In article ,
Bob Hobden wrote:

Hmm. Did you actually investigate whether they were any safer, or
were merely claimed to be by people with an interest in doing so?

Always interesting to check the actual crash test results if looking for a
"safe" car ....

True, but whether they are likely to get you into a crash is FAR
more important! At one stage, Volvos had a very bad reputation
for that, due to a tendency to lose control under poor conditions.
And it wasn't just the incompetence of the drivers, though that
didn't exactly help ....

However, that was decades back. What the recent situation is, I
haven't a clue.

That is the old and continuing argument, do you want a safe car to crash in
or one that is so nimble it avoids the crash in the first place.

No, not at all. The situation was that they actually caused the
crashes, by being so unforgiving that most drivers couldn't keep
them on the road, and so they needed the safety features merely
to be no more dangerous than other cars!

Nimbleness had nothing to do with it - quite the contrary, in fact,
because it was instability that caused the trouble,


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.