Matt16

Seeing as everyone is crashing due to the ice on the road, I'm curious about about the crash-worthiness of our Truck/ 4Runners. Any one been in a big one?

The crash test ratings are pretty low (1 star for driver, 4 for passenger), but none of the wrecked 4Runners I've seen look all that damaged. They seem to how together pretty well in a crash (as i would, expect). The low rating for the driver leads me to believe that the steering wheel is a dangerous design.

I wonder how tough it would be to chop a section out of the steering shaft and weld in a crush can so that your innards end up looking like kebabs on the steering shaft in a head-on.

If you've wrecked a 4Runner, post up pictures and tell us your story and injuries.

Here's some pics from a local wrecker:

http://www.usedsuvparts.com/Oct_90runner_06.htm

http://www.usedsuvparts.com/Nov_91runner_15.htm

CRAZY. I owned this truck (below) for a day (yes 1000% certain), then the clutch went and I brought it back to the seller and he refunded the cash. Looks like it got in a bit of a rear ender.

http://www.usedsuvparts.com/Oct_91runner_11.htm

Elton

as seen in my sig here's my very clean 4runner after 1 week of owning it... my back and neck are still pretty trashed as the seat belt failed to lock up this was at about 45mph.... i had really no time to slow down thanks toyota for the rear only abs idea the frame took most of the impact as it hit his towing hitch

96redtoy

Matt the reason behind the poor crash test on the drivers side might be caused because the lack of an airbag. The driver has a lot less room for the head and body to move before making an impact on the wheel, while the passenger has that extra foot or so before they make contact with the dash.

just a thought to chew on for a little bit

space-junk

iTrader: (1)

also, from the research that my dad made me do on the runner before i bought it, the main reason for the low crash test rating is that the newer 3rd gen runners actually have a crossbar in the drivers side door... 2nd gens do not... that coupled with a steering wheel that eill kebab you, and no airbags means very unsafe...

the good news is that the 2nd gen runners actually had the BEST stability on an emergency manuver (hard steer to the left then right or vice versa) fo all the suv's in its class...

B. Graves

i was hit by a drink driver in my 94 pickup. he was travelling about a hundred and lost control passing me. he hit me where the driver door and the front fender meet. it sent me into a ditch and my truck flipped up on its side. me and my sister were both in it. the worst injuries to us was some whip lash. i hit my head on the back window as it was a regular cab and it busted my head open but you dont have to worry bout that. it was a very strong truck. id assume that the runners are just as good. ill say for the tundra that hit me that its really good too. it rolled a few times and only lost the windows. the cage was still intact and fine. but the 2 ass holed that hit me wernt wearing seat belts. so one died and one is on his way to jail for a long time for man slaughter of his friend. so, wear your seatbelt and you will be fine driving a toyota truck.

Matt16

Don't post '93 4Runners have a side impact beam?

I'm very surprised about the "best in class" stability, makes me wonder what classmates its being compared against? The Unimog? Model-T?

space-junk

iTrader: (1)

i believe the trooper, the s-10 blazer, bronco II... all those crappy small SUV's from the early 90's...

and you may be right about the change being made in 93... havent done any research on that in 2 years... that and im too lazy to do it now...

Tooltime

My plan was to give my 93 runner to my daughter when she turns 16. It's a 3.0 auto, plenty slow enough, 4 wheel drive for the snow and an auto "one less distraction". I plan on taking the rear seats out for the first year, law says no passengers for the first year anyway. After reading this thread maybe I'll think about a roll cage and a 4 point harness. Who here lets their kids drive a runner,good or bad idea.

ozziesironmanoffroad

hey the 90s troopers are cool... lol. i dunno id let my kid sister have my yota, if i was done with it. but im plannin on buyin her a 66 chevy c10, since i know she'll be safe in it (and she wants one cuz she saw twilight...hmmm...)... and i figure ill be ok with payin the gas cuz ill be in the military and wont have nethin better to spend my money on.. lol.

scuba

Im 18, I feel more safe in my beefy sheet metal truck then my dads plastic yaris...
Now, I just need to learn to wear my seatbelt more

Vanman

Ozzie,

"...but im plannin on buyin her a 66 chevy c10, since i know she'll be safe in it."

Brings back a few memories. My Dad had a '66 Chevy. He ran into a bull one time that had strayed on to the road. The bull died. My dad bent a few things back, and spray painted the hood/front. The funny thing is that the "orange" didn't quite match the red. A few years after that, while parked in the street, a drunk driver ran into the back of the truck. Broke the tail light. My Dad heard the noise at like 2 a.m. and caught the guys down the block pushing their mangled car. Despite the advancements in safety, that vehicle was a tank. Wish I had it now.

Matt16

I have no idea what a Chevy C10 is, but if its from 1966, its going to suck for crash-safety. Seat-belts were a novelty and crumple zones weren't invented yet. Car safety really isn't about the size of the vehicle. The vehicle may stand up well, but you want it to crumple the right was in a crash.

From wannabe Top Gear.
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbEa3C2vL7U[/YOUTUBE]

InternetRoadkill

I was going to add rock sliders to my 884R ... not because I intend to do any rock crawling, but rather to make up for the lack of side impact protection.

874runnersr5

i was also thinking about that to..
maybe even a small exocage

Matt16

I don't think sliders will make any difference. Its the body that is vulnerable, not the frame. Sliders also only stick out less than a foot and only has a 2 inch side profile, so likely the slider would just intrude into the other vehicle instead of stopping it.

You could install the doors off a 1994, 95 4Runner with OEM side impact beams.

Matt16

Looks like this guy is happy with the crash worthiness: https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...recked-162497/

Another 4Runner that looks to have withstood quite an impact.

ozziesironmanoffroad

actually, matt, back in 66 they actually used real metal to make vehicles, it only got poor crash test ratings cuz it didnt have airbags or seatbelts. only reason. if it had airbags and seatbelts, it prob would have gotten high marks. i mean consider this... you get hit by a malibu or taco or something, what would u rather be in... a prius, a new plastic truck, or an old tank?

mlrtime99

The sole reason for the low drivers rating has to do with the space left after an impact for the knees and feet. I guess things get a little tight down there.

space-junk

iTrader: (1)

which is one of the reasons that scion installed little airbags for your knees that pop out from under the steering wheel...

a pretty trick setup... it would be cool if you could incorporate an airbag system into our trucks...

Alex 400

THis is a c20 but, looks basically the same. THis my buddies truck. The fender is crunched a little, but that was from big dear and I think it was a loading dock or something.



hmmmm ok, so. I understand the crumple theory. But I would like to drive away from the accident too. That is why in the next few years, I plan on getting one these.



Good luck getting that to crumple.