Hacker News Reader

Comment by sundvor | Hacker News Reader

The safety record of the Mustang is horrid. Absolute shit engineering.

You'd have to be rather silly to buy one: http://www.ancap.com.au/media-and-gallery/releases/ford-must...

Safety isn't everything you know. The lowest scoring component (Safety Assist for stuff like speed assistance systems, lane support systems etc...) is basically about removing control from the driver and considering the target demographic for the Mustang, it makes not having them make sense. Some cars are made to be enjoyed and "safety" is increasingly compromising that concept.

I get that you don't like active safety, but did you even read the part about the poor structural integrity aka crashworthiness of the car? That's why I wrote "shit engineering".

There are plenty of cars that are fun to drive and safe.

"“Of concern, the full width frontal test showed a risk of serious head, chest and leg injury for the rear passenger. There was also insufficient inflation of both the driver and front passenger airbags in the frontal offset test which allowed the driver’s head to contact the steering wheel and the passenger’s head to contact the dashboard,”

“The driver’s door opened in the pole test, and whiplash protection for rear-end collisions was marginal,”"

Exactly. In my book, cars with such poor ratings should be banned from the market. There really is no excuse.

"We spent all our money making the car look brutal and sexy to our target customers, so there was no money left to also make it safe". ... !

> considering the target demographic for the Mustang

Entitled bogans who think they're the Jamie Whincup but are more likely to hurt themselves and others than win any races?

Seriously, this is what track days are for.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com