size matters a lot - in a crash...

[motif]

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=7329117&page=1

so maybe I'd reconsider 3 series and rob more banks to buy 7 series? :redspot
;) :stickoutt

[mattjw916]

this is news?

by that logic everyone should be driving Hummers so they'd be safer... or we could all just drive smaller cars and waste less resources...

[Acyd]

Ice cream is cold. Thought i would throw that out there.

[knightrider711]

Technological escalation: describes the fact that whenever two parties are in competition, each side tends to employ continuing technological improvements to defeat the other. Technology is defined here as a creative invention, be it an object or a method of using an object. This is a natural result of mankind's use of our brains, and the nature of science and technology that understanding and innovations build on each other.
Escalation is usually a negative term, meaning to make bigger in a bad way. However, if two companies are in an escalating war to produce the best widget, the consumer benefits because they get a choice between better and better widgets.


So we should all drive tanks and be ok? I just want to drive to work in a car and know that i will make it there in one piece. I know that any BMW is built like a tank But it still have an amazing ride and get ok mpg. So is bigger really better?

[E36M34life]

Who woulda thought! You learn something new every day!


:facepalm

[SilverBeam]

Big cars crash more often though, because they cannot avoid crashes as well. SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents on average than cars are.

[sleepy740]

SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents on average than cars are.

maybe this is because of the people who drive the SUVs?
(this is not a stab at women drivers, BTW.)

[e36rok]

Loud noises!

[E36M34life]

(this is not a stab at women drivers, BTW.)

The truth is the truth and you can't change that.

*cough*

[Chris V]

Big cars crash more often though, because they cannot avoid crashes as well. SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents on average than cars are.

um..., better bring the tech on that statement, bub. I wanna see actual stats from the NHTSA. In fact, I can do you one better: Actual NHTSA reports.

Let's start with number of registered vehicles. 137 million registered passenger cars, 41 million registered pickup trucks, 20 million vans, and 39 million SUVs.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/PPT/2009/811034.pdf


And now on to actual crashes:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/TSF/2007/TSF2007FE.pdf

6,024,000 crashes in 2007 (the latest data set), 4.2 million of them property damage only (no injury or fatality), 1.7 million of them injury accidents, and 37,000 of them fatalities.

Now on to types of vehicles involved in those crashes. Remember, this is where YOU said SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents than cars. Wanna put money on it yet?

Fatalities
cars: 22,716
Light trucks (which includes pickups, vans and SUVs): 21,686

Hmm. Even if NO pickups or vans were in fatal accidetns, doesn't look like that category is 10% higher than cars, does it?

Injury accidents:
cars: 1.7 million
light trucks: 1.16 million

Once again, less accidents in that category.

Maybe they were involved in absolutely huge numbers of just body damage crashes...

Property Damage Only:
cars: 4 million
light trucks: 3 million.

Hmm. "SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents on average than cars are."

Nope, the FACTS say you're spouting typical BS. Light trucks have less crashes than cars. SUVs account for less than half of light truck crashes, meaning SUVs account for not 10% MORE than cars, but less than 50% of cars crashes.

Here's an interesting one: rollovers, that big SUV scare. In fatal crashes, 3809 of them were caused by a passenger car rolling over, while only 2750 were cused by an SUV rolling over. In 2007, 105,000 passenger cars rolled over total, while 82,000 SUVs rolled over, and 65,000 pickup trucks rolled over. In all cases, less than 3% of all crashes had a rollover. Since there were 39 million registered SUVs, and 82,000 of them rolled over, that means that a mere .002% of SUVs rolled over. .002% Think about how small that percentage is. 99.998% of SUVs dont' roll over. Remember, when you get to chapter 3, figure 13, the percentages there are based on total number of crashes per vehicle type, not total number of vehicles registered.

[SilverBeam]

There was a report on it a few years ago. I appologize for not using footnotes in my posts, but it was true as of somewhere between 200-2006

[mattjw916]

um..., better bring the tech on that statement, bub. I wanna see actual stats from the NHTSA. In fact, I can do you one better: Actual NHTSA reports.

