When will it end!?!?!

[derek77]

Dallas Police Say Crown Vic Fix Doesn’t Work

The shields Ford has planned to install on Ford Crown Victoria police cars may not prevent fires that occur in high-speed collisions — and they may make the problem worse, the City of Dallas reports. City officials told Reuters on Tuesday that the Trunk Packs developed to safeguard the Crown Vic’s fuel tank in a high-speed rear-end collision could actually increase the amount of fuel leaking from the tanks after a crash. Dallas officials ordered two 75-mph crashes to gauge the effectiveness of the tank containers, and found the packs made the tanks leak 7.6 gallons of fuel versus the 0.3 gallons in original production form. The news agency says 12 law officers nationwide have been killed in crashes where Crown Vic patrol cars have caught fire after being struck in the rear. A Ford spokesperson said the shields performed as intended.

http://www.crownvictoriasafetyalert.c om/pressrelease_ford_test.html

What's next, crashes from 100mph?

[jerrym3]

Wonder why Ford hasn't commisioned a test using other manufacturer's vehicles in a high speed rear end crash test to show that other cars exhibit the same "design flaw" when hit in the rear at high speed.

Seems like a quick and easy way to get the spotlight off them, assuming that there is no design defect.

[MAD-3R]

Pop a few Wimpalas and Intrepids at 75MPH and see what happens...

[WolfeBros]

Its all madness........shear madness.
Media hype and BS.......not to mention a few lawyers.
Sorry.....Marty

[Dr Caleb]

Sure, you could design a vehicle that could survive a 75mph rear end collison that wouldn't leak any fuel. It would have to be ethier solar powered, or look something like an armoured personelle carrier.

What are they looking for here? I like 3R's idea though, what about other makes/models/manufacturers?

[MAD-3R]

Or... PUT THE FUEL IN THE FRONT!!!! No leakadge from Rearending..!!

[lshultz]

I agree with jerrym3...I drive a Crown Vic Sport and have wondered why the Feds and Ford have not tried to duplicate the 75 MPH crash test with other brands...I don't believe very many cars of any type can withstand a 75 MPH and not burn...sort of one sided if you ask me...Ford needs to do something, not just throw bandaids at the problem...what about not parking on the side of the road on a pull over...I know, I know...where can they pull somebody over at...something that they have to work out...

[jefferson-mo]

They have tested the other cars and they all failed but the media and the lawyers(sorry martyo) keep the spotlight focused on the Fords for whatever reason....................prob ably 'cause there's thousands more CrownVics on the road

the ONLY complete fix for this problem is to remove the fuel tank completely.................... ..but then what good is it

[jerrym3]

If other cars have been tested and failed, why doesn't Ford make this known to the public?

Can't be because Ford doesn't have any legal staff on their payroll, so why not? Isn't it a clear case of product defamation if other cars experience the same effects and only Ford is "picked on"?

Something just doesn't make sense, especially with the potential lawsuits and potential cost to a company that's not doing that great to start with.

Sure, they're probably insured, but 100%???.

And, if insurance companies were forced to pay, wouldn't they insist that the results of the other tests be included in the rap against Ford?

[jefferson-mo]

well yeah in a common sense world.................but..... ...........

[derek77]

I found it. I know what these lawyers and cops are looking for. And you don't need to change much.




http://www.tapconet.com/graphics/traffic_control/attenuators/alpha100.jpg


Just slap this huge attenuator on the back of the Vic and the "problem" will be solved. You might not even feel the sob who hit you.

[Bigdogjim]

It will never end. At least untill the money runs out.

[RCSignals]

Those are test conducted by the city of Dallas.
The Dallas city attorney is noted for spouting of too quickly. the tests haven't even been finalised. The tests were conducted on about 11 July, the initial report which was basically just observations, written 14 July, and The attorney's letter to Ford, and press release dated 15 July. All just a little quick.
One has to wonder what the purpose of the City of Dallas is conducting these tests. It sure doesn't look like it is to determine a "solution"
One thing about "The shields Ford has planned to install on Ford Crown Victoria police cars may not prevent fires that occur in high-speed collisions" . The report states that those shields did work, in that there were no punctures in the front of the tanks from the components those shields protect.
The tests were to test the effectiveness of the "trunk pack" which is something that is supposed to help Police load the trunks in a safer manner. There is no statement of how the trunk packs were loaded with equipment for these tests, or what equipment was loaded. One thing is for sure whatever was loaded was forced into the fuel tanks.

[RCSignals]

Originally posted by derek77


What's next, crashes from 100mph?

Actually, the way things are going, it seems so.

I've said this before, and people have laughed, but it has almost become an unwritten requirement for any new Police vehicle that it have 100% survivability for occupants in a 100mph rear crash, and 0% chance of fire.

Notice the silence of GM and Chrysler on new Police vehicles

[RCSignals]

Here s a picture of a rear ended new unibody car.
who says unibody is stronger?

