Seat Collapse in Accident - Follow Up

[rlhdweman]

I didn’t see where the OP stated he weighs 325 lbs. If that is accurate, then it explains why the seat extended beyond the 35 degrees of rotation safety limit. To me it looks like 40 degrees of rotation (keep in mind that no one sits at 0 degrees of rotation normally, but the seat starts at 15 or so degrees reclined.

The NHTSA uses 6 pediatric dummies and 4 adult dummies. I’ll focus on the adult ones only. First, the smallest one, “small adult female” is 4’11” and 97 lbs. This is the one that is most likely to get injured. The air bags are too powerful for her small size and the seat backs are too stiff for her low weight, so she is more likely to get a spine injury. Then there is the “5th percentile adult female”, which is 4’11” and 108 lbs. Standards get built off of this one, as safety devices are designed for people in the middle, from the 5th percentile to 95th percentile. Then there is the old generation “50th percentile male” that is 5’9” and 160 lbs. And as American’s weight has increased over the years, the new generation 50th percentile male is 5’9” and 171 lbs.

A 325 lb driver weighs 1.9 times as much as the largest test dummy, which means that his drivers seat would have 90% more rotational deformation than with the largest crash test dummy.

Again, I didn’t see where the OP stated his weight, but if it is 325 lbs, this amount of rotational deformation of the seat is completely expected and somewhat unavoidable.

Many lawyers have brought law suits saying that the seat backs allow too much deformation and need to be stiffer, but then the NHTSA scientists get involved and start showing physics data on what happens to the small female and 5th percentile female dummies with the current stiffness requirements. If they go stiffer, it will create more injuries for small occupants.

If these are the current 'percentiles' being used by the NHTSA they are grossly outdated, have they looked at the average American? 50% for female now is 5'4" 150lbs & male would be at least 5'10" 200 & that's conservative.

Sponsored

 

[Phimosis]

If these are the current 'percentiles' being used by the NHTSA they are grossly outdated, have they looked at the average American? 50% for female now is 5'4" 150lbs & male would be at least 5'10" 200 & that's conservative.

Here’s the thing, the NHTSA doesn’t just use the weight of the average American and pretend like they are a round blob. They need crash test dummies that are shaped like humans, sized like humans and have masses like humans and weight distributions like humans, including muscle mass differences between men and women. So the crash test dummy makers need to have all of the anthropometric data: height, weight, inseam, femur length, tibia length, chest circumference, shoulder width, etc, etc.. And that data is hard to come by. The best data set is from the Anthropmetic survey of US Army personnel (ANSUR). The most recent ANSUR data set is from 2012. It gives a very good snapshot of the height and weight distribution curve of healthy and relatively fit American adult males and females. Companies that make crash test dummies, like Humanetics, use the available anthropometric data sets to make the most realistic dummies as possible, but this data excludes the morbidly obese, as they are not eligible to be military personnel.

In the end, they crash test with the 5th percentile female and the 95th percentile male to make sure they pass the minimum crash safety standards, but they don’t release that data to the public. The data they do release is with the 50th percentile male. He is also what the crash worthiness ratings are based off of. Why the 50th percentile male? Because the 50th percentile male will receive less injuries than the 5th percentile female and the 95th percentile tile male. Also because males drive more miles than females and they get in crashes at a higher rate than females because of speeding, aggressive driving, and alcohol consumption.

 

[johnny99]

In 1978 I bought a 1972 Capri, the "Sexy European" not the boat Caprice.



At the time there was a milk crate wedged between the back seat and the driver seat to hold it up. As a 17 year old I didn't care.

Not long after there was a recall for that so I took it to the dealer and they welded it up.

Maybe the same recall for Mavs in six years.

Didn't these have a foot switch similar to the old high/low beams that when pushed gave you a wiper cycle?

 

[sprcoop]

Didn't these have a foot switch similar to the old high/low beams that when pushed gave you a wiper cycle?

Maybe someone else would know but that was too long ago and too many cars ago. It got totaled in 81' (not by me). I don't remember.

 

[johnny99]

Maybe someone else would know but that was too long ago and too many cars ago. It got totaled in 81' (not by me). I don't remember.

I understand. My buddy in college in '80 had one with that feature, just not sure what year it was. Great way to add that to a car I thought.

 

[Jim Walker]

Here’s the thing, the NHTSA doesn’t just use the weight of the average American and pretend like they are a round blob. They need crash test dummies that are shaped like humans, sized like humans and have masses like humans and weight distributions like humans, including muscle mass differences between men and women. So the crash test dummy makers need to have all of the anthropometric data: height, weight, inseam, femur length, tibia length, chest circumference, shoulder width, etc, etc.. And that data is hard to come by. The best data set is from the Anthropmetic survey of US Army personnel (ANSUR). The most recent ANSUR data set is from 2012. It gives a very good snapshot of the height and weight distribution curve of healthy and relatively fit American adult males and females. Companies that make crash test dummies, like Humanetics, use the available anthropometric data sets to make the most realistic dummies as possible, but this data excludes the morbidly obese, as they are not eligible to be military personnel.

