Advocacy & Safety - Are bigger cars safer?

This should get some blood boiling around here...

Are bigger cars safer? Apparently, yes:



Vehicle Crash Test: Bigger Is Safer

CONSUMER NEWS — If you thought bigger is safer, you're right, at least according to the latest round of crash tests.

he "Insurance Institute For Highway Safety" tested eight full-sized family and luxury cars -- all 2005 models -- in 40 mile-per hour frontal crashes. For the first time, all eight vehicles in the category were rated as "good" -- the institute's highest. That means the occupant would probably walk away from the crash with only minor injuries.

Cars tested include the Buick LaCross, Kia Amanti, Toyota Avalon, Acura R-l and Lexus G.S.

In these tests, sedans, which are among the heaviest passenger cars made, were rammed into a barrier. The degree of safety was determined by measuring impact forces on a test dummy placed in the driver's seat.



In related news, a $2,000,000 UCSB study proves that if you're going to slam into a barrier at 30 mph, you're better off sitting inside a Chevy Suburban than on a Schwinn. :rolleyes:


http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/news/consumer/062005_nw_crash_test.html

Key word here is cars and specifically frontal crash survival. List doesn't include SUVs, trucks, etc. for good reason and overall death statistics, they are not safer and this article should have very clearly pointed this out, as it is written right now it does a severe disservice to automobile safety awareness.

Al

More specifically front offset crash, but that's just picking nits. Big cars probably are safer. The danger in the SUV/truck category is the rollover risk which big cars probably don't have. Also, safety here is only measured for passengers of the vehicle, not the public at large. I agree the article is incomplete as written.

Yes of course bigger cars are safer - for the occupants of bigger cars - Duh.

Studies are often tiresome. I heard one the other day on Fox or MSNBC claiming that virgins get less VD.

Yes of course bigger cars are safer - for the occupants of bigger cars - Duh.

But even this is not true. All this study showed was that those specific 8 cars rated in the highest 'good' category of front end impact safety. There are many big cars on the road that you are more likely to die in relative to other smaller cars. But yes there are also statistics that show that heavier cars are safer, but one needs to dig in and look at the details before drawing any conclusions if they are to inform a vehicle purchase choice.

Al

It's really a bit of a narrow inquiry made by the whole study, isn't it? First it assumes a crash. Second, it assumes a frontal crash.

First question, is it easier to avoid the crash altogether in a smaller car? Second question, how often is it the front of the car that gets impacted as opposed to somewhere else?

Eight cars don't count as a statistic. Besides, if this were true, wouldn't fat cyclists be safer? :D

I think there are larger issues to be considered when deciding if a car is "safer" than just the safety of the occupants. A car the size of a Ford Explorer, for instance, is 8 times as likely to kill somebody in ANOTHER car in the event of an accident than is the average sedan. Big cars are very likely increasing the rate of deaths on our streets, even though relatively few of those killed are occupants of big cars.

It's also much safer to be a drunk driver than to be hit by one. But we don't publish studies encouraging drunk driving as a safety measure, do we? ;)

gotta love studies. especially when they point out the obvious. not like physics changed when we weren't looking.

i own 2 cars: one weighs about 1800 lbs (almost totally gutted - has front seats and door panels, but no soundproofing, etc. plus extraneous stuff like a/c has been yanked too), and the other about 5000 lbs. gee, which one is safer in an accident? the 2.5 ton sedan. duh. which one will be more likely to avoid an accident? the sub-1 ton race car. problem is, the Jaguar is a lot more comfortable than the gutted Honda.

consumers will almost always go for comfort over conscience.

plus, it would be kind of difficult for all of the "Super-Sized" members of our society to wedge themselves into economy cars...

Well based on this trend, tanks should be rolling on the streets soon...

Afterall Hummers are there now.

Jeeze.

All cars are equally safe... until you add the driver and make them move. ;)

I think there are larger issues to be considered when deciding if a car is "safer" than just the safety of the occupants. A car the size of a Ford Explorer, for instance, is 8 times as likely to kill somebody in ANOTHER car in the event of an accident than is the average sedan. Big cars are very likely increasing the rate of deaths on our streets, even though relatively few of those killed are occupants of big cars.

It's also much safer to be a drunk driver than to be hit by one. But we don't publish studies encouraging drunk driving as a safety measure, do we? ;)You always do a good job of explaining statistics. In addition to the factor you mentioned, the big vehicles also severely reduce other drivers' (including cyclists) ability to see the road and traffic. Thus, they may cause accidents in which they aren't even involved. I'm sure this makes the roads less safe for all, but this data is probably not gathered.

