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.
Backup this claim.. Give me ONE scenario where a SUV driver and a Prias driver are in the same accident, and the prias driver ends up safer.. JUST ONE..
Easy. Side impact. The IIHS runs a test that simulates being- T-boned. From IIHS' website:
Expected injuries for the Prius passenger and driver as follows:
Quote:
Driver — Measures taken from the dummy indicate a low risk of any significant injuries in a crash of this severity. Rear passenger — Measures taken from the dummy indicate a low risk of any significant injuries in a crash of this severity.
Expected injuries for an H3 as follows:
Quote:
Driver — Measures taken from the dummy indicate that rib fractures and/or internal organ injuries would be possible in a crash of this severity. The risk of significant injuries to other body regions is low.
Rear passenger — Measures taken from the dummy indicate a low risk of any significant injuries in a crash of this severity.
So, looking around to see who these CNW characters are, I seem to run into a lot of redirects. In other words, who is Art Spinella and what research has he done? Putting the heaviest vehicles in the hands of the least experienced drivers doesn't sound like a great idea for the surroundings.
Do you have anything to indicate they are wrong? I doubt it.. I've NEVER seen a report to indicate a smaller car was safer than a larger one. Maybe you liberals have access to top secret reports not available to the general public.. Would you mind sharing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
A car hauling company's website? At least they have the decency to list their source, the IIHS. And the top scorer on their death trap list: Chevrolet Blazer. Mid-size SUV. Ooops.
No woops.. I clearly listed that not all larger vehicles were safer.. Heck I QUOTED them as saying so.. But the question isnt if SOME suvs are death traps, its which is MORE safe generally.. you want to selectively pick the few that are not safe and blanket all SUVs as the same.. How silly..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Looking over the rest of their top-16 list, cars like Acura RSX, Nissan 350Z, Pontiac Sunfire, Pontiac Grand Am, Mitsubishi Eclipse and even the Mustang shows up. Relatively cheap, sporty cars, marketed to young men with ambitions of driving fast. I think I can make an educated guess as to why they'd be over-represented.
No.. that would explain why there would be more accidents with those types of vehicles. It would not expain WHY the accidents are more devistating in cars than SUVs..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Acceleration? And here everybody since Newton has been computing kinetic energy as proportional to mass times speed squared. Unless the guy is thinking of deceleration.
Driving faster doesnt necessarily mean you are being more dangerous.. They are not computing speeds, they are computing DANGER in speeds..
Someone driving 40 in a prias could be killed while someone driving 70 in a Hummer might receive a bump in the head.. Its the TYPE of damages being calculated. Are you telling me Newton was calculating car crash statistics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
This is actually true, and a lot of engineering effort goes into making the car absorb energy rather than the passengers.
But yet you had to question it in the previous paragraph..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
The weight determines the speed?
That is NOT what it says.. It says the weight of the vehicle determines the amount of speed that can be impacted.. A smaller car can accept the impact at a much lower speed before it passes this impact onto the passengers.. A larger vehicle can accept the impact which would minimize the impact on the passengers..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Enough to know the difference between mass, speed, acceleration, force and energy.
And none of that has anythign to do with the topic..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Behind the gobbledygook, there is actually a point. All other things being equal, a heavier vehicle needs to shred more energy in a collision. It imparts more force - the heavier vehicle is more destructive to its counterpart. That doesn't make it de facto safer for it's occupants, though - just more dangerous for vehicles around it. It's the arms race approach to safety.
Clearly you didnt learn enough to discuss the topic. Re-read two paragraphs above and then maybe it will sink in.. Again, a larger vehicle can accept the damages at a higher speed than a smaller vehicle..
Again, a hummer could drive into a tree going 70 MPH and the passengers be harmed.. If a Prias was to do the exact same thing, the passengers could be killed. This has nothing to do with causing damage to others.. You could run into objects that dont move and the results would be devistating for the smaller vehicle and much lower for the larger ones because the vehicle absorbes the impact, and then passes what it cant obsorb onto the passengers.. You are more than welcome to let your children obsorb the impact your vehicle cant but I'd rather have the vehicle do the work..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Given the choice of driving a modern 4-door sedan (1 ton) or an M113 APC (11 tons) into a concrete wall at 20 MPH, I'd take the sedan. It will crumple and absorb the energy. The APC will remain intact and transfer the energy to its passengers. Mush. Sure, the wall will look worse, but that's not much of a comfort, is it?
