For those of you prone to fits of epilepsy, please proceed with caution, the frame-rate does not appear kind. To watch it in HD, click through to Vimeo.

Yes, you read that right, these little beasties are street legal. They run on either Kawasaki or Honda motorcycle engines and co-opt vintage bumper car bodies into the most awesome form of mini-car we've seen in too long. There's seven of these little monsters floating around California, and they're all the creation of one man, Tom Wright, a builder in the outskirts of San Diego who figured the leftovers of the Long Beach Pike amusement park needed a more dignified end than the trash heap. They were originally powered by Harley motors but they rattled like hell and Tom replace them with Honda or Kawasaki 750's and a couple have been measured as capable of 160 MPH, which is terrifyingly fast in machines with such a short wheelbase. Doesn't mean we would totally rock one should the opportunity present itself. In fact, we now have only one burning desire, to see these things running a go kart track with a clown in the drivers seat. No idea where the clown came from.

[via Jalopy Journal, read more at Bench Race]

The test involves compressing a metal plate into the corner of the roof. Withstand four times your vehicle's weight before reaching five inches of crush and you earn a "good" rating (the Smart Fortwo did 5.4 times its weight). Withstand better than 3.25 times your weight and you earn an "acceptable" grade. This is where the Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Mini Cooper, and Toyota yaris performed. The Aveo was a the bottom with a "marginal" rating, which means it had to do better than 2.5 times its weight.

Full details in the IIHS press release below the photos.

Smart Fortwo rates good for roof strength; test is designed 
to assess & compare occupant protection in rollover crashes
ARLINGTON, VA - The Smart Fortwo has the strongest roof and the Chevrolet Aveo has the weakest among 2009 micro and minicars recently tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The Smart earns the highest rating of good compared with acceptable for the Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Mini Cooper, and Toyota Yaris. The Aveo is rated marginal.
The rating system is based on Institute research showing that occupants in rollover crashes benefit from stronger roofs. Vehicles rated good must have roofs that are more than twice as strong as the current minimum federal safety standard requires. The ratings, products of the Institute's new roof strength testing program, add to consumer information tests that rate vehicles for front, side, and rear crashworthiness. The roof test is designed to help consumers pick vehicles that will help protect them in rollover crashes.
"We anticipate that our roof strength test will drive improved rollover crash protection the same way our frontal offset and side tests have led to better occupant protection in these kinds of crashes," says Institute president Adrian Lund.
Roofs have gotten stronger during the past few years, Institute research shows. Part of the reason is that automakers have made structural improvements to earn better front and side ratings in Institute tests. Strong A and B pillars help prevent intrusion in these types of crashes. They also help hold up the roof.
"Small cars should have an easier time with the roof strength test," Lund explains. "Their light weight means their roofs don't have to work as hard to keep the structure around the occupants intact in a rollover."
About 10,000 people a year are killed in rollovers. When vehicles roll, their roofs hit the ground, deform, and crush. Stronger roofs crush less, reducing the risk of injury from contact with the roof itself. Stronger roofs also can prevent people, especially those who aren't using safety belts, from being ejected through windows, windshields, or doors that have broken or opened because the roof deformed. Roofs that don't collapse help keep people inside vehicles as they roll.
The best protection is to keep vehicles from rolling in the first place. Electronic stability control is significantly reducing rollovers, especially fatal single-vehicle ones. When vehicles do roll, side curtain airbags help protect people. Belt use is essentiall

How roofs are evaluated: In the Institute's test, a metal plate is pushed against 1 side of a roof at a constant speed. To earn a good rating, a roof must withstand a force of 4 times the vehicle's weight before reaching 5 inches of crush. This is called a strength-to-weight ratio. For an acceptable rating, the minimum required ratio is 3.25. A marginal rating value is 2.5. Anything lower than that is poor.
"Compared with the current federal standard of 1.5, a strength-to-weight ratio of 4 reflects an estimated 50 percent reduction in the risk of serious or fatal injury in single-vehicle rollover crashes," Lund explains.
The Smart withstood a force of 5.4 times its weight. The Aveo withstood a force of just over 3 times its weight.
Cars have been built to meet the same roof crush standard, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 216, since 1973. The rule was extended in 1994 to include all passenger vehicles up to a gross weight rating of 6,000 pounds. Many SUVs and pickup trucks are heavier, so they're exempt.
New federal requirements: In April the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ended numerous delays by unveiling a new rule that doubles the current roof strength requirement (strength-to-weight ratio of 1.5) for vehicles with weight ratings up to 6,000 pounds. Roofs on vehicles with weight ratings 6,000 to 10,000 pounds will be required to withstand a force equal to 1.5 times their unloaded weight. Another requirement is that roofs maintain sufficient headroom during testing. For the first time, the government also will require the same performance on both sides of the roof when tested sequentially. Phase-in begins in September 2012, and all vehicles must comply by September 2016.
"The federal government's leisurely phase-in of the new standard means roofs won't have to get stronger right away," Lund says, "so we plan to continue rating vehicle roof strength for the foreseeable future. We want to reward manufacturers who are ahead of their competition when it comes to providing protection in rollover crashes. We want to help consumers identify the safest vehicle choices."

