Uh, actually, body on frame is MUCH stronger than unibody. This is why trucks still use this technology. Unibody technology is just now catching up with the rigidity and load carrying ability of body on frame construction. For example, my Wrangler (body on frame) does considerably better than a Cherokee (unibody) in all types of accidents yet my Wrangler has no real doors or body to speak of.
Brice again in defense of the Monster -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Austin [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2000 9:37 PM To: W. Lee Hendrick Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: SUVs & SAVs > Actually, that's not quite true anymore. The latest studies >have found that SUVs are less safe (more injuries/fatalities) in >single vehicle accidents, while being a little more safe in >multi-vehicle accidents. The advantage in multi-vehicle accidents is >probably due to their weight advantage, while the greater injuries in >single vehicle accidents is probably due, in large part, to >roll-overs and loss-of-control. What none of these studies take into >account, however, is accident avoidance. SUV's have longer braking >distances and far worse handling compared to even an average family >sedan or station wagon. I would much rather be able to avoid an >accident in the first place, than get by saved by completely crushing >the poor guy in the smaller car. > > I drive much slower when behind the wheel of my girlfriend's >Pathfinder, but I still feel much safer in my GTI. Part of the problem with SUVs is that most still use body on frame construction rather than a unit body. The grand cherokee, ML320 and X5 are all probably safer due to the unibody.... ************** Patrick Austin [email protected] (617)493-6636 ************** _____________ List Sponsor: http://www.netsville.com To remove yourself from this list, send mail to [email protected] with 'unsubscribe a2_16v' in the body of your message See us on the web at http://www.a2-16v.com Visit the 16V Homepage at http://www.gti16v.org
