Is Your Vehicle Deadly?

[bbhero]

Great, great point Indy ^^^^^^^^ The driver's decisions make all the difference in many cases. And let all of us remember.... Any vehicle no matter how big or heavy... Loses when it hits a mature tree that doesn't move at all when hit by any vehicle going 60, 65, 70+ mph. Blunt force trama and massive and I mean massive G forces put on a human being in a sudden stop accident are truly what's deadly.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted by IndyIan

I'm pretty sure the Focus is as safe as a wet cardboard box, soaked in gas...

Make sure you light up while driving, lol.

Originally Posted by IndyIan

Somehow all of the very large pickups have higher death rates than a Mini in the 2017 stats, so clearly mass isn't everything.

I recall 10, 15 years ago there was some data pointing out that the large tipsy trucks & SUV's were prone to rollovers. And that highway maintenance was starting to have to put up taller barriers to prevent such vehicles from going over them. Maybe some of that is mitigated today by VSC, I dunno. But at the time there was a tradeoff between sheer mass winning in a collision and the possibility of rolling over. And as bbhero points out, it might be for naught, depending on what you're hitting. I do believe risk management is a thing. We examine the risks and determine if it is safe enough, or if we wish to mitigate it somehow and make safe enough. Some people think driving sans seatbelt is perfectly safe while others think they need to be in an Abrams to negotiate rush hour (despite it moving at a crawl). Each of us has a threshold. And to some degree, there can be trading one risk for another, if the reward is there.

 

[bbhero]

Great point supton... Roll overs can easily kill a person... And those roofs could well be a weak point in a larger vehicle. The roofs and supports in race cars are heavily modified for extra resistance to being crushed down upon a driver's head.

 

[andyd]

Do these stats have anyway of accounting for fatalities caused by ejections? Fatalities caused by failing to wear seat belts has nothing to do with a cars' crash worthiness. Are certain cars more prone to be driven by scoff laws?

 

[bbhero]

Great point too ^^^^^^^ World Champions not wearing seat belts is a huge variable in this .

 

[Mr Nice]

Originally Posted by bbhero

Great point too ^^^^^^^ World Champions not wearing seat belts is a huge variable in this .

I know a woman and her 17 year old daughter was killed in a roll over / ejection accident. Could have been easily prevented.

 

[JohnG]

Quote

I know a woman and her 17 year old daughter was killed in a roll over / roll over accident. Could have been easily prevented.

Yeah, every time I get in a car, I look up at the dash and roof. IF I can pick out one thing I'd like to have imbedded in my chest or head, I leave my seatbelt off.

 

[Lolvoguy]

Deadly? Yes. They've also been described as "Awesome, Gnarly, Wicked, Rad and Tubular" as well as several other 80s/90s references.

 

[macarose]

As many here have already mentioned, this is the automotive version of fake news. I have a Nissan LEAF in my garage. It's very safe... but beyond that most LEAF owners don't drive them on the highway and they are heavily concentrated in urban areas,. The VW Golf is also a vehicle that doesn't do well with rural customers. Witness how many VW dealerships that exist outside of a metropolitan area. Despite the head gasket and CVT issues, the Subaru Outback is a relatively safe car. Unfortunately a used one with over 190,000 miles will still set you back $5000.

 

[02SE]

I recall back in the 90's when SUVs were becoming so popular, that it was mentioned that they were safer than small cars for their occupants. So you'd think that SUV owners would get a discount for driving a safer vehicle. But NO, since they were so popular, it was decided to instead soak the SUV owners for higher premiums, because they posed a greater hazard to compact cars. Proving that it really is all about the money. As if there were any question. I argued using their logic that since I also had Motorcycles which were apparently really at risk from all these large SUVs, I should be getting the insurance on the bikes nearly for free. Of course that didn't happen...

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted by bbhero

Great point supton... Roll overs can easily kill a person... And those roofs could well be a weak point in a larger vehicle. The roofs and supports in race cars are heavily modified for extra resistance to being crushed down upon a driver's head.

I own a few Saabs, built like tanks.

 

[meadows]

The drivers also influence the results. Most young people do not drive SUVs. They want sporty cars. Older people tend to drive larger vehicles. This skews these results.