Roof ratings added to award criteria:  A good roof strength rating will be a new requirement to earn the Institute's Top Safety Pick award for 2010. This is the second time criteria for this award have been tightened since the first winners were announced in 2005. Availability of electronic stability control became a requirement starting with 2007s.
"Adding roof strength to Top Safety Pick criteria means we're going to see fewer winners in 2010," Lund points out. A record 84 vehicles have qualified for the 2009 award so far."

To earn a top safety pick a vehicle must get top ratings in front, side, and rear tests. They must also be equipped with electronic stability control. While none of these things make a car any more fun to drive, they certainly make them more comforting to crash. The Insight and Prius were sort of givens and we're not altogether surprised about the Soul as it competes with the Honda Fit and Scion XB, both of which won the award last year.

The IIHS was kind enough to include some Kia Soul and Honda Insight carnage, which you can view below.

<img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/stills/insight_front_jalopnik.flv.jpg"

The IIHS tested 2009 models of the Honda Accord, Hyundai Sonata, Mazda 6, Nissan Maxima and Chevrolet Malibu along with the 2010 Ford Fusion. Each car was was tested with low-speed corner and straight-ahead crashes in the front and the rear. Costs were estimated for each accident and averaged to determine how well each car did. The best of the bunch was the Mazda6, the only mid-size to score "acceptable" with a weighted average cost of $871. The worst was the Chevy Malibu, which will set you back more than $3,400 for a 6 MPH rear-ending. None of the vehicles scored a "Good" rating.

Click "next" to see how each of the cars performed overall as well as in individual tests.

[IIHS]

Ford Fusion
Overall: Poor
Front Full Cost: $2,529
Front Corner Cost: $1,889
Rear Full Cost: $2,610
Rear Corner Cost: $1,073
Weighted Average: $2,207

Mazda Mazda6
Overall: Acceptable
Front Full Cost: $742
Front Corner Cost: $1,437
Rear Full Cost: $768
Rear Corner Cost: $767
Weighted Average: $871

Honda Accord
Overall: Marginal
Front Full Cost: $941
Front Corner Cost: $1,461
Rear Full Cost: $974
Rear Corner Cost: $1,507
Weighted Average: $1,133

Hyundai Sonata
Overall: Marginal
Front Full Cost: $1,791
Front Corner Cost: $1,019
Rear Full Cost: $1,131
Rear Corner Cost: $729
Weighted Average: $1,265

Nissan Maxima
Overall: Poor
Front Full Cost: $997
Front Corner Cost: $1,787
Rear Full Cost: $2,494
Rear Corner Cost: $1,352
Weighted Average: $1,687

Chevrolet Malibu
Overall: Poor
Front Full Cost: $2,092
Front Corner Cost: $1,685
Rear Full Cost: $3,494
Rear Corner Cost: $1,116
Weighted Average: $2,329

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) tested the seven most popular small cars — the smart ForTwo, Chevy Aveo, Mini Cooper, Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent and the Kia Rio — in four different low-speed tests: front bumper, front corner, rear bumper, rear corner. The cost of replacing the parts were used to determine whether the cars achieved high or low ratings. The worst performer was the Kia Rio with $9,380 worth of damage, earning it a "Poor" rating. Also earning a "Poor" rating were the Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent and the Kia Rio. The Chevy Aveo did one better with a "Marginal" rating. The best vehicle was the Smart Fortwo with only $3,281 in total damage from the four tests, earning it an "Acceptable" rating. None scored "Good." Take a look at the damage below.

