Ford Focus 120 MPH Crash Test

Submitted by: MrAtari 5 years ago in Science

BAM! You"re dead... But it is in a spectacular way
There are 41 comments:
Male 26
That`s a nice convenient compact car for shopping.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Wow that looks mighty painful.
0
Reply
Male 2,424
oooh fat cats with tv shows destroying cars the peoples republic of America could have used!
0
Reply
Female 1,283
You know what baffles me? When you see some idiot survive a 100 MPH crash, barely unscathed.

Then you see how badly people are...mangled, for lack of a better term in head-on collisions on highways and interstates, just cruising at around 50-60 MPH.
0
Reply
Male 106
i didnt fully understand that concept until i saw that episode of Mythbusters. so thank you physics!
0
Reply
Male 106
no it wouldnt. based on newtons 3rd law, which is that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. so two cars colliding at 120 Mph headon would still be like hitting a non moving wall because of the amount of force they throw forward is equal to what is pushed back. that is why the car stopped after the crash instead of continuing in either direction. 120---> <---120 then <--- 120 120--->
0
Reply
Male 289
well, actually, a car going 120 hitting a wall thats not moving would simulate 2 cars going 60 in a H.O.C. 2 cars goinf 120 each hitting would cause the force impact of 240Mph.

OMG facts
0
Reply
Male 361
In theory, obviously head on collisions don`t tend to be so clean cut
0
Reply
Male 361
When a car hits another car head on, both cars come to a full stop in the same way, each car goes from 60mph to 0mph. They explained the reason for the force is the deceleration.

A head on collision between 2 cars would not double the force for each car, rather both cars would experience the force of 0-60 in however many milliseconds.
0
Reply
Male 3,322
Everyone`s talking about the Mythbusters and the science behind this. When I saw this video I thought about the Mythbusters, too, but about the rocket car sled episode. Where the rocket sled goes into the compact car, and then through it, and there is no compact car left. The front half of this focus was kind of like that.
0
Reply
Male 2,790
mythbusters did it
0
Reply
Male 2,033
@Quackor


You...aren`t so smart, are you? For the brain dead, it explains at the start of the video that it replicates two cars hitting one another head on.

Only an idiot can`t comprehend the purpose of crash tests, wtf is your life supposed to accomplish?
0
Reply
Male 2,855
only a complete idiot crashes 90 degrees into a wall, wtf are these tests supposed to accomplish
0
Reply
Male 588
vegascartman, HolyGod and everyone else claiming that head-on collision of 2 cars traveling at 60 mph is the same as one car hitting a stationary wall at 120 mph: you are wrong. They even tested that on Mythbusters, when will you learn already?

inb4 MYTHBUSTERS ISN`T REAL SCIENCE, etc.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
Yeah,,, they could walk away from that :P
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Uhhhh...anyone else catch the error in their math? If a car hits a wall at 120mph, that DOESN`T mean you are simulating TWO cars hitting head-on at 120mph each, as they suggested in the first few seconds of the video. Each car should be simulated going 60mph hence, the same as 1 car hitting a stationary wall at 120.[/quote]
Actually, their math is correct. Hitting another car going the same speed is the same as hitting a wall since in either case, your car is stopped cold.

When 2 cars of equal mass collide head-on, you can add the speeds to get the equivalent of hitting a parked car of equal mass. However, a parked car will recoil and absorb half of the energy of the collision. When you hit an immovable object, you absorb ALL the energy.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Forgive the stupid question, but force is equal to mass x acceleration right? So does that mean there is technically no measurable force on the wall because it doesn`t change speed? How does that work?[/quote]

Technically, the wall DOES accelerate. However, since it is effectively part of the earth, the acceleration is imparted to the entire earth. So in your equation F = ma, or F/m = a, if you have a very large m (~6 x 10^24 kg) you end up with a very small a. A quick calculation shows that at the moment of impact, the earth sped up by ~6 x 10^21 m/s

Next time, give me the car, and I`ll tell you what would happen.
0
Reply
Male 734
Uhhhh...anyone else catch the error in their math? If a car hits a wall at 120mph, that DOESN`T mean you are simulating TWO cars hitting head-on at 120mph each, as they suggested in the first few seconds of the video. Each car should be simulated going 60mph hence, the same as 1 car hitting a stationary wall at 120.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]Forgive the stupid question, but force is equal to mass x acceleration right? So does that mean there is technically no measurable force on the wall because it doesn`t change speed? How does that work?[/quote]

Technically, the wall DOES accelerate. However, since it is effectively part of the earth, the acceleration is imparted to the entire earth. So your equation F = ma, or F/m = a, if you have a very large m (~6 x 10^24 kg) you end up with a very small a.

