Crash standards ruining cars?

OilHammer

Hard Core 4+
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
1,795
Location
Denver
I finally had a free day and thought it would be fun to go crawl around an Ineos and drive one. To cut right to the point- my overall opinion was thumbs down but not because of how things drove or closed, it was that I can’t see out of it!

Things that were likely ruined by crash standards:
A pillars are massive and the windshield is too short. That wouldn’t necessarily be a problem except that it’s so far away from your head your view window is decreased.
B pillar is 12” wide or so. Again not a problem except that I have to run the seat back enough that looking left puts the B pillar square in my face.
Lots of headroom…but the windows are lower than your head! I’m assuming rollover protection is too blame here.
Rearward vision- almost zero. Between the spare and the weird offset thick barn door, you can’t see squat. Is rollover really requiring the barn doors to be that thick? Old 70 series weren’t bad but this is.

Most of my complaints could be fixed if I could move the pedal box and seat forward but you can’t because the engine is almost a mid engine. That long nose and half the cylinders are under the dash with a nice void between grill and radiator. Pedestrian impact zone I’m assuming.

It’s too bad really, there’s much to like about that platform but I just can’t bring myself to drive something so coffin like. I guess the 100 series was the last cruiser you could see out of!
 

mcgaskins

Rising Sun Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
2,103
Location
Denver, CO
It's an interesting point, and it's true that crash standards have generally increased the size of pillars and added weight for things like crumple zones, sensors, etc. I would argue the Ineos Grenadier's visibility issues are more related to the overall design language however because they leaned so hard into the nostalgic look over practicality. For instance, if Ineos truly designed around crash safety, it wouldn't have a solid front axle which significantly lowers crash worthiness and creates a long list of compromises for on-road performance over off-road performance, cool factor, and other niche desires.

Personally I still find the visibility in the 200 excellent (I'm probably just used to it after driving one for a decade) even though it has massive A pillars relative to other Land Cruisers, but then when I get in the 80, it feels like I'm in a giant fishbowl in a good way. But then I look at those tiny A pillars and realize the large evolution of design in 2 generations. With how crazy people drive these days, I really appreciate modern crash safety as long as it isn't too intrusive.
 

OilHammer

Hard Core 4+
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
1,795
Location
Denver
Could be. I’d have pushed that engine forward, which moves the pedal box up and gets rid of the floor bump on the passenger side. That would fix half the visibility issues for me and given second row passengers more room. Where that engine is now kills all manner of packaging from people to maintenance. Maybe the hot ticket is a dirt cheap one with a blown motor. Swap a 100 drivetrain in and wind up with something cool.
 

OilHammer

Hard Core 4+
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
1,795
Location
Denver
No doubt weight has something to do with the test criteria but compare a 2025 WRX A and B pillar to an Ineos. I think they could have done more to slim those down and still be safe to meet the criteria.. Regarding the 60 in a crash- go look up Project x? from Gary Waggoner. He put a 62 on an 80 frame and rolled it soon after. That was all it took for him to be done with the platform. I don’t know if a cage would have been better or worse.
 

nuclearlemon

Hard Core 4+
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
8,767
Location
windy wyo
Other days I drive by a crash with full airbag deployment and wonder if that impact would have killed me.
Nope, you would've lived since you have great crumple zones...thanks to all the new cars being built for being great crumple zones. ;)
 

SteveH

Hard Core 4+
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
3,223
Location
Colo Springs
When my buddy (driving my former '87 FJ60) was hit head-on at 65 by a modern (front wheel drive) Monte Carlo, the guy in the Monte opened the door and walked away. My buddy spent about a year recovering - no broken bones, but it rang his bell quite hard. The Monte (as you may recall) is a rolling hunk of crush space with air bags - the perfect sacrificial heap. The FJ60 is not.

Having said that, when I took my youngling co-workers to lunch in my FJ62 they seemingly all said 'wow, you sure can see out of this vehicle'.
 

Attachments

  • front_view.jpg
    front_view.jpg
    121.5 KB · Views: 99
  • left_front_closeup.jpg
    left_front_closeup.jpg
    112.5 KB · Views: 109
  • left_front_quarter.jpg
    left_front_quarter.jpg
    112.9 KB · Views: 107

OilHammer

Hard Core 4+
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
1,795
Location
Denver
lol. My time underneath one was an eye opener. I could see the yokes were at max angle with just the weight off the tires. And the plastic oil pan…yikes.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6659.jpeg
    IMG_6659.jpeg
    1.1 MB · Views: 116
  • IMG_6657.jpeg
    IMG_6657.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 101
  • IMG_6654.jpeg
    IMG_6654.jpeg
    1.4 MB · Views: 113

OilHammer

Hard Core 4+
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
1,795
Location
Denver
I will say that some of the components had the beef stick thrown at them. Like the gorgeous exhaust and tie rods. Makes the few things like exposed bolts at the transfer make you scratch your head.
 

Corbet

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
10,524
Location
Durango, Colorado
When my buddy (driving my former '87 FJ60) was hit head-on at 65 by a modern (front wheel drive) Monte Carlo, the guy in the Monte opened the door and walked away. My buddy spent about a year recovering - no broken bones, but it rang his bell quite hard. The Monte (as you may recall) is a rolling hunk of crush space with air bags - the perfect sacrificial heap. The FJ60 is not.

Having said that, when I took my youngling co-workers to lunch in my FJ62 they seemingly all said 'wow, you sure can see out of this vehicle'.
And this is why we gave Bridger an Impreza as his first car. As much as I’d love for him to enjoy an old cruiser as a daily he can drive my 80 on occasion.
 

devo

Rising Sun Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2024
Messages
286
Location
NoCo
I like this thread, all so true with our National Highway safety standards.
What is it like driving a 250 Prado or GX550, can you see out of them or only rely on cameras? I know in an LX600 or 700 you can see almost everything!

I’ve been driving 40’s for years and always thought of them being tanks, even in a crash. But now after riding in modern cars I think to myself jeez, all I have is a roll bar and a 3 point seat belt!
 
Back
Top