And that's ignoring the active safety - acceleration, handling, braking, all that good stuff that helps prevent collisions. It is much easier to make a light vehicle perform well in those respects.
All of the babble you just stated has been discredited by every single report I've ever seen. You can pretend and make up things but that doesnt make it true, nor does it mean you are safer.. SUVs are also designed to crumble..
I went to a Toyota dealership once... I couldn't find a single car dealer that said the Prius looks "good"... I did the math and I couldn't find a single dollar sign that said the Prius was a better buy... looks ugly and costs too much... yeah... I bought an SUV instead... saved me some money and looked good at the same time...
Compare this to SUVs' Large SUVs Audi Q7
Buick Enclave
Chevrolet Traverse
GMC Acadia
Mercedes R class built after 9/08
Saturn Outlook
Midsize SUVs Acura MDX
Acura RDX
Audi Q5
BMW X3
BMW X5
Cadillac SRX 2010 models
Chevrolet Equinox 2010 models
Dodge Journey 2010 models
Ford Edge
Ford Flex
Ford Taurus X
GMC Terrain 2010 models
Honda Pilot
Hyundai Santa Fe
Hyundai Veracruz
Infiniti EX35
Lexus RX 2010 models
Lincoln MKT 2010 models
Lincoln MKX
Mercedes M class 2009-10 models
Nissan Murano
Saturn VUE
Subaru Tribeca
Toyota FJ Cruiser
Toyota Highlander
Toyota Venza
Volvo XC90
Small SUVs Ford Escape
Honda CR-V
Honda Element
Mazda Tribute
Mercury Mariner
Mitsubishi Outlander
Nissan Rogue
Subaru Forester
Toyota RAV4
Volkswagen Tiguan
Dont pick and choose ONE area where a hummer might be worse.. Why dont you look at ALL of it.
Interesting article about SUV/Safety/Rollover. The question that I initially posed was regarding the change of heart with relationship to the gas prices going up. Now, just to be honest, I felt really safe in my Honda Pilot SUV, no question. It was a economic manner as to why we switched to a hybrid car with the driving we do.
I think safety has quite a bit to do with how you drive. Honestly, I do not like driving a car as opposed to an SUV on an interstate. Due to the economy and the rising gas prices, I was wondering if folks saw a huge jump in how much they are spending for gas.
I think those goalposts were just fine where they were originally... Can't remember what you typed? Let me help - this was your post, right?
Quote:
Backup this claim.. Give me ONE scenario where a SUV driver and a Prias driver are in the same accident, and the prias driver ends up safer.. JUST ONE..
Now all of a sudden...
Quote:
Dont pick and choose ONE area where a hummer might be worse.. Why dont you look at ALL of it.
Please make up your mind. "JUST ONE" scenario or "ALL of it" - which is it?
I think those goalposts were just fine where they were originally... Can't remember what you typed? Let me help - this was your post, right?
Now all of a sudden...
Please make up your mind. "JUST ONE" scenario or "ALL of it" - which is it?
Now validate that small vehicles are safer than SUVs and explain to me why the IIH lists ONE small car as safe, and forty three SUV's as safe...
Come on.. You can do it.. If smaller cars are safer, then wouldnt they have more small cars listed in their top pics for safety reports than SUVs, and surely they would list more than ONE on their list, right?
Im not. I love SUV's.
I drive a full size Range Rover, it cost me about $80 bucks every two weeks to fill up.
Im considering buying a newer, bigger Range Rover soon.
Do you have anything to indicate they are wrong? I doubt it.. I've NEVER seen a report to indicate a smaller car was safer than a larger one. Maybe you liberals have access to top secret reports not available to the general public.. Would you mind sharing?