Petroleum will probably hit $60/bbl tomorrow. Maybe we will see fewer big SUVs and big sedans on the road in a couple years.

All cars are equally safe... until you add the driver and make them move. ;)This is not strictly true. Intelligent design of controls and instruments can counteract some stupid human tendencies. Of course, it is probably impossible to design a human-controlled system that is totally immune to human stupidity.

This is not strictly true. Intelligent design of controls and instruments can counteract some stupid human tendencies.

Yes, but don't underestimate the capability of the human mind to adapt and overcome. Just take a look at what happened with anti-lock brakes. People pushed on the pedal and it vibrated so they thought something was wrong and took their foot off the pedal.

A wise man was once rumoured to have said...
For every solution, there can be found a problem.

What the world really needs is not more safety in design but more safety in training. Obviously both would probably be the best thing.

I drive a VW Passat. 16 driver deaths per million vehicles. Zero deaths in multiple vehicle collisions. :) It's considered a midsize. My wagon weighs in at around 3400lbs.

I drive a VW Passat. 16 driver deaths per million vehicles. Zero deaths in multiple vehicle collisions. :) It's considered a midsize. My wagon weighs in at around 3400lbs.

That's what we own, too (2001 Passat wagon, 4-cylinder engine), and safety IS one of its major selling points. It's the best all-around compromise among safety, economy, maneuverability, cargo capacity, practicality, and comfort that we could find.

I heard a road safety expert make a good point once, "instead of putting airbags in cars, install 12" spikes in the steering wheel, then you'll see some safe driving".

Sure big cars are safer, to hell with everyone else whom you may hit with your big car though. So, more people get bigger cars, then SUVS, then hummers..... it's a classic arms race and the oil companies are smiling all the way to the bank.

I'd say if I wanted all-out safe, I'd get a BMW 3 series or 5 series wagon. That's probably the best combination of maneuverability, crashworthiness, ability to see what's going on around you, etc. And the wagon because wagons are cool, and are the same as the car, just with a wagon body.

... SO IN CONCLUSION
Larger cars are safer and should phase out the use of smaller cars within the next 2 years.
If you care about your children, family, cats, dogs, and fluffy bunnies you should sell your economy and hybrid cars and purchase our new Exhust-o-saurus 200 LX today. The lower gas milage (4 mpg) and larger wheel base (120 inches) coupled with our new and improved front end crumple zone made out of space aged concrete and the blood of the nonbelievers should render you impervious to any harm should you find yourself staring point blank down the carnivorous barrel of an oncoming Mack Truck as you swerve from lane to lane oblivious to the world around you.
And at only $49,997.62 we're giving them away!

This study has been brought to you by the National Oil Producers Society and the Organization For Pulling Statistics Out of Our Asses.

There is so much more to consider - the ability of the car (and driver) to evade accidents - quick and responsive turning, little or no body sway, stop quickly, not lose traction, etc. Many cars have active handling which is a huge benefit in emergency situaions. Then there are saifty factors like side air bags. This is one situaion where newer is generally better.

A UK TV program conducted some high-speed crash tests of the tiny SMART car just to see if it was as weak as it seemed. At 70mph, a head-on collition into a concrete barrier did not collapse the safety cage. Of course the desceleration would have turned the occupant's brains to jelly but they would have left a beautiful corpse.

Depends on which side of the windshield you are. Sometimes, you are the bug, sometimes the windshield.

Who is safer:
-- a nose guard,
-- a tight end, or
-- a receiver?

In terms of vehicle accidents there are many relevant factors:
-- skills of driver, i.e. range of vehicle movement options is higher for skilled drivers and lower for nonskilled
-- accident avoidence skills, i.e. defensive driving
-- accident impact skills, i.e. choosing the best positioning for the impact vs closing eyes
-- weigh of vehicles
-- angle of impact
-- smart crumple zones in vehicle
-- air bags: driver and side cushion
-- bumper heights when bumpers contact

Bigger does not mean safer. It does mean somewhat lower probability of being pushed back. Which is safer in a collision: a 80's cad fleetwood or a new toyota camry? If you don't know, it's time to check out the accident data on the vehicles you drive.

The three greatest safety factors are:
-- driver skill, more of a professional driver than a brain dead motor mouth
-- accident avoidance. The greatest accident is the null accident because I avoided it.
-- a vehicle that can accelerate quicker, brake faster, and corner faster so it can dart out of the accident.

But few want to get into the science of which it better. It's easier to assume that old football tackle will suffer the least in an accident. I don't recall Jerry Rice suffering much from being punished by the big heavy dudes. He'ld just slip past them. No accident, just zippy doo dah, and rack up another touchdown.