Let's start with number of registered vehicles. 137 million registered passenger cars, 41 million registered pickup trucks, 20 million vans, and 39 million SUVs.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/PPT/2009/811034.pdf


And now on to actual crashes:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/TSF/2007/TSF2007FE.pdf

6,024,000 crashes in 2007 (the latest data set), 4.2 million of them property damage only (no injury or fatality), 1.7 million of them injury accidents, and 37,000 of them fatalities.

Now on to types of vehicles involved in those crashes. Remember, this is where YOU said SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents than cars. Wanna put money on it yet?

Fatalities
cars: 22,716
Light trucks (which includes pickups, vans and SUVs): 21,686

Hmm. Even if NO pickups or vans were in fatal accidetns, doesn't look like that category is 10% higher than cars, does it?

Injury accidents:
cars: 1.7 million
light trucks: 1.16 million

Once again, less accidents in that category.

Maybe they were involved in absolutely huge numbers of just body damage crashes...

Property Damage Only:
cars: 4 million
light trucks: 3 million.

Hmm. "SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents on average than cars are."

Nope, the FACTS say you're spouting typical BS. Light trucks have less crashes than cars. SUVs account for less than half of light truck crashes, meaning SUVs account for not 10% MORE than cars, but less than 50% of cars crashes.

Here's an interesting one: rollovers, that big SUV scare. In fatal crashes, 3809 of them were caused by a passenger car rolling over, while only 2750 were cused by an SUV rolling over. In 2007, 105,000 passenger cars rolled over total, while 82,000 SUVs rolled over, and 65,000 pickup trucks rolled over. In all cases, less than 3% of all crashes had a rollover. Since there were 39 million registered SUVs, and 82,000 of them rolled over, that means that a mere .002% of SUVs rolled over. .002% Think about how small that percentage is. 99.998% of SUVs dont' roll over. Remember, when you get to chapter 3, figure 13, the percentages there are based on total number of crashes per vehicle type, not total number of vehicles registered.
breathe dude... breathe...

[epmedia]

It doen't take a rocket scientict to come up with those conclusions...

What's gonna be safer in a crash every time; a Tank, or a Car....

Duh....

Robert

[Rakshas]

This thread makes me love my GMC, and hate my E36. :(

[Chris V]

There was a report on it a few years ago. I appologize for not using footnotes in my posts, but it was true as of somewhere between 200-2006

Actually, it was never true. The report I posted shows data back to the late '80s. And the NHTSA website has more data.

I've posted similar information using NHTSA data from 2006, 2004, and 2002, to other people posting spurious anti-SUV claims on various forums for years.

[PixMan]

I'll just take my chances, and drive what I like. And I like motorcycles. :)

[CirrusSR22]

Size is relative. There are millions of semi trucks on the road that will destroy even the largest SUVs. Not to mention dump trucks, snow plows, concrete trucks, garbabe trucks, etc...

I'll take my "chances" with a smaller car.

[mryakan]

Who takes anything on ABC news seriously anyway :shifty.

[gtxragtop]

Thanks! Actual data derived from a reputable source rather than "winging it" with opinion.


um..., better bring the tech on that statement, bub. I wanna see actual stats from the NHTSA. In fact, I can do you one better: Actual NHTSA reports.

Let's start with number of registered vehicles. 137 million registered passenger cars, 41 million registered pickup trucks, 20 million vans, and 39 million SUVs.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/PPT/2009/811034.pdf


And now on to actual crashes:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/TSF/2007/TSF2007FE.pdf

6,024,000 crashes in 2007 (the latest data set), 4.2 million of them property damage only (no injury or fatality), 1.7 million of them injury accidents, and 37,000 of them fatalities.

Now on to types of vehicles involved in those crashes. Remember, this is where YOU said SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents than cars. Wanna put money on it yet?

