 | Home > Technical > Wonder why the Puma does not have airbags? |
 
|
|
|
| Eduardo Member Since: 28 Aug 2008 Location: Región Metropolitana Posts: 2109   
|
Looking other cars I really asking myself this question....
Some experts said that the space in the dash is not enough to put it but. a) The driver airbag is located in the steering wheel. Defender steering wheel already have a protuberance and I dont see why cannot be put there like in all other cars. b) Passenger. The new dash have a good space were the map trash and the handle are located. This space should be enough to accomodate an airbag. Any thought about why LR didnt put that in the Pumas?. Cheers Eduardo MY 2007 110 SW PUMA 2.4: Big Fog of 64' MY 1994 Jayco 1207 Folding camper: "El Tremendo"  Click image to enlarge |
||
23rd Apr 2009 5:05pm |
|
| Eduardo Member Since: 28 Aug 2008 Location: Región Metropolitana Posts: 2109
|
Mse
Just wonder why, not more than that. I like to be in the safe side and obviously have an airbag in my car is better than do not have it. In fact Defender is an utility vehicle, but still a vehicle that transport people in several kinds of roads, included paved ones at fairly high speeds. I think this people deserved safety measures as any other IMHO. Airbag sizes has been reduced in size trough the time, but as you said maybe is not enough yet to accomodate in the Dash or steering wheel. But when I see a compact car and the size of the components (airbags included) I really think that the reason to do not put airbags is not because a lack of space. Cheers! Eduardo MY 2007 110 SW PUMA 2.4: Big Fog of 64' MY 1994 Jayco 1207 Folding camper: "El Tremendo" Click image to enlarge |
||
|
23rd Apr 2009 5:25pm |
|
| ay4alex Member Since: 18 Feb 2009 Location: Midlands Posts: 327  
|
Take a look at the Recaro seats that are used in the SVX. if your bothered about safety, they have side airbags. some protection is better than none. 110 Tdci Double Cab
|
||
|
23rd Apr 2009 5:43pm |
|
| dgardel Member Since: 30 Nov 2008 Location: Veneto (Heart & Head) Posts: 3586 
|
Are you shure????? for me NOT, SVX havn't the electrical circuit (sensor and cables) for this........... and Sonic3D can confirm it (or not), because he installed the SVX recaro seats on "normal" Puma. Puma, originally was designed for airbag, but the car (or track if you prefer) was designed for hard off-road, and airbag are potentially dangerous also with on/off switch (Mercedes "G" series have a lot of trouble with it) Also the front windows is desgned for resist to the bag impact..... Land Rover build same NAS prototipe with airbag installed and functionally, but the cost for this system was too high (for Land Rover Managers)........... I think that they loose a lot of $ (USD) when LR stopped the USA experience for the Defender..... LR was very Shear (in my opinion off course) See the price for Defender (90) NAS in US, they start from 30.000 USD for 1995 vehicle..... |
||
|
23rd Apr 2009 6:43pm |
|
| mhasting2004 Member Since: 07 Dec 2008 Location: Gosford Posts: 29 
|
IMO its more about the fact that a Defender has zero in the way of crumple zones. Air bag sensors rely of the deceleration force of the vehicle to trigger. They don't fire in anything but a fairly abrupt impact but again IMO even a minor impact in a Defender would give fairly abrupt jolt and fire the airbag unnecessarily. The stadium style seating of a DEf also may pose problems to having the bag deploy in the right place and the lack of space between your head and the hard stuff (windscreen wheel etc) is probably half of what it is in a car... all that adds to the reasons an airbag might not work in a Defender.
Drive safe. Cheers Mark |
||
|
23rd Apr 2009 11:34pm |
|
| mse Member Since: 06 Apr 2008 Location: UK Posts: 5024 
|
Rather ironically though - the defender in the Department of Transport stats is the safest car to be in in an accident!
So does it actually need an airbag? Mike |
||
|
23rd Apr 2009 11:48pm |
|
| sasha2001 Member Since: 02 Jan 2009 Location: New Zealand+ russia Posts: 206  
|
Hmm from Medical Knowledge re accidents , Landrover is "safe" as such but injuries are brought on by "transferring of the energy" from the crash straight into the driver, crumple zones absorb and get rid of this My friends in A&e says you get lots of internal injuries (ie Soft tissue/organ damage) from the shock when it goes into the human body, crumple zones, airbags espically side airbags as most accidents do not occur exactly head on and even a few degress offset will force your head into the say driver windows, bash it and then swing it back and forth left to right and transfer energy downwards leading to soft tissue injuries, spine etc He said worst injuries are from more side type acccidents and once a big carlike a defnder with"no crumple zone" is above say 80kpm it transfers all the "shock" into the drivers cabin and more directly into you the driver and you get all the energy of the crash into you instead of going else where Hope I explained it Ok |
||
|
24th Apr 2009 2:46am |
|
| mse Member Since: 06 Apr 2008 Location: UK Posts: 5024
|
You would think, but the Defender does score the top score in real accidents that you have and survive, making the defender the safest car to be in an accident in, in the UK Mike
|
||
|
24th Apr 2009 7:13am |
|
| mhasting2004 Member Since: 07 Dec 2008 Location: Gosford Posts: 29
|
Sasha is right its all about the transfer of energy. The bumper sticker "YOU are my crumple zone!" says it all. The other car's crumple zone has to absorb the energy of an impact with a Fender as it (the fender) absorbs very little. Add that to the fact that most cars will impacted well below our hips also makes us "safe". However if you get hit by something bigger or you hit a tree (immovable object etc) we are going to be much worse off than the guy in his little Getz with an air bag and crumple zones.
