Haha I saw that Road Wars espisode on youtube. In the USA they would used spike strips, the spin out manuvere or just shot him way before the UK stopped him. lol. I'm sure you have seen the USA cops on TV. I bet people outside of the USA have a negative opinion of American cops. Some of which is valid.

Its interesting talking to people outside of the states about what they think of American crime. America seems terrible to them! I've heard that living in a dangerous city like Detriot or DC, one has a high risk of being murdered while just doing day to day activites!

 

Ouch

 

Jaguar XJR 100+ crash 2005 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!


This one is even worse! The door panel looks ok though. Which is very weird.

 

That is nasty .....

 

What generation of S Class? Let's look at the Princess Diana crash. The lone survivor was a front passenger and the only one with a seat belt on. If you study the pictures of that car you see how massive the intrusion was. The motor was shoved so far back, etc. To me, Mercedes-Benz safety is beyond doubt and for any Jaguar to claim to be on the same level is a joke. I want to see this so called study because I think the numbers are "worked" There is no way a X300 or X308 is a tank like a W140 Benz.

 

It is difficult to make vehicle comparisons with highway statistic data. There are so many variables at work. Ex. the driving styles of XJ drivers may be more conservative than S-class drivers, and there are fewer fatalities as a result or literally probably thousands of other variables.

 

Found the report.
I have included the front page and the comparison data page of XJ vs S Class.
Both have the same risk of fatal or serious injury.

 

I may sound old school but I am one of those who believe older cars safer than newer cars . It may not apply to Jags let's say Mark V vs Jaguar X308 . I was told that X308 has a longer bolts to hold up the chassis and better protection than that of Mark V

I find XJ40 pretty solid and feel safer when I am in it .I tap my fingers on the body and feel safe . I feel same when I also lean forward into the body , not even a loose point .
As for the jap , korean cars even a shopping cart can damage the body so how on earth they are safer than older cars , I look at some cars and there is literally no bumper but just a plastic body part instead . Sorry guys, I just prefer chrome bumpers instead of cheap plastic body parts

 

When the 308 was built it had one of the safest encap ratings out there. It is a safe car to have a crash in. To compare it to bang up to date cars is moot. A brand new car has a multitude of safety features, including the plastic deformable front end for hitting pedestrians. These newer cars have an amazing ability to protect the occupant from head on collisions. For example...
YouTube - Smart ForTwo Coupe Crash Test @ 5th Gear - Crash Test Dummy

Features not mentioned (I think) are the belt tensioners, and deformable areas on the chassis, basically it set a standard when released. I feel very safe in mine, the sheer bulk of the car, it's design underneath what you can see, will keep you safe in all but the most fierce of crashes. If anyone doubts this, install a rollcage!

I leave it to Tiff and Vicki, the forces put on a human body in a modern car will kill you, not the crash intrusion.

 

Do you have a link for the X308 encap test? I haven't been able to find any crash test data on these cars.

One thing everyone should be able to agree on is that newer cars perform better than older cars in side impact crashes. Cars were not generally designed to provide much side impact protection until somewhat recently.

 

Which perhaps goes back to my earlier question: when discussing "crash ratings" are we talking about injury to the car or injury to the occupants?

It's accepted that properly engineered, impact absorbing crush zones are safer for the occupants but obviously it means the car itself is more extensively damaged.

But I still think that there's a point when mass can overwhelm the safety engineering.


Cheers
DD

 

I respect what you have to say very much I am a fan of older cars and have a classic car myself. However I thought I'd share this with you:

YouTube - Crash test Chevrolet 1959 vs Chevrolet 2009

Not too good is it? Still doesn't stop me wanting a 58 Impala Sport Coupe!!

 

There is a ex-Jaguar engineer who posts on this forum that would know more about the safety than any of us. Maybe he can shed some light on the Jaguar safety testing process?

 

That was a wicked test. That '59 Impala folded like a wet matchbook.

 

Was certainly not an XJR 100, wrong color trim and tire/wheel

 

I think they meant 100+ mph

 

Gentlemen:

See the attached image.

According to the IIHS, you are 50% less likely to be injured in a 2001 XJ8 than other cars in the same category.

Injury Index: The Injury ratings represent the frequency of insurance claims filed for injuries occurring in insured vehicles. All losses are stated in relative terms, with 100 representing the average injury rating for all cars.

According to the HLDI, loss claims (due to collision and theft) are 93% higher. No surprise, due to the cost of parts/replacement.

Theft Index and Collision Index: Collision and Theft ratings are a measure of the average loss claims per insured vehicle year. All losses are stated in relative terms, with 100 representing the average collision and theft rating for all cars.

SirJag

 

I saw this video before . Chevrolet can have improved its protection , results were horrific for '59 . I think when you remove the front bumper cover you can see a metal part accross the body in the Malibu .



I still XJ Jaguars think are tougher than Chevrolets . I do drive Chevrolet Cruze as my daily driver , it's got thicker pillars but doors are heavier in Jaguar and the bumpers protrude a few centimeters off the body for both rear and front in the Jaguars

 

I remember my father coming home with a new Volvo while I was in college -- 1980 240 DL ......in green naturally. He spouted off all the safety features -- he was big into safety. I think it reminded him of his 1960 Peugeot 403 cab - it certainly was as ugly ......albeit more common.

Anyway, after driving it I remember coming back and jokingly mentioning that "it was nice but I could not get the parking brake off". It took a second for the horror to leave his face before realizing I was talking about the acceleration - or lack of acceleration ........and had not been driving around smoking the brakes. Naturally, as the youngest in the family I was low man on the proverbial car totem pole and when the feelings for the shinny Volvo dissipated - I got stuck with it. Off went my magnificent ... very thirsty MB 450SE. The Volvo and I somehow became friends ...plus all the history and international relations professors would wave as we all prodded out of the parking lot in our green Volvo's.

I have to admit that it was a tough little car -- great in the rain. But, I do believe that much of the safety halo built up around them had to do with its inability to get you into any trouble coupled with the people who bought them. It is kind of like Subaru today. I have a house in a area with many of them and the owners have that familiar superior look while driving that I remember from Volvo. That "Yes .... a Subaru" look. Often when we are leaving town to return to the city I will hear a yell from the back seat "Subaru" -- and I know that the watchful eyes have spied the enemy who will ruin our 15 mile drive along the one lane river road if we let it stay ahead.

V8's are nice -- although endangered.

I totaled my 98VDP -- it did its job and I walked away.

 

at the end of the day, that's all that matters.

Good story by the way...