Head on with a tree or an SUV...which way do you go?

[zinfamous]

After seeing the pics of that girl that plowed her daddy's Porsche into the tollbooth pylons.....I'm going to go with SUV.

However, I think that with the few seconds of reaction time available in that situation, I imagine most humans would instinctively veer towards the tree.

 

[Tweak155]

That would be false.

But, I would hit the SUV, all things considered you'd be going from 40 mph to 0 either way. With the SUV, at least there's a chance it moves. Trees don't have insurance and the dickwads in the SUV can learn to pay attention when driving next time.

Not true. Even Mythbusters went through this one, so even average joes should know this by now.

This relatively common fuckup always makes one crucial mistake: you're ignoring the fact that since both vehicles are relatively equal in mass (compared to a rooted tree or fixed wall) that the two cars share the impact energy. The damage done is shared between the two cars, so one car at 40mph suffers the same damage against a wall or a car going the same speed.

The TOTAL damage suffered is greater, as you have two vehicles suffering 40mph worth of damage instead of just one against a wall... but you do NOT see a difference in damage for each car.

In this case the SUV is much larger than a car. So while it is not stationary at 80mph as I wrote, it is definitely not 40mph. I think the key is head on... if there is no leeway in either direction, the impact will be as though it is greater than 40mph.

 

[SSSnail]

Whatever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W937NM11o8

 

[Humpy]

It seems unlikely there would be a choice, rather just a reaction.

OP, what do you think your reaction was going to be?

 

[zinfamous]

The tree choice is not helped by the two different "flower memorials" pinned to two different trees on this road. :\

reminds me of this video, which always gives me a chuckle

http://www.digitallifeplus.com/8299/this-bridge-takes-on-any-truck-in-the-world/

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Uh, assuming the SUV is also going ~40mph, you should consider it hitting the SUV @ 80mph or a stationary tree at 40mph. I think the tree will always be better if you have a half decent vehicle.

I'm assuming head on applies to both tree & SUV.

Kinda wrong. Mythbusters covered this.

 

[Tweak155]

Whatever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W937NM11o8

Those cars are the same size. I guess I'm just envisioning a much larger vehicle, probably the SUV should be specified.

 

[vi edit]

It seems unlikely there would be a choice, rather just a reaction.

OP, what do you think your reaction was going to be?

I think the overriding survival instinct says to point at the tree and hope for the best since your face is looking right at the SUV.

But under more critical thought I think the SUV is probably better gamble. It's one of those things it's nice to be able to think about ahead of time. Sort of like those drivers ed classes that teach you to steer into the direction of the slide. It's not intuitive but it's one of those things that just popped into my head 15 years after drivers ed when I finally needed to use it.

 

[thesmokingman]

I would probably even take semi sandwhich over tree lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylDOKtFu__Q

 

[zinfamous]

I think the overriding survival instinct says to point at the tree and hope for the best since your face is looking right at the SUV.

But under more critical thought I think the SUV is probably better gamble. It's one of those things it's nice to be able to think about ahead of time. Sort of like those drivers ed classes that teach you to steer into the direction of the slide. It's not intuitive but it's one of those things that just popped into my head 15 years after drivers ed when I finally needed to use it.

on a pure numbers gamble, one should always opt for the SUV because you expect that more than half the time, both you and the SUV are going to swerve at least some before the impact, which should reduce the head-on impact. And at least one person (you) will swerve 100% of the time (assuming part of the problem is that SUV is too busy texting to look up)

With the tree, there really is no chance of a different outcome. The tree is always just going to sit there like a boss.

 

[SSSnail]

Those cars are the same size. I guess I'm just envisioning a much larger vehicle, probably the SUV should be specified.

Yeah, but the chance of the driver of the SUV move, or you just glance the SUV and thus avoiding greater damage is much better than a solid tree. As others have stated, trees don't give a fuck.

 

[Tweak155]

Yeah, but the chance of the driver of the SUV move, or you just glance the SUV and thus avoiding greater damage is much better than a solid tree. As others have stated, trees don't give a fuck.

Which is why I said if head on also applies to the SUV. Otherwise there isn't much debate as the thread is showing.

 

[thesmokingman]

Which is why I said if head on also applies to the SUV. Otherwise there isn't much debate as the thread is showing.

Head on vs SUV is better odds than an immovable object.

 

[Tweak155]

Head on vs SUV is better odds than an immovable object.

