Driver death rates remain high among small cars

[Ron Texas]

https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/driver-death-rates-remain-high-among-small-cars

"Despite manufacturers’ efforts to make them safer, the smallest late-model cars remain the most dangerous, according to the most recent driver death rates calculated by the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety.

Small cars and minicars accounted for 15 of the 20 models with the highest death rates for model year 2017, while nearly half of the 20 models with the lowest death rates were luxury SUVs".

 

[Wes]

Where is Gordon Murray when we need him?

 

[amirm]

I had not heard about this for years. I guess you can't change the laws of physics.

 

[LTig]

Yeah, it's probably safest to drive a tank. Anybody remember "Golden Eye"?

 

[jhaider]

The same data could be accurately described by the headline "expensive cars are safer than cheap cars."

Note that the mass-safety correlation breaks down given that some of the smallest cars available (e.g. Miata or FT86/BRZ/FRS) are not on the "most deadly" list. Nor are well-engineered small cars, such as Honda Fit.

I'm also curious why Leaf is called "small" but CT200h is "midsized." Leaf is equal or larger in every single dimension:
per Google,
CT200h: 171″ L x 70″ W x 57″ H
2015 Leaf 175″ L x 70″ W x 61″ H (2020 Leaf is bigger)

 

[pjug]

Not so big, not so expensive can do OK

 

[Blumlein 88]

At one time SUV were rather dangerous due to rollovers. Since those have had stability control systems that has been greatly reduced. There rest looks mostly like physics. Heavy vehicles with large crumple zones come out better than light cars with small crumple zones do worse. A few well engineered exceptions not withstanding.

 

[Ron Texas]

For non US members, large vehicles, especially pickup trucks, are dominant in the US. Low fatal crash rates for select small vehicles could be due to self selection by safer drivers and not entirely due to engineering features. Vehicle size for US fuel economy purposes is measured by footprint, not overall dimensions. Footprint is wheelbase x track. This may account for some classification oddities where the wheels are stuck out as far to the corners of the car as they can be.

 

[MZKM]

For non US members, large vehicles, especially pickup trucks, are dominant in the US

Yeah, when I went to the UK to watch the Olympics, the only pickup truck I ever saw was a company one towing a rock climbing wall.

 

[Wes]

The same data could be accurately described by the headline "expensive cars are safer than cheap cars."

Note that the mass-safety correlation breaks down given that some of the smallest cars available (e.g. Miata or FT86/BRZ/FRS) are not on the "most deadly" list. Nor are well-engineered small cars, such as Honda Fit.

I'm also curious why Leaf is called "small" but CT200h is "midsized." Leaf is equal or larger in every single dimension:
per Google,
CT200h: 171″ L x 70″ W x 57″ H
2015 Leaf 175″ L x 70″ W x 61″ H (2020 Leaf is bigger)

usually cabin volume is used

 

[Wes]

Yeah, it's probably safest to drive a tank. Anybody remember "Golden Eye"?

Sherman tanks were quite dangerous.

Go German if you go tankin'

 

[jhaider]

Yeah, when I went to the UK to watch the Olympics, the only pickup truck I ever saw was a company one towing a rock climbing wall.

Yes, outside of Taliban/ISIS/Boko Haram/al-Shahab, compensating Americans are the only group of people who find such vehicles appealing for daily (noncommercial) use.

 

[MZKM]

Yes, outside of Taliban/ISIS/Boko Haram/al-Shahab, compensating Americans are the only group of people who find such vehicles appealing for daily use.

As a car driver I hate it as I can’t see traffic up ahead. Now, my father’s business kind of needs a pickup as he deals with chemicals which permeate the air a bit so a van wouldn't cut it; but yeah, I’m not the type to drive one, I like a low center of gravity (low body roll) and it not being a pain to get in/out (I laugh when there isn’t just a side step but actually a ladder because it’s raised so high).

 

[BDWoody]

Yes, outside of Taliban/ISIS/Boko Haram/al-Shahab, compensating Americans are the only group of people who find such vehicles appealing for daily use.