The costliest design choices include the Mini Cooper's sloping hood, which wraps around the front car like a fender and thus has to be replaced in a low speed test. The numerous plastic pieces help keep the Smart on the cheaper end of repairs because the parts are easy to replace, saving the trouble of replacing an entire fascia. The Chevrolet Aveo received a "Marginal" rating, due in large part to its pre-painted fenders, which are cheaper to replace because there's no need to factor painting into the replacement cost.

Mini and microcar bumpers allow pricey damage;
none of the 7 tested rates good under new system

ARLINGTON, VA - Urban drivers often pick mini and microcars because they're affordable, fuel efficient, and easy to park on city streets. Fender-benders are hazards of urban driving, and just one of them can add up to thousands of dollars in repair costs because the bumpers don't adequately protect vehicles from damage. None of the bumpers on 7 mini and microcars the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently tested earns the top rating of good, and just 1, the Smart Fortwo, is acceptable. Five out of the 7 earn poor ratings and 1 earns a marginal.

The Institute evaluated results according to a new ratings protocol for low-speed tests that better represents the damage insurance claims centers assess daily. The worst performer is the Kia Rio with $9,380 total damage in the 4 tests, 2 full-width and 2 corner impacts, to earn a poor rating. The Rio's repair bill is worse than those of most other small and midsize cars and minivans the Institute has tested. This minicar racked up about $3,700 damage, or 30 percent of its purchase price, in the full-front test alone. The Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, and Mini Cooper also earn poor ratings for bumper performance (see table below).

The Smart Fortwo is best overall, with $3,281 total damage in 4 tests. Costs are relatively low for this microcar because its prepainted plastic body panels are dent-resistant, inexpensive, and easy to replace. The Chevrolet Aveo, a minicar, is next best, with $4,490 total damage.

"You should be able to drive your car home after a low-speed crash, but too often vehicles are sidelined by only minor impacts," says Institute senior vice president Joe Nolan. "Damage to sheet metal, air-conditioning condensers, and safety equipment like headlights should never happen when your car is bumped at just 3 to 6 miles an hour. Bad bumpers add up to one big headache for consumers."

New ratings system: These are the first bumper test results released under a new Institute ratings protocol that's based on repair costs averaged and weighted to reflect real-world damage patterns. These averaged and weighted repair costs determine each vehicle's overall rating of good, acceptable, marginal, or poor in 4 bumper tests representing full-width and corner crashes at low speeds. Weighted average repairs must be less than $500 for a good rating, less than $1,000 for acceptable, and less than $1,500 for marginal. Repairs of $1,500 or more earn bumpers a poor rating.

"Bumpers can be designed so there's no damage in these low-speed impacts. At a minimum, repairs should cost less than the typical insurance deductible for a collision, which is $500," Nolan explains. "This is why we set the benchmark for a good rating at less than $500. Damage at this level may be only cosmetic, so consumers may choose not to bother with repairs. Likewise, $1,000 is about the cost of a new bumper cover, reinforcement bar, and paint, while $1,500 includes replacing vehicle parts like grilles and headlights. When you reach $1,000 the bumper isn't doing its job, and anything $1,500 or higher is egregious."

No vehicle can earn a good or even an acceptable rating in the Institute's bumper tests if it's unsafe to drive afterward or can't be driven at all. Inoperable headlights or taillights, severely buckled hoods, or a compromised engine cooling system would prevent any vehicle from achieving the top 2 ratings. For instance, the Accent's hood buckled and its radiator hose kinked in the full-front test.

"If you decided to drive away after this, you'd be calling a tow truck in short order because of engine overheating," Nolan says.

Besides this group of minicars and a microcar, the Institute has tested 54 other vehicles under the new ratings protocol. The Smart Fortwo joins the Ford Focus and Scion xB as the only cars to earn acceptable ratings. The Aveo is 1 of 15 to rate marginal. Of the 61 cars the Institute has tested so far, 43 rate poor.

How they're rated: The Institute puts bumpers through 4 crash tests including full front and rear into a barrier that mimics the front or back bumper on another vehicle plus front and rear corner impacts. The full-width impacts are run at 6 mph while the corner ones are at 3 mph. The shape of the barrier the Institute uses to test bumpers represents a typical vehicle bumper. It's set at 16 inches from the ground in the corner test and 18 inches from the ground in the full-width test.

Bumpers are supposed to absorb the energy of low-speed collisions and slow vehicles before there's damage to expensive-to-repair parts like grilles, hoods, and fenders. They also should extend to vehicle corners to protect costly lights and fenders.