 

[javacontour]

Rural collisions like occur at higher speeds, leading to more deaths.

Originally Posted by fsdork

Originally Posted by tbm5690

This is probably skewed as well by where these vehicles are driven: small car = large city, high traffic, higher accident rate. Not a popular choice in rural areas, as opposed to the larger SUVs and trucks that are spread out but much higher in popularity in areas where accidents are likely not as common.

That's a logical thought, but a higher accident rate doesn't necessarily mean a higher fatality rate. The attached is an excerpt from a report on 2017 collision stats in Alberta. We see in this case that although there is a far higher number of overall and injury collisions in urban areas, the fatalities are heavily skewed to rural areas.

 

[5AcresAndAFool]

Originally Posted by javacontour

Rural collisions like occur at higher speeds, leading to more deaths.

I also feel it is due to the fact trauma centers are farther away. If you get in a bad wreck here its going to be over an hour to get you to the nearest trauma center and that is by helicopter

 

[bbhero]

True ^^^^^^^ And... People hitting decent size trees. . I just saw a large Pine tree that was obviously hit by a large vehicle just a couple of days ago. In a section where Rte 5 is straight as a arrow for almost 3 miles. Someone passing in a wrong way/time evidently led to the vehicle going to the right and hitting that large Pine tree... And the speeds seen in that stretch of Rte 5 are 60-75 mph.

 

[MCompact]

One guy I know has a dingbat wife that refused to ride in one of his cars after it received a bad score in an IIHS crash test. Another friend has a mint 1973 2002; his nutball spouse won't let the kids ride in it because it doesn't have 25 airbags stuffed into every nook and cranny(she would have almost certainly reported me to Child Protective Services if she found out that my son's first car was also a 2002). In both case I suggested that they keep the car and trade in the wife.

 

[5AcresAndAFool]

Originally Posted by IndyIan

Originally Posted by gman2304

Originally Posted by fsdork

You can't beat physics. Engineering and safety features go a long way, but in a head-on crash, mass is pretty important.

^^ This ^^. Mini vs F250......

If you know what type of potentially deadly accident you are going to have then you can pick your vehicle... Somehow all of the very large pickups have higher death rates than a Mini in the 2017 stats, so clearly mass isn't everything.

Obviousy if a 2500lb car is involved in a collision with a 6000lb vehicle mass is a huge factor. If a 6000lb vehicle is involved in a wreck with a 60k lb semi, mass is a huge factor. The difference is its hard to flip a Mini and they handle great, whereas you see alot of wrecks where pickups have been flipped, along with less seat belt use by pickup drivers you have a higher death rate per capita. I own one of the statistically safest vehicles for a 2005, one of the many reasons is it is typically owned by a demographic where you will find it parked in the garage at 1am Saturday morning instead of the bar parking lot, not because it would fare well in a collision with a 8000lb vehicle.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by MCompact

his nutball spouse won't let the kids ride in it because it doesn't have 25 airbags stuffed into every nook and cranny

What model is that? I think I have 9 airbags in one car and 7 in the other. The one with 9 has an option for the rear for side impact bags so you could get up to 11. Even has knee airbags. I don't doubt that somehow we'll get to 25 someday but going to 11 from one decades ago is still a pretty big jump. Never had one deployed on me so far.

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted by Wolf359

Originally Posted by MCompact

his nutball spouse won't let the kids ride in it because it doesn't have 25 airbags stuffed into every nook and cranny

What model is that? I think I have 9 airbags in one car and 7 in the other. The one with 9 has an option for the rear for side impact bags so you could get up to 11. Even has knee airbags. I don't doubt that somehow we'll get to 25 someday but going to 11 from one decades ago is still a pretty big jump. Never had one deployed on me so far.

I was exaggerating; she's just mental.

 

[bulwnkl]

I LOVED my SAAB, and my family's SAABs when I was young.

Originally Posted by Trav

Originally Posted by bbhero

Great point supton... Roll overs can easily kill a person... And those roofs could well be a weak point in a larger vehicle. The roofs and supports in race cars are heavily modified for extra resistance to being crushed down upon a driver's head.

I own a few Saabs, built like tanks.