I dunno...A rolling, leather appointed, elevated high tech living room with a shed out back is a pretty nice way to pass the miles. With all our extra room to roam and all, and of course all the stuff we Americans all naturally just have, because well...Americans...a little econo-box won't work for a lot of us.( Edit: Tongue at least partially in cheek...don't overreact out there...)
I do love my truck.

Lovely company you've put me in.

I actually need a truck for my work, but it's a lot more comfortable on longer trips than the BMW. Plus, at 15 mpg, it gets better mileage.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Yes, outside of Taliban/ISIS/Boko Haram/al-Shahab, compensating Americans are the only group of people who find such vehicles appealing for daily use.

I think this attitude about it is frankly ridiculous. I get it, I don't like it either. Especially as a sports car driver. You can't see around them, they don't see you. You have to park carefully at stores as the behemoths will back into or over your car not having seen it or looked for something that low. It is disgusting the amount of engineering advancement in power and efficiency has been wasted to give us what we had before only bigger than before instead of getting better performance and better fuel mileage.

OTOH, to say only people 'compensating' for something are buying them is very head in the sand. As it is near 60% of buyers that idea simply cannot make much sense. Big and bigger is what most Americans want. It is what sales and small doesn't. I don't guess the idea of such huge vehicles is popular in Europe. It appears to be popular among the growing Chinese middle and upper class.

So what are 60% of the automobile lite truck market compensating for in the USA?

 

[watchnerd]

Yes, outside of Taliban/ISIS/Boko Haram/al-Shahab, compensating Americans are the only group of people who find such vehicles appealing for daily use.

You left out all of Latin America and Australians.

 

[Ron Texas]

usually cabin volume is used

Certainly, at one time this was the metric. Today, I don't know what goes on the vehicle sticker, but I know regulators grade fuel economy performance by footprint.

 

[ta240]

The crash ratings are a bit deceiving in that they only apply within the specific vehicle size class. I think this leads a lot of people to think they are driving a car that is safer than it really is. A smaller, lighter car hits the stationary barrier with less force; while in the real world a jacked up F250 will hit the small car with a massive amount of force and won't even come close to having bumpers that line up with the bumpers on the other car.

I've always been amazed that it is, apparently, legal to raise the height of ones vehicle to such an extreme level that their bumpers are at head level for other drivers. It seems like they shouldn't be able to alter a safety feature like that. I knew a guy in high school that had a customized VW Beetle that he'd replaced the front bumper with a decorative chrome thing and he said he'd get pulled over frequently because that wasn't legal.
About every 10th vehicle you see around here is one of these:

The US probably has some of the widest range in sizes of 'personal' vehicles and that really puts the people in the smaller ones at great risk.

 

[Ron Texas]

Yes, outside of Taliban/ISIS/Boko Haram/al-Shahab, compensating Americans are the only group of people who find such vehicles appealing for daily use.

You are equivocating ordinary Americans with terrorists. That's awful. Let he who is free from guilt throw the first stone.

 

[Blumlein 88]

The crash ratings are a bit deceiving in that they only apply within the specific vehicle size class. I think this leads a lot of people to think they are driving a car that is safer than it really is. A smaller, lighter car hits the stationary barrier with less force; while in the real world a jacked up F250 will hit the small car with a massive amount of force and won't even come close to having bumpers that line up with the bumpers on the other car.

I've always been amazed that it is, apparently, legal to raise the height of ones vehicle to such an extreme level that their bumpers are at head level for other drivers. It seems like they shouldn't be able to alter a safety feature like that. I knew a guy in high school that had a customized VW Beetle that he'd replaced the front bumper with a decorative chrome thing and he said he'd get pulled over frequently because that wasn't legal.
About every 10th vehicle you see around here is one of these:

The US probably has some of the widest range in sizes of 'personal' vehicles and that really puts the people in the smaller ones at great risk.

Side impact testing actually uses a mold that mostly resembles the size and weight of a large RAM pickup truck. I'm thinking of the IIH testing which is different than the gov't NHTSA testing.

https://www.iihs.org/ratings/about-our-tests