Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I noticed some uncontrolled variables in that snippet from IIHS right off the bat. Like how they say that small cars are more likely to have insurance claims in general, without controlling for the likely age of the driver of the respective vehicles: small cars are more likely to have younger drivers, who are always more likely to have insurance claims. I'm sure with a deeper look, there would be more of the same.
Not making a judgement about the relative safety of the Smart car in particular, but really the only thing you have going for you in a bigger vehicle is more mass. That can be compensated for with good design.
I noticed some uncontrolled variables in that snippet from IIHS right off the bat. Like how they say that small cars are more likely to have insurance claims in general, without controlling for the likely age of the driver of the respective vehicles: small cars are more likely to have younger drivers, who are always more likely to have insurance claims. I'm sure with a deeper look, there would be more of the same.
Not making a judgement about the relative safety of the Smart car in particular, but really the only thing you have going for you in a bigger vehicle is more mass. That can be compensated for with good design.
Well, you know what they say about statistics...
Regardless, the actual test of the smart being slammed into the C300 is pretty convincing and I don't see any "variables" that were unaccounted for in that test. As for "only having more mass", well that matters a lot when it comes to a crash. You are correct that good design can compensate, hence why the smart doesn't simply explode into a million pieces in an accident. The problem is good design can only go so far.
I had a CRX Si. and yeah, it's about what the Smart could be. But no one MAKES a CRX anymore, and if you're talking safety, sorry, but a Smart is safer than a '91 CRX HF by a MILE.
I'm not a fan of the Smart car. I wouldn't own one. But I did see a rig like this going down the highway a few weeks ago and thought that this is the coolest use for a Smart.
I'm not a fan of the Smart car. I wouldn't own one. But I did see a rig like this going down the highway a few weeks ago and thought that this is the coolest use for a Smart.
The crash test numbers for trucks don't really look that much better, some actually worse. This chart is from Consumer Reports, discussing the NHTSA ratings for trucks. Full link below. Note that the Kia Soul, Mazda 3, and Hyundai Sonata are included for comparison. The Smart doesn't seem to fare too badly. I'm not a huge fan, but I do want to give credit where it's due.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
