Most active commenters
  • aziaziazi(4)
  • bunderbunder(3)
  • stego-tech(3)
  • floxy(3)

←back to thread

307 points MBCook | 64 comments | | HN request time: 1.457s | source | bottom
1. bunderbunder ◴[] No.42151125[source]
I'd love to see some sort of multiple regression or ANOVA on this, instead of singling out a single variable. Is car brand really the best independent predictor? Or is it specific design decisions you tend to see in certain brands?

(Like, say, maximizing driver distraction by consolidating a bunch of essential controls and information displays into a touchscreen display that's really difficult to operate when it's sunny outside. Just to pick something at random, of course.)

Somewhat related, I was recently shopping for refrigerators, and fell down a data rabbit hole. If you just look at the overall style of fridge, French doors look like a terrible option from a reliability perspective. But then, digging in a bit more, it turns out that's kind of a spurious correlation. Actually it's the presence of bells and whistles like through-door ice dispensers that kill a refrigerator's reliability. And then perhaps on top of that the amount of extra Rube Goldberg machine you need to make a chest height ice dispenser work in a bottom-freezer French door refrigerator creates even more moving parts to break. But a those problems don't apply to a model that doesn't have that feature.

replies(10): >>42151205 #>>42151278 #>>42151294 #>>42151316 #>>42151413 #>>42151582 #>>42151717 #>>42151753 #>>42162767 #>>42176234 #
2. doctorpangloss ◴[] No.42151205[source]
It's an interesting perspective. I was recently shopping for shoes, and a fully closed shoe had more places where it could break compared to my flip flops. That's why whenever you are doing a dangerous activity, flip flops are recommended.
replies(2): >>42151248 #>>42151259 #
3. TheGamerUncle ◴[] No.42151248[source]
Nick Mullen may disagree
4. bunderbunder ◴[] No.42151259[source]
I'm not entirely sure an anecdote about the dangers of singling out just one variable is a great counterpoint to a criticism of the practice of singling out just one variable.
5. stego-tech ◴[] No.42151278[source]
I mean, even lacking proper scientific data, ask yourself how often your brain “autocompletes” someone based on a brand or object? There’s a reason advertisers spend so much money and effort cultivating a very specific customer image: it works.

In the case of Tesla - and I cannot overstress enough how much lf this is purely subjective conjecture on my part and not a statement of fact - the image cultivated by the company and its Chief Executive is very much one of rejecting norms and expectations, fierce independence, and a hostility towards others (mostly from the Cybertruck unveiling onward). The people who relate to that brand would, I would think, be more likely to flout laws like speed limits, failing to use indicators for turns or merges, and drive more aggressively than a brand that emphasizes safety or enjoyment of experience (like Hondas and Toyotas). My purely subjective experiences bear this out, and I’m consistently rewarded giving Teslas a wider berth on the roads.

So as far as branding as an indicator of outcome, yeah, I can totally see that being a reliable indicator. I’d still be darn curious to see more research about it, though.

replies(4): >>42151775 #>>42151786 #>>42152034 #>>42152380 #
6. jameskraus ◴[] No.42151294[source]
I’d love to read any analysis you’ve done like this, or any reading you might recommend.
7. cowpig ◴[] No.42151316[source]
Check out the study, it's linked to in the article:

https://www.iseecars.com/most-dangerous-cars-study#v=2024

8. bilsbie ◴[] No.42151413[source]
I was thinking for my next fridge to just buy a plain cheap one and then buy a cheap countertop ice cube maker.

