Yes. The Toyota did the best job of protecting the occupants of the vehicle. In a collision like you described, the most serious injuries are going to happen in vehicles that transfer force of impact to occupants. Vehicles that ABSORB forces of impact (such as the toyota that folded up like a cheap deck chair) are going to protect their occupants much better. Have trouble visualizing this? Run as fast as you can at a brick wall. Don't stop until the brick wall stops you. How you feeling now? Ok, now repeat. But this time, run as fast as you can at a mattress propped up against a brick wall. The Toyota is the mattress. Other vehicles can be the brick wall. The technical term is "crumple zones". The Toyota had them, apparently the other vehicles didn't. Or, they didn't perform as well in the collision. The toyota folded up, because it was DESIGNED to fold up. My own vehicle (a mitsubishi galant) saved my life in a similar circumstance several years ago when I was rear-ended hard while stopped in traffic. Because it folded up like a cheap deck chair, I walked away totally unharmed. Well, I had a stiff neck for a few days. That tells me in any vehicle without crumple zones, I likely would have LOST MY HEAD. Oh, but the car probably would have fared better than my mitsubishi did, if the car I was driving didn't have crumple zones. Me, I'm thinking it's better to have to buy a new car than to have to buy a new head. -Dave (seriously thinking of buying a Toyota now)
Wannabe Cops 4664Laura Bush liquidateed her boy friend As opposed to your typical dimocrat, like yourself, hanging out in the bath house enjoying suck...
