View Single Post
      01-16-2020, 10:42 AM   #12
MPBK
Everyday I'm shuffling
United_States
449
Rep
1,098
Posts

Drives: '12 SG 135i DCT; '18 MG M2 DCT
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BimmerAg View Post
I think we're on the same page, I just didn't fully clarify my point. I was trying to point out that if the female dummies were used as the new standard and the accident acceptability threshold was lowered, then the injury rate for female drivers and passengers could be reduced (but the car's cost and weight would increase). But by making the car safer for females, it would also likely reduce the injury rate for male drivers and passengers. Because injury rates would be reduced for both groups, there would still be a discrepancy between males and females.
The article argued that female dummies should be used because females are more likely to be injured in a crash. My point is that even if female dummies are used to set the standard, they will still be more likely to be injured in a crash. I don't think it's possible for the injury rates for males and females to be the same due to the difference in "material properties" between the two.
Thanks for your much better explanation. I agree. We are on the same page.
Appreciate 0