[quote=flu][quote=jpinpb]It says something for the BMW safety. [/quote]
…the car car was lower to the ground and probably suffered the brunt of of the damage… [/quote]
which is what JP was saying, the BMW was safer. ?
Don’t know if anyone has noticed, but Toyota has been running ads at the bottom of the front page of the Union-Trib lately…I counted the word “safe” 7 times in the ad that ran a few weeks ago! It’s almost as if they are trying to brainwash Americans into believing it.
And then this happens…[/quote]
Again, my interpretation of what jpinpb was inferring was, since this LF-a got trashed when it hit the bimmer head on, all toyotas are unsafe…And my point was considering this car was
1)prototype car (which remains to be seen if all the safety equipement was in there)
2)driven by a 67 year old who probably couldn’t withstand an accident if this magnitude versus the two younger folks in the bimmer
3)the car being lower to the ground and seemingly clobbered by a higher ride both probably going at ridiculous speeds
it neither supports or refutes the claim that this incident alone that all toyotas are unsafe.
By this logic, if a Carrera GT ran plowed into a Hummer (which I pretty confident that GT would be totaled), I don’t think one could generalize that all Porsches are less safe that GM cars, or that all GM cars are safer than Porsches.
If this was a question in the GMAT critical reasoning section, I’m pretty sure selecting that answer would be incorrect 🙂
If you want to question the “safety” of Toyotas, because of all the unintended acceleration/the issues of the Prii/the shody build quality of Tundras and Tacomas, I couldn’t agree more with you.
My personal bias are that Germans build safer cars than either the japanese or domestic, but that’s my completely unsubstantiated opinion/bias, as I have never totaled a car (yet) either on a road or track (though I have come pretty close to it 10 years ago, which I probably don’t want to repeat on the track)…