A while back I remember hearing a proposal that crumple zones should be designed based on the mass of the vehicle (heavier you are the softer your crumple zone) the idea being that a head on between two different sized vehicles split the impact 50/50. Personally I would much rather be in my mazda 3 in a 60kmh collision with a tree than in the fender. Best tip..... avoid the tree and hit parked Getz instead  
Cheers Mark |
||
|
24th Apr 2009 10:19am |
|
| mse Member Since: 06 Apr 2008 Location: UK Posts: 5024
|
I would disagree - modern cars are with crumple zones are MUCH worse when it comes to impact - especially multi-contact impacts. We had a family friend, in a new BMW top of the range model fully airbag equipped 3years ago. Her daughter was on the phone to her dad, the mom was driving. a van hit them. Airbags deployed they then hit a tree (all at 30/40mph) - both front passengers died. The car crumpled and had nothing else to give so the people gave...shame it was their life. On the other hand. 300Tdi discovery (mine as it happened) Stationary. Drunk driver hit it (at 70 in a 40 - wrong side of road eg in my friends drive!) the disco moved back (on its handbrake) about 3/4feet and hit a telegraph pole. No airbag deployment (car was parked and off) - front smashed in, still drove (a little loose), front door opened (after a little push) - car written off at my request but also due to cost. It took a 70mph + impact as if it was nothing major Here it is:
Thats a full head on collision (biased to drivers side) at minimum of 70mph after police crash investigation to prosecute the offending driver Another example. Richard Brandson (Virgin guy) wife a daughter in a RR classic. front blowout at 70mph on the motorway. It hits the barrier and rolls down the bank ends up on its roof. Wife, Daughter OK - he then purchased 5 or 10 from land rover for all his official business work and family. Im not saying there isnt a need for crumple zones - and defenders have them!! But i dont subscribe to some of this car breaks up on impact school of thought. There have been lots of studies on energy transmission in many scenarios and seatbelts (trying to keep your movement to the movement of the vehicle) is key to minimising impacts. The great thing, however, about the 3 examples above and the report published by the DfT a few years ago - this isnt fake silly crash tests at euroncap or similar - this is me in a car and getting out. All i can say - i trust my land rovers last act in this world to save me and my family well over and above the other cars we have/have access to - new fords, new citeron new seat and new vw van...ive been in them when they do it. Mike |
||
|
24th Apr 2009 10:36am |
|
| Sonic3d Member Since: 28 Jan 2008 Location: Ross on Wye Posts: 1505 
|
No airbags in the SVX seats |
||
|
24th Apr 2009 9:20pm |
|
| Leo Member Since: 25 Apr 2009 Location: under an acacia Posts: 22 
|
Defenders don't have airbags because of the costs involved in re-engineering the crumple zones, body mounts, body and a lot else. It can be done, as Mercedes have done with the G-wagen, and the next generation Defender will most probably have airbags. Even the Toyota 70-series Landcruisers will get airbags later this year. Modern cars are a LOT safer in any impact, I would wager that the BMW was doing alot more than 30/40 mph and that the Disco pictured had a twisted chassis. Also, have you ever seen a rolled Defender? Not a pretty sight! Am an engineer who used to have a large bodyshop Last edited by Leo on 25th Apr 2009 9:18pm. Edited 1 time in total |
||
|
25th Apr 2009 5:07pm |
|
| ay4alex Member Since: 18 Feb 2009 Location: Midlands Posts: 327
|
http://www.recaro.com/index.php?id=486&L=2
the ones from recaro in the same style are available with an airbag - SVX does not have one, however. 110 Tdci Double Cab |
||
|
25th Apr 2009 6:50pm |
|
| mse Member Since: 06 Apr 2008 Location: UK Posts: 5024
|
Nope the BMW was not doing more than 30/40 - my dad tells the best (worst stories) of people dying in smashed cars. The disco didnt have a twisted chassis - it was checked several times. But even if it did - that wouldnt matter i was safe. As for a rolled 90 - ive seen a few, this is a recent one i saw:
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_ho...?ID=408679 Mike |
||
|
25th Apr 2009 7:04pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
