I'm using the 8,100 pound vehicle weight of the H1 as an off-the-cuff reference point in physics, because in practical terms, yes, bigger tends to be safer in the real world. If somebody can find the NHTSA numbers for the H1 that'd be relevant to clearing that up. Oh, and I'm talking about the military converted version that was road legal, not the GM product.
Until we get the official test numbers from a 3rd party, I'm not going to believe Tesla's numbers. For all I know they could be better than advertised, but they could also be worse. I saw the 800 G having a top speed closer to 170, which would make it faster. Also, having been on the road with 50+ Teslas, I can assure you that the speed of the vehicle absolutely does not matter, because they don't use it. Anecdotal, sure, but there's always a bragging rights speed metric to brag about, which means it's not really worth bragging about.
So basically on the last point you agree with my premise, that Tesla likes to pick terms to hype itself along the lines of Apple and how "revolutionary" their products are. Basically the Model X hasn't proven itself capable of anything yet, because it's a year behind and I haven't seen any 3rd party tests of it...unlike the Land Cruiser, which is highly regarded worldwide for being, you know, capable of handling normal and abnormal conditions.
Bigger is safer, all else being equal. But all else is far from equal when it comes to crash safety in cars, especially when you're comparing a brand new 2015 design with one from 1992.
Cars have become dramatically safer over the years. A 60% increase in mass isn't going to make up for 20+ years of improvement in safety design and technology. As far as I can find the H1 was not crash tested, so it's hard to say just what its safety is truly like, but I would not expect it to fare nearly as well as something modern.
Regarding speed, if you're saying you don't believe Tesla's numbers then you have no facts on which to base a claim either way.
The last point is puffery. (That's a technical term.) It can't be objectively compared, because it's inherently a subjective claim.
None of this supports your rather insulting invocation of "actual facts" in your previous post. I see no actual facts coming from you here.
So based on your 3rd paragraph, you frequently see Brabus 800Gs running at 170mph on the highway? I mean, there's always a bragging rights speed metric to brag about, which means it's not worth bragging about...
I don't think those 8100 pounds will help much if you are crashing into a mountain wall or drop down into a 1m deep ditch on the side of the road. Just slamming the brakes will probably give you a whiplash in that thing and it probably has tons of sharp and hard edges in the interior. Modern cars have so many safety features, auto tightening of the safety belts, seats give way in strategical locations to save your back, etc etc etc. And don't forget active safety such as auto brakes.
I'm using the 8,100 pound vehicle weight of the H1 as an off-the-cuff reference point in physics, because in practical terms, yes, bigger tends to be safer in the real world. If somebody can find the NHTSA numbers for the H1 that'd be relevant to clearing that up. Oh, and I'm talking about the military converted version that was road legal, not the GM product.
Until we get the official test numbers from a 3rd party, I'm not going to believe Tesla's numbers. For all I know they could be better than advertised, but they could also be worse. I saw the 800 G having a top speed closer to 170, which would make it faster. Also, having been on the road with 50+ Teslas, I can assure you that the speed of the vehicle absolutely does not matter, because they don't use it. Anecdotal, sure, but there's always a bragging rights speed metric to brag about, which means it's not really worth bragging about.
So basically on the last point you agree with my premise, that Tesla likes to pick terms to hype itself along the lines of Apple and how "revolutionary" their products are. Basically the Model X hasn't proven itself capable of anything yet, because it's a year behind and I haven't seen any 3rd party tests of it...unlike the Land Cruiser, which is highly regarded worldwide for being, you know, capable of handling normal and abnormal conditions.