Since that’s the thing that always breaks on the fridges. And it adds like $500 to the price.

replies(2): >>42151473 #>>42151915 #
9. _dark_matter_ ◴[] No.42151473[source]
Mine is French door without a front ice maker/water, and I love it. Way more room in the fridge too. Just open the bottom to get ice.
10. jdietrich ◴[] No.42151582[source]
The Tesla Model Y is a two ton SUV with the performance of a Porsche 911. The base RWD model is fast and the Performance model is stupidly fast. I don't think anyone would be particularly surprised to learn that Porsche drivers get into a lot of fatal accidents.
replies(4): >>42151731 #>>42151738 #>>42151752 #>>42151851 #
11. bonestamp2 ◴[] No.42151717[source]
My fridge has been repaired twice, the first time within its first year. Both times, each repair guy said the same thing: Avoid LG and Samsung. Avoid counter depth. I have no idea if that's accurate, so I'm curious if your data dive backs up either of those notes?
replies(1): >>42152160 #
12. technothrasher ◴[] No.42151731[source]
The top most model of the Model Y is as fast in a straight line as the lowest base model 911, and the handling isn't even close to the same. Saying the Model Y has the performance of the 911 is not really an accurate statement.
replies(1): >>42151759 #
13. Freedom2 ◴[] No.42151738[source]
Don't the aerodynamics severely limit the cornering performance of the Model Y? How can it have the same performance? Or is there only one metric of performance that is being measured?
replies(1): >>42152206 #
14. XenophileJKO ◴[] No.42151752[source]
Looking at the results.. it does make you wonder if there is something other underlying problem with the model Y vs the Model X or model 3.
15. aziaziazi ◴[] No.42151753[source]
> essential controls

Can’t you drive a Tesla without it? I expect the screen was for radio, gps, AC…

I agree those are distracting through.

replies(2): >>42151789 #>>42152564 #
16. CarVac ◴[] No.42151759{3}[source]
The straight-line performance is exactly what makes it dangerous.
replies(2): >>42151887 #>>42154708 #
17. sshine ◴[] No.42151775[source]
> The people who relate to that brand would, I would think, be more likely to flout laws like speed limits, failing to use indicators for turns or merges, and drive more aggressively than a brand that emphasizes safety or enjoyment of experience

And BMW owners like German shepherds?

replies(1): >>42152267 #
18. soerxpso ◴[] No.42151786[source]
This was my thought as well from looking at the actual list. Of the top 5 models with the worst fatal accident rate, 2 are luxury cars that seem like they'd attract drivers with reckless personalities (the Chevrolet Corvette and the Porsche 911). I don't think the average mile driven in a Corvette is really equivalent to the average mile driven in a Honda Civic.

This data is interesting, but not really useful for decisionmaking if we can't isolate the extent to which the disparities are caused by features of the actual vehicle, as opposed to driver selection factors.

Is anyone making an argument that the Model Y has an actual safety problem in its design? I'd like to hear about which physical aspect of the car people think is making it 4x less safe than the average car? I don't see anything obvious. Its crash test performance is fine. I'd hesitate to blame autopilot, since we know that they crash less often with autopilot enabled than without (even if due to selection factors).

19. jvanderbot ◴[] No.42151789[source]
Rent a Tesla and try to adjust the mirrors while driving I dare you.

Less difficult but much more common:

Change the radio station / music.

Change the climate control.

Both of those require taking your eyes off the road and navigating through multiple touch screen-only modal windows. I have owned one for years and it is a distraction factory.

replies(2): >>42151934 #>>42152726 #
20. floxy ◴[] No.42151851[source]
>I don't think anyone would be particularly surprised to learn that Porsche drivers get into a lot of fatal accidents.

From the actual study:

                               Fatal Accident Rate   Compared to
    Rank| Model               |(per 10^9 Miles)    | Overall Average
    ----+---------------------+--------------------+-----------------
     1  | Hyundai Venue       | 13.9               | 4.9x
     2  | Chevrolet Corvette  | 13.6               | 4.8x
     3  | Mitsubishi Mirage   | 13.6               | 4.8x
     4  | Porsche 911         | 13.2               | 4.6x
     5  | Honda CR-V Hybrid   | 13.2               | 4.6x
     6  | Tesla Model Y       | 10.6               | 3.7x
replies(2): >>42151921 #>>42152026 #
21. mauvehaus ◴[] No.42151887{4}[source]
To be more precise, it's probably the disparity between straight-line performance and cornering performance that gets people in real trouble.
22. interestica ◴[] No.42151915[source]
Dedicated Ice Makers can be quite good and fast at what they do too.
23. IAmNotACellist ◴[] No.42151921{3}[source]
So the Tesla Model Y has a lower fatal accident rate than sports cars, but they report it as Tesla overall having the highest fatal accident rate? Perhaps that's because _all_ the cars they make are stupid fast and heavy, and they don't offer cars where it's far harder to get into those situations?
replies(1): >>42152010 #
24. aziaziazi ◴[] No.42151934{3}[source]
I get it but Climate and Music can wait right? It’s a vehicle not an entertainment room. And adjusting mirors while driving seems crazy and dangerous!! changing something that supposed to be set before departure?

