Manta crash yesterday

[humbucker]

Not exactly a common car, anyone know 'em?

http://m.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/114 ... ?ref=var_0

[Chip Pan Dan]

ouch poor car!

[Lowrider Dave]

Oooo, chuff! Hope people were okay, pity about the car.

[Super89]

Dam, What a shame..

[Cavalier342]

Not good... A rare one got written off.

[Ads]

i can not beleive the comments about the car, when a old lady was actuallu KILLED, Ads

[Cavalier342]

Yes I understand that, and it is very bad, however the original topic was about the Manta.

[humbucker]

Um, no it wasn't... I was asking if anyone knew those that were involved as the car is pretty distinctive and is likely to be known on 'the scene'.

[Cavalier342]

I do apologize.

[humbucker]

But yeah, a shame about the car too!

[Robsey]

I am amazed that the fatality was not from the Manta.
It looks totally trashed and flattened.

From the picture, the Fiesta looks in fairly good overall shape.
Not a day any of them will forget in a hurry.

Quite a sobering image.

Anyway - in response to the original question, I did not know anyone involved in the incident.

[James McGrath]

I am amazed that the fatality was not from the Manta.
It looks totally trashed and flattened.

From the picture, the Fiesta looks in fairly good overall shape.
Not a day any of them will forget in a hurry.

It looks like the roof of the manta was cut off so that the occupants could be removed safely. This makes the car look in worse shape than it actually is.
The damage seems to be contained at the front of the car.

I'd imagine that as the manta has a far longer bonnet and probably more leg room than the fiesta, the occupants stood a far better chance of their legs not being crushed by the dashboard moving forward in the accident.

[Cavalier342]

I don't care what people say, I'd rather be in the Manta. As you rightly say James, MUCH longer front end, therefore more crumple zone, therefore better safety. In an accident, crumple zones are the most essential life saving parameters. Even if the newer cars are better armored (or so they claim) they are shorter up front which means less crumple zone which means 100% chance of whiplash and a good chance of a broken neck or collarbone. More crumple zone = more cushioning upon impact therefore the forces are applied less harshly. Fact.

But still a sad thing....

[terkin]

seen this have we? bit of a dream world i think
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emtLLvXrrFs

[HAIRIBO]

Yeah I wag reading the last comment. And thought I'd rather be in a new car than an old tank. And that video just proved it. Obviously Andrea doesn't understand modern engineering.

[HAIRIBO]

If you read the article you'll find the driver of the manta had life threatening injuries. Both front passengers in the fiesta were basically fine. The poor old woman was sitting in the back and died. Old people can die from just falling over. So it proves that. He small modern ford is safe. Where as an old car is not.. . . . . . . But I'd rather drive a manta/mk1 cav over a modern Ford anyday. They are so much cooler. And let's face it if you thought you were going to have a car crash every time you set off. You wouldn't dare drive. No matter how safe your car. . .