4 ms·

>And that's why you now have front camera on SUVs. No. It's not. Kids are in front of your car how often? Not often enough to make an effective sales pitch

>And that's why you now have front camera on SUVs. No. It's not. Kids are in front of your car how often? Not often enough to make an effective sales pitch for the feature. Front cameras are a thing because people think they're useful in mundane parking and low speed maneuvering circumstances. The more offorady themed vehicles also sell them as being useful in that context.

Retric 4y ago
The statistics for SUV’s are really bad overall and can look even worse depending on the age range you call “kids.” “The study, published in The Journal of Safety Research, found that passenger cars were the striking vehicle in 62% of accidents involving pedestrian or cyclist children but resulted in only 19% of fatalities. In comparison, SUVs were the striking vehicle in only 16.9% of crashes involving children but were responsible for 40% of fatalities.”
- sokoloff 4y ago
  SUVs were over 30% of sales in the US by 2010 and over 50% by 2020. If they’re responsible for only 40% of fatalities, it seems likely that they’re quite comparable as safe as cars for pedestrian/cyclist children. (If the base rate of vehicles on the road matches the share of fatalities, there isn’t a spread in fatality risk.)
  - Retric 4y ago
    Your intuition is wrong here because vehicles are kept around for a long time (~25years) and the study covered a longer period. The definition used in this study places the percentage of the vehicle fleet as SUVs from 13% in 2000 to 21.5% in 2019 while causing 40% of all children’s deaths over the study period. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Pedestrian-deaths-and-large-vehicles-Tyndall/ca171138528df0cf05f8300e85394cfb4a0735f9/figure/2 https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Pedestrian-deaths-and-... Thus on average a SUV was more than 4x as likely to kill kid than a car.

Retric 4y ago

The statistics for SUV’s are really bad overall and can look even worse depending on the age range you call “kids.” “The study, published in The Journal of Safety Research, found that passenger cars were the striking vehicle in 62% of accidents involving pedestrian or cyclist children but resulted in only 19% of fatalities. In comparison, SUVs were the striking vehicle in only 16.9% of crashes involving children but were responsible for 40% of fatalities.”

sokoloff 4y ago
SUVs were over 30% of sales in the US by 2010 and over 50% by 2020. If they’re responsible for only 40% of fatalities, it seems likely that they’re quite comparable as safe as cars for pedestrian/cyclist children. (If the base rate of vehicles on the road matches the share of fatalities, there isn’t a spread in fatality risk.)
- Retric 4y ago
  Your intuition is wrong here because vehicles are kept around for a long time (~25years) and the study covered a longer period. The definition used in this study places the percentage of the vehicle fleet as SUVs from 13% in 2000 to 21.5% in 2019 while causing 40% of all children’s deaths over the study period. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Pedestrian-deaths-and-large-vehicles-Tyndall/ca171138528df0cf05f8300e85394cfb4a0735f9/figure/2 https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Pedestrian-deaths-and-... Thus on average a SUV was more than 4x as likely to kill kid than a car.