That's what we own, too (2001 Passat wagon, 4-cylinder engine), and safety IS one of its major selling points. It's the best all-around compromise among safety, economy, maneuverability, cargo capacity, practicality, and comfort that we could find.

What about reliability?

I heard a road safety expert make a good point once, "instead of putting airbags in cars, install 12" spikes in the steering wheel, then you'll see some safe driving".

That is my new, most favorite "point" made regarding safe driving. As khuon mentioned, we don't need safer cars, we need safer drivers. Design/engineering can only account for so much stupidity, after all.

BUT the law of physics prevail. If I took any full size sedan or truck and hit your VW Passat head on at 45 your going to die but not me! In fact your car would save my life because of it's smaller nature it would take the brunt of the impact sacrificing itself for me...thank you for saving my life!!!

Petroleum will probably hit $60/bbl tomorrow. Maybe we will see fewer big SUVs and big sedans on the road in a couple years.
I don't think expensive fuel will change that, unfortunately. I have noticed that more and more, larger cars and those giant digusting SUV's are purchased by companies that use them as company cars. Therefore, the driver isn't paying anything for it (company picks up the lease payment), or paying for the fuel (company picks up the tab). So there would be no effect on the driver of this vehicle because what do they care, it's not THEIR money. Very sad. In this area (Chicago), you can't drive anywhere without having your vision obscured by some jagoff in a Hummer.

How well do you understand safety?
Can you pass this 8 question quiz? Your life may depend on your answer :eek:

This quiz is based on national vehicle deaths for 4 years ending 2003.
http://www.iihs.org/srpdfs/sr4003.pdf Your life may depend on your answers so don't peek until you have answered the quiz.

#1 Which vehicle had more fatalities: BMW Z3 -OR- Chevy Blazer 2 door?

#2 How much higher death rate?
[ ] 0 times, even odds
[ ] 2 times more fatalities
[ ] 4 times more fatalities
[ ] 6 times more fatalities
[ ] 7 times more fatalities
[ ] 9 times more fatalities
[ ] 11 times more fatalities

#3 Which vehicle had more fatalities: VW Golf convertible -OR- the big Ford Excursion SUV?

#4 How much higher death rate?
[ ] 0 times, even odds
[ ] 2 times more fatalities
[ ] 4 times more fatalities
[ ] 6 times more fatalities
[ ] 7 times more fatalities
[ ] 9 times more fatalities
[ ] 11 times more fatalities


#5 Which vehicle had more fatalities: Honda Odyseey Minivan -OR- Chevy Silveraro 4x4 SUV?

#6 How much higher death rate?
[ ] 0 times, even odds
[ ] 2 times more fatalities
[ ] 4 times more fatalities
[ ] 6 times more fatalities
[ ] 7 times more fatalities
[ ] 9 times more fatalities
[ ] 11 times more fatalities

#7 Which vehicle had more fatilitie: Toyota small suv RAV4 -OR- Chevy Blazer 4 door SUV?

#8 How much higher death rate?
[ ] 0 times, even odds
[ ] 2 times more fatalities
[ ] 4 times more fatalities
[ ] 6 times more fatalities
[ ] 7 times more fatalities
[ ] 9 times more fatalities
[ ] 11 times more fatalities

STOP. WRITE DOWN YOUR ANSWERS BEFORE READING FUTHER.

More interesting info:
Death rates for cyclists per 1,000,000 population
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSF2003/809768.pdf
all states listed, you might want to check out your state.
N Dakota & Arkansas about safest, 0.0% && .037%
Alaska & Florida the worst, 6.17% && 5.93%

Cyclists' accident death rates by type of collusion
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/ctanbike.pdf
how to be safer in riding, data on each accident type and illustions of car[s] and
bikers positions for each accident and graphic breakouts. about 41 accident types

All vehicle accidents, overview data
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

Head on collisions vs Rollover deaths

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSF2003/809767.pdf
rollover deaths in 2003== 8,947
head on deaths in 2003== 5,063

so 1 3/4 more likely to die of rollover than head on collision. SUV's have about 4 times the rollover death rates of cars. [Sorry, you'll have to look up the data for that one. Just what I remember from previous studies]

You didn't peek did you? Answer is coming, just be sure you answer before scrolling down. ;)

Which vehicle had more fatalities:

That's a really bad question, since the answer is based on the actual number of each vehicle on the road. I assume this is per driver or per mile driven?

