neither car left the intersection during the crash) and passenger in Lincoln was slightly injured with bruises & cuts. Air bag/seat belt combo along with 'well designed' crumble zones saved my life. I had no injuries at all.
Last edited by Cruiter; 07-15-10 at 05:22 AM. Reason: correction
07-15-10, 06:18 AM
#10
There are a lot of design factors to figure into that prediction. It can be a good 'general' statement but not always true. In 1995 I was traveling through a green light in my new Acura Integra at about 40mph. The trip was interrupted by a large 4 dr Lincoln (much bigger and almost twice the weight) whose driver was on the cell phone. Both cars were destroyed (neither car left the intersection during the crash) and passenger in Lincoln was slightly injured with bruises & cuts. Air bag/seat belt combo along with 'well designed' crumble zones saved my life. I had no injuries at all.
07-15-10, 02:35 PM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Small and light does not equate to unsafe. That is the simple hysteria that has people buying huge vehicles thinking its safer.
If anything the smaller, lighter vehicle will avoid the accident better and there is no evidence to show small vehicles are deathtraps. Europe LOVES this segment of vehicles.
This is no Fit or Smart car....
If anything the smaller, lighter vehicle will avoid the accident better and there is no evidence to show small vehicles are deathtraps. Europe LOVES this segment of vehicles.
This is no Fit or Smart car....
07-15-10, 02:47 PM
#12
Small and light does not equate to unsafe. That is the simple hysteria that has people buying huge vehicles thinking its safer.
If anything the smaller, lighter vehicle will avoid the accident better and there is no evidence to show small vehicles are deathtraps. Europe LOVES this segment of vehicles.
This is no Fit or Smart car....
If anything the smaller, lighter vehicle will avoid the accident better and there is no evidence to show small vehicles are deathtraps. Europe LOVES this segment of vehicles.
This is no Fit or Smart car....
Of course, a lighter vehicle is more agile. However, you can't avoid all accidents, right? Evidence? Try looking up IIHS and youtube. It was proven through 3 separate manufacturers (Mercedes/Smart, Toyota, and Honda) that their small lighter cars do NOT do well in a crash against your average midsize sedan. Size matters in a collision. Crumple zones and whatnot helps, but mass is mass. And 1sicklex, before you respond, please note that i also own a fairly light car...so, no, i am not trying to put down the CT200h.
EDIT: here is the IIHS article: http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr041409.html
And here is the video: http://www.iihs.org/video.aspx/releases/pr041409
I guess that 1sicklex knows more about car crashes than the folks at IIHS.
And no, IIHS folks do not work for BMW...and no, IIHS is not Car & Driver! So please spare me the "anti-Toyota" bias by IIHS, 1sicklex. 
07-15-10, 03:37 PM
#13
1sicklex, just in case you do not choose to read the article, here is an excerpt:
"Crash statistics confirm this. The death rate in 1-3-year-old minicars in multiple-vehicle crashes during 2007 was almost twice as high as the rate in very large cars.
"Though much safer than they were a few years ago, minicars as a group do a comparatively poor job of protecting people in crashes, simply because they're smaller and lighter," Lund says. "In collisions with bigger vehicles, the forces acting on the smaller ones are higher, and there's less distance from the front of a small car to the occupant compartment to 'ride down' the impact. These and other factors increase injury likelihood."
The death rate per million 1-3-year-old minis in single-vehicle crashes during 2007 was 35 compared with 11 per million for very large cars. Even in midsize cars, the death rate in single-vehicle crashes was 17 percent lower than in minicars. The lower death rate is because many objects that vehicles hit aren't solid, and vehicles that are big and heavy have a better chance of moving or deforming the objects they strike. This dissipates some of the energy of the impact.
Some proponents of mini and small cars claim they're as safe as bigger, heavier cars. But the claims don't hold up. For example, there's a claim that the addition of safety features to the smallest cars in recent years reduces injury risk, and this is true as far as it goes. Airbags, advanced belts, electronic stability control, and other features are helping. They've been added to cars of all sizes, though, so the smallest cars still don't match the bigger cars in terms of occupant protection.
Would hazards be reduced if all passenger vehicles were as small as the smallest ones? This would help in vehicle-to-vehicle crashes, but occupants of smaller cars are at increased risk in all kinds of crashes, not just ones with heavier vehicles. Almost half of all crash deaths in minicars occur in single-vehicle crashes, and these deaths wouldn't be reduced if all cars became smaller and lighter. In fact, the result would be to afford less occupant protection fleetwide in single-vehicle crashes.
Yet another claim is that minicars are easier to maneuver, so their drivers can avoid crashes in the first place. Insurance claims experience says otherwise. The frequency of claims filed for crash damage is higher for mini 4-door cars than for midsize ones."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although i am a big fan of fuel economy (thus, my Prius), i think that lessening the weight AND size of a vehicle to accomplish this feat may be detrimental in a crash, esp. with a bigger vehicle.
1sicklex, for all your extensive forum roaming, i am surprise that you do not know this.
"Crash statistics confirm this. The death rate in 1-3-year-old minicars in multiple-vehicle crashes during 2007 was almost twice as high as the rate in very large cars.
"Though much safer than they were a few years ago, minicars as a group do a comparatively poor job of protecting people in crashes, simply because they're smaller and lighter," Lund says. "In collisions with bigger vehicles, the forces acting on the smaller ones are higher, and there's less distance from the front of a small car to the occupant compartment to 'ride down' the impact. These and other factors increase injury likelihood."
