No matter if you always wear seat belts, how robust your car is, how many airbags it has: the point is 1) slow down and 2) pay attention. It's not only about our life, it's also about other people's lives.
I crashed my beloved 106 1400 quicksilver of 2001 back in 2006. It was a direct front crash when I hit the road barriers with 70khm. Yes it was my fault and thank god I didn't hit anyone or another car. Airbag and seatbelt saved my life. The car's engine completely destroyed from the impact. I found the ac about 20 meters away from the wrecked car. The dashboard didn't brake, in fact didn't brake or moved at all. Only thing that left intact was the dashboard and the seats, nothing else. Though I got out easy without a single scratch. Well no, sure the car is not safe at high level, I just was very lucky. Sure you may feel somehow safe in a way (and maybe it is safe), when you know that the car you're driving has high NCAP stars. But in an real accident most of all, you really need to be lucky that moment.
Not only have I always worn my seatbelt and I feel naked without one but this video certainly has a lasting impression on me and the way I drive my Peugeot 106... Great cars but made of cheese and old crisp packets!
Impressive in this speed it,s not total pulvurized and that maybee some get off the car with seat belts.But all sudden stops are dangerous in any car,the stop can destroy internal organs etc at that speed.I have the 107 and drive it with caution as do in all cars.
I thought my 2 decades old pug was a death trap until 1:44 when he said wearing belts they would have got a way with 'minor injurys' - at 49mph thats good!
The airbag had been deactivated as this is one of the cars that we train on cutting people out of. Airbags are designed to be used in conjunction with seatbelts and don't work aswell when there are unsecured passengers in the vehicle. In this case because the force of the crash was sending the driver sideways and away from the steering wheel, the airbag may not have had much effect.
The main point of that comment is that if someone dies in a car accident the road will be closed until the Police are satisfied that they have been able to investigate the scene fully. This "fatal" accident could have been easily avoided if the passengers wore seat belts.
there are some unfair mistakes in the crash test. first of all there is no regular first impact absorbation barriers. and second important thing is impact velocity is 76km/h, not 60km/h as standard. and the most important other thing is why the driver and passenger has no seat belt? What is the point of this video?
The point of the video is to highlight the importance of wearing seatbelts by showing what happens to the people in a car who aren't wearing them. This isn't a standard test and was run for us specially as we wanted to show a crash at 40 mph which is why it is faster than the standard 30 mph. This particular crash is simulating what would happen if you hit a large object with no barrier around. This type of hazard can be common here in the UK. If the occupants of the vehicle had worn seatbelts then they would likely have survived the crash with minor injuries.
Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service I don’t think someone could survive this accident. With or without seatbelt. Do you see the steering wheel? In a modern car it would stay in place.
I think I'm going to be putting all sorts of cages in mine now I already knew it was a bad car for an accident but didn't think it would crumple that easy at 40 odd mph
To be fair he said the cabin wasn't actually compromised to badly during this and if they'd had seat-belts on they would most likely have been fine. At 50mph that's actually pretty good for any car
My point was really on the use of the word 'Murder' A murder scene is treated quite differently from the scene of a fatal RTC. The loss and or contamination of evidence is more critical, inner and outer cordons are maintained more strictly and those who enter and leave the scene are controlled far more tightly. A good example is that following a suspected murder the ambulance that transported the victim to hospital will be temporarily seized as evidence, that wouldn't happen after a fatal RTC.
Not all of these cars have airbags. My 106 doesn't have airbags. They're good wee cars but I wouldn't like to be in an accident in one. Even if it's driven safely there's still a chance that some tool could crash into it. That's why i'm saving for a Clio Dynamique S. Drive safely. :-)
Yeah the car no have airbags but have seatbelt,you can see the front pillar is deformed and this is fatal because in an real accident the passengers probably dead in the impact but is a car of 1990's dont wait what the car have airbags
Surely all this proves is:- you don’t want to drive your Peugeot 106/ Citroën Saxo into an immovable Concrete block at 45mph. I doubt any car will survive an impact like that without looking like a crumpled beer can. Just drive more carefully & avoid hitting solid concrete blocks that have NO give during a high speed impact.
Bit late - but yes it does have one, it was deactivated during this test as they were using this car for drill where they would free the occupants by removing the roof*
No matter if you always wear seat belts, how robust your car is, how many airbags it has: the point is 1) slow down and 2) pay attention. It's not only about our life, it's also about other people's lives.
I crashed my beloved 106 1400 quicksilver of 2001 back in 2006. It was a direct front crash when I hit the road barriers with 70khm. Yes it was my fault and thank god I didn't hit anyone or another car. Airbag and seatbelt saved my life. The car's engine completely destroyed from the impact. I found the ac about 20 meters away from the wrecked car.
The dashboard didn't brake, in fact didn't brake or moved at all. Only thing that left intact was the dashboard and the seats, nothing else. Though I got out easy without a single scratch. Well no, sure the car is not safe at high level, I just was very lucky.