At least that’s what taught at driving school and written in texts I guess… too sad the distraction factory is so dangerous. I wouldn’t drive that.

replies(3): >>42151996 #>>42152636 #>>42152763 #
25. bunderbunder ◴[] No.42151996{4}[source]
Engineers should not ask reality to adapt to their designs; they should adapt their designs to reality.
26. jiggawatts ◴[] No.42152010{4}[source]
I wonder if it’s because there’s more passengers per model Y on average than a two-door sports car!

One fatal model Y accident might cause half a dozen gas fatalities, but a Porsche wrapped around a tree might kill just the lone driver.

replies(2): >>42152140 #>>42153994 #
27. piotrkaminski ◴[] No.42152026{3}[source]
What in the world is the Honda CR-V Hybrid doing so high on this list?! That doesn't seem to fit any of the theories I've seen spun up so far.
replies(1): >>42152799 #
28. piotrkaminski ◴[] No.42152034[source]
> brand that emphasizes safety or enjoyment of experience (like Hondas and Toyotas)

This is plausible on its face, and yet the Honda CR-V Hybrid ended up higher on the list than the Model Y. No idea how to explain that...

replies(2): >>42152256 #>>42152872 #
29. IAmNotACellist ◴[] No.42152140{5}[source]
Good point too. Things that the authors should've thought about.
30. BLKNSLVR ◴[] No.42152160[source]
What is "counter depth"?
replies(1): >>42152250 #
31. larkost ◴[] No.42152206{3}[source]
I would suspect that it is the weight of the vehicle that is the primary driver there. There is some additional negative effects of the vehicle being taller (increasing roll), but that is probably mostly mitigated by the battery pack pulling down the (vertical) center of mass. But certainly the aerodynamics creating less down-force would play some role.
32. duderific ◴[] No.42152250{3}[source]
It's a shallower style refrigerator, that doesn't "stick out" past the depth of the counters next to it.
replies(2): >>42154662 #>>42156633 #
33. stego-tech ◴[] No.42152256{3}[source]
It’s why I was very careful to make it as clear as possible that my own theory is rooted purely in conjecture and speculation based on personal experience, because: A) I don’t want to get sued B) I am not a researcher

Though if I had to take a guess on the CR-V: big, cheap SUV, often seen driven by young drivers in my area. Could be lack of experience? I can only speculate, though.

This is quickly becoming fodder for car forums!

replies(1): >>42153101 #
34. stego-tech ◴[] No.42152267{3}[source]
Oh heck, we could go down the list car forum style if we’re not careful. So many stereotypes.
35. interestica ◴[] No.42152380[source]
You highlighted the correlation. I bet GoPro users have the highest fatality rate of all camera brands.
replies(1): >>42209454 #
36. Veserv ◴[] No.42152564[source]
Gear selection is done via the screen on a Model 3 [1]. Technically, there is a touchscreen button on the rearview mirror unit, but I doubt anybody actually uses that.

Alternatively, you can use the AI gear selector from park which guesses what direction you want to go.

[1] https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/model3/en_eu/GUID-E9B387D...

replies(1): >>42152775 #
37. duderific ◴[] No.42152636{4}[source]
I dunno, I adjust climate and music frequently while driving. I have a Volvo now which requires touchscreen for those things, and I can't stand it. Otherwise a great car though.

After a while you "learn" to do it without looking at the screen too much. Nonetheless, it's far inferior to having tactile controls.