2000-2003 National Fatality Answers

6 times more drivers and passengers of 2 dr Blazers died in these 4 years than of Z3 drivers and passengers.
2 times more drivers and passengers of Excursions died than of Golf Converible drivers and passengers.
7 times more drivers and passengers of Silverados died than of Odyssey drivers and passengers.
11 times more drivers and passengers of 4 door Blazers died than of Rav 4 drivers and passengers.

Did you get more than 1/2 right? :beer:

Point is simple. It is NOT always the heaviest vehicle that wins, i.e. driver and passenger is safer.
In real life it is not just head on accidents, you also have to count the rollovers, the intersection T-bones,
the DUI, etc.

By the way, in the cycling data did you see where there are less deaths to cyclists than there were 10 years ago? Both in actual numbers and in % of miles traveled. Motorcycle riders have about the highest death rate.

Well, ponder the quiz and how well you did. If nothing else, maybe next time you buy a vehicle you'll check one of the above links for current data on real life safety before you make a horrible mistake.:)

Just so don't have to look up numbers again, here are the raw numbers used in quiz:

z3 vs 2dr blazer 58vs308
golf vs excursion 52vs107
odyssey vs silverado 19vs125
rav4 vs 4dr blazer 18vs 190

I wanted to use 'vette data, but it wasn't included in list, or any real sports cars. stangs and pontiacs, but no vette or jag xke. [ nor little duece coupe, or little old lady from pasadena ]

Your point is seriously flawed. The SUV's have a high rate of turnover and the majority of those deaths is a result of that. But take those same questions and use the cars and smash each one head on into each other at 45mph a piece (90mph closing rate) and then tell me who survives. I don't own an SUV due to the high roll over rate, but if I didn't have a choice and I was going to collide head on with a BMW Z3 but had a choice of vehicle to use I would chose the SUV...or a Semi, but lets keep it down to the normal world. So I own a full size sedan and a minivan and either of those cars will survive an accident better then any of you "safe" car examples you used above.

2000-2003 National Fatality Answers

6 times more drivers and passengers of 2 dr Blazers died in these 4 years than of Z3 drivers and passengers.
2 times more drivers and passengers of Excursions died than of Golf Converible drivers and passengers.
7 times more drivers and passengers of Silverados died than of Odyssey drivers and passengers.
11 times more drivers and passengers of 4 door Blazers died than of Rav 4 drivers and passengers.


There's a slight problem here. There are more 2-dr Blazers driving around than Z-3's. So that's not exactly accurate. Kind of like the old "most car accidents occur within 10 miles of your home." Well duh, that's where cars spend most of their time. You gotta drive FROM your home to get anywhere, so I find that to be rather stupid.

If you wanna be accurate, try Z-3's against Miatas, or S-2000's.

The point about SUV safety in collision actually depends on the design of the car/SUVs frame. I forget the exact terminology, but many SUVs designed on truck bodies have a very stiff frame, and in a collision, much of the impact is delivered to the driver, not absorbed by the car's crumple zones... which are designed into in most cars and some later SUVs, but not into many SUV's. The truck bodies are actually quite dangerous for the SUV occupant as well. Auto makers like the truck bodies 'cause they're cheaper, tho. Frame design-- and the ability of that design to absorb impact-- is certainly an element in car safety no matter the size of the vehicle.

That is my new, most favorite "point" made regarding safe driving. As khuon mentioned, we don't need safer cars, we need safer drivers. Design/engineering can only account for so much stupidity, after all.

Interesting thread here, all. Anyone do any studies on the types of drivers and their skill levels for each kind of car? Back when I owned a car, I had a little Toyota MR2, and everyone, esp. my mom, thought I was in such danger. I always felt very safe in it, though, because as a hyper-paranoid driver, I felt more in control of that little thing than anything else. And it definitely made me a more skilled, safer driver. I don't suppose there is anyway of measuring how many collisions have been avoided by certain types of drivers and certain types of cars.

I'm sure that if you took most highly-skilled race car drivers, and you gave them a choice of one automobile to drive and drive safely in, they'd probably choose some kind of coupe over an SUV or truck.
Course this is pure supposition on my part.

I'm sure that if you took most highly-skilled race car drivers, and you gave them a choice of one automobile to drive and drive safely in, they'd probably choose some kind of coupe over an SUV or truck.
Course this is pure supposition on my part.

I think you'll find that it depends. These guys might choose an SUV because they're more comfortable with its handling and have developed better skills. Again, I would point to driver training.

http://www.juanyjuan.com/images/Baja1000a.JPG

I think you'll find that it depends. These guys might choose an SUV because they're more comfortable with its handling and have developed better skills. Again, I would point to driver training.


