distance

I was just on my lunch and watched a accident occur. I Nissan goes out of control and hits the rear driver side of a subaru wagon/whatever. THe subaru spins and rolls and lands upside down. The "cab" part is totally crushed in. Are these cars not supposed to have roll cages? I mean both passengers had to be ripped out of the car. The driver was in the back seat, the passenger was in his seat the seat reclined backwards. (That was sort of OK) The driver might be paralized (lower body). She came to after 30 minutes and started to move. All I can say is that, we should drive a little slower and this lane change thing, in and out, in and out. This has to stop. The driver who sort of caused the acident was with his girlfriend and they looked 20ish (low). Play safe/drive safe because I never want to witness this again.

turbonium959

I know it is your opinion about the suckiness of Subaru, but I think that you didn't take into effect how fast the Nissan was going, and at what angle it hit the Subaru, and etc. Was Subaru moving or standing? When the manufacturers and the government rate the cars on safety, they do it at max speed of about 40mph. But in accident anything could contribute to the severity of the crash. If the Subaru had to roll over, the impact with Nissan have had to be really big, and from then on, the phyics take over. If it was an identical situation with another car, then you might have said that the other car sucks too! Anyhow, I just wanted to say to you not to jump to conclusion with out thinking first. I might not be the first one, but there could be other people here that also might say that you are not exactly correct. Please don't take any offense, I did not mean to say anything bad. Subaru's don't suck, the drivers who create accidents do!

distance

Turbonium!

The Nissan was doing the same speed as I when it hit and bumped the subaru into a spin and it caught a dry spot and rolled. You said 40MPH for safety tests and it was 90KPH ~50MPH. Roll cages are designed to create a shell, so pasengers do not get crushed. (WELL, THEY WERE CRUSHED!!! ) The Nissan just caused the Subaru to spin and roll, the impact from the Nissan was not great at all. Any car will go out of control, but to completely smash down the passenger area when flipped,!!! That's a garbage disposal, not a roll cage. My neighbor rolled his car 3 years ago (roughly) and the car was still uncolapsed! Really Turbonium, would a sharp metal piece through your chest convince you. Do you need to be seriously hurt before you say Hey..... I never said Subaru's look ugly and they handle poorly, I just quoted the facts. I never read ***** in a magazine: "I seen it first hand" Don't tell me its normal for a car to crush like that. And yes, I have taken Physics, Thanks!

distance

Convince me that subaru's compare. Can anybody please provide a good link to safety scores as I am just jumping to conclusions. This was a newer if not subaru with a decent size pipe off the back. Might have been a forester, but all crushed up like that, it could have been a WRX. Anyways, tubonium, take the effort and convince me that Subaru is a awesome car. Please, I'll feel better and won't worry as much in the future. Please convince me! Show the safety scores!

BL_Protege

SUBARU'S DONT SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pro_fan

Subarus (in general) do quite well in crash tests:
www.nhtsa.dot.gov
www.highwaysafety.org

mazdanewbie

Huh? What mass production commuter car does? We had an accident a few weeks back where a Mercedes ML flipped and squashed the passengers just the way you described (they had to be unceremoniously jaws-of-lifed out), that's a $40k+ automobile if you didn't know.

Was the roll more of a flip? I've seen a few nasty true rolls that sort of wind themselves down into a fairly low impact final rest.

I test drove an impreza TS back to back with my P5 and it seemed easily as solid. No matter, I would take a stock WRX over my P5 (even if the factory roll cage was not installed). They certainly don't "suck".

turbonium959

I am not trying to convince any one that Subaru is better then any other car out there on the road. I was only implying that if it was a different car in the identical accident, there would be the same outcome. When the cars are tested for safety, the manufacturer performs many tests, but they cannot predict the infinite possibilities of accidents that happen on the road each day. Once again, my point was not about Subaru's being a better car - I could care less! My point was, that you blamed Subaru, only because it was a Subaru. If it was any other car, the outcome could have been identical. You didn't know that, nor anyone else knows that. Like I said before, Subaru didn't suck, it just happened to be in there, when the Nissan hit it! It was the ******* in Nissan that created this accident that sucks - why can't you see that?

P.S. Do you even know the difference between a roll-cage, and a frame? It is two very different things.

itzkcatz

go to kazaa and watch a guy racing a wrx roll not sure if it had a rollcage but it did pretty well .. was it a older like 80s wagon?

Nuder

Dude you dont like Subaru's and you're blaming them for the accident...which is stupid cause it could have happened to any car.

Jurrell

Mercedes suck!?

itzkcatz

Gesh the front looks mint on that benz.

distance

Sorry guys and Gals!

I have since talked with guys who own all sorts of vehichles and now understand that subaru rates OK. I witnessed a accident unlike any other I have ever seen. I am just extrememly shocked that this subaru conforms to or is greater than the average in safety scores. If this is the case, I am extremely lucky that I was not involved in the accident as I would have been "Pancaked".

Really just shocked at the lack of safety available in any car and that, we can send man to the moon, but we can't make a great safe (ultimately safe car).

I know now, I was wrong with my statements about subaru being unsafe, but really am disturbed at the lack of safety of all cars.

anyways.....sorry for peeing in everybodies cornflakes!

mazdanewbie

it's a balancing act. if safety is your only concern, buy something like say a greyhound bus and strap yourself in the very middle, instruct the driver not to go over 30 MPH. Not in the budget? Buy something with a lot of mass (SUV) and drive defensively (slow and careful). I think people demand economy, performance, comfort, superfluous gizmo's...and those things compete with safety. If you consider what we are really talking about...taking the fragile human body, putting it in a bunch of metal, hurtling around with tons of obstacles and you consider how far we have come (can you say horse drawn wagon?) the modern auto is a pretty sweet deal. If only we didn't have to depend on petroleum... The man on the moon comparison is interesting, my position is that if the human species were to dedicate the same degreee of resource outlay (material and productivity) to ANY problem (world hunger, health, poverty, education...) we would be doing pretty well and if you tossed in military expenditures, we would be set. Look at the traffic pile up in LA over the weekend, it would be hard to improve on that: 198 vehicle pile up, 0 dead. Maybe with mass transit you could have avoided the thing in the first place, but I don't think anyone wants to trade cars for trains/busses. I was rear ended in my pro and it did very well, compared to wrecks I have been in before (in older cars) it was light years ahead.

MP5s Make Ready

Lucky for me I don't eat corn flakes.........