小车不安全？高速正面对撞的几率有多少？

除非故意杀人或自杀，哪有高速正面碰撞的，别瞎掰吗。
多数是失控兑上树兑上人屁股嘛，所以碰撞试验的结果还是可信的。

所有跟帖： 

• Well, many many people live outside of the city -mdgg- ♂ (483 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 05:57:01

• +1 -internuts- ♂ (0 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 06:40:42

• 40m/h is not high speed, it is common city drive! -bassman- ♂ (0 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 06:51:30

• 看看NHTSA的统计数据 -cys254- ♂ (255 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 07:27:48

• 数据:撞车是第一死因, 正面结果不好,斜角对撞可能更惨! -bassman- ♂ (0 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 09:40:43

• 所以说正面对撞的几率并不是很大，汽车安全性能不能只看 -woth- ♀ (253 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 11:04:43

• Well Well, if 38% deaths are due to collision with another car -once4all09- ♂ (316 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 11:31:57

• 你以为hwy都有隔离带啊，都一边八条道啊。 -杀雨- ♂ (146 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 09:27:12

• 就算如此，还有人打U turn, 上错方向呢 -biglow- ♂ (0 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 10:39:04

• The riskiest thing is "中间有虚线允许跨线超车"head-on -internuts- ♂ (0 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 12:33:37

• 确实不算很多。汽车安全性能要综合起来看的 -woth- ♀ (0 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 11:05:34

• 事故可分为两种 -cys254- ♂ (511 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 12:50:32

• 假设世上只有两种车， -Audi- ♂ (107 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 13:05:50

• 回复：假设世上只有两种车， -cys254- ♂ (163 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 13:11:00

• I am confused ... "所以说应该两辆车都去撞重量相同的车更合理. -Audi- ♂ (66 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 13:15:38

• "大车也可能撞上大车,小车也可能撞上小车"-exactly! -Audi- ♂ (95 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 13:20:49

• 没说清楚:中文不好多包含 -cys254- ♂ (218 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 14:15:20

• 拿三千磅的分别去撞四千磅和两千磅的车,岂不更偏离真相? -MOVEOVER- ♂ (0 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 14:18:26

• 那就撞三次好了 -cys254- ♂ (50 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 14:25:26

• What is your logic? -Audi- ♂ (98 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 17:10:50

• 你是不是个留学生，从来没出过大学城呐？ --vip-- ♂ (476 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 11:42:43

• Real man! -MOVEOVER- ♂ (156 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 15:02:31

• 彻底服了。LMAO --vip-- ♂ (0 bytes) () 04/15/2009 postreply 15:06:32