Fatalities
cars: 22,716
Light trucks (which includes pickups, vans and SUVs): 21,686

Hmm. Even if NO pickups or vans were in fatal accidetns, doesn't look like that category is 10% higher than cars, does it?

Injury accidents:
cars: 1.7 million
light trucks: 1.16 million

Once again, less accidents in that category.

Maybe they were involved in absolutely huge numbers of just body damage crashes...

Property Damage Only:
cars: 4 million
light trucks: 3 million.

Hmm. "SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents on average than cars are."

Nope, the FACTS say you're spouting typical BS. Light trucks have less crashes than cars. SUVs account for less than half of light truck crashes, meaning SUVs account for not 10% MORE than cars, but less than 50% of cars crashes.

Here's an interesting one: rollovers, that big SUV scare. In fatal crashes, 3809 of them were caused by a passenger car rolling over, while only 2750 were cused by an SUV rolling over. In 2007, 105,000 passenger cars rolled over total, while 82,000 SUVs rolled over, and 65,000 pickup trucks rolled over. In all cases, less than 3% of all crashes had a rollover. Since there were 39 million registered SUVs, and 82,000 of them rolled over, that means that a mere .002% of SUVs rolled over. .002% Think about how small that percentage is. 99.998% of SUVs dont' roll over. Remember, when you get to chapter 3, figure 13, the percentages there are based on total number of crashes per vehicle type, not total number of vehicles registered.

[M3vil]

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r181/dryskal/smartcarvsmercbenz.jpg

ive always wondered what a smart car would like getting railed.

[Itsablurr]

Its not WHAT you crash, but HOW you crash it. ;)

[mattjw916]

very true...

and I'm not just agreeing because I used to own an estorilblau M Roadster too :D

[Charlie]

That video seriously made my head hurt.

The fact that this passes as "news" makes it hurt more.

-Charlie

[SilverBeam]

Thanks! Actual data derived from a reputable source rather than "winging it" with opinion.

Just because I didn't supply the source, because it was a study done a few years ago (I have a great memory for statistics) and I don't know where I would find it now, doesn't mean that it was "opinion".

[bighorns]

The smaller cars tested all look like FWD cars. This means a much shorter hood than a 3 series, and hence, a shorter crumple zone. Granted that the weight difference still factors in, but I would guess that a 3 series should fair much better than a Fit or Yaris in this type of collision, not to mention that the superior handling and brakes should give the 3 series driver the opportunity to avoid the collision in the first place.
Another factor that figures in for me is that if I wasn't driving my 3 I would probably be on 2 wheels, and at least in a car I'm surrounded with a cushion!

[kornkid8600]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RAN4gTtc4s

[Chris V]

Just because I didn't supply the source, because it was a study done a few years ago (I have a great memory for statistics) and I don't know where I would find it now, doesn't mean that it was "opinion".


But it isn't factual. NHTSA keeps crash data on hand for years. SUVs have never been involved in more crashes than cars. EVER. Light trucks as a category have never been involved in more crashes than passenger cars. EVER. ALL crash data at hand says you're wrong, so you're either misrembering the study, or it didn't exist, whether you can retrieve it or not.

And the father you go back from today, the fewer SUVs there were compared to passenger cars and light trucks. Every year you go back, there were fewer and fewer SUVs in the mix, and every year you go back in NHTSA data, the fewer SUVs were involved in accidents. So there is no point as you go back that they COULD have been involved in 10% more accidents than cars. It's simply impossible.

[Critter7r]

um..., better bring the tech on that statement, bub. I wanna see actual stats from the NHTSA. In fact, I can do you one better: Actual NHTSA reports.

Let's start with number of registered vehicles. 137 million registered passenger cars, 41 million registered pickup trucks, 20 million vans, and 39 million SUVs.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/PPT/2009/811034.pdf


And now on to actual crashes:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/TSF/2007/TSF2007FE.pdf

6,024,000 crashes in 2007 (the latest data set), 4.2 million of them property damage only (no injury or fatality), 1.7 million of them injury accidents, and 37,000 of them fatalities.