The death rate per million 1-3-year-old minis in single-vehicle crashes during 2007 was 35 compared with 11 per million for very large cars. Even in midsize cars, the death rate in single-vehicle crashes was 17 percent lower than in minicars. The lower death rate is because many objects that vehicles hit aren't solid, and vehicles that are big and heavy have a better chance of moving or deforming the objects they strike. This dissipates some of the energy of the impact.
Some proponents of mini and small cars claim they're as safe as bigger, heavier cars. But the claims don't hold up. For example, there's a claim that the addition of safety features to the smallest cars in recent years reduces injury risk, and this is true as far as it goes. Airbags, advanced belts, electronic stability control, and other features are helping. They've been added to cars of all sizes, though, so the smallest cars still don't match the bigger cars in terms of occupant protection.
Would hazards be reduced if all passenger vehicles were as small as the smallest ones? This would help in vehicle-to-vehicle crashes, but occupants of smaller cars are at increased risk in all kinds of crashes, not just ones with heavier vehicles. Almost half of all crash deaths in minicars occur in single-vehicle crashes, and these deaths wouldn't be reduced if all cars became smaller and lighter. In fact, the result would be to afford less occupant protection fleetwide in single-vehicle crashes.
Yet another claim is that minicars are easier to maneuver, so their drivers can avoid crashes in the first place. Insurance claims experience says otherwise. The frequency of claims filed for crash damage is higher for mini 4-door cars than for midsize ones."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although i am a big fan of fuel economy (thus, my Prius), i think that lessening the weight AND size of a vehicle to accomplish this feat may be detrimental in a crash, esp. with a bigger vehicle.
1sicklex, for all your extensive forum roaming, i am surprise that you do not know this.
07-15-10, 06:29 PM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, Europe also does not have big *** trucks and SUVs roaming the highways like here in Texas! Of course, a lighter vehicle is more agile. However, you can't avoid all accidents, right?
Evidence? Try looking up IIHS and youtube. It was proven through 3 separate manufacturers (Mercedes/Smart, Toyota, and Honda) that their small lighter cars do NOT do well in a crash against your average midsize sedan. Size matters in a collision. Crumple zones and whatnot helps, but mass is mass. And 1sicklex, before you respond, please note that i also own a fairly light car...so, no, i am not trying to put down the CT200h.
EDIT: here is the IIHS article: http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr041409.html
And here is the video: http://www.iihs.org/video.aspx/releases/pr041409
I guess that 1sicklex knows more about car crashes than the folks at IIHS. And no, IIHS folks do not work for BMW...and no, IIHS is not Car & Driver! So please spare me the "anti-Toyota" bias by IIHS, 1sicklex.
Of course, a lighter vehicle is more agile. However, you can't avoid all accidents, right? Evidence? Try looking up IIHS and youtube. It was proven through 3 separate manufacturers (Mercedes/Smart, Toyota, and Honda) that their small lighter cars do NOT do well in a crash against your average midsize sedan. Size matters in a collision. Crumple zones and whatnot helps, but mass is mass. And 1sicklex, before you respond, please note that i also own a fairly light car...so, no, i am not trying to put down the CT200h.
EDIT: here is the IIHS article: http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr041409.html
And here is the video: http://www.iihs.org/video.aspx/releases/pr041409
I guess that 1sicklex knows more about car crashes than the folks at IIHS.
And no, IIHS folks do not work for BMW...and no, IIHS is not Car & Driver! So please spare me the "anti-Toyota" bias by IIHS, 1sicklex. Sorry but your post and link is talking about mini/micro cars which the CT is not. It is a subcompact.
: The Honda Fit, Smart Fortwo, and Toyota Yaris are good performers in the Institute's frontal offset barrier test, but all three are poor performers in the frontal collisions with midsize cars. These results reflect the laws of the physical universe, specifically principles related to force and distance.
Are your chances higher to be hurt in a sub compact compared to a big SUV that weighs twice as much? Probably. That doesn't scare me from a subcompact.
07-15-10, 07:41 PM
#15
IIHS is NOT government...you're confusing with NHTSA. You didn't know that?!
My point is that making a car light and small may not be a good thing in a crash. I am NOT calling CT200h "micro"...you're missing my point. Lexus is making a big deal about how LIGHTWEIGHT and SMALL this CT200h is. This is great for handling and fuel economy, but there is always a tradeoff. The BIG tradeoff in my mind is crash protection against a bigger vehicle. And where i live (texas), there are plenty of BIG vehicles on the road...most are much bigger than your average Camry/Accord. And as IIHS showed, a bigger vehicle always win in a crash.
I know that you're a BIG Lexus fan (Lexus can't do no wrong, as you have demonstrated on multiple forums), but you need to step back and look at the bigger picture!
My point is that making a car light and small may not be a good thing in a crash. I am NOT calling CT200h "micro"...you're missing my point. Lexus is making a big deal about how LIGHTWEIGHT and SMALL this CT200h is. This is great for handling and fuel economy, but there is always a tradeoff. The BIG tradeoff in my mind is crash protection against a bigger vehicle. And where i live (texas), there are plenty of BIG vehicles on the road...most are much bigger than your average Camry/Accord. And as IIHS showed, a bigger vehicle always win in a crash.
I know that you're a BIG Lexus fan (Lexus can't do no wrong, as you have demonstrated on multiple forums), but you need to step back and look at the bigger picture!