Thread: Defender Safety

I have no problem with my family driving around in a defender

I have seen some nasty accidents with them and they have come of better

After all we all know the crupple zone on a defender is on the car you hit. But then the defender is still in alot of countrys running on the series 2 test results under a loop hole which states that safety test only need to be redone if the bulk head changes. Which was the reason the 110 and 90 had the same size bulkhead but they had to put the spats on.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I regularly drive round with my (now adult) children and grandchildren in my 110, without qualms.

It is worth noting that both the accident rate and fatality rate for large four wheel drives is lower than for any other class of car, despite the fact that rollover rates are higher. In fact, recent injury and fatality rates (from insurance data) show no relation to safety features. (MUARC reports)

The likely reason for this is that the major effect of increased perceived safety is that drivers take more risks, helped by the fact that they tend to go along with increased insulation from the world outside the car. And as a result most Defender drivers drive slower and more carefully!

The fatality rate (and accident rate) have been decreasing ever since statistics started being collected. The only vehicle feature that has significantly shown up on this is seat belts. Major reasons for the decrease are probably better roads and a generally better driving attitude.

John

Originally Posted by austastar

Hi,
Hypothesising: replace front air bags with prominent sharp steel spikes.

Would the accident rate go up - or down!

Wondering, wondering.

cheers

No difference, but air bags have saved more lives in those crashes. Remember that it was normal for there to be a steering shaft fixed to the chassis for all vehicles until the 70's, then they became collapsible. There's your "prominent sharp steel spike".

Originally Posted by schmierer LR at singleton

it has be proven that airbags have killed people in crashes

I have heard that before but never seen the evidence. Usually I hear it uttered by those who claim that seat belts kill people too.

Frankly in an accident, if I were given the choice of air bags or none, I would take the airbags please. I have been in enough potentially serious accidents in my life to appreciate anything that is going to soften the blow.

Alan

Where are those UK accident statistics again??? They show that 90s/110s are some of the safest vehicles on UK roads.

As JDNSW points out, there is very little correlation between the NCAP-type test results and real world accident stats (at least for 4x4s).

Have a look at this http://www.racq.com.au/__data/assets...afety_2010.pdf

The Disco 1 and 2 is safer than a Patrol (which has always crashed poorly) AND the Landcruiser.

I have seen many accident aftermaths in my line of work. Weight is critical. 4WD's - large - have that. That does not account for why the Disco for eg is stronger in a crash than the Patrol...that comes down to design and strength. The box chassis on the Disco and Defender are heavy and strong. Air bags are always of large benefit in a major prang. The ultimate protection in LR is the D3 - heavy and with massively strong construction AND all the air bags.

Side impact wise being above it all certainly helps...but if you get wacked int he side by another large vehicle you can be in trouble.

I think a Defender is strong. I would rather be in that than pretty much any sedan in most situations, but roll over wise wihtout a cage or barrier it can be an issue. Have a look at the Discovery in comparo in the top sides...I took out all the rear trim to get it ready for LPG tanks. Its a reverse tardis for a reason. It has a full outer skin and then a few inches in you have a full inner skin - its insane. I have not seen that in any other vehicle.

In terms of rear end prangs it has to be remembered that the rear of any vehicle is usually much stronger than th front...for eg i had a prado rear end me and wipe out most of the front end for 10 inches back and I had a crease in my rear placcy bumper.

Cheers

Only scare I have is a roll over. I have had a car side swip me and it left a dent in his rear piullar big enough for a small child to fit into. All I had was a small dent on the guard and a scratch on the bull bar.

I have seen a rangie do a multiple roll where the cargo barrier stopped it from beeing a serouse accident.
Also had friends crash a pulsar into the back of a truck. Would have been no hope for a front passenger, MR2 that lost control after a front tyre blew while going round a corner and dodging a roo. That car disintergrated into the tree it hit.

On Friday a car span out and hit a tree back first. you could not recognise what it was. Drive killed instantly while passenger airlifted. Defender would have survived the tree impact.

Real world data:

Although various 'theoretical' crash testing scenarios are popular in assessing car safety in UK the Department of Transport publish the actual level of road deaths in two-car injury accidents in each type of car. These statistics are available tabulated in the form of the "Cars: Make and Model: The Risk of Driver Injury in Great Britain" reports for 2003 and 2005, which are available from the link below:

[Cars: make and model: the risk of driver injury http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...s/carsmmrisk/]

The report does not address issues of
"active safety" or statistics of mortality and injuries in "single-vehicle accidents" (for instance, rollover).

Overall these statistics show a ten to one ratio of in-vehicle accident deaths between the least safe and most safe models of car.

The statistics show that for popular, lightly built cars occupants have a 6%–8% chance of death in a two car accident.(e.g. BMW 3 series 6%, mustang 8%, Honda Accord 6%). Traditional "safety cars" such as the Volvos halve that chance (Volvo 700 4% incidence of death, Volvo 900 3%).

Despite poor performance in theoretical tests and criticism from media pundits SUVs fare much better than 'safety cars' with the Jeep Cherokee and Toyota Land Cruiser giving 2% incidence of occupant death in actual two vehicle injury crashes. However, in multiple-vehicle crashes SUVs are probably between three (Bicycle Safety Almanac) and six (International Injury & Fatality Statistics) times more likely to kill the occupant of the other vehicle (car, cyclist, or pedestrian) than cars.

Overall the four best vehicles to be in are the Jaguar XJ series 1%, Mercedes-Benz S-Class / SEC 1%, Land Rover Defender 1% and Land Rover Discovery 1% .

Motorcyclist deaths within the England and Wales stand at 65% of the annual road death statistics, however scooters/mopeds up to 50cc only account to 3% of those deaths. Scooter/moped deaths where also founded that 2% of the scooter deaths were 17-19 year olds who had not taken the CBT (Compulsory Basic Training)

These statistics taken alone are incomplete. They do not take into account the demographics of drivers. The BMW 3 series and Subaru Impreza were both marketed as “performance cars” and more likely to be driven by young males, who were more likely as drivers to be involved (high speed) collisions. In contrast the Volvos were marketed as “safe” vehicles, bought and defensively driven by drivers with families. Similarly, neither Land Rovers were designed to be driven fast; speed being a major contributing factor to the seriousness of collisions. Therefore these are not straightforward guidance on which cars are “safe”.

It is important to note that these statistics relate to DRIVER deaths or injuries, not to passenger or pedestrian deaths or injuries.

(Statistics taken from DSA road deaths of 2005)

http://www.pibriefupdate.com/mags/latest/article9.php

Re the driver bit - this is necessary as most cars/accidents are single occupant. Btw - NCAP tests usually show the highest risk of injury is for the driver.

Ben,

I am a big believer in the theory that trucks that slow you down, improve your individual crash statistics. I love going slow in the Disco, changing gears and enjoying the drive and (lack of) pace...now in other vehicles such as my Accord Euro I feel like going harder..and of course higher speed usually leaves less room for error and higher speed accidents and just generally more chance of an accident (setting aside the prospect of falling asleep on long night trips at 100kph in the Honda...where faster keeps you alert).

Cheers