We all know that the vehicle rules, chase combat in particular, failed their crash test right out of the gate. Even the most rudimentary application of search-fu will provide a bottomless well of questions, complaints, and homebrewed jerry-rigs. I'm not here to start another thread lambasting them, or to ask for nebulous and theoretical fixes-- I'm curious as to how you fine folks actually handle them at your respective tables.

I tend not to use them at all. Thus far, there have been no vehicle-based situations in my campaign in which the players would feel extremely cheated by letting most of their actions be adjudicated solely according to GM fiat, so we typically just freeform our chases, with the players declaring their actions and me taking all the drivers' pilot rolls and vehicle stats into account to help decide the scene. All vehicle and drone mods have to be cleared through me, and I don't allow overmodding.

I run them RAW. At home, at cons, at the FLGS. No problems. Lots of fun.

Us too... have not noticed any problems yet...

Keep the Faith

I think the main problem is the lack of rules for seatbelts and stuff like that.
Sure, there are rules for passenger protection and rigger cocoon. But they are upgrades to a car. It doesn't say anywhere what is the basic protection for passengers (none?).

What don't you like about them? What questions has your group had so far?

That's what happens when corps make the rules.

Check pg 103 of Arsenal for seatbelt rules. Having actually been in an accident I can say they are bullshit as far as not being hurt (hit by a bus) but it works for the game I guess.
We also run vehicle rules RAW. Never had much issue with it so long as you remember it is just abstract. It was never meant to be a move by move play on a car chase. It took a little work to get used to it but it works fine for us now. Just ran one last weekend involving a hovercraft and a magically boosted lampray sub. Kind of fun really.

"Roll a pilot check" usually, the rest is handwaved.

We use them RAW as well.

Have used them one time (chase scene in the first denver mission), one player in particular had some issues with them, mainly they being somewhat abstract, but also the point that acceleration/speed is not used in the equation. I think i gave them a few bonus dice for them being faster after that, as i could see the point and the situation allowed.

That said, i think they are just about right and find it very action packed and lots of fun !

Darune, I'm not sure if this is what you meant in your game example, but a faster vehicle actually gets +1 dice bonus per 10 points of speed it exceeds the other car. It's on pg 170 of SR4a in the chase combat section. If that's what you meant just disregard this, however it sounds like you were just giving a bonus cuz the player whined for it. He actually deserved the bonus.

So, I've just remembered of posting this today. I've seen the rules on page 103 of Arsenal saying that they avoid ALL damage. But I've also seen the rules on page 171 of SR4A saying that damage to a vehicle only affects the vehicle with the exception of: ramming, full-automatic burst and area-effect attacks like grenades and rockets.
So, there is a little contradiction here.

If the rules said that seatbelts, air-bag whatever, added a fixed amount of dice to soak damage according to the rating of the system, whatever, I would be ok with it.

It isn't a contradiction. The Arsenal rule says

So, because SR4 assumes that you have air bags and side air bags and seatbelts and likely some other cool high tech safety things, you don't take damage for a crash, but can still get hurt by bullets going through the door, or the concussive force of an explosions, or maybe being jolted around by ramming (Enough to shake you but not enough to set off airbags maybe?)

I do agree that no damage from a crash regardless of speed or anything does seem a bit excessive as far as reduction goes though.

hi hi

At the time, I thought the way you were supposed to run it was to add the vehicles body and armor to the people who were inside to resist crash damage. Now I don't think that is the case.

Right... Because according to rules, ramming another vehicle is different than rammed vehicle crashing.
For instance: if two vehicles collide and one of the loses control of the vehicle and crash, people inside will only take damage from the collision, not the crash...
Yeah, RAW doesn't make sense here.