20-12-2017, 08:26 PM
I'd like to step firmly into the middle ground here. In the modern motor industry, parts are classified by failure mode. If a single part failure can result in a fatal accident, the design is changed (as far as reasonably practicable) so that there is some kind of fail-safe. If not practicable, a healthy safety margin is applied to the part strength. It is thus highly improbable (I didn't say impossible) that the failure of a single part can result in a fatal accident, even though plastic bits and electronic items may be falling off by the dozen.
For a part which could immobilise the car, or scare the driver without necessarily killing him, an acceptable failure rate would be established - let's say 0.5% over vehicle lifetime. Needless to say, modern cars are not expected to last 90 or 100 years.
To claim that an Austin Seven is as safe as a modern car is a little misleading. To scaremonger people into believing they are death traps is equally misleading. Regular maintenance is without doubt a good idea, as is keeping an eye on components which could lead to a serious accident should they fail.
Personally, I worry a good deal more about other road users. As is well known, all those 'safety' systems only enable them to drive faster and closer...
For a part which could immobilise the car, or scare the driver without necessarily killing him, an acceptable failure rate would be established - let's say 0.5% over vehicle lifetime. Needless to say, modern cars are not expected to last 90 or 100 years.
To claim that an Austin Seven is as safe as a modern car is a little misleading. To scaremonger people into believing they are death traps is equally misleading. Regular maintenance is without doubt a good idea, as is keeping an eye on components which could lead to a serious accident should they fail.
Personally, I worry a good deal more about other road users. As is well known, all those 'safety' systems only enable them to drive faster and closer...