Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Spit\s+safety\s+question\.\.\.\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Spit\s+safety\s+question\.\.\.\s*$/: 26 ]

Total 26 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: David Stevely <DStevely@webleicester.co.uk>; Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998 12:26:42 +0100; The reason that the modern car had crumpled (as it is meant to do) is that the front of the car was doing it's job correctly and absorbing the energy of the impact. I am sure that the passenger compa; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00001.html (9,670 bytes)
2. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: GatesDavid@aol.com; Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1998 14:00:23 EDT; A "modern" car is actually designed to be destroyed in an accident. The front and rear of the car are intended to smash in and act as a giant shock absorber thus sacrificing the car and saving the pe; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00002.html (8,830 bytes)
3. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>; Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998 22:34:46 -0700; You get my emotions really churning on that issue. I really hate the way we accept the fact that we now have, "disposable Cars". Frankly, I believe that Crumple zones are the biggest ripoff that has; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00008.html (11,231 bytes)
4. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Patrick Barber <sailnbail@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 22:10:52 -0400; I am glad to see that this thread has been started. Last Wednesday 7/29, I totaled out my 74 Spit in an crash at a local intersection (only 5 days since I was at VTR in Hudson). Both vehicles involve; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00024.html (10,448 bytes)
5. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: "Will O'Brien" <hobrien@webos1.com>; Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 22:12:26 -0500; I just gotta say this... He who thinks crumple zones are rip offs should study physics a little bit. Particularly inertia.; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00025.html (11,131 bytes)
6. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>; Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 20:28:06 -0700; You won't get me to back down on this one. While I'll admit that in theory the crumple zones are brilliant. It's the application that troubles me. What they do is reduce a very expensive piece of eq; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00026.html (12,704 bytes)
7. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: GT6in@aol.com; Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 01:31:50 EDT; I might as well jump in here since this has been nagging me since forever. Were there ever any tests done on the GT6 concerning the safety of the gas tank sitting inside the car and right in the back; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00027.html (8,289 bytes)
8. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>; Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 22:59:06 -0700; In a word, "YES". Although, I think my wife has now thrown all my "Funky" clothes away by now. Now she buys me "loose fitting jeans"! Joe -- "If you can't excel with talent, triumph with effort." --; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00028.html (8,846 bytes)
9. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Trevor Boicey <tboicey@brit.ca>; Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 03:46:16 -0400; Simply, no. It's kind of an urban legend that if you don't get crushed you will survive, but physics doesn't listen to legends. Even if you don't touch anything or get crushed by anything, human bodi; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00029.html (9,150 bytes)
10. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>; Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 01:05:54 -0700; Once again, At 60 MPH, perhaps the crumple zones are necessary. I can understand applying that marvelous technology at that speed, but what I'll never understand is why the cars are reduced to rubbl; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00032.html (10,357 bytes)
11. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: James <james.carpenter@ukaea.org.uk>; Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:23:37 +0000; I remember seeing a crash documentary on tv here are some of the things it mentioned. 1987 Ford Fiesta (Small 700 kg hatch back) v a 1975 RR (2000 kg) 50 mph Fiesta occupants killed (driver drunk and; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00034.html (9,885 bytes)
12. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Edward Hamilton <hamilton@ptd.net>; Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 08:39:28 -0400; Speaking of stopping short, don't forget daily carrier landings. About 130 knots to 0 in less than two seconds.; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00035.html (10,336 bytes)
13. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: James <james.carpenter@ukaea.org.uk>; Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 12:18:25 +0000; On one thing I forgot to mention road death statistics go like this. Statistis high - safty regulation - two years of low stats then go back up to the normal levels. So the morel is, now matter how m; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00036.html (8,529 bytes)
14. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Patrick Barber <sailnbail@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 22:22:04 -0400; Andy, We didn't formally meet. I did see you riding around on the bicycle several times. You will see me in the Panoramic Photo however. I have the Black Spit in the second row on the Left hand side; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00056.html (11,510 bytes)
15. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Patrick Barber <sailnbail@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 22:26:51 -0400; Joe, Keep it in the database. I still haven't decided what to do with it. I may rebuild it, I may part it out. All of my money is in the Engine and Suspension which I can still salvage. The Body Tub; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00057.html (13,675 bytes)
16. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Trevor Boicey <tboicey@brit.ca>; Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 03:33:12 -0400; That range rover has a HUGE crumple zone.... the Fiesta! In all seriousness, that's not a fair comparison. Because of mass, that range rover didn't decelerate very fast at all. Think of a 10 pound bo; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00064.html (8,418 bytes)
17. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: James <james.carpenter@ukaea.org.uk>; Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 07:37:44 +0000; Not a range rover, a Roles Royce. James Carpenter Yellow '79 spit wired by a trained marmot; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00068.html (7,613 bytes)
18. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>; Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 01:17:13 -0700; I wonder how many crumple zones are on your average Rolls??? Joe Curry -- "If you can't excel with talent, triumph with effort." -- Dave Weinbaum in National Enquirer; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00069.html (7,647 bytes)
19. Re: Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: Patrick Barber <sailnbail@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 18:45:07 -0400; Joe, Seattle is a bit toooo far from Detroit. It may have been worth 800 to 1000 mile drive, but not 2000 miles (4000 Round trip). Thanks for the offer on the frame. With the help of the body shop ow; /html/spitfires/1998-08/msg00115.html (8,171 bytes)
20. Spit safety question... (score: 1): Author: gsmith@cvn.net (gsmith); Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 21:58:35 -0400; My wife is concerned about strapping our 18-month old son into his car seat in the Spitfire's passenger seat. Any words of encouragement, etc. for her? She's concerned about the safety and stability; /html/spitfires/1998-07/msg00347.html (7,379 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]