Honda Car Forum

I have a 1991 Honda Civic and it runs well, but I feel like I should
probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.
Another reason I might want to buy another car is that mine is small.
A larger car would probably provide additional protection. On the
other hand, if I keep my current car I'd save money. Does anyone
think it's not necessarily worthy spending the money for a bigger car
with airbags?

ahorsefly@yahoo.com wrote:
> I have a 1991 Honda Civic and it runs well, but I feel like I should
> probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.
> Another reason I might want to buy another car is that mine is small.
> A larger car would probably provide additional protection. On the
> other hand, if I keep my current car I'd save money. Does anyone
> think it's not necessarily worthy spending the money for a bigger car
> with airbags?

Some helpful details would include what type of driving you do, whom you
carry in the car, besides yourself, how many miles a year you put on the
car, and whether you're stupid enough not to wear a seat belt.

Jeff

Here is a thread you might find of interest, it is in a Hybrid group but,
physics is physics....the newer Civic is, according to the epa, hybrid or
not, one of, if not the cleanest running cars on the road right now as well
as one of the safest.

http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/f...24/#post161264


<ahorsefly@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5dcf3260-56c4-47e0-8c7d-7224a1bf9e2e@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I have a 1991 Honda Civic and it runs well, but I feel like I should
> probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.
> Another reason I might want to buy another car is that mine is small.
> A larger car would probably provide additional protection. On the
> other hand, if I keep my current car I'd save money. Does anyone
> think it's not necessarily worthy spending the money for a bigger car
> with airbags?

<ahorsefly@yahoo.com> wrote

>I have a 1991 Honda Civic and it runs well, but I feel like I should
> probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.

I also had a '91 Civic and was happy to "upgrade" to a '97 at least because
it had front airbags and ABS. My '04 Accord has front, side, and side
curtain bags, and ABS... I wish it had traction control, and will look
forward to one day having a car with that feature. So it does appear later
model cars are safer. I often hear Tom and Ray advising against an older car
for new drivers for that reason.

I always wear my seat belt. I would think that even if you wear it,
an airbag is going to provide a lot of added protection.

I drive under 12,000 miles/year. I drive to work an average of only
about once a week. When I do drive, to work or anywhere; my trip
usually is 30 minutes or longer each way.

On Feb 10, 3:25 pm, Jeff <kidsdoc2...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> ahorse...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > I have a 1991 Honda Civic and it runs well, but I feel like I should
> > probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.
> > Another reason I might want to buy another car is that mine is small.
> > A larger car would probably provide additional protection. On the
> > other hand, if I keep my current car I'd save money. Does anyone
> > think it's not necessarily worthy spending the money for a bigger car
> > with airbags?
>
> Some helpful details would include what type of driving you do, whom you
> carry in the car, besides yourself, how many miles a year you put on the
> car, and whether you're stupid enough not to wear a seat belt.
>
> Jeff

I too have a 1991 Civic that runs well. A year or so ago I
was thinking of buying a 1999 or more recent Civic. I priced
the auto insurance for a newer car. Despite the newer car's
higher value, the auto insurance was less by a fair amount.
Ten percent or so? Can't remember, but your current auto
insurer should be happy to quote you the figure. I asked
what was behind this. My insurer said all the safety
features of the newer car. I think the insurance companies
back this up with statistics.

As to whether it's worth the extra piece of mind, I reckon
that's up to each individual.

I do not speed. I am not out gallavantin' at 2 AM or
similar. Lately I do almost all [western] city driving
(ugh). So a high speed, and hence more dangerous, crash
might be said to be less likely. My Civic is very
maneuverable compared to SUVs and other large cars. Overall,
I feel safe driving it. The fuel mileage is great, too.

<ahorsefly@yahoo.com> wrote
>I have a 1991 Honda Civic and it runs well, but I feel like
>I should
> probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a
> crash.
> Another reason I might want to buy another car is that
> mine is small.
> A larger car would probably provide additional protection.
> On the
> other hand, if I keep my current car I'd save money. Does
> anyone
> think it's not necessarily worthy spending the money for a
> bigger car
> with airbags?

ahorsefly@yahoo.com wrote in news:5dcf3260-56c4-47e0-8c7d-
7224a1bf9e2e@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com:

> I have a 1991 Honda Civic and it runs well, but I feel like I should
> probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.



Air bags may have no overall effect at all in safety. Offsetting behavior
is a confounding factor in computing their effectivelness.
See the book "True Odds", chapter 10, By James Walsh. Merritt Publishing,
1996.


> Another reason I might want to buy another car is that mine is small.
> A larger car would probably provide additional protection.



A larger car is undoubtedly safer than a smaller one. You are safer in a
large car with no seat belt than you are in a small one with a seat belt.



> On the
> other hand, if I keep my current car I'd save money. Does anyone
> think it's not necessarily worthy spending the money for a bigger car
> with airbags?


