It dawned on me during the whole "pickups have poor offset colision ratings" that physics plays a big part in these accidents.

Try this logic out:

Pickups are much heavier than the star performers in the 40 mphr offset colion test. Moreover, in the 40mphr offset collision the vehicle is run on a sled into a barrier set to impact 50% of the driver side. With these facts one can see the effect of the weight relative to the impact has been doubled due to the surface area being reduced by some 50%, leaving less of an area to spread the impact. A 5000 lb truck hitting an object at 40 mph head on has the effect of being hit by a 5000 lb object, spread across the entire front of the vehicle. Offset colisions would seem to double this effect. A car with some 3000 lbs would fare far better with the doubling effect, resulting in a (3000 lb * 1/2 surface area) force being transmitted. Likewise, our L's see a (5,000 lb *1/2 surface area) force affecting the vehicle. With this holding true, of coursse heavier vehicles would fare worse than lighter vehicles in these tests. The lighter vehicles are only seeing a 3000 lb force being transmitted to them during the impact of a frontal colision, but we are seeing a 5000 lb collision being transmitted to our vehicles. This is a poor way to test a vehicles crash worthiness in my mind. How many accidents involve hitting stationary objects and how many involve moveable objects?

Just a thought. Welcome to interpretation.