5 ms·

Vehicle safety is a significant confounder here. It is possible that increased deaths from higher limits was more than offset by mandatory airbags, anti lock di

Vehicle safety is a significant confounder here. It is possible that increased deaths from higher limits was more than offset by mandatory airbags, anti lock disc brakes, crumple zones, etc. Actually it's pretty neat how much safer cars in America have gotten since then.

u801e 9y ago
While that is true between 1995 and 2005, if you look at the data [1] between 2005 (roughly 10 years after both drivers and passenger side airbags were required equipment) and 2015, you can see the fatality rate dropped from 1.46 down to 1.08 Given the average age of a vehicle on the road is about 10 years give or take, then by 2005, the majority of vehicles had both drivers and passenger side air bags and crumple zones. Traffic speeds have also increased to some extent in the last 10 years as well. [1] https://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx https://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
- learc83 9y ago
  There are other new safety features introduced on many cars since then. Vehicle stability control is a big one.
  - u801e 9y ago
    Vehicle stability control isn't mandated by NHTSA, and I don't think that it's a feature on a substantial portion of the vehicle fleet. You would have to look at what vehicle safety features were mandated between 2000 and 2010 to really see if any of them played a part in the decline in the fatality rate in the 2005 to 2015 time period.
    - learc83 9y ago
      Electronic stability control has been mandated by the NHTSA since 2012 (they required at least 55% of 2009 models sold to be equipped with it, 75% of 2010 models, and 95% of 2011 models) Also in 2007 about half of all new cars sold were equipped with it. The NHTSA and the Insurance Institute for Highway safety estimate that stability control could prevent 1/3 of fatal accidents. If a substantial portion of cars started to be equipped with it around 2005 (they did), it's a likely explanation for a decline in traffic fatalities since then.
      - u801e 9y ago
        > Electronic stability control has been mandated by the NHTSA since 2012 (they required at least 55% of 2009 models sold to be equipped with it, 75% of 2010 models, and 95% of 2011 models) I should have looked that up before stating the opposite. My mistake. > Also in 2007 about half of all new cars sold were equipped with it. I've read that the average vehicle age is about 10 years. That means that only now are we getting to the point where the vast majority of vehicles would be equipped with electronic stability control. Looking at the FARS page I cited earlier, the decline in fatality rate is pretty clear, but how prevalent ESP was and how much it changed in that time period is not as clear (at least I don't have the data for it).
        learc83 9y ago
        Some very back of the envelope math shows that each year about 7% of vehicles are replaced each year, so by 2012 we can estimate that about 35% of cars would have been 2007 models or newer. So by 2012 we have a minimum of 17% of cars with electronic stability control (probably much higher given that by 2010 75% of cars sold were mandated to include it). If cars with electronic stability control are really involved in 1/3 few accidents, then we'd expect a very sizeable decrease in vehicle fatalities due to electronic stability control alone by 2012 and probably much earlier.
  - CWuestefeld 9y ago
    Vehicle stability control is a big one. In some situations, but in other situations it seems to be a negative (at least as implemented on my car, a '13 Hyundai Genesis Coupe). I can see that it's helpful for low-traction situations where it's just protecting the driver from losing control. But on my car it has a really annoying, and I think dangerous, side effect. You'll note that difference in wheel speed from left to right is what triggers the stability control behavior, and that this delta is proportionately greater for tighter-radius turns, the ultimate example of which is a right turn from a stop sign or driveway. And the effect of it is to severely limit the force applied to the wheels (whether by pulling back the throttle or by applying a brake to the affected wheel). But that right turn, when I'm trying to merge into traffic on a road with a 60mph speed limit, is exactly where I need the power to accelerate. So I see a break in traffic, turn onto the road, a tire slips on a bit of sand, and then I'm stuck wallowing there with no power, watching my mirrors as a car barrels down on me from behind. I've learned that I get the best results if I make the first thing I do when I get into the car, to turn off the traction control unless the pavement is wet.
    - learc83 9y ago
      The NHTSA and the Insurance Institute for Highway safety estimate that stability control could prevent 1/3 of fatal accidents. Studies show it's effective. Of course it depends on the car, but I've never found it to be a problem unless I'm driving like I'm at the track. Also where are you turning right onto a road with a 60mph speed limit with no merging lane?
      - CWuestefeld 9y ago
        Studies show it's effective. I agree that it's doing a good job in keeping me from breaking my tires free, which could lead to losing control. But I'm skeptical that enforcing these tactics blindly in all cases (as my car does) is the best overall strategy. where are you turning right onto a road with a 60mph speed limit with no merging lane? Specifically, US 290 west of Austin TX. But this seems to be the norm in much of Texas.
        9y ago