But the question isnt if SOME suvs are death traps, its which is MORE safe generally.. you want to selectively pick the few that are not safe and blanket all SUVs as the same..
Wouldn't dream of it. Some SUVs are quite safe, some aren't. Some smaller cars are quite safe, some aren't. "SUVs are safer" is an imprecise blanket statement.
Quote:
No.. that would explain why there would be more accidents with those types of vehicles. It would not expain WHY the accidents are more devistating in cars than SUVs..
That's an interesting idea for a statistic, but is has nothing to with the cite in your article. That's "driver deaths per million registered vehicle years". Of course the Acura RSX is going to score high in that statistic - targeted directly at the 18-25 male demographic, and you can ask any insurance actuary what sort of risk they are.
Here's the full report that your source lifted his figures from: http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4204.pdf - it's good reading. Even documents how SUVs figured a new way to kill their drivers, by making rollover accidents a statistically significant cause of death. (In fairness, that has been engineered out of modern SUVs.)
Quote:
Someone driving 40 in a prias could be killed while someone driving 70 in a Hummer might receive a bump in the head..
Cite, apart from your gut feeling? Wait, not necessary.
IIHS offset frontal collision rating for the H3: Acceptable.
IIHS offset frontal collision rating for the Prius: Good.
Good is better than acceptable. And, to reiterate, these results come from actually crashing the vehicles. (The H2 was never made available for IIHS testing. But I'm sure it would have been a paragon of safety.)
Quote:
Its the TYPE of damages being calculated. Are you telling me Newton was calculating car crash statistics?
Newton described the relationships between mass, speed and energy. For non-relativistic speeds, those are universally true. "mass, coupled with acceleration, determines the force of a crash" is just not true.
Quote:
That is NOT what it says.. It says the weight of the vehicle determines the amount of speed that can be impacted.
That's possibly even dumber.
Quote:
A smaller car can accept the impact at a much lower speed before it passes this impact onto the passengers.. A larger vehicle can accept the impact which would minimize the impact on the passengers.
Yeah, well. Two problems, here. Sadly, the laws of physics aren't kind enough to make sure that every possible joule of energy is absorbed by the vehicle before any is transferred to the passengers. A heavy, but rigid vehicle is much worse than a light one designed to crumple in a controlled manner. Which was the point of the APC vs. car comparison. An M113 is super-rigid (armored, right?) and won't crumple worth a damn. Hence it just stops, and everything inside of it suffers the full deceleration of the collision. A modern car will crumple and in doing so both absorbs part of the collision energy and makes for a gentler deceleration.
Quote:
And none of that has anythign to do with the topic..
Well, don't bring up speed and acceleration if you're not prepared to debate it, then.
Quote:
Again, a larger vehicle can accept the damages at a higher speed than a smaller vehicle..
You've stated that flat-out 3 or 4 times now, yet when the IIHS crashes vehicles, counterexamples abound. The Prius driver stands a better chance in a frontal collision with a stationary object than the H3 driver does. This has been demonstrated by actually crashing samples of both cars.
Quote:
You could run into objects that dont move and the results would be devistating for the smaller vehicle and much lower for the larger ones because the vehicle absorbes the impact, and then passes what it cant obsorb onto the passengers..
Selective laws of physics again? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
A well-designed vehicle - light or heavy - will deform to absorb energy and make the deceleration less abrupt, but pure mass doesn't help. The car that's twice as heavy will also have exactly twice as much energy to disperse somehow.
Quote:
All of the babble you just stated has been discredited by every single report I've ever seen.
Oh. Well, that's a blow.
Last edited by Dane_in_LA; 03-06-2011 at 04:01 PM..
Reason: "speed", not "cospeed". WTF is "cospeed"?
Now validate that small vehicles are safer than SUVs and explain to me why the IIH lists ONE small car as safe, and forty three SUV's as safe...
Dear me, when did I ever claim that?
You asked for a scenario. "JUST ONE", if I recall correctly. I gave you one.
Please, do cite where I've claimed that "smaller cars are safer". You can't, and you full well know it. So please have the courtesy to not ascribe that viewpoint to me, mmkay?
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.
