# Effects of 2005 Pedestrian Regulations on design



## vehigal (Oct 30, 2004)

According to Bob Lutz: http://www.autofieldguide.com/articles/030401.html

ON THE EFFECT OF 2005 EUROPEAN PEDESTRIAN SAFETY REGS ON DESIGN
The 2005 pedestrian protection legislating in Europe is just going to radically change the look of automobiles in Europe post-2005.

Cars like the Mercedes 500SL or the McLaren Mercedes-all of these are going to have to be radically reconfigured in the next generation because you need 10 cm between the sheet metal and the first hard spot under the hood. If you can imagine the Nomad, Curve or Solstice with the hood higher, I dare say it would spoil the design concept considerably. Which is one reason why I think the Volkswagen roadster that was shown as a concept in Frankfurt was mid-engine. That way the front end is empty. That is a huge enabler to meeting the law.

The next generation of European cars is going to look different. You can see a precursor to that in the Audi design: very horizontal hoods and then sharp, flat front end. A little bit like the new Chryslers. The 300C and Dodge Magnum. I asked Dieter Zetsche [president and CEO of Chrysler Group], 'Did you guys do this front end because of pedestrian protection? It looks like they would meet European pedestrian protection.' Dieter said no, they don't quite meet it. But that is the kind of styling you will see a lot of until people come up with the active devices, but that's years away. It takes all the sensor technology and you also need a 20 cm band around the front of the car that's absolutely flat so that if you hit a person's leg there's no stress concentration. They want the impact stress spread over as large a surface as possible so that the pedestrian legs get swept out from under him without breaking. They want the pedestrian to rotate and hit the soft hood that would absorb the impact.
-----


----------



## pod13 (Dec 20, 2001)

Maybe they could just slap a cowcatcher to the front? :dunno:


----------



## vehigal (Oct 30, 2004)

I'll make mine M-tech!


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

Does the E90 meet this spec, or was it designed before it?


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Don't worry, Chris B. and his team will find a way to meet those criterias with their gorgeous designs.


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

Alex Baumann said:


> Don't worry, Chris B. and his team will find a way to meet those criterias with their gorgeous designs.


Bangle bonnet?


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Cliff3 said:


> Bangle bonnet?


:rofl:

I don't even want to imagine how that might look like


----------



## Artslinger (Sep 2, 2002)

Europeans... :tsk:


----------



## vehigal (Oct 30, 2004)

Dawg90 said:


> Does the E90 meet this spec, or was it designed before it?


"Auto makers will not be able to sell new vehicles in the European Union after Oct. 1, 2005, unless they conduct strict tests to prove their vehicles meet the new pedestrian impact rules. Source: http://bohr.winthrop.edu/faculty/arvidson/link_to_webpages/courses/phys250/Pedestrian impact.doc

What's in store around 2010: 
"... fiber optics around the front of the cars. The system can differentiate between a fire hydrant and a pedestrian and if a pedestrian is involved the *system instantaneously raises the hood to catch the pedestrian*. Raising the hood can stop the pedestrian from striking the engine block beneath the hood." Source: http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7676


----------



## vehigal (Oct 30, 2004)

*Perhaps Bangle isn't to blame after all...*

"Experts say *the Honda Civic is the car that conforms best to the stringent new rules*. "If we are forced to make something that looks like a Honda Civic we will not be able to sell it," says Aston.

By 2010 pedestrian safety rules will be tightened further and may result in cars with *larger front overhangs *, higher, *sloping bonnets * and bigger "crumple zones."

Experts agree bonnets will have to be raised by as much as three inches. The result will be a higher seating position for the driver to ensure good visibility over the raised bonnet, and therefore a higher roof too.

That *will add bulk to the sports car's traditional design * that "wraps" the front-end metalwork around the engine to reduce wind drag and keep the car's stance low and sleek for maximum agility." http://www.walk.com.au/pedestriancouncil/Page.asp?PageID=607

Sad for car lovers  , great for pedestrians...

I wonder if even Bangle is :bawling: over this...


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

> 'Outside





> North America, pedestrian deaths are a far higher percentage of overall traffic fatalities. In EU countries, one-fifth of all traffic deaths are pedestrians hit by a vehicle. In densely populated countries such as the U.K., the rate is as high as 30%. In total, more than 7,000 pedestrians are killed every year in Europe.
> 
> In Japan, nearly 2,700 are killed, amounting to 30% of all traffic fatalities.'
> 
> 'By comparison, a study released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. in March revealed that pedestrian deaths are just 11% of all motor vehicle crashes in the U.S. '


 

As a side note, I guess we Americans aren't as bad drivers as a lot of people accuse us of being ...