Now on to types of vehicles involved in those crashes. Remember, this is where YOU said SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents than cars. Wanna put money on it yet?

Fatalities
cars: 22,716
Light trucks (which includes pickups, vans and SUVs): 21,686

Hmm. Even if NO pickups or vans were in fatal accidetns, doesn't look like that category is 10% higher than cars, does it?.

Ok... but 22,716 fatalities out of 137 million vehicles for cars vs. 21,686 fatalities out of 101 million vans, pickups and SUVs. There's only a thousand less fatalities yet there are 36 million fewer vehicles. Which statistically makes no case for fewer SUV fatalities. The actual number may be fewer, but the percentages are not.

I had more... but I gotta go!



Injury accidents:
cars: 1.7 million
light trucks: 1.16 million

Once again, less accidents in that category.

Maybe they were involved in absolutely huge numbers of just body damage crashes...

Property Damage Only:
cars: 4 million
light trucks: 3 million.

Hmm. "SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents on average than cars are."

Nope, the FACTS say you're spouting typical BS. Light trucks have less crashes than cars. SUVs account for less than half of light truck crashes, meaning SUVs account for not 10% MORE than cars, but less than 50% of cars crashes.

Here's an interesting one: rollovers, that big SUV scare. In fatal crashes, 3809 of them were caused by a passenger car rolling over, while only 2750 were cused by an SUV rolling over. In 2007, 105,000 passenger cars rolled over total, while 82,000 SUVs rolled over, and 65,000 pickup trucks rolled over. In all cases, less than 3% of all crashes had a rollover. Since there were 39 million registered SUVs, and 82,000 of them rolled over, that means that a mere .002% of SUVs rolled over. .002% Think about how small that percentage is. 99.998% of SUVs dont' roll over. Remember, when you get to chapter 3, figure 13, the percentages there are based on total number of crashes per vehicle type, not total number of vehicles registered.

[Chris V]

Ok... but 22,716 fatalities out of 137 million vehicles for cars vs. 21,686 fatalities out of 101 million vans, pickups and SUVs. There's only a thousand less fatalities yet there are 36 million fewer vehicles. Which statistically makes no case for fewer SUV fatalities. The actual number may be fewer, but the percentages are not.

I had more... but I gotta go!


Of the percentages registered, yes, but SUV only make up a small portion of the light truck market (large pickups, compact pickups, lartge vans, minivans, SUVs) so SUVs by themselves are still a similar percentage to cars, and certainly not MORE.

[Andy348]

Should have shown this to that pesky benz dealer...

A couple weeks ago my dad and I went to a Benz dealer to look for an suv. Once we realized that 900 a month wasn't in our budget, he tried to sell us a smart car! We specified that we were currently using a Dodge Durango and didn't really want to downsize, yet he babbled on at how they were great in the snow and super safe!

Ill go forward and email this to him :)

[Ianbiz]

That's what she said.

[Critter7r]

Of the percentages registered, yes, but SUV only make up a small portion of the light truck market (large pickups, compact pickups, lartge vans, minivans, SUVs) so SUVs by themselves are still a similar percentage to cars, and certainly not MORE.

Agreed, but since SUVs aren't separated out of that figure and some SUVs are actually in the "car" category (Subaru Outback comes to mind) and SUVs are difficult to classify (Subaru Outback comes to mind again), we may never have actual hard numbers to be able to compare apples to apples.

[Maverick1225]

Lets not forget that SUV's contribute to global warming way more than what cars do.

[Takashi]

We specified that we were currently using a Dodge Durango and didn't really want to downsize, yet he babbled on at how they were great in the snow and super safe!

Let's put it this way: When any small cars, SUV, or trucks hits a wall, it is going to suffer damage. You are not going to escape the laws of physics or laws of nature.

A lot of people feel safer riding in a big SUV and put faith of having a higher chance in survival when they get into an accident. That's completely wrong. Car is a car, truck is a truck. It will be damaged when it gets into an accident and there is nothing much one can do about it.

