Hi,
48kt are 48kt are 48 kt... are 48kt you have to de-energize when hitting any structure, no matter if it's a corn field, a tree or a brick wall.
I would always (!) favor the parachute over the high angle approach with minimum forward movement.
About the crash resistance: there has been a C182 (old generation) crash a few weeks ago with minor injuries. There doesn't seem to be much need for a crumple zone when a chute is being installed. Good to have, but not essential as it seems.
I'm stunned that the BRS retrofit for the C172 and C182 models is chosen by so few - for the price of some avionics gimmicks and with only 25kg or so weight penalty one can save ones life (and their loved ones') in so many cases of spatial disorientation, midlife collisions, incapitation and so on... (no, I don't have any connection with BRS to praise their products, but the BRS chute discussion has some similarity with the seat belt discussions in the 70s and 80s...)
Kind regards,
Peter