Cool.

 

[who?]

Hitting perfectly head on will spread the force over the whole width of both vehicles. A glancing blow will concentrate the force on smaller areas which could cause more intrusion into the passenger compartment.

 

[LTC8K6]

SUV has crumple zones to dissipate energy. Tree not so much.

Plus, tree is relatively small impact area compared to SUV. Forces concentrated.

Much rather hit the SUV.

Plus, if you let that fucker run you off the road into a tree, there will be no witnesses.

 

[dullard]

Uh, assuming the SUV is also going ~40mph, you should consider it hitting the SUV @ 80mph or a stationary tree at 40mph. I think the tree will always be better if you have a half decent vehicle.

I'm assuming head on applies to both tree & SUV.

It is an SUV. No way it is going just 40. Add 10 mph for SUVs. The add another 5 for being a crappy driver in the wrong Lane.

 

[dullard]

For me, the tree would likely hit the passenger side vs the SUV hitting the driver's side. I'm the driver, usually with no passengers. I assume the passenger side impact would be safer.

But, the SUV might move to avoid you, the tree likely won't. I'd still likely just veer right out of instinct.

 

[thesmokingman]

For me, the tree would likely hit the passenger side vs the SUV hitting the driver's side. I'm the driver, usually with no passengers. I assume the passenger side impact would be safer.

But, the SUV might move to avoid you, the tree likely won't. I'd still likely just veer right out of instinct.

It's better just ot hit the tree from the front and not try anything tricky in case you over-correct and hit it sideways which would be terribad.

 

[Schmide]

Dudes in a modern car the chance of a stray piece of metal dashboard or anything hurting you is small. So all you're dealing with is the total g-force upon the individual. Because the SUV has more energy, that energy is transferred into the lesser vehicle in a F=MA relationship, regardless of crumple zones or angular points of impact. At some point, all the crumple zones reach their maximum and in a inelastic collision that energy has to go somewhere whether it be rotational or harmonic motion.

The way I see it, I'd rather go 40-0 in the total time it takes to crumple the hood of my car than 40-(-5) in the total time it takes to crumple both hoods. Worse yet the possibility of pin-balling between trees and SUV and the torsional effects that would ensue.

Probably in the end the best course is to commit to either action I guess.

 

[thesmokingman]

Dudes in a modern car the chance of a stray piece of metal dashboard or anything hurting you is small. So all you're dealing with is the total g-force upon the individual. Because the SUV has more energy, that energy is transferred into the lesser vehicle in a F=MA relationship, regardless of crumple zones or angular points of impact. At some point, all the crumple zones reach their maximum and in a inelastic collision that energy has to go somewhere whether it be rotational or harmonic motion.

The way I see it, I'd rather go 40-0 in the total time it takes to crumple the hood of my car than 40-(-5) in the total time it takes to crumple both hoods. Worse yet the possibility of pin-balling between trees and SUV and the torsional effects that would ensue.

Probably in the end the best course is to commit to either action I guess.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDUem5wWlQI



Also place your bets...


https://youtu.be/vRxLlFm3VUA?t=177

 

[Captante]

I'm swerving out of the path of the SUV 100% of the time and taking my chances with the tree.

Biggest problem I see here is that the Tahoe weighs in approx 2200 lbs more then the Camry so its going to come out ahead every time.

 

[thesmokingman]

I'm swerving out of the path of the SUV 100% of the time and taking my chances with the tree.

Biggest problem I see here is that the Tahoe weighs in approx 2200 lbs more then the Camry so its going to come out ahead every time.

It doesn't matter if its suv vs car, they are both designed to crash into each other and with both cars crumple zones together you will stand a chance of survival. However hitting a tree with no crumple zones, the deceleration to zero, the crash, your internal organs will turn to mush.

 

[IronWing]

It's better just ot hit the tree from the front and not try anything tricky in case you over-correct and hit it sideways which would be terribad.

Defensive driving courses encourage drivers to hit things sideways rather than head on. The idea is to try to dissipate the energy down the side of the car, allowing more time to decelerate and decreasing the magnitude of instantaneous deceleration forces.

 

[thesmokingman]

Defensive driving courses encourage drivers to hit things sideways rather than head on. The idea is to try to dissipate the energy down the side of the car, allowing more time to decelerate and decreasing the magnitude of instantaneous deceleration forces.

Thats great if you hit a wall/car sideways. Not good with a tree.