As I stated in a post from last July, the ElectraVan 600, a small electric van made by Jet Industries based on the chassis of an early '60s Subaru van, scored so badly in a 30 mph full-frontal crash test that it's hard to imagine it scoring any worse. As it turns out, the ElectraVan 600 had a big brother: the ElectraVan 1000, which itself had a pickup version, the ElectraVan 1000P.
Both were based on Dodge products; the 1000 was based on the full-size van, which was a new-for-1979 design, while the "P" stood for pickup, in this case the full-size D Series truck, which had a body style that dated to 1972. The more modern designs with larger crumple zones should mean better performance than the 600, right? While both vehicles did perform better than the 600 - hardly a difficult feat - both still performed quite badly.
The van's performance was only marginally better than the ElectraVan 600. There was massive battery electrolyte leakage into the occupant compartment as well as fuel leakage from the accessory fuel tank. Both would lead to a fire hazard, and the electrolyte leakage would put occupants at great risk of acid burns. The steering column moved upward nearly to the windshield, and the dashboard was extensively damaged. The windshield was completely ejected. Not surprisingly, forces on the dummies were very high. The driver's head and chest struck the intruding steering column with a great deal of force, and fatal head and chest injury would be almost certain. The passenger got off a bit easier, but the face still struck the dash with a great deal of force, which would have caused a severe head injury and approximately a 50/50 chance of fatality. The only good thing that can be said about this van's performance was that the passenger door was still operational. The right turn signal and windshield wipers were activated and continued to operate after the test.
Test date: January 7, 1980, 2:34 p.m.
Injury measures (from page 52 of report)
Driver: 2,703 HIC, 97 Chest G's, Femur loads 1,769 left / 2,255 right
Passenger: 1,963 HIC, 52 Chest G's, Femur loads 483 left / 589 right
The pickup's performance was significantly better, likely due to its larger crumple zone. There was battery electrolyte leakage that did not enter the occupant compartment, and there was no fuel leakage. The windshield was intact. That being said, there was still severe rearward movement of the steering column, which contributed to very high head injury forces on the driver that would have been likely to cause severe injury and a possible (though unlikely) fatality. A broken femur and serious chest injury would also be likely. Forces on the front passenger were very low and would be unlikely to cause any significant injury.
Test date: January 8, 1980, 3:12 p.m.
Injury measures (from page 87 of report)
Driver: 1,758 HIC, 66 Chest G's, Femur loads 1,599 left / 2,866 right
Passenger: 310 HIC, 23 Chest G's, Femur loads 467 left / 178 right
See the original test report for both vehicles here. For some reason, the report is backwards; page 1 is at the very bottom, and the last page at the very top.
Both were based on Dodge products; the 1000 was based on the full-size van, which was a new-for-1979 design, while the "P" stood for pickup, in this case the full-size D Series truck, which had a body style that dated to 1972. The more modern designs with larger crumple zones should mean better performance than the 600, right? While both vehicles did perform better than the 600 - hardly a difficult feat - both still performed quite badly.
The van's performance was only marginally better than the ElectraVan 600. There was massive battery electrolyte leakage into the occupant compartment as well as fuel leakage from the accessory fuel tank. Both would lead to a fire hazard, and the electrolyte leakage would put occupants at great risk of acid burns. The steering column moved upward nearly to the windshield, and the dashboard was extensively damaged. The windshield was completely ejected. Not surprisingly, forces on the dummies were very high. The driver's head and chest struck the intruding steering column with a great deal of force, and fatal head and chest injury would be almost certain. The passenger got off a bit easier, but the face still struck the dash with a great deal of force, which would have caused a severe head injury and approximately a 50/50 chance of fatality. The only good thing that can be said about this van's performance was that the passenger door was still operational. The right turn signal and windshield wipers were activated and continued to operate after the test.
Test date: January 7, 1980, 2:34 p.m.
Injury measures (from page 52 of report)
Driver: 2,703 HIC, 97 Chest G's, Femur loads 1,769 left / 2,255 right
Passenger: 1,963 HIC, 52 Chest G's, Femur loads 483 left / 589 right
The pickup's performance was significantly better, likely due to its larger crumple zone. There was battery electrolyte leakage that did not enter the occupant compartment, and there was no fuel leakage. The windshield was intact. That being said, there was still severe rearward movement of the steering column, which contributed to very high head injury forces on the driver that would have been likely to cause severe injury and a possible (though unlikely) fatality. A broken femur and serious chest injury would also be likely. Forces on the front passenger were very low and would be unlikely to cause any significant injury.
Test date: January 8, 1980, 3:12 p.m.
Injury measures (from page 87 of report)
Driver: 1,758 HIC, 66 Chest G's, Femur loads 1,599 left / 2,866 right
Passenger: 310 HIC, 23 Chest G's, Femur loads 467 left / 178 right
See the original test report for both vehicles here. For some reason, the report is backwards; page 1 is at the very bottom, and the last page at the very top.
Comments
Post a Comment