Bumpers have to be tall enough to engage, and stay engaged with, the bumpers on other vehicles in collisions, even during emergency braking. Otherwise, the bumpers bypass each other when vehicles collide, overriding and underriding so crash energy is absorbed by body parts instead of bumpers.

For example, the front bumper of the Rio briefly engaged the barrier in the front full-width test before it underrode it, resulting in damage to its grille, hood, headlights, radiator, fender, and air-conditioning condenser, plus the bumper reinforcement bar. The Rio had the most expensive damage in this test, and the Accent had the second highest.

Five of the 7 cars in the full-front test underrode the barrier, and none sustained less than $1,000 damage. The 2 that engaged the barrier, the Aveo and Fit, have the lowest damage totals in this test. In the full-rear test, only the Mini Cooper fully engaged the barrier. It also has the highest bumper of the group and the second lowest damage total behind the Smart Fortwo's. The Mini's rear bumper is tall enough to do a reasonably good job in the full-width-rear test. Repairs cost $929, while the Smart's bill is $631. Damage to the Fit in the same test is $3,648, or 25 percent of this car's list price.

"Just about every panel and part on the back of the Fit had damage in the full-rear test," Nolan says. "The bumper isn't in the right place to protect the tailgate, rear panel, and taillights because it's mounted too low. It's built this way to allow easy cargo access through the tailgate. The trade-off is that in an everyday rear-ender, the other car will hit the tailgate instead of the bumper."

Pricey styling decisions: The Mini Cooper is the only car the Institute has tested with a hood that buckled in the front corner test. This is a pricey styling design on the manufacturer's part, Nolan points out. The minicar's hood wraps around the front of the car like a fender, so instead of replacing just a fender, the car needed an $810 new hood. Repairs total $2,637 in this test.

Minor impacts can cause lots of damage if the bars underneath bumper covers aren't long enough to protect car bodies out to the front and rear corners, compromising lights and other safety-related parts. Five of the 7 cars in the full-front test and 6 in the front corner test required headlight replacement.

In the rear corner test, the bumpers on the Aveo, Mini Cooper, Rio, and Yaris all engaged the barrier. Damage was limited to the bumper cover, a sign of a better bumper design.

"Bumpers are doing their job if the only damage is to the bumper cover. Bumpers aren't doing their job when headlights get knocked out or sheet metal crumples after a low-speed impact," Nolan says.

Smart's design saves on repairs: The Smart's plastic body parts easily can be replaced in sections. This makes repairs relatively affordable in comparison to other vehicles. For example, front and rear bumper covers come in 3 sections each (left, right, and center), so mechanics need to replace only the damaged parts instead of the entire plastic cover. Also keeping costs down is the fact that the bumper cover sections are prepainted. They cost roughly $160 for the center section and $180 each for the left or right fender sections.

This is the first car the Institute has tested that has prepainted body panels. In comparison, it costs $480, not including labor, to replace and paint a front bumper cover on the Aveo.

"With consumers watching every penny in this shaky economy, no one should have to shell out hundreds and even thousands of dollars to fix damage that shouldn't happen in the first place. That's not to mention the time that's wasted coordinating and waiting for repairs," Nolan says. "Our new bumper ratings should help streamline the buying process so consumers can zero in on vehicles with good bumpers. At the same time, the ratings should encourage automakers to make improvements that help move cars off their lots."

Better bumpers don't have to be complicated. Auto manufacturers already know how to make good ones. Longer and taller reinforcement bars and energy-absorbing material are key to reducing damage in low-speed collisions.

[Source: IIHS]

The little cars are meant for young children, obviously, and even have duel controls for "authentic movement." They work for 40 minutes per charge and have foam bumpers so the kids don't end up killing each other, or the furniture. At a low price of £79.98 for the set, we think they're a steal. Unfortunately, corndog-scented old dude leering at kids not included. [h/t Pocket Link]

Ah, the California State Fair. Apparently, there are all sorts of things happening at Cal Expo; wine contests, cattle judging, etc. But the main things we remember are concentric design painted on the water tower, the late-summer Sacramento heat and of course, the midway. And while at some point in our early teens, the Tilt-A-Whirl began to make us queasy, bumper cars have never lost their potential for fun. But what if one had a bumper car that wasn't dependent on an overhead electrical grid? What if it had say, some type of Honda motor in it? One UK man has built exactly that. Can we get ours with VTEC? – Davey G. Johnson

Dodgem Car [L&L Amusement Rides]

Related:
eBay Find: Sweet Firey Geronimo! Jet Powered Go-Kart! [Internal]