In the end, they crash test with the 5th percentile female and the 95th percentile male to make sure they pass the minimum crash safety standards, but they don’t release that data to the public. The data they do release is with the 50th percentile male. He is also what the crash worthiness ratings are based off of. Why the 50th percentile male? Because the 50th percentile male will receive less injuries than the 5th percentile female and the 95th percentile tile male. Also because males drive more miles than females and they get in crashes at a higher rate than females because of speeding, aggressive driving, and alcohol consumption.

Here’s the thing, the NHTSA doesn’t just use the weight of the average American and pretend like they are a round blob. They need crash test dummies that are shaped like humans, sized like humans and have masses like humans and weight distributions like humans, including muscle mass differences between men and women. So the crash test dummy makers need to have all of the anthropometric data: height, weight, inseam, femur length, tibia length, chest circumference, shoulder width, etc, etc.. And that data is hard to come by. The best data set is from the Anthropmetic survey of US Army personnel (ANSUR). The most recent ANSUR data set is from 2012. It gives a very good snapshot of the height and weight distribution curve of healthy and relatively fit American adult males and females. Companies that make crash test dummies, like Humanetics, use the available anthropometric data sets to make the most realistic dummies as possible, but this data excludes the morbidly obese, as they are not eligible to be military personnel.

In the end, they crash test with the 5th percentile female and the 95th percentile male to make sure they pass the minimum crash safety standards, but they don’t release that data to the public. The data they do release is with the 50th percentile male. He is also what the crash worthiness ratings are based off of. Why the 50th percentile male? Because the 50th percentile male will receive less injuries than the 5th percentile female and the 95th percentile tile male. Also because males drive more miles than females and they get in crashes at a higher rate than females because of speeding, aggressive driving, and alcohol consumption.

 

[Jim Walker]

Being at 325lb, that’s pretty extreme on weight spectrum, I’m only half that, I don’t know if I would of purchased a compact truck for the size and comfort , I think the NTSB does a good job on safety checking, but all crash incidents are going to vary, as it showed in his 2 frt seats

 

[Skaht]

Being at 325lb, that’s pretty extreme on weight spectrum, I’m only half that, I don’t know if I would of purchased a compact truck for the size and comfort , I think the NTSB does a good job on safety checking, but all crash incidents are going to vary, as it showed in his 2 frt seats

It was actually a very roomy and comfortable car. At 6'3, I was never cramped.

 

[Jim Walker]

It was actually a very roomy and comfortable car. At 6'3, I was never cramped.

That’s good to hear, I know when having

 

[Jim Walker]

That’s good to hear, I know when having people in back seat always concerned on leg room, I do like my Tremor too. It’s been a good truck from going from full size, wife likes it for size and getting in and out for her since we are 1 vehicle now

 

[SuperDave71]

I’m 6’2” and spend a lot of time in my Maverick. I’ve never felt cramped, and I drive a lot. In my 18 months Maverick ownership, I’m approaching 130k miles. I’ve always felt safe, but almost all of my miles have been solo. I also have a F350, which sits except for when I pull our camper or need a full size truck. I must admit though, that when my wife and I go out, and occasionally have our last at home child with us, I take the Maverick more often than not because it’s more efficient or I want to keep the F350 clean. OP, your experience, and the data presented bring to light the real world risks and costs of a small vehicle, especially grown adult sized passengers in the back seat. Thanks to all for sharing.
Dave

 

[sanpablo]

In 1978 I bought a 1972 Capri, the "Sexy European" not the boat Caprice.



At the time there was a milk crate wedged between the back seat and the driver seat to hold it up. As a 17 year old I didn't care.

Not long after there was a recall for that so I took it to the dealer and they welded it up.

Maybe the same recall for Mavs in six years.

The seat back pivot on 1968 Mustangs would fatigue and snap off also.
Probably the same problem.

 

[23grayXLT84]

I’m 6’2” and spend a lot of time in my Maverick. I’ve never felt cramped, and I drive a lot. In my 18 months Maverick ownership, I’m approaching 130k miles. I’ve always felt safe, but almost all of my miles have been solo. I also have a F350, which sits except for when I pull our camper or need a full size truck. I must admit though, that when my wife and I go out, and occasionally have our last at home child with us, I take the Maverick more often than not because it’s more efficient or I want to keep the F350 clean. OP, your experience, and the data presented bring to light the real world risks and costs of a small vehicle, especially grown adult sized passengers in the back seat. Thanks to all for sharing.
Dave

130k miles on your hybrid mav ?
How has it been reliability wise ?

 

[mcluvin]

I remember watching a 60 Minutes report on this very issue many years ago. Mercedes was the only car manufacturer with seats that didn't easily collapse.

 

[FreedomPenguin]

155lbs 5’8 male and gf 5’4 105lbs. So I figure we are within standards or I’m underweight as male

Sponsored