Sure you may feel somehow safe in a way (and maybe it is safe), when you know that the car you're driving has high NCAP stars. But in an real accident most of all, you really need to be lucky that moment.
Not only have I always worn my seatbelt and I feel naked without one but this video certainly has a lasting impression on me and the way I drive my Peugeot 106... Great cars but made of cheese and old crisp packets!
Impressive in this speed it,s not total pulvurized and that maybee some get off the car with seat belts.But all sudden stops are dangerous in any car,the stop can destroy internal organs etc at that speed.I have the 107 and drive it with caution as do in all cars.
I thought my 2 decades old pug was a death trap until 1:44 when he said wearing belts they would have got a way with 'minor injurys' - at 49mph thats good!
The airbag had been deactivated as this is one of the cars that we train on cutting people out of. Airbags are designed to be used in conjunction with seatbelts and don't work aswell when there are unsecured passengers in the vehicle. In this case because the force of the crash was sending the driver sideways and away from the steering wheel, the airbag may not have had much effect.
Holy shit I have a 106 since 2009, hope never know that.
I have one aribag, for me, driver.
Thank you for your words
This is now a 'murder' scene? Who are we going to convict, Peugeot?
The main point of that comment is that if someone dies in a car accident the road will be closed until the Police are satisfied that they have been able to investigate the scene fully. This "fatal" accident could have been easily avoided if the passengers wore seat belts.
Definitely will be wearing my seatbelt at all times...
there are some unfair mistakes in the crash test.
first of all there is no regular first impact absorbation barriers.
and second important thing is impact velocity is 76km/h, not 60km/h as standard.
and the most important other thing is why the driver and passenger has no seat belt?
What is the point of this video?
The point of the video is to highlight the importance of wearing seatbelts by showing what happens to the people in a car who aren't wearing them.
This isn't a standard test and was run for us specially as we wanted to show a crash at 40 mph which is why it is faster than the standard 30 mph.
This particular crash is simulating what would happen if you hit a large object with no barrier around. This type of hazard can be common here in the UK.
If the occupants of the vehicle had worn seatbelts then they would likely have survived the crash with minor injuries.
Ting Tong are all tests done at 60km? even the 206 ncap test that's on UA-cam?
yes at 64 kmh that 106 is very dangerous compared to the 200 series...
Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service I don’t think someone could survive this accident. With or without seatbelt. Do you see the steering wheel? In a modern car it would stay in place.
I think I'm going to be putting all sorts of cages in mine now I already knew it was a bad car for an accident but didn't think it would crumple that easy at 40 odd mph
To be fair he said the cabin wasn't actually compromised to badly during this and if they'd had seat-belts on they would most likely have been fine. At 50mph that's actually pretty good for any car
My parents drive the same car.Damn now I'm scared to put the pedal to the metal
Wait, wait, wait a minute! The dummies aren't wearing seat belts?
My point was really on the use of the word 'Murder' A murder scene is treated quite differently from the scene of a fatal RTC. The loss and or contamination of evidence is more critical, inner and outer cordons are maintained more strictly and those who enter and leave the scene are controlled far more tightly. A good example is that following a suspected murder the ambulance that transported the victim to hospital will be temporarily seized as evidence, that wouldn't happen after a fatal RTC.
God dam! The strong point of the car - as a fun little sport car - (ligth wheight) is also is weak point as a regular - daily -car...safety.
Sports car? Funny looking sports car..
Not all of these cars have airbags. My 106 doesn't have airbags. They're good wee cars but I wouldn't like to be in an accident in one. Even if it's driven safely there's still a chance that some tool could crash into it. That's why i'm saving for a Clio Dynamique S. Drive safely. :-)
Aaaaand we have this car.....Call help.
Yeah the car no have airbags but have seatbelt,you can see the front pillar is deformed and this is fatal because in an real accident the passengers probably dead in the impact but is a car of 1990's dont wait what the car have airbags
Surely all this proves is:- you
don’t want to drive your Peugeot 106/ Citroën Saxo into an immovable Concrete block at 45mph.
I doubt any car will survive an impact like that without looking like a crumpled beer can.
Just drive more carefully & avoid hitting solid concrete blocks that have NO give during a high speed impact.
Airbag Failure.
was the driver´s airbag disconected? How the rear passenger head goes troughthe windscreen? It was laminated
is there no airbag in that car?
Bit late - but yes it does have one, it was deactivated during this test as they were using this car for drill where they would free the occupants by removing the roof*
Gaby Eboney switched off
may i have the sunroof?? :P
Big up Hampshire
could of atleast done it to a shitty like 94 106 ;) that 106 WAS in mint condition;)
Wow, still won't affect my driving though. I always wear a seatbelt anyway :)
I may have to fit a bull bar to mine now
chris hosking lol
Bloody Hell!!
I've got one, even in a same color. Anyone wants to buy? Now I'm afraid to get into this thing... :D
COOL!
Peugeot 106 is the worst car to have a crash in!
Virtual crash 3.0 :-D