- This topic has 200 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 4 months ago by svelte.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 23, 2009 at 8:43 AM #436348July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #435676dbapigParticipant
[quote=svelte]
IIHS provides a comprehensive test of frontal,side, and rear impact test and soon to be evaluated roof strength.[/quote]
Talking about roof strength reminds me of a rental minivan I rented in Oahu. I rented a Chevrolet Uplander (not sure about the model) few years ago there. When I picked it up at the airport I didn’t notice any damage. However during the week I noticed that the roof of the minivan was caved in. It looked like someone had loaded a heavy suitcase or something onto the roof and caused the external roof to cave in. I noticed it only because the root of the minivan was below my line of sight as I was coming into the parking lot.
The cave-in wasn’t noticeable from inside of the van.
The rental agency workers probably didn’t notice the damage either because your eye level has to be well above the roof to see it. I assume they usually look for damages around bumpers, sides etc, not the roof of a minivan.
I wonder which unfortunately soul got blamed for the damage.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #435882dbapigParticipant[quote=svelte]
IIHS provides a comprehensive test of frontal,side, and rear impact test and soon to be evaluated roof strength.[/quote]
Talking about roof strength reminds me of a rental minivan I rented in Oahu. I rented a Chevrolet Uplander (not sure about the model) few years ago there. When I picked it up at the airport I didn’t notice any damage. However during the week I noticed that the roof of the minivan was caved in. It looked like someone had loaded a heavy suitcase or something onto the roof and caused the external roof to cave in. I noticed it only because the root of the minivan was below my line of sight as I was coming into the parking lot.
The cave-in wasn’t noticeable from inside of the van.
The rental agency workers probably didn’t notice the damage either because your eye level has to be well above the roof to see it. I assume they usually look for damages around bumpers, sides etc, not the roof of a minivan.
I wonder which unfortunately soul got blamed for the damage.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #436202dbapigParticipant[quote=svelte]
IIHS provides a comprehensive test of frontal,side, and rear impact test and soon to be evaluated roof strength.[/quote]
Talking about roof strength reminds me of a rental minivan I rented in Oahu. I rented a Chevrolet Uplander (not sure about the model) few years ago there. When I picked it up at the airport I didn’t notice any damage. However during the week I noticed that the roof of the minivan was caved in. It looked like someone had loaded a heavy suitcase or something onto the roof and caused the external roof to cave in. I noticed it only because the root of the minivan was below my line of sight as I was coming into the parking lot.
The cave-in wasn’t noticeable from inside of the van.
The rental agency workers probably didn’t notice the damage either because your eye level has to be well above the roof to see it. I assume they usually look for damages around bumpers, sides etc, not the roof of a minivan.
I wonder which unfortunately soul got blamed for the damage.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #436274dbapigParticipant[quote=svelte]
IIHS provides a comprehensive test of frontal,side, and rear impact test and soon to be evaluated roof strength.[/quote]
Talking about roof strength reminds me of a rental minivan I rented in Oahu. I rented a Chevrolet Uplander (not sure about the model) few years ago there. When I picked it up at the airport I didn’t notice any damage. However during the week I noticed that the roof of the minivan was caved in. It looked like someone had loaded a heavy suitcase or something onto the roof and caused the external roof to cave in. I noticed it only because the root of the minivan was below my line of sight as I was coming into the parking lot.
The cave-in wasn’t noticeable from inside of the van.
The rental agency workers probably didn’t notice the damage either because your eye level has to be well above the roof to see it. I assume they usually look for damages around bumpers, sides etc, not the roof of a minivan.