Next time, give me the car, and I`ll tell you what would happen.
0
Reply
Male 11,740
At least the back two wheels survived. That`s something, right?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Forgive the stupid question, but force is equal to mass x acceleration right? So does that mean there is technically no measurable force on the wall because it doesn`t change speed? How does that work?[/quote]

It`s not a stupid question. It`s a good question. Here`s my take on it:

i) The force on the wall is equal to the force on the object hitting it. Newton`s third law. Newtonian physics is an approximation, but at these speeds it`s an extremely accurate one.

ii) If the wall is attached securely enough for it to not break, it is in effect part of the Earth. The mass is therefore extremely high, so the acceleration is negligable.
0
Reply
Male 8,132
Forgive the stupid question, but force is equal to mass x acceleration right? So does that mean there is technically no measurable force on the wall because it doesn`t change speed? How does that work?
0
Reply
Male 38,507

Angilion, is "The Bing Bang Theory" tv show based on your life? Which one are you?

0
Reply
Male 71
It looks like it only got halfway into platform 9 3/4.
0
Reply
Male 559
The issue of 120/240 all deals with how much force each body absorbs. If a car is travelling at 120 m/s and a wall is travelling at -120 m/s, when they hit, the car receives an impact as if it were travelling 240 m/s. In the case of two identical cars, one travelling 120 m/s and the other travelling -120 m/s, when they impact, they each absorb half of the total force of impact, and so each is damaged as if they hit a wall at 120 m/s.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Hey nerds! Can`t you just enjoy watching the crash without popping your intelectual zits by disecting the video for it`s Newtonian accuracy?

Lighten up.[/quote]

Physics is part of the enjoyment, if you understand it. Any idiot can enjoy destruction without having any idea what`s going on. It takes a better educated idiot to gain additional enjoyment from having some understanding of it.

In short, what you see as a detraction because you don`t understand it is an addition to those who do understand it. The lack is in you, not them.
0
Reply
Male 38,507

Hey nerds! Can`t you just enjoy watching the crash without popping your intelectual zits by disecting the video for it`s Newtonian accuracy?

Lighten up.
0
Reply
Male 2,419
@Bottleofrum
A dicky ticker is slang for heart problems..
0
Reply
Male 246
@dingdingdong no that`s wrong. actually when two cars going the same speed hit each other, it`s the same as 1 car hitting a wall at half the speed. here`s a link for proof, brought to you by the mythbusters. http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbusters-mythssion-control/ Watch the "crash force high speed" video (the 6th video down) and the "100 MPH Crash" video (the last video on the list)

So that being said, the video on IAB will be equivalent to two cars traveling at 240 MPH in a head on crash.
0
Reply
Male 5
@dingdingdong That is untrue. Newton`s third law, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction disproves that. If you still don`t believe it. Mythbusters
0
Reply
Female 2,674
F*cking terrifying. This is why I don`t drive, and I hate riding in cars for that matter... I wish people took driving more seriously. Maybe after they had been to as many funerals as I have for people killed in car accidents they would think differently. Or not.

Sorry to be a bummer... on a lighter note: I just realized I`m going to be that crazy old lady who walks everywhere and yells at the young kids for driving too fast. *shakes fist in air* Hehe.
0
Reply
Female 249
@DingDingDong You clearly need to watch more Mythbusters
0
Reply
Male 265
"Ummmm, I`m no physics professor but the force of an object traveling 120MPH into a stationary object is NOT equivalent to the force of two objects traveling 120MPH each head on."

It all depends on the delta (change) in velocity of the car in question.

If the mass of the two cars are roughly the same then both cars will go from 60mph to 0mph (delta-v of 60mph) ending in a tangled mess of metal at rest and you would be correct. If however you have a Ford Focus going at 60mph running into a cement truck going at 60mph in the opposite direction... due to the differences in mass the cement truck would win out and the tiny focus would go from 60mph to maybe -45mph (negative for reversal of direction) leading to a delta-v of 105mph. The end result would be similar to the video above.

To get even closer to the intended result you would want to compare a Focus to a freight train.

TLDR: No, not the same as two cars crashing at 60mph head on.
0
Reply
Male 163
wtf is a dicky ticker?

0
Reply
Male 179
Actually I think the maths of this works out to a car traveling at 120mph crashing into a concrete wall.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
dicky ticker = bad heart
dicky=diseased or unsound
ticker=heart
0
Reply
Female 1,743
worst facial hair, ever.
please, guys, don`t do it.


Pretty awesome, anyway.
0
Reply
Male 1,511
Cool test. But it`s equivalent to two cars both going 60MPH crashing head on. Not both going 120MPH like he said.
0
Reply
Male 4,902
"Sensitive viewers and those with a dicky ticker"

WTF?
0
Reply
Male 8,132
Equivalent to: "2 cars colliding head on whilst both travelling at 120 miles per hour"

Ummmm, I`m no physics professor but the force of an object traveling 120MPH into a stationary object is NOT equivalent to the force of two objects traveling 120MPH each head on.
0
Reply
Male 1,569
Link: Ford Focus 120 MPH Crash Test [Rate Link] - BAM! You`re dead... But it is in a spectacular way
0
Reply