38. buffington ◴[] No.42152726{3}[source]
All of these things can be done without looking if you use voice commands. They can be done with a scroll wheel/button as well if you spend five minutes, once, to set your preferences for what the wheel controls.

That said, I hate the touch screen only UI of my car. There are times when I can't use voice or the scroll wheel and want (not so much need) to do something with the menus. In most cars, it's trivial to do most things by feel if you know where the buttons are.

Even if you could get really good at only touching the "right" place on the touch screen, one software update can change things enough to where it's now accessed differently.

39. buffington ◴[] No.42152763{4}[source]
The mirror's angle can change, while driving, in such a way that pulling over to stop and fix it isn't the safest option. With dedicated tactile controls you can adjust mirrors without taking your eyes off the road, while also verifying that the mirrors are adjusted correctly.

I think the number of people who can say that they have never needed to adjust mirrors while moving, even after having spent a few minutes adjusting them in the driveway, is very much next to zero.

replies(2): >>42154896 #>>42155380 #
40. aziaziazi ◴[] No.42152775{3}[source]
Not used to US gears, aren’t they only used when you park? Not sure if that’s the dangerous part of the commute.
41. yardstick ◴[] No.42152799{4}[source]
Family car, probably lots of accidents due to kids distracting drivers.
replies(4): >>42152910 #>>42152948 #>>42154345 #>>42154695 #
42. floxy ◴[] No.42152872{3}[source]
I guess I wouldn't be surprised if there were issues with data and/or analysis. Should we assume they are basing their miles driven off of used car listings? That is, they see someone puts a 2019 Subaru Impreza up for sale in 2023, with 50,000 miles, and they add that to their data set on how many miles the average Impreza gets driven per year? But maybe people leasing drive differently than those who own or keep vehicles longer? I'd like to see the data on their average number of miles driven per car model per year.

Would also be interesting to see which were the safest cars according to their analysis.

43. floxy ◴[] No.42152910{5}[source]
Looks like the hybrid version of the CR-V was released in 2020:

https://hondanews.com/en-US/honda-automobiles/releases/relea...

...and the study only covered model years up to 2022. It would be interesting to compare the hybrid to the standard version. If there is a significant difference, I'd be suspicious of data quality.

44. tzs ◴[] No.42152948{5}[source]
If that was the case I'd expect the non-hybrid CR-V to be up there too.

I found a discussion of the 2019 report, which was the year before the CR-V hybrid came out, and the CR-V fatality rate was 2.7.

45. tzs ◴[] No.42153101{4}[source]
That doesn't explain why it was the hybrid CR-V with the high fatality rate, unless inexperiences drivers prefer the hybrid to the non-hybrid.
46. tga_d ◴[] No.42153994{5}[source]
Both the comment and TFA clearly indicate it's measured in terms of fatal accidents, not fatalities.
replies(1): >>42180650 #
47. lostmsu ◴[] No.42154345{5}[source]
Highlander that I see everywhere is not.
replies(1): >>42156612 #
48. EasyMark ◴[] No.42154662{4}[source]
maybe that's why my 12 year old samsung fridge seems fine. no repairs yet, but I've been expecting it to die anyday according to the internets. of course it could also be that samsung is the most popular brand for fridges in the USA
replies(1): >>42167714 #
49. m463 ◴[] No.42154695{5}[source]
Could it be more average passengers per accident?
50. m463 ◴[] No.42154708{4}[source]
> A focused, alert driver

I dislike how tesla kills situational awareness. It is the central touchscreen.

The model 3 and y and cybertruck put everything there - both status and control. You have to look to the side to see the speed of the vehicle, and the gearshift is on the touchscreen.

The S and X both retain a dashboard in front of you, but most of the controls moved to the touchscreen.

And the removal of stalks from all models have moved turn signals to steering wheel buttons, and most of the rest to the touchscreen.

I think the cars are really well designed, it is just that these user interface choices make you worse driver.

replies(2): >>42156841 #>>42179406 #
51. jpc0 ◴[] No.42154896{5}[source]
13 years driving so far. Only time I've had to adjust mirrors while driving is if I am in a car I haven't driven before and I didn't adjust them before departing.

