Heavier Vehicles Not Always Safer

Environmental News Service ^ | 07/29/2002

[cogitator]

You get what you pay for. That seems obvious enough!

[Mr. Bird]

Other studies have not considered combined risk, which looks at both risk to the driver of the model in question and risk to the drivers of all other vehicles involved in crashes with that model. The study found that, when measuring the combined risk, most cars are safer than SUVs, while pickup trucks are much less safe than all other types of vehicle

Well, no s***. An SUV slamming into a Geo is going to cause a lot of hurt, and not to the SUV driver. But using the "combined risk" method here, the SUV gets docked for safety as much as the Geo. Brilliant.

This is like saying that guns are just as dangerous to the person pointing it as the person he is pointing it toward. This is Green crap.

[sheik yerbouty]

More like Green Slime!

[spqrzilla9]

This "study" is bogus crap, first of all the NHTSA studies did compare relative risk - all one needs to do is to actually read them. Secondly, the NHTSA studies didn't just claim that SUV's were "safer" than subcompacts but showed that lighter subcompacts were more dangerous than heavier subcompacts.

[MJemison]

...small cars....have been...as safe as larger ones.

As my kids would say, "Um, yeah, riiiiight."

[TC Rider]

Having scraped a couple of Hundais off of the back of my SUVs, I would beg to differ.

What's not safe about this heavy truck?

[Blue Screen of Death]

(1/2M)*(V²)

[Prolix]

"What's not safe about this heavy truck?"

If you forget to set the parking brake it might roll down your driveway and crush your house ...

[Defend the Second]

Key to this piece of propaganda is the use of "combined risk" to estimate risk to both the driver of your car and the risk of injury to others involved in the accident. It appears from this article that the following two accidents would yield identical safety ratings: Accident 1: Geo with one driver crashes into Geo with one driver and both die. Rating = -2. Accident 2: Geo with two people crashes into Surburban with two people. Geo people dead, Surburban people walk away. Rating = -2. By this logic the Suburban is no safer than the Geo. But I sure do know which one I want me and mine to be in...

Not to be too harsh about it, but I don't buy a Suburban to protect the other guy. I buy it and drive it to protect me and my family. Screw these people and their study.

[Mr. Bird]

but you are ignoring the risk of one car accidents.

Not really, I was just commenting on the absurdity of using combined risk as a valid indicator of safety. In addition to the roll factor, SUV and pickup owners are more likely to engage in riskier driving behaviors (off-roading, snow driving, etc.). HOWEVER, common sense (and hundreds of studies) leads me to believe that my personal person is a lot safer in a truck than in a Miata. That said, if you control for seat belt usage, air bag deployment, etc., I bet the safety differences are nominal. No company wants a deathmobile on the market.

[Still Thinking]

To determine quality, Ross and Wenzel used quantifiable parameters such as new car price, used car price, Consumer Reports safety ratings, and country of origin.

OK, I have no beef with trying to use price as a predictor of quality, although I don't think one necessarly follow the other. But how is country of origin supposed to predict quality?? Are the weenies saying that a car made somewhere other than the US is automatically presumed to be better??

And what about using Consumer Reports safety ratings to predict quality?? If they find out these cars actually are safer, it just amounts to saying "Yeah, the cars that those other guys said are, um, safer." If they are trying to correlate to quality, why don't they use the repair ratings as a quality measure? This way, their thesis is "proven" by presuming it to be true in the study design.

[Post Toasties]

My one foray into compact cars (Dodge Aries) was terminated suddenly one morning (about six months after I paid it off) on the way to work by a college student who blew two red lights and hit me at 50mph without even putting the brakes on.

[Still Thinking]

Having scraped a couple of Hundais off of the back of my SUVs, I would beg to differ.

Excellent point. That reminds me of an accident I was involved in. I was sitting stopped at a light in the rain in my '77 Plymouth, and was rear-ended by a Honda Civic, who was then rear-ended by a Toyota Genericus. The Toyota had major damage, the Honda was probably totalled, while I had a small scratch on my license plate. ;-)

[Physicist]

They can say what they want, but they can't repeal Newton's second law:

F=ma

The bigger the "m" (mass), the smaller the "a" (acceleration). The "a" is what kills.

Certainly, for a given mass, safety is strongly dependent upon design, but that doesn't change the fact that for a given design, heavier is safer.

[toddst]

My one foray into compact cars (Dodge Aries) was terminated suddenly one morning (about six months after I paid it off) on the way to work by a college student who blew two red lights and hit me at 50mph without even putting the brakes on.

I'm amazed you're still with us. I was hit from behind by a driver who "didn't see me" and hit full force at about 30mph. She exited her car through the windshield (obviously no seat-belt engaged, along with her brain.) I have permanent damage to my back & neck.

I now have been driving a Suburban for almost ten years. The next fool to rear-end me will be the only one hurt IMO.

[Post Toasties]

Well, I was lucky. I saw her coming out of the corner of my eye and came to a stop just in time for her car to hit and glance off the front of my car. If I hadn't seen her in time to stop, I would probably have also suffered permanent injury or wound up in the morgue.

[Free the USA]

Index Bump

[SLB]

Two years ago a young stud decided to try to park his Mitsubishi 3000 under the rear of my 1987 Suburban while we were stopped at a red light. The score was: Suburban - $125.00 for a bumper, Rice burner - $?????.?? (totaled). There were six in the Suburban, I was the only one injured. I tightened my arms and got a little sore neck out of it. I saw him coming and yelled to the rest of the family to drop and they all did. I did have to use 4WD to pull off of the hood of the wreck. It is amazing what a Drawtight hitch with an insert in the receiver will do to the grill, radiator, hood, firewall and windshield of a nice red (little) car. That was how far under us he was. Now, someone try ot convince me that an SUV is not more crash worthy than a rice burner.

We just bought our second Suburban, a 1999 model and you got it right, it also has a Drawtight hitch and insert already in place. I drive the 1987 model to work and Mrs SLB and the kids drive the 1999.

[Wm Bach]

Who cares? If you drive an SUV like a sports car, you deserve what you get. And if you're smart enough to
drive an SUV responsibly and suffer a owers risk of death
in multicar accidents. Kudos. Let Darwin cull the herd.