• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

vi edit

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
So this morning I was driving on a super narrow country road that has enormous trees a couple feet away from the road edge along the entire way.

I drive a recent model year Camry and came around a corner to find a Tahoe wallowing halfway into my lane. They thankfully corrected and pulled back over to their lane (mostly) before anything bad happened.

But it raised a question...if I had to bail the road and my only option was to head long into a 14' diameter hardwood tree or head on into a tahoe that has twice the curb weight of my car @ 40MPH....

Which of those is the lesser of two really shitty choices?

At least with the SUV there's some chance that it crumples a bit. Trees typically win. Against anything.
 
SUV all the way for me. Even though there is more velocity in the impact, I think there is more of a chance of a glancing impact instead of you just going full speed into the tree with a lot more mass that isn't going anywhere.

Also, fuck the people in that suv for being in my lane. I'm not letting them get off injury free while I go into a tree.
 
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.
 
Probably the suv, chances are it's going to absorb the impact alittle better than a tree. I would imagine it would be hard to prove they ran you off the road if no one else was there to see what happened.
 
I'd make like a tree and get out of there.

The defensive driving class I took last week, and a horrible, horrible class it was, said steer right no matter what and try for a glancing blow which in this case I guess would mean that you would try to hit the tree with the passenger side front quarter panel in attempt to dissipate the energy of impact using the cushioning power of the crumpling of an annoyingly and unnecessarily long run-on sentence.
 
vi edit said:
Which of those is the lesser of two really shitty choices?

At least with the SUV there's some chance that it crumples a bit. Trees typically win. Against anything.
Click to expand...


The tree = death, or flying thru the windshield then death. You at least have a fighting chance vs the SUV.
 
SUV's have crumple zones and some of the impact is absorbed.
A tree doesn't give a f*ck because that's what trees do.
I'll take Camry vs SUV over Camry vs SUV
 
Last edited:
IronWing said:
I'd make like a tree and get out of there.

The defensive driving class I took last week, and a horrible, horrible class it was, said steer right no matter what and try for a glancing blow which in this case I guess would mean that you would try to hit the tree with the passenger side front quarter panel in attempt to dissipate the energy of impact using the cushioning power of the crumpling of an annoyingly and unnecessarily long run-on sentence.
Click to expand...

It's make like a tree and leaf!

The tree choice is not helped by the two different "flower memorials" pinned to two different trees on this road. :\
 
Reduce the impact forces by braking as hard as you can without locking up the brakes and hit the SUV.
 
Kelvrick said:
Also, fuck the people in that suv for being in my lane. I'm not letting them get off injury free while I go into a tree.
Click to expand...

That made me laugh. Now I feel like a bad person for having done so. :'(

I'd still try for a less than head on with the SUV.
 
Hitting a vehicle coming head on at you, the force of impact/energy is multiplied much, much higher than hitting a solid, stationary object. I'd rather hit the tree.
 
Tweak155 said:
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.
Click to expand...
GlacierFreeze said:
Hitting a vehicle coming head on at you, the force of impact/energy is multiplied much, much higher than hitting a solid, stationary object. I'd rather hit the tree.
Click to expand...

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.
 
I've been in similar situations, and I can only say I was luckier than good. What concerns me is, how are Google, Apple and similar no human driver cars, going to make these avoidance decisions? If I am wrong and at fault, then I have to pay the criminal or civil penalties. Who will be responsible when the car makers' software fucks up and someone is mangled or worse?

Look at Volkswagen and maybe other manufacturers. VW has admitted to intentionally programming their diesel cars to defeat the US states'' emission tests. Have any individuals been indicted? Not a good precedent.
 
SUV .. trees do not give easily and there have many cases of a vehicle wrapping itself around the tree, with major damage to both vehicle and occupant.
 
Tweak155 said:
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.
Click to expand...

GlacierFreeze said:
Hitting a vehicle coming head on at you, the force of impact/energy is multiplied much, much higher than hitting a solid, stationary object. I'd rather hit the tree.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top