----------



## Jever (Apr 16, 2003)

Don't they teach you to look both ways before crossing the street over there? :rofl:


----------



## Artslinger (Sep 2, 2002)

Jever said:


> Don't they teach you to look both ways before crossing the street over there? :rofl:


Hey it is their right as a careless pedestrain to be hit by a car and not break a leg.

How about some regulations from the lawmakers that would really save lives... like pedestrians will be required to wear a helmet and hold a big red flag when crossing the street.


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

AF-RX8 said:


> As a side note, I guess we Americans aren't as bad drivers as a lot of people accuse us of being ...


Either that, or nobody walks.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Cliff3 said:


> Either that, or nobody walks.


I will probably take the second suggestion. It is not possible to compare the pedestrian behaviours of countries with population densities whole orders of magnitudes apart (for example 31 people per sq km in the USA plays England's 380 - which is by no means the most densely populated country in Europe). Cars and people have to share an awful lot of space - more, I wager, than most Americans would consider safe or even acceptable. (London metropolitan region: 12,300 people per square mile, on average.)

I don't much like the state meddling in car body design - it's a car, it's dangerous to hit people with one, whatever its shape - but it is a reflection of the environment, not dissimilar to the mandate for lower exhaust emissions. If you don't like it, don't buy a European car - no-one's forcing you.


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

andy_thomas said:


> I don't much like the state meddling in car body design - it's a car, it's dangerous to hit people with one, whatever its shape - but it is a reflection of the environment, not dissimilar to the mandate for lower exhaust emissions. If you don't like it, don't buy a European car - no-one's forcing you.


I'd be willing to bet after the first year or two it goes into effect not many are even going to realize there was a design compromise


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

AF-RX8 said:


> I'd be willing to bet after the first year or two it goes into effect not many are even going to realize there was a design compromise


There is an element to this, yes. The latest Honda Civic - a mostly world-market car, I think - has very good pedestrian protection, and looks none the worse for it. One of the worst cars for this is the Audi TT - its engine hangs out beyond the front wheels, and the nose cone has no compliance. Then again the chances of TT's sales having been affected by this are rather like its pedestrian safety score - a big fat zero.


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

Why not more strigient laws about jay walking (crossing against lights and not in cross walks) and tougher laws against hitting pedestrians who are crossing legally?

Change the behavior, NOT the instruments.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Pinecone said:


> Why not more strigient laws about jay walking (crossing against lights and not in cross walks) and tougher laws against hitting pedestrians who are crossing legally?
> 
> Change the behavior, NOT the instruments.


Fair question. But have you ever driven through a cramped European city? The entire road is a place to cross. You could not possibly legislate against jaywalking. Consider also that the laws vary greatly from country to country, and in some places are impossble to implement.


----------



## xspeedy (Apr 10, 2003)

Call me insensitive, but I think this just goes beyond reason for safety. How about we just cover the whole car with an airbag to cushion impacts of any kind?

Reminds me of one of the Naked Gun movies, where they wear the body sized condoms for safe sex.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

xspeedy said:


> Call me insensitive, but I think this just goes beyond reason for safety. How about we just cover the whole car with an airbag to cushion impacts of any kind?
> 
> Reminds me of one of the Naked Gun movies, where they wear the body sized condoms for safe sex.


...or one of the Sylvester Stallone movies, where the entire car fills with foam when it crashes.

At the end of the day, a good or bad NCAP rating for pedestrian safety quite rightly means little to the average buyer, and is only a guide. mandating some form of major design restriction like this is years away - which means never (hopefully). In urban contexts I can see the need to remove stuff which will do significant damage - bull bars, bonnet mascots and suchlike.


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

Actually I am IN a European city now. And I have driven in European cities. And have been off and on over the last month or so. At least in Spain, Belgium, and France, the majority of people cross at the cross walks, and wait for the light. And if they don't wait for the light, they do move rather quickly.

Cars do tend to stop for people in the crosswalks when the lights say to cross.

So it would be a slight change to make the penalties more severe for infractions of the rules already in place. Basically if you get hit crossing in the middle of the street or against the light, tough, you deserve it. If you hit someone in a crosswalk with the light, you are in deep trouble.


----------

