It's an arms race.
I used to live near a couple who were both doctors in the ER and they both drive the biggest trucks that they could find because they saw that people in large trucks tended to be fare better in accidents.
I have a small sedan for myself and a smallish SUV for my wife and kids. I feel pressure to upgrade both to something larger.
Larger potentially means even in a single-vehicle accident, there is a greater distance to decelerate over and things are less likely to intrude into the vehicle.
The IIHS, which systematically tests vehicles in simulated crashes, says:
> A bigger, heavier vehicle provides better crash protection than a smaller, lighter one, assuming no other differences. The part of the vehicle between the front bumper and the occupant compartment absorbs energy from crashes by crumpling. As a result, the longer front ends of larger vehicles offer better protection in frontal crashes. Heavier vehicles also tend to continue moving forward in crashes with lighter vehicles and other obstacles, so the people inside them are subject to less force.
https://www.iihs.org/topics/vehicle-size-and-weight
There is some simple actuarial data there on their page, too, which shows there's a marked advantage but it is less than it used to be.
Not only will the bigger object experience less F=ma acceleration in a collision, it will also have a stronger frame and deeper crumple zones.
https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/passe...
Just a consideration: Would integrating 5-point harnesses and an rollover cage into these trucks help to mitigate this problem? (I am of course aware that the latter would make to truck even heavier)
People don't generally consider that the bigger cars are more likely to be in accidents in the first place even if they come out of it better. Ireland would have much smaller cars than the US but much better traffic record.
So bigger == safer -- isn't giving a nuanced story or understanding. For sure though bigger == less fuel efficient.
Arguably the strengthening of the roll-cage in vehicles has lead to the a-pillar problem. https://www.thewisedrive.com/the-a-pillar-problem/ - my small modern car has a much wider a-pillar than my massive boat from the 60s.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23562447 - arguing that SUVs are immoral.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Tullock#Tullock's_spike
Is there actually an indication that larger cars are more prone to accidents or are their drivers inherently more aggressive and accident prone?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenworth_W900
Or Peterbilt 379 (Optimus Prime)
The fraction of that damage and injury borne by the occupants of that vehicle, the only people with the power to make the decision to use that vehicle, is reduced.
The volume of damage, injury, and death borne by everyone else increases by multiples when a modern passenger pickup enters the mix.
I'm fairly sure that safety standards essentially require the roof to not crumple in rollover conditions.
Roll cages are necessary in racing where speeds (and forces) are much higher than road speeds.
So when F150 lightning gets 5 star rating, it's within class. If you hit an overweight dumptruck you're going to have a bad time. Luckily dumptruck drivers know how to drive and that rarely happens.
However if you're in a ecobox compact, if you hit that dumptruck you're literally flat. If you hit one of the new electric vehicles which weigh in the area of 7-9000lbs. You're going to have a bad time.
If you were to properly measure safety rating not within class. It basically is just a measurement of size. So why do they do this? Clearly misrepresenting safety of smaller vehicles? It's entirely a political decision.
Bigger vehicles are more expensive. Transportation is one of the highest costs to society. So you dont want everyone driving the biggest vehicles. You want to adjust society so they choose smaller vehicles. The total cost of ownership to society is thusly less and you produce more wealth for your own people.
You can see where it's going. Private ownership of cars will remain, some people need full time access to personal transportation. However there's lots of people who really just need to be brought somewhere.
Municipalities can offer autonomous electric vehicles that say an elderly person can jump into and get to their destination much like a taxi at much lower cost than a taxi. The cost per trip is going to be measured in cents, maybe dollars with inflation? The cost of transportation to society dramatically decreases. We will be significantly wealthier.
International produced a line of pickup trucks that might suffice.
Maybe for Ford/GM/etc.
But it looks like Kia/Hyundai/Honda/Toyota are still pumping them out with vigor. And Tesla basically _only_ makes sedans.
> Trusks are also way more profitable than cars and thats another reason there are so many of them.
Maybe that explains the supply side, but it doesn't explain the demand side.
http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/transcripts/19731100roadand...
I don't drive a truck but my family has been in life threatening accidents and my parents both drive massive vehicles. All Black Secret Service like SUVs. I cant really blame them.
Rarely, I would say I need a pickup to carry stuff, and that's pretty rare. Maybe once or twice a year at most. And would be serviced by something in the old Ford Ranger class of light truck. I know Ford is bringing back the Ranger, but I don't know if it's in the same class as the 90's/00s Ranger.
They are two very different approaches to safety that aren't really compatible.
Modern F150s come with Advacetrack sport mode for TC/Stability that essentially lets you hold a slight drift angle if you want without letting the rear get out of hand - it monitors yaw, tire speeds, throttle e.tc.
Even the Civic and Corolla have gotten huge. 2004 Civic was 4455 mm long and 1720 mm wide. The new Civic is 4674 mm long and 1801 mm wide. The new Civic is actually bigger than the 2004 Accord (which was 4665 mm long and 1760 mm wide)
> I feel pressure to upgrade both to something larger.
It's same for me - one really starts to double think choice of next car when someone clearly distracted, on the phone etc. stops in perpendicular street and huge ass grill or bumper is at the level of your eyes when looking at side window.
Pounds That Kill: The External Costs of Vehicle Weight
"Heavier vehicles are safer for their own occupants but more hazardous for other vehicles"
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/591f304fa5790aa5cc8df...
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/the-hidden-danger...
Pickup trucks are getting larger and becoming a hazard to pedestrians and drivers of smaller vehicles
We've also had to ask you this before. Please just don't do it here. I don't want to ban you, but when accounts do this kind of thing repeatedly, we don't really have much choice.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32426780
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32426607
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32426432
We ban accounts that post like that, so please don't do post like that here.
In terms of the specific comment I replied to: even if we ignore your other comments, it seems obviously sarcastic and aggressive. If you didn't intend it that way, you should have written it very differently.
People sometimes think that their intent communicates itself when posting comments, but it doesn't—it has to be encoded into a message in a way that the reader can receive.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...