Just curious, has anyone ever had a serious RTA in a RR and how well protected were you?

Have seen the NCAP results video and they seem to fair quite well in a nice orchestrated situation but was wondering what they are like in "real accidents"

Well, there's always this - http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-25943171 Got - 2017 SDV8 Autobiography in Loire Blue
Had- 2008 TDV8 Vogue SE in Java black
Had - 2007 S/C in Stornoway Grey

Or this

Katash wrote:

Just curious, has anyone ever had a serious RTA in a RR

I'm sure thousands of people world wide have had serious accidents in them. Maybe not on this board though.

Why are you asking the question though? Are you thinking of buying? or are you just planning on having an accident in one?

One problem i can see with your question in terms of research purposes, is that it depends on the circumstances of the accident. I mean if you're in a RR (or any 4x4) and you're in a multi car pile up with 2 minis, a peugot 107, a smart car and 3 ford fiesta's chances are you're going to come off better than all the others.

If the same crash has a couple of artics you might not fare so well.

If you roll one down a mountain side, then it probably just depends on how far down you go before you stop.

To answer your question,

Katash wrote:

Just curious

Then i'd say accident survivability is probably better than average, being as the average is heavily weighted by lots of small hatchbacks. Simply because you're bigger than half the vehicles on the road.

There's a lot of metal to crumple up before what ever you've crashed into gets to you and there are plenty of airbags in the car.

It's probably better still for the armoured version.

Generally, 4x4s are really not as good in a crash as you would think. Accident survival is all about how the energy from the impact is absorbed. Just because you are in a big 4x4 and surrounded by lots of metal can be more of a risk than a benefit.

This video is worth a watch (and yes, I know the Disco has a ladder chassis, we are just taking broad principles...)


The other 4x4 issue is that of stability and the high centre of gravity resulting in a possible rollover when changing direction quickly.

All of that said, I guess that it's all down to luck on the day and how many lives you have left. This guy walked free and probably won't drive anything else!

Quote:

Generally, 4x4s are really not as good in a crash as you would think. Accident survival is all about how the energy from the impact is absorbed. Just because you are in a big 4x4 and surrounded by lots of metal can be more of a risk than a benefit.

As i said though, it depends what else is involved. Your photos for example, it's with a 40 ton artic, the driver in that is surrounded by even more metal with an even higher centre of gravity. I'd bet the lorry driver was more or less unharmed, would probably have been different if he'd rear ended another lorry. Don't get me wrong I know what you're getting at with energy absorption, however i would think the Range Rover being designed with large crumple zones has more metal to crumple and absorb the impact? The Smart car (the original one), was apparently pretty tough in a crash, with very little intrusion into the passenger compartment, however there is very little metal around it to crumple and absorb impacts so occupants suffer serious internal injuries.

Physics comes into it too. The lorry driver in those photos probably barely felt that impact. Much like you'd barely feel a cyclist crashing into a Range Rover. But you'd definitely feel a bridge if you hit it at 70 no matter what you were driving, if i'm going to hit a bridge at 70, i'd rather do it in the Range Rover than a Fiesta.

I would have to admit though i think perhaps the armoured RR probably has it's crumple zones compromised with armour.

ps. the upper tail gate on that one, looks undamaged, was it rust free?

Odds are better than average but a stupid question really .You can trip over and die of your injuries or fall out of a plane at 20,000 ft and walk away with bruises.Whatever you do if you value your motor and you havnt wrecked it don't tell anyone you have a stiff neck because the fire brigade will cut off the roof and do that for you!!!

That's what i was getting at Rangeyman, but you've summed it up so much better than i did.

So sorry to have posted such a stupid question, was looking for some first hand experience stories - thought that was pretty clear in the OP.

Lost interest in the subject now.

Sorry for causing any offence, but your question was fairly wide ranging, which is why I asked your reasons for asking.

Against a normal car, a modern LR is pretty invincible.

I know it's a D3 not an RR, but this link really shows the difference in a high speed horror crash:
http://www.4x4community.co.za/forum/showthread.php?t=102495

As you can see, the D3 is heavily damaged but mostly intact inside. the Audi, probably the same age or newer, is completely unrecognisable apart from one corner NW060

"Red Shed" - 1982 Series 3 88" County Station Wagon
"Spirit of Great Britain" - Rolls Royce Meteor V12 engine
ZG875 - Westland Sea King (cockpit section)
"Carly Rae Jeepsen" - 2006 Jeep Commander 5.7 Hemi
"Pride Of The Road" - 1/4-scale Marshall traction engine - sold
"Georgina" - 2000 Discovery 2 TD5 ES - sold
"Windsor" - 2005 Range Rover Vogue 4.4 - dead

I crashed a new focus, hit a lamp post side on at speed, walked away without a scratch. Very safe car. And i don't think its a stupid topic, intact a very sensible one, or they wouldn't carry out nap ratings tests.

Steve You remind me of a young me, not much younger mind, perhaps even a little older!

Just for reference I found the Australian crash test info

http://www.howsafeisyourcar.com.au/2004/La...l-TDiesel/


and then I found the European one

http://www.euroncap.com/en/results/land-rover/range-rover/15574

there is a pdf report file on both but I note they both use the same photo