I don't think it's necessary. The probability of being involved in a fatal
or greviously injurious collision is remote.

Overall, it's about 1 in 60 if you drive 10,000 miles every year for your
whole life, but that's misleading, since the figure (from the NHTSA, 1993)
includes all drunks and 16 year-olds as well.

Personally, I've covered well over half a million miles since I started
driving. By the NHTSA's figures, I should be dead now.



--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

ahorsefly@yahoo.com wrote:
> I have a 1991 Honda Civic and it runs well,

great car.


> but I feel like I should
> probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.

if that is truly a concern, wear a helmet. seriously. if transport
safety authorities were serious about safety, helmets and 5-point seat
belts would be mandatory.


> Another reason I might want to buy another car is that mine is small.
> A larger car would probably provide additional protection. On the
> other hand, if I keep my current car I'd save money. Does anyone
> think it's not necessarily worthy spending the money for a bigger car
> with airbags?

these are not airbag issues, but they are "should i buy a more modern
car or look at the big picture" issues:

1. paradoxically, the gas savings of more efficient modern engines are
offset by much heavier modern cars, so no benefit there.

2. heavier cars are harder to stop, given that tire sizes are the same
and thus available braking traction is the same.

3. modern cars consume more resources in their manufacture.

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:00:13 -0800, jim beam wrote:

>> but I feel like I should
>> probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.

> if that is truly a concern, wear a helmet. seriously. if transport
> safety authorities were serious about safety, helmets and 5-point seat
> belts would be mandatory.

Will a helmet keep the steering column from piercing your chest?

Will a helmet keep your neck and ribs from snapping when that SUV hits you
directly on the driver's door at 60mph?

The answer to both questions is "NO". An airbag likely would, though.

I wouldn't drive, or let any member of my family drive, a vehicle without
airbags. Yeah, we all used to do it "back in the day", but things change.
There's just no good reason to not have them now. Not to mention the fact
that the roads are crowded with inattentive morons talking on cell phones
while driving 20+ MPH over the speed limit, and driving the biggest
vehicle they (can't) afford. An airbag is a necessity.

> 1. paradoxically, the gas savings of more efficient modern engines are
> offset by much heavier modern cars, so no benefit there.

We're talking safety here, not gas mileage. Would you rather be safe(r),
or save $0.23 on a trip across town?

> 2. heavier cars are harder to stop, given that tire sizes are the same
> and thus available braking traction is the same.

Tire sizes are generally quite a bit wider now-a-days than they used to
be, not to mention the existence of ABS. Today's cars can stop *MUCH*
better than a car of 15-20 years ago.

> 3. modern cars consume more resources in their manufacture.

That's beyond our control, and not a factor in anything.


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Dan C wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:00:13 -0800, jim beam wrote:
>
>>> but I feel like I should
>>> probably buy a newer car with airbags for more safety in a crash.
>
>> if that is truly a concern, wear a helmet. seriously. if transport
>> safety authorities were serious about safety, helmets and 5-point seat
>> belts would be mandatory.
>
> Will a helmet keep the steering column from piercing your chest?
>
> Will a helmet keep your neck and ribs from snapping when that SUV hits you
> directly on the driver's door at 60mph?
>
> The answer to both questions is "NO". An airbag likely would, though.
>
> I wouldn't drive, or let any member of my family drive, a vehicle without
> airbags. Yeah, we all used to do it "back in the day", but things change.
> There's just no good reason to not have them now. Not to mention the fact
> that the roads are crowded with inattentive morons talking on cell phones
> while driving 20+ MPH over the speed limit, and driving the biggest
> vehicle they (can't) afford. An airbag is a necessity.

untrue. there are no air bags in race cars. race cars can crash at
150+ and the driver walks away because [s]he's properly restrained.
5-point belts and helmets will save many more lives than airbags.



>
>> 1. paradoxically, the gas savings of more efficient modern engines are
>> offset by much heavier modern cars, so no benefit there.
>
> We're talking safety here, not gas mileage. Would you rather be safe(r),
> or save $0.23 on a trip across town?
>
>> 2. heavier cars are harder to stop, given that tire sizes are the same
>> and thus available braking traction is the same.
>
> Tire sizes are generally quite a bit wider now-a-days than they used to
> be,

that's a function of suspension, not desire to improve braking. you
need wider tires with macpherson strut to make up for its geometrical
shortcomings. the disadvantage of wider tires is more gas consumption
and more tendency to aquaplane in rain or slide on loose surfaces.



not to mention the existence of ABS. Today's cars can stop *MUCH*
> better than a car of 15-20 years ago.

untrue. they can help a driver stop under certain conditions where
inexperience or lack of skill may be a problem, but in many situations,
anti-lock braking distances can be longer than stock brakes. check your
owners manual.



>
>> 3. modern cars consume more resources in their manufacture.
>
> That's beyond our control,

if we make it, we control it. by definition.


> and not a factor in anything.