4 ms·
$4k death traps more like. There’s no way you would ever get those approved in the US for sale.
by partingshots 6y ago
$4k death traps more like. There’s no way you would ever get those approved in the US for sale.
- montzark 6y agoDeath traps because rest of the vehicles are way heavier and more dangerous (also to pedestrians). If all cars were like that it would be fine.
- Lucasoato 6y agoNo, they would still be death traps since cars may also hit other hard obstacles like walls and rocks.
- jessaustin 6y agoThey're going slower so it will be ok.
- icedistilled 6y ago20mph to a wall is going to leave a mark without crumple zones
- saiya-jin 6y agoIf they would be used for city speeds only, the risks aren't much bigger compared to scooters, in contrary. But I have 0 doubt that being priced so aggressively, US and Europe would slap such a huge tariff to protect local markets, they would be very uncompetitive.
- aww_dang 6y agoIt wouldn't be suitable for US highways. It would make sense if regulators would allow another class of vehicle for city cars.
- kube-system 6y agoThe price likely wouldn’t be very competitive if the manufacturer adds all of the design features required to sell that vehicle in the US.
- rtx 6y agoBetter than scooters they are supposed to replace.
- f6v 6y agoI wonder what’s worse: being squashed inside this car or just become airborne when scooter hits something. At least you’re required to wear a helmet when on a scooter. But as someone said here, if we only had those cars on the road(and a 30 km/h speed limit), it’d be much safer.
- bobthepanda 6y agoSeatbelts saved a bunch of lives by preventing occupants from getting flung out the car, so I’d imagine that being in the car is safer. Current road death trends in the US indicate that people inside cars are dying less, but people outside of them are dying more, notably cyclists and pedestrians.
- tener 6y agoAnd this car has just one seatbelt (for the driver). The other passengers can go take a flight .
- kylebenzle 6y agoIt has two seat-belts.
- tener 6y agoHuh, the video claimed otherwise. Nevertheless the safety is quite low here.
- kube-system 6y agoThe US auto market requires a lot of specific safety features even compared to other developed countries. There are plenty of new cars from leading global auto manufacturers that aren’t legal for sale in the US.
- kolinko 6y agoSome of the regulations are pretty weird though - the mirrors in US cars are far worse, and so are lights.
- kube-system 6y agoFor sure. Red rear turn signals and not requiring better headlight glare mitigation come to mind.. and are some of my pet peeves. But when it comes to expensive systems like crash structures, active and passive safety systems, the US requires a lot.
- Daho0n 6y agoEuroNCAP ratings are harsher, so not really. It's mostly that the US system is based on SUVs and other behemoths. Look at the new small Toyota Yaris. That's what is required to get a good rating these days. Most newish SUVs doesn't even have the same amount of safety systems (like airbags between driver and front passenger seat).
- kube-system 6y agoI was speaking solely about regulatory requirements (i.e FMVSS) for selling a vehicle, not the NCAP programs. It is generally legal to sell vehicles with bad NCAP scores. For instance: the 2018 Fiat Panda met EU regulations to be sold but scored 0 stars on EuroNCAP.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- riffraff 6y ago
- anti-shill 6y agoback in the 1980s americans were able to buy cars cheaper because the manufacturers were not required to install all the added safety features that we have today...back then the gas mileage was better too because the cars were lighter...then some corporate lobbies got congress to force manufacturers to add safety features...the prices of cars went up...the weight of cars went up, and the gas mileage went down... what corporate lobby did that? Oil companies, perhaps....and as a result americans are forced to spend more on cars and more on gas than citizens of free nations... some might say we are lucky to have the government looking out for us....but I would not say that...
- GhostVII 6y agoProbably much safer than a motorcycle though. I always found it interesting how we have such strict crash safety testing for cars, but still allow motorcycles despite them being incredibly dangerous. Maybe just because it is visually obvious that a motorcycle is dangerous? Or more likely because everyone would get mad if you tried to ban them.
- KMag 6y agoI suspect there are a few factors: * Motorcycles aren't very dangerous to bystanders. * Approximately zero infants or toddlers are routinely transported via motorcycle. * Motorcycles don't make up a large percentage of traffic in the U.S. * Motorcycle deaths are more likely to leave donable organs intact, so it's a bit like the lottery, but for organs. Some people opt in to entertainment, and the rest of society benefits.
- m463 6y agohttps://www.wired.com/2009/09/ff-ecars/ https://www.wired.com/2009/09/ff-ecars/