It is usually injury to internal organs that leads to future complications. Most car buyers tend to overlook this. If your car can't absorb the energy of the accident, then it's up to your internal organs (especially your brain) to pick up the tab. The question is: Are there any garantees that a big car (e.g., Durango) will be able to absorb more energy compared to a smart car? The answer to this question relies on the design of both cars itself.

[Chris V]

At the risk of stating the obvious, you can choose what you want, but if you're in a small car, pay attention. If you pay atention you can survive for decades. If you fail to pay attention, this is what happens:

[Takashi]

I remember reading a post where a Mini and a big SUV got into an accident and the mini only suffers minor damage and the big SUV flipped over.


At the risk of stating the obvious, you can choose what you want, but if you're in a small car, pay attention. If you pay atention you can survive for decades. If you fail to pay attention, this is what happens:


In such accidents, the driver / passenger of the vehicle will die anyway. The only thing that can survive against a tractor trailer is another tractor trailer.

[Critter7r]

In such accidents, the driver / passenger of the vehicle will die anyway. The only thing that can survive against a tractor trailer is another tractor trailer.


maybe so, but I still prefer to have a car where my feet aren't resting 6 inches behind the front bumper. Maybe a frame rail between me and that tractor trailer.

I dare say there was NO crumple zone to absorb the impact in the SMART car. So how "smart" is that?

[Mstearnsy]

Your data indicates that Light Trucks have a 31% higher fatality rate than Passenger Cars.
Passenger Cars have a 7% higher injury rate than Light Trucks.
Light Trucks have a 3% higher "property damage" occurance than Passenger Cars.

I can see the ad now: "Why suffer through life with an injury? We'll finish you off right away! Trucks: a more humane way to travel"


um..., better bring the tech on that statement, bub. I wanna see actual stats from the NHTSA. In fact, I can do you one better: Actual NHTSA reports.

Let's start with number of registered vehicles. 137 million registered passenger cars, 41 million registered pickup trucks, 20 million vans, and 39 million SUVs.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/PPT/2009/811034.pdf


And now on to actual crashes:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhtsa_static_file_downloader.jsp?file=/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/NCSA/Content/TSF/2007/TSF2007FE.pdf

6,024,000 crashes in 2007 (the latest data set), 4.2 million of them property damage only (no injury or fatality), 1.7 million of them injury accidents, and 37,000 of them fatalities.

Now on to types of vehicles involved in those crashes. Remember, this is where YOU said SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents than cars. Wanna put money on it yet?

Fatalities
cars: 22,716
Light trucks (which includes pickups, vans and SUVs): 21,686

Hmm. Even if NO pickups or vans were in fatal accidetns, doesn't look like that category is 10% higher than cars, does it?

Injury accidents:
cars: 1.7 million
light trucks: 1.16 million

Once again, less accidents in that category.

Maybe they were involved in absolutely huge numbers of just body damage crashes...

Property Damage Only:
cars: 4 million
light trucks: 3 million.

Hmm. "SUVs are involved in 10% more accidents on average than cars are."

Nope, the FACTS say you're spouting typical BS. Light trucks have less crashes than cars. SUVs account for less than half of light truck crashes, meaning SUVs account for not 10% MORE than cars, but less than 50% of cars crashes.

Here's an interesting one: rollovers, that big SUV scare. In fatal crashes, 3809 of them were caused by a passenger car rolling over, while only 2750 were cused by an SUV rolling over. In 2007, 105,000 passenger cars rolled over total, while 82,000 SUVs rolled over, and 65,000 pickup trucks rolled over. In all cases, less than 3% of all crashes had a rollover. Since there were 39 million registered SUVs, and 82,000 of them rolled over, that means that a mere .002% of SUVs rolled over. .002% Think about how small that percentage is. 99.998% of SUVs dont' roll over. Remember, when you get to chapter 3, figure 13, the percentages there are based on total number of crashes per vehicle type, not total number of vehicles registered.