You are complaining about having to look over at a screen however taking several seconds to look evem further from the front of the car while adjusting a mirror isn't an issue regardless of the controls?

52. aziaziazi ◴[] No.42155380{5}[source]
> you can adjust mirrors without taking your eyes off the road

Now I imagine one eye looking at the road, the other one doing active strabismus to check the mirror, one hand on the wheel and the other using muscle memory to operate the settings on a flat surface.

> The mirror's angle can change, while driving

Maybe a loose screw somewhere in the mirror or a manufacturing defect? It would be surprising QA and legal security standards don’t require mirrors to stay in the position set for a reasonable mileage…

53. mathgeek ◴[] No.42156612{6}[source]
The Highlander rates somewhat higher on crash ratings from what I can find (both are top picks). Also a significantly heavier vehicle (by about 10% depending on model years).
54. mathgeek ◴[] No.42156633{4}[source]
I assume the issues with counter depth and reliability are due to them not compromising mich on internal volume (thus reducing the heat dissipation ability around the compressor). Most folks are going to buy purely based on volume inside. Compressor failing was what killed our Samsung but at the end of the day these appliances are cheap enough to let folks choose what they value.
55. collingreen ◴[] No.42157638{6}[source]
What?? Is this an automated post to make an account look real? This doesn't make any sense in context.
replies(1): >>42163554 #
56. valval ◴[] No.42162767[source]
It’s also worth noting that sample sizes in this study are low, and without checking I know the results aren’t statistically significant.
57. childintime ◴[] No.42163554{7}[source]
FYI the parent was down voted when I wrote this. That's the context you're missing.
58. riffraff ◴[] No.42167714{5}[source]
My Samsung fridge (in Europe) died after 12 years, and the tech guy said it actually lasted more than average as they used to have some experimental compressor back then.

But he also said they have since improved that, and indeed, now samsung fridges come with a 20 year warranty on their compressor.

59. daft_pink ◴[] No.42176234[source]
While I think that a single variable isn't always very useful, when something is an outlier and people are moving from other luxury brands with much lower rates to a new brand and experiencing high rates, there is definitely something wrong.

I'm guessing that while the total accident rate declines with automation, that the serious accident rate is increasing, because a human driver drives in a risk adjusted way and takes less care to avoid minor accidents and more care to avoid serious accidents, but when a robot find itself unable to drive the errors are more evenly distributed or even more likely to result in a serious accident, because its doing things idiotically with no sense of self preservation.

60. CarVac ◴[] No.42179406{5}[source]
I dislike how 99% of cars make you look down so far. Looking to the side as well isn't an issue, especially when my gaze is scanning my mirrors.

By comparison, my older Prius has the speedometer at the base of the windshield super close to the road. It's simply better.

I haven't tried a heads-up display, though.

replies(2): >>42209173 #>>42219984 #
61. sneed-oil ◴[] No.42180650{6}[source]
I would guess that having more than one passenger increases the chance of at least one of them dying in an accident
62. titusjohnson ◴[] No.42209173{6}[source]
My 2024 Mazda CX-5 has a heads-up display and I quite like it. It presents in the windshield right above my hands on the top of the wheel, shows current speed, cruise status, and lane detection. I feel like I don't have to take my eyes off the road to get a speed update, it's nice.
63. robertlagrant ◴[] No.42209454{3}[source]
You should see the average injuries for mountain bikes over all bikes. Mountain bikes must just be really badly made!
64. t0mas88 ◴[] No.42219984{6}[source]
I've had two cars now with head-up display info on the window. It shows speed, adaptive cruise control status, lane keeping, maximum speed, navigation info and warnings. I will definitely get it again on any future cars. It's so much easier than looking at the displays inside the car.

A small but well thought out safety future using the HUD is in the dark, when the car detects a pedestrian or cyclist on or moving into the road using the infrared camera it will show a yellow warning icon. Has shown me people walking in dark clothes on dark rural roads a few times far before I could see them myself. This is a video of the detection, mine doesn't have that spotlight, but shows the warning on the window instead: https://youtu.be/WpB8ZLGq7EE