How much stock do you put into IIHS crash test ratings when buying a car?
Is there a different safety rating system that is more accurate?
>implying a board where everyone drives 1980's shitboxes knows anything about vehicle safety
My truck doesn't even have seatbelts
I don't got a heck to give
not at all.
my car has no airbags, no traction or stability control and no ABS.
>>15055902
Nice truck man! Unibody? I've got a 62' myself.
>>15055857
I used to not care about safety until i got my shit wrecked by a careless driver.
>>15055902
That isn't a side step is it?
>>15055902
>>15055914
No 65 f250 with a 300 and the twin I beam.
What engine you running? I am going to 351w swap at some point though.
>>15055935
Lucky, my unibody is a bitch to find parts for. Sticking with the 292 and 3 speed.
>>15055902
thought those trees were on fire for a second
>>15055929
No but it has a step in the side.
https://www.flickr.com/#/photos/75773714@N08/sets/72157645339367440/
>>15055930
Kek
>>15055945
Mine started with a t19 then the owner swapped to a c6. I'm sticking with a sbf so I don't have to change trannies yet.
>>15055957
Everyone report kit kat, he has the stolen truck. It doesn't have sidesteps.
4+ stars only
once you've been in a wreck bad enough to hurt yourselves you'll grow up /o/
if I owned a weekend car I would not care as much but for a DD there are too many idiots on the rodas
>>15055963
U wot. It only has one step on the driver side. The passenger side has a toolbox
>>15055857
You'll never get into Valhalla with all those airbags keeping you alive.
>>15055857
>Is there a different safety rating system that is more accurate?
In a crash, the bigger vehicle wins
Let's just say I'm way more fucking cautious when I'm in the Fox than when I'm in the Ram despite them receiving similar safety ratings.
>>15055857
>small overlap test
I bet that test could destroy a tank.
>>15056085
Fuckshiscousin/10
>>15055984
Half of the inside of my knee is scar tissue because of a wreck. Also had internal organ damage(four lacerations on my liver).
Still don't give a shit about safety features
>>15056097
They conduct their speed tests at 45MPH, so you'd have to redline an M1 Abram to come close to replicating their evaluation.
That thing chewed through EVERY LAST 2016 TRUCK except the F-150:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V5WGkRZQOU
>>15055857
>How much stock do you put into IIHS crash test ratings when buying a car?
literally none.
>>15055857
It depends, that's really the only answer. I can't get on a bike over 650cc because I'm retarded and know I'll try gunning it, or the fact that I drive like a fucking moron, and kill myself. Honestly, at least on a bike I'll be paying a bit more attention to the road, but other drivers are so shit here it honestly doesn't tickle my fancy.
Anyway, safety is somewhat important to me. I require ABS, seat belts, and airbags. When I test drive a vehicle, I slam the brakes from 40 on a secluded road at least once. Side airbags are optional for me, but a great idea for most vehicles. Otherwise, unless you feel like you might get slammed or slam into something at over 100mph, or feel like there's a risk of rolling off a cliff, the safety differences of most modern sedans are going to be similar, SUVs will be somewhat similar, and vans will be somewhat similar. Side and front airbags, seat belts, abs, and in some cases collision detection. Drive a larger vehicle if you feel like safety is more of a major issue.