u801e 9y ago

While that is true between 1995 and 2005, if you look at the data [1] between 2005 (roughly 10 years after both drivers and passenger side airbags were required equipment) and 2015, you can see the fatality rate dropped from 1.46 down to 1.08 Given the average age of a vehicle on the road is about 10 years give or take, then by 2005, the majority of vehicles had both drivers and passenger side air bags and crumple zones. Traffic speeds have also increased to some extent in the last 10 years as well. [1] https://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx https://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

learc83 9y ago
There are other new safety features introduced on many cars since then. Vehicle stability control is a big one.
- u801e 9y ago
  Vehicle stability control isn't mandated by NHTSA, and I don't think that it's a feature on a substantial portion of the vehicle fleet. You would have to look at what vehicle safety features were mandated between 2000 and 2010 to really see if any of them played a part in the decline in the fatality rate in the 2005 to 2015 time period.
  - learc83 9y ago
    Electronic stability control has been mandated by the NHTSA since 2012 (they required at least 55% of 2009 models sold to be equipped with it, 75% of 2010 models, and 95% of 2011 models) Also in 2007 about half of all new cars sold were equipped with it. The NHTSA and the Insurance Institute for Highway safety estimate that stability control could prevent 1/3 of fatal accidents. If a substantial portion of cars started to be equipped with it around 2005 (they did), it's a likely explanation for a decline in traffic fatalities since then.
    - u801e 9y ago
      > Electronic stability control has been mandated by the NHTSA since 2012 (they required at least 55% of 2009 models sold to be equipped with it, 75% of 2010 models, and 95% of 2011 models) I should have looked that up before stating the opposite. My mistake. > Also in 2007 about half of all new cars sold were equipped with it. I've read that the average vehicle age is about 10 years. That means that only now are we getting to the point where the vast majority of vehicles would be equipped with electronic stability control. Looking at the FARS page I cited earlier, the decline in fatality rate is pretty clear, but how prevalent ESP was and how much it changed in that time period is not as clear (at least I don't have the data for it).
      - learc83 9y ago
        Some very back of the envelope math shows that each year about 7% of vehicles are replaced each year, so by 2012 we can estimate that about 35% of cars would have been 2007 models or newer. So by 2012 we have a minimum of 17% of cars with electronic stability control (probably much higher given that by 2010 75% of cars sold were mandated to include it). If cars with electronic stability control are really involved in 1/3 few accidents, then we'd expect a very sizeable decrease in vehicle fatalities due to electronic stability control alone by 2012 and probably much earlier.
- CWuestefeld 9y ago
  Vehicle stability control is a big one. In some situations, but in other situations it seems to be a negative (at least as implemented on my car, a '13 Hyundai Genesis Coupe). I can see that it's helpful for low-traction situations where it's just protecting the driver from losing control. But on my car it has a really annoying, and I think dangerous, side effect. You'll note that difference in wheel speed from left to right is what triggers the stability control behavior, and that this delta is proportionately greater for tighter-radius turns, the ultimate example of which is a right turn from a stop sign or driveway. And the effect of it is to severely limit the force applied to the wheels (whether by pulling back the throttle or by applying a brake to the affected wheel). But that right turn, when I'm trying to merge into traffic on a road with a 60mph speed limit, is exactly where I need the power to accelerate. So I see a break in traffic, turn onto the road, a tire slips on a bit of sand, and then I'm stuck wallowing there with no power, watching my mirrors as a car barrels down on me from behind. I've learned that I get the best results if I make the first thing I do when I get into the car, to turn off the traction control unless the pavement is wet.
  - learc83 9y ago
    The NHTSA and the Insurance Institute for Highway safety estimate that stability control could prevent 1/3 of fatal accidents. Studies show it's effective. Of course it depends on the car, but I've never found it to be a problem unless I'm driving like I'm at the track. Also where are you turning right onto a road with a 60mph speed limit with no merging lane?
    - CWuestefeld 9y ago
      Studies show it's effective. I agree that it's doing a good job in keeping me from breaking my tires free, which could lead to losing control. But I'm skeptical that enforcing these tactics blindly in all cases (as my car does) is the best overall strategy. where are you turning right onto a road with a 60mph speed limit with no merging lane? Specifically, US 290 west of Austin TX. But this seems to be the norm in much of Texas.
      - 9y ago