3 ms·
I don't know how much can be attributed to this but always seemed weird to me that the safety tests (which both are mandated legally and also used in marketing)
by fasthands9 4y ago
I don't know how much can be attributed to this but always seemed weird to me that the safety tests (which both are mandated legally and also used in marketing) are solely about how safe the passengers of the car will be in the event of a crash.
It seems like a classic collective action problem. If an automaker has a new car design which will make its passengers 5% safer in a crash but passengers in the other car 10% more likely to die then they have incentive to do the design change anyways. I wouldnt know the exact numbers but would think with a lot of the changes (such as cars getting 1000s of lbs heavier) the impacts are real - especially when you factor in pedestrians.
- rafeto 4y agoI don't know about other markets, but Euro NCAP (https://www.euroncap.com/ https://www.euroncap.com/) includes pedestrian and cyclist safety in their assessments and Land Rover claimed that they had to stop the production of the original Defender because it did not comply with the mandated minimum safety standards for pedestrians and occupants. I spent a lot of time in a 2012 Defender without any airbags and seats which were essentially just screwed to a wooden/sheet metal frame - but the high and upright seating position made me feel safer than do in an (objectively safer) sedan or hatchback.
- gnopgnip 4y agoThere are a lot of automotive standards that address pedestrian safety, other crash testing besides the ones for passengers. This is why pop up headlights and hood ornaments are rarely used now for example.