This wasn't a Police car, but I'm told passengers didn't survive

http://www.asap-com.com/~dptyrob/crash1a.jpg

[SergntMac]

Originally posted by RCSignals
The Dallas city attorney is noted for spouting of too quickly. the tests haven't even been finalised. The tests were conducted on about 11 July, the initial report which was basically just observations, written 14 July, and The attorney's letter to Ford, and press release dated 15 July. All just a little quick.
One has to wonder what the purpose of the City of Dallas is conducting these tests. It sure doesn't look like it is to determine a "solution" The report states that those shields did work, in that there were no punctures in the front of the tanks from the components those shields protect. The tests were to test the effectiveness of the "trunk pack" which is something that is supposed to help Police load the trunks in a safer manner. There is no statement of how the trunk packs were loaded with equipment for these tests, or what equipment was loaded. One thing is for sure whatever was loaded was forced into the fuel tanks.


Clipped this from BON's press release...

"Johnson added thatone of the tests consisted of filling the Trunk Pack with 200 pounds of sand to represent the weight of the police equipment and then crash-testing it in the vehicle at 75 m.p.h. She said the force of the Trunk Pack hitting the fuel tank caused it to split "like a melon."

Yeah, well...what did you expect to happen? The dummies filled the cars crush zone with test material that compressed to a solid object, thereby acting as the extended "front bumber" of the object used to simulate the striking vehicle. This has the same effect as striking the gas tank directly, and I would expect the gas tank to "explode like a mellon," who would not? O M G! ROTHLMAO! Just how stupid can you be, no wonder Ford said "no thanks, start without me."

I wonder how much sand spilled...

[gdmjoe]

And I'm SURE y'all are gonna want one of these (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3618564517&category=39720) :D

- gDMJoe ( 2003 CV LX Sport )

[sailsmen]

Sand does not compress, if it was tightly packed the only compression would be the air in between the grains of sand. If the sand was fine then there would be very little air hence no compression.

If in fact they used sand in lieu of Police items, which in all probability would actually compress, then the test is truly flawed. It is hard to beleive that the testers are this amateur.

It leads me to beleive the test was designed to fail and not to represent a real life simulation.

It all points to $$$$$$ in someone's pocket and I can assure you it will never end up in the pockets of any patrolmen or their survivors. Just like the tobacco money, not one single penny is in the "victims" pockets.

[DHULK]

MAYBE THEY SHOULD PUT THE LAWERS IN THE TRUNKS!!!!

[LincMercLover]

No use crying over spilt sand? :lol:

Oh, and thanks gdmjoe, now I wanna kill someone this morning... Geez... How insensitive and ignorant can a person be to put that crap up on e-bay! :mad: :mad2:

[TripleTransAm]

Originally posted by DHULK
MAYBE THEY SHOULD PUT THE LAWERS IN THE TRUNKS!!!!


Do lawyers compress? Wouldn't want to skew the test in any way, if they didn't.

Anyone want to give it a shot and let us know?

[nhinterceptor]

Here's some more info...Ford won't sell to class action suit cases and more

Ford cuts them off (http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/vic19_20030719.htm)

- Dan

[jgc61sr2002]

Originally posted by LincMercLover
No use crying over spilt sand? :lol:

Oh, and thanks gdmjoe, now I wanna kill someone this morning... Geez... How insensitive and ignorant can a person be to put that crap up on e-bay! :mad: :mad2: Anything for the almighty $.:(

[RCSignals]

Originally posted by nhinterceptor
Here's some more info...Ford won't sell to class action suit cases and more

Ford cuts them off (http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/vic19_20030719.htm)

- Dan

From that link "Dallas hasn't purchased any Crown Victoria police cars since last year"

"last year" , 2002, Dallas purchased a number of new 2003 CVPIs. They are playing a game of smoke and mirrors here.

[MENINBLK]

Or... PUT THE FUEL IN THE FRONT!!!! No leakadge from Rearending..!!

What about the vehicle DOING the rear-ending ???

[hitchhiker]

Cool...


Dallas, Government, and Lawyers in the same sentence!


Wow, an ********* trifecta...


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:







<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD>tri·fec·ta http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/JPG/pron.jpg (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.refe rence.com%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dtrife cta) ( P ) Pronunciation Key (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html) (trhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/imacr.gif-fhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/ebreve.gifkhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.gifthttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gif)









n. <DL><DD>A system of betting in which the bettor must pick the first three winners in the correct sequence. Also called triple.</DD></DL>



<HR align=left width="25%">[<TT>tri-</TT> + <TT>(per)fecta</TT>.]</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


Best Regards,

David

[Silver_04]

Ford fired back a few times.

http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/quotes8_20031208.htm.

There is another good letter from Ford to the Detroit Free Press that I'm still trying to find. It had some good stats in it.

Ford has to walk a fine line when politely telling people they are ignorant.

[merc406]

It will end when FORD and other auto companies realize they cannot place a fuel tank behind the rear axel. They already know how to fix it..by placing it over the rear axel, as discussed in a memo back in the 60's with Ralph, don't let the auto companies fool you, it will take $$ for a fix, (redesign) that they don't want to admit to. A fuel cell in the meintime will save a few innocent people.