Just curious if they were dangerous in a frontal impact as they have fuel tank at front? A mate of mine has just bought an early 70's one and my dad said they are death traps in a front impact, more so than other cars of teh era.
Is this true?
|
|
Any 70's car would perform quite badly in a frontal impact compared to modern cars. I suppose adding a front petrol tank may make matters much worse.
|
|
|
|
I think a 1970s car is generally more dangerous in a frontal crash than a modern one. Whether the fuel tank positioning makes this worse is probably down to how well protected it is. All modern mid and rear engined Porsches, for example, have the fuel tank at the front. On the other hand, a Beetle of that era is a potential death trap anyway due to lethal swing axle rear suspension which dramatically increases your probability of going through a hedge backwards on a wet bend.
|
On the other hand, aBeetle of that era is a potential death trap anyway due to lethal swing axle rear suspension which dramatically increases your probability of going through a hedge backwards on a wet bend.
Not so Bagpuss. Rear suspension of the Beetle was modified to a double universal, semi-trailing arm setup some time in the early sixties, making lift-off oversteer much less likely and incidentally giving a better ride.
Actually rear-engined cars aren't too bad in frontal impacts, because the front boot is crushable and there's no heavy machinery to be shoved back into the passenger compartment. It would have to be quite a severe impact to rupture the tank which is just ahead of the scuttle. I never heard anything about an extra fire risk with Beetles.
That said, as people keep insisting, all cars are dangerous and the older ones have less in the way of passive safety. But so what?
|
Rear suspension of the Beetle was modified to a double universal, semi-trailing arm setup some time in the early sixties
Without wanting to get too trainspotterish about this, semi-trailing arm rear suspension was introduced to the beetle range in 1971 in the 1302 model model also known as the, ahem, Super Beetle due to the availability of a monstrously powerful 60bhp 1600cc engine. The remaining models (1200 and 1300) stuck with swing axle suspension until 1974 when the product range was finally rationalised.
A further safety "innovation" was the adoption of a curved windscreen in the 1303 model in 1973, due to the USA authorities being worried about the proximity of the front seat occupants' heads to the screen.
I'll get my anorak.
|
Obviously my anorak has some holes in it Bagpuss! Still, I was only a decade out. ... But the OP was about a 70s Beetle so it probably has the double-jointed back suspension.
Frankly I would be just as happy with swing axle. I had a swing axle Skoda which could surprise you, certainly, but only once really. After that you learned never to lift off when cornering. The swing axle setup was much stronger (in Skodas) than the semi-trailing one, which gave better handling and ride but wore out quickly, so that noisy bearings became a pain.
|
|
|
|
glad you said that Bagpuss......... i learnt to drive in one and having passed my test borrowed it frequently... i lost count the amount of times i spun it, but it was always a neat little parabola, that never went off the carriageway...... i eventually didn't bother borrowing it any more 'cos even at 17 years old my concerns for my mortality became too strong.
i always thought it was too much testosterone, minimal driving skills and even less sense
(come to think of it, that was a high likelihood)
|
glad you said that Bagpuss......... i learnt to drive in one and having passed my test borrowed it frequently... i lost count the amount of times i spun it, but it was always a neat little parabola, that never went off the carriageway...... i eventually didn't bother borrowing it any more 'cos even at 17 years old my concerns for my mortality became too strong. i always thought it was too much testosterone, minimal driving skills and even less sense (come to think of it, that was a high likelihood)
A mate of mine had a Beetle when we were 17. What I remember about it, apart from the white knuckle handling, is the very narrow interior compared to the super luxurious Ford Escort Mk2 which I had at the time. Basically the driver and front seat passenger were almost rubbing shoulders. My mate told me this feature was very advantageous in "getting to know the girls better".
|
Thanks for the info, ill pass it onto my mate, put his mind at rest.
I think if you have a head on at 60mph impact speed, even todays cars wouldnt do so well - do they test them at anything other than 30?
|
|
All old cars are much less safe (or 'more dangerous'?) than modern cars, but of course there was little concern for safety back then. I used to travel in the front of my Dad's Austin A40 with no seat belt, occasionally standing up to look out the windscreen holding the thin foam edging that was all that would stop you hitting the metal dash in an accident. He wasn't being irresponsible in permitting this if judged by the standards of the time.
|
|
you're not wrong........ mater's Austin Healey Sprite, with a chrome boot rack..... i used to sit with my backside on the boot, holding onto the boot rack........... any decent braking and i'd have been over the windscreen
|
|
maybe that's what she was trying to achieve..............(thinking about it)........ i must call my therapist
|
|
|
|
|
Had three VW beetles in period 1953 to 1961,had a minor shunt with one which caused little apparent damage at the front but distorted the bodywork making one door stiff to operate,I commented on this weakness to the staff at VW Plaistow where it was taken for repair and they pointed out that it was caused by the spare wheel which was fitted across the car in front of the petrol tank,they said it could be a life saver in a more serious frontal collision
ndbw
|
OK So the front mounted tank of a VW might make it more dangerous in a frontal impact.
What about the rear mounted tank of the car in front that you've just driven into?
|
|
|
|