I wonder which unfortunately soul got blamed for the damage.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #436443dbapigParticipant[quote=svelte]
IIHS provides a comprehensive test of frontal,side, and rear impact test and soon to be evaluated roof strength.[/quote]
Talking about roof strength reminds me of a rental minivan I rented in Oahu. I rented a Chevrolet Uplander (not sure about the model) few years ago there. When I picked it up at the airport I didn’t notice any damage. However during the week I noticed that the roof of the minivan was caved in. It looked like someone had loaded a heavy suitcase or something onto the roof and caused the external roof to cave in. I noticed it only because the root of the minivan was below my line of sight as I was coming into the parking lot.
The cave-in wasn’t noticeable from inside of the van.
The rental agency workers probably didn’t notice the damage either because your eye level has to be well above the roof to see it. I assume they usually look for damages around bumpers, sides etc, not the roof of a minivan.
I wonder which unfortunately soul got blamed for the damage.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #435685dbapigParticipant[quote=paramount]
I’d much rather put my family in a 5,500lb Ford Expedition than a Toyota Camry. An Expedition will generally smoke a Camry (or similiar) any day of the week.[/quote]True but this kind of idea troubles me. I mean I do respect you wanting to protect your family from harm but what about the other families driving in Camry (or similar)?
How would you feel if your 5,500lb SUV got tangled up with a smaller car and caused serious injury/death to a small child in the smaller car?
just a thought.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #435892dbapigParticipant[quote=paramount]
I’d much rather put my family in a 5,500lb Ford Expedition than a Toyota Camry. An Expedition will generally smoke a Camry (or similiar) any day of the week.[/quote]True but this kind of idea troubles me. I mean I do respect you wanting to protect your family from harm but what about the other families driving in Camry (or similar)?
How would you feel if your 5,500lb SUV got tangled up with a smaller car and caused serious injury/death to a small child in the smaller car?
just a thought.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #436212dbapigParticipant[quote=paramount]
I’d much rather put my family in a 5,500lb Ford Expedition than a Toyota Camry. An Expedition will generally smoke a Camry (or similiar) any day of the week.[/quote]True but this kind of idea troubles me. I mean I do respect you wanting to protect your family from harm but what about the other families driving in Camry (or similar)?
How would you feel if your 5,500lb SUV got tangled up with a smaller car and caused serious injury/death to a small child in the smaller car?
just a thought.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #436284dbapigParticipant[quote=paramount]
I’d much rather put my family in a 5,500lb Ford Expedition than a Toyota Camry. An Expedition will generally smoke a Camry (or similiar) any day of the week.[/quote]True but this kind of idea troubles me. I mean I do respect you wanting to protect your family from harm but what about the other families driving in Camry (or similar)?
How would you feel if your 5,500lb SUV got tangled up with a smaller car and caused serious injury/death to a small child in the smaller car?
just a thought.
July 23, 2009 at 10:37 AM #436454dbapigParticipant[quote=paramount]
I’d much rather put my family in a 5,500lb Ford Expedition than a Toyota Camry. An Expedition will generally smoke a Camry (or similiar) any day of the week.[/quote]True but this kind of idea troubles me. I mean I do respect you wanting to protect your family from harm but what about the other families driving in Camry (or similar)?
How would you feel if your 5,500lb SUV got tangled up with a smaller car and caused serious injury/death to a small child in the smaller car?
just a thought.
July 23, 2009 at 10:39 AM #435695Diego MamaniParticipantI was going to reply the exact same way that Itokuda did. If your friend wasn’t injured, then there was no need for the airbag to deploy in the first place.
July 23, 2009 at 10:39 AM #435902Diego MamaniParticipantI was going to reply the exact same way that Itokuda did. If your friend wasn’t injured, then there was no need for the airbag to deploy in the first place.
July 23, 2009 at 10:39 AM #436222Diego MamaniParticipantI was going to reply the exact same way that Itokuda did. If your friend wasn’t injured, then there was no need for the airbag to deploy in the first place.
July 23, 2009 at 10:39 AM #436294Diego MamaniParticipantI was going to reply the exact same way that Itokuda did. If your friend wasn’t injured, then there was no need for the airbag to deploy in the first place.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.