Not that I'm a racecar driver, but I'd choose a HMMWV if gas prices(and monthly payments) weren't at issue. I never wrecked mine in the Army so I don't know any collision stats, but I never got it stuck anywhere either. Plenty of room for my bikes, too.;) Don't get me started on the H2, tho.... :mad:

I think you'll find that it depends. These guys might choose an SUV because they're more comfortable with its handling and have developed better skills. Again, I would point to driver training.

I own a 2001 2 door Ford Explorer, previously a 1992 Explorer. I know the handling of this car extremely well, probably better than most Explorer owners, both on road in city and highway driving and on dirt roads worse than pictured. I also have driven a Toyota Prius for about a year, my wife mostly drives it (I mostly cycle and use Ford for special needs)

I am far, far more comfortable with the handling of the Prius, it can corner faster, stop better, swerve around obsticals better. The Explorer is very sketchy in the handling in comparision - its a lumbering beast that quickly looses control if you push it.

Al

Bigger cars are not necessarily safer--

(Following link shows b&w of Jane Mandfield's Lincoln after crash there is some gore)

http://www.findadeath.com/Deceased/m/Mansfield/Jayne%20CAR/mansfield%20crash.JPG

The other one of Jane's curves. Road shot of Jane's last curve. No body shot.
http://www.findadeath.com/Deceased/m/Mansfield/curve.jpg

Front end car only. No human.
http://www.findadeath.com/Deceased/m/Mansfield/mansfield%20crash%201.JPG.

Not that I'm a racecar driver, but I'd choose a HMMWV if gas prices(and monthly payments) weren't at issue. I never wrecked mine in the Army so I don't know any collision stats, but I never got it stuck anywhere either. Plenty of room for my bikes, too.;)

Well, you have to know the terrain, where you can fit, where you can't, where you can get high-centered, where your cambers are, your speed, your momentum, your weight distribution, your corners, your wheel placement, your differential placement, etc... It's all about driver training. Likely you had the proper training so you felt more confidant in the HMMWV. Unfortunately, the standard driver generally does not get that type of training. They rarely if ever explore the limits and boundaries of their vehicles. Jeep offers special offroad driving course as does Land-Rover. Those are companies that are serious about offroad driving and education about the proper operations of their vehicles. There's a couple of Hummer offroad driving schools too. I would have to say however that 95% (and I'm being generous) of SUV owners know very little about the special characteristics of their vehicles... what it can and can't do. They drive it like any other car. I personally would like to see vehicle-specific driver training applied to ALL vehicles regardless of make/model. And this should be done before the consumer is allowed to take posession of the vehicle. A two-day weekend course should be required at the minimum. But of course I'm fairly draconian about these sorts of things and I'd be surprised if anything like that gets implemented. I really believe that the greatest improvement to safer roads is through raising the bar.


Don't get me started on the H2, tho.... :mad:

You mean the Suburban? ;)

Khuon's right; most people don't realize that their SUV has special handling issues and should not be driven like a car; but we live in America, home of the free, land of the brave and country of morons! Go any day on any major interstate (hwy 5 in California is notorious for this) and you'll see these idiots running 85-90mph weaving in and out of traffic, with no regard or thought that if an emergency situation came up they would be tumbling along with the tumble weeds! AND these people also don't realize that SUV's come with tires design for mostly road but some off road capability which means they are low speed rated tires. Now take a 100 degree day and the SUV idiot is driving 80mph, those tires think their doing 150 or more but their only rated between 99 to 112mph. You should never exceed the speed rating of a tire - nor should you be anywhere near the speed rating for a tire. The speed rating of the tire is determined in a laboratory environment usually at a moderate ambient temperature. This does not factor in load due to cornering, nor heat due to hot asphalt or long periods of driving, nor inflation pressure that is not at the recommended level. Nor does a high rating rule out a defective tire. And remember that speed ratings is the TOP speed that it will do for 1 hour, not a prolong drive like most do on interstates. When you drive near or over the speed rating of a tire you are risking your life because there are always factors that cannot be taken into account.

Bottom line: Mountain bikes are a lot more fun than SUVs!

I enjoy my bike more than my F-350. But...I will win when I am in my truck in a head-on. Arrogant? no, just realistic. I live in the country and on a ranch. My truck is a tool of the trade. I have never been in an accident or received a ticket of any kind and have driven over 800,000 miles in my life. A safe driver is a safe driver. A bad driver will kill a cyclist, even if he or she is in a Yugo.

Car drivers - Pay attention, have respect and don't be a pr*ck. :mad: We can all share the road. :)

Riders, don't think that because you are on two wheels you are superior, you will lose :( , even if you are wearing a helmet.