This is also not true - he would have hit the road. If this accident happened many years ago in an older roadster, then it would have been much more dangerous. In a modern convertable the safety standard is much higher than years ago. It is therefore your choice with which car you want to drive - i.e. cost of safety.Andres125sx wrote:But there´s a difference. If you would have crashed with a convertible, the road would have been much closer to your head, to the point that probably you could have not survived. Instead of being hitted by the roof, you could have been crushed by the roadCiro Pabón wrote:Having been in an couple of accidents myself (and some in karts), I don't see much difference between your head hitting the car roof or hitting the road.
All vehicles undergo a simulated roll-over test, which is actually a static load test on the roof of the car. Convertables are not exempt to these tests, so it is difficult to say if they are that much more dangerous than normal sedans. I can say that I am against the proposed change - it would make most cars look horrible. Think of an Audi TT with the roll hoops sticking out a foot over the windshield. Nope.
Additionally, according to this study http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/809438.pdf, it would be smarter to get active in SUVs, since there are many more and the % on the road is growing massively vs. convertables. It's better to go after the low-hanging fruits first.