Now your really wasting your time. I've said this before - you can find information to support ANY opinion on the internet. I've been through link wars before, and it's never gotten anybody anywhere.
Quote:
Originally posted by NapaBavarian
Sidestep the question?
|
Did you not understand my answer?
Quote:
Originally posted by NapaBavarian
So in the F bodies for every average fatality there would need to be 2 more caused by the drivers with CR (cranial rectitus, aka head up their ass) and as many dumb drivers are out there I still believe that they are the minority.
|
You've obviously never been to New Jersey. Here on the east coast, drivers with CR syndrome far outnumber healthy ones.
Your numbers make sense for several reasons...the F-bodies are much more powerful than the Mustangs...thus more accidents, and more of the weaker mustangs were sold than the weaker F-bodies.
I think it's kinda dumb to look at sports car numbers...they are not built with safety as the first priority. Remember the Fiero? They didn't even think about safety until the car had already been for sale for two years. But then alot of cars were like that back in those days.
Quote:
originally posted by NapaBavarian
I have gotten my information from many different areas, you still havn't shown us an area across the board where GM OUT PERFORMES the other makes in safty.
|
Well then again we're even. You never showed me where any make outperforms GM in safety ACROSS THE BOARD. Nor can you, cause none do.
Edit: I should take that last comment back...i'm sure that Badonkadonk thing that you posted is probably safer than 90% of the vehicles on the road today.