5 ms·

Pretty slanted. Could write a complementary article: large cars are safer for the passengers. Why don't we keep pedestrians separate from traffic more effective

Pretty slanted. Could write a complementary article: large cars are safer for the passengers. Why don't we keep pedestrians separate from traffic more effectively?

pmontra 3y ago
Pedestrian bridges on every intersection? Cars mandated to use only yet to be digged underground roads? Any other idea?
resoluteteeth 3y ago
Large cars aren't inherently safer for passengers. They are only safer in collisions with other cars that are smaller, at the expense of the safety of the people in the smaller cars. Having an arms race where people buy bigger and bigger cars to be safer in collisions with other cars is really not ideal, because it doesn't improve overall automobile safety on a national level even just for drivers, and it hurts safety for pedestrians.
- cozzyd 3y ago
  They also will typically stop slower and are often more vulnerable to rollovers...
- Scoundreller 3y ago
  It’s also a matter of comfort. Cities including mine are drunk on putting speed humps everywhere. But obviously they’re not “tuned” for each vehicle size. A coupe/sedan needs to slow down to half the speed limit to go over, while a larger vehicle with a suspension and tire sizes to match can take them at speed. Same story for potholes, which of course are worsened by heavier vehicles while small vehicles pay the price. Literally encouraging an arms race when it comes to vehicle size.
  - kemayo 3y ago
    "Large cars let me ignore speed humps" sounds exactly like prioritizing the occupants of the car over the safety of others...
    - Scoundreller 3y ago
      My main beef is that the speed humps should be navigable at the speed limit of the road they’re installed on. And they are, but only for larger vehicles on my ass for slowing down to go over them in my sedan.
      - cozzyd 3y ago
        That is certainly not the intent
        Scoundreller 3y ago
        But it is the outcome. And yet another driver in the adoption of ever larger vehicles.
  - chrisco255 3y ago
    This is almost entirely suspension based. I currently have an F350 but drove an off-road edition Tacoma for a long time. The Tacoma is half the weight and significantly smaller than the F350, and it would take speed bumps like they were nothing because of the offroad tuning, whereas the F350 is quite difficult to drive at fast speeds and takes bumps pretty harshly due to its weight and stiffer suspension designed for hauling.
- chrisco255 3y ago
  Pedestrians aren't getting killed more often because cars are bigger. They're not being seen due to low visibility from A pillar designs. SUVs used to be quite boxy and large in the 90s and early 00s (think 90s Ford Explorer, Chevy Suburban, etc), but began to take on a more streamlined, car-like look in the late 00s / early 10s. As a result of this design shift to crossovers, the A column gets slanted and blocks a wide field of view that especially affects drivers when making left turns. This coupled with a higher ride height means pedestrians aren't getting seen, especially at night. If you look at the stats, virtually the entire increase in pedestrian deaths over the last 10 years has occurred at night.
  - cozzyd 3y ago
    I think cars getting taller also doesn't help (pop over the hood vs. trampled underneath), but I'm not sure...
    - chrisco255 3y ago
      That "pop over the hood" theory is incorrect. If a car is moving at deadly speed you will not simply roll over a cars hood unharmed. You're still taking a 3000+ pound hit at 30 or more miles per hour, and you will most likely be embedded into the forward crush zone and subsequently flung forwards after the driver brakes in response. At any rate, it's largely left-turning, night driving vehicles that are causing the increase in deaths in North America. These pedestrians are being struck at an angle rather than head on.
      - cozzyd 3y ago
        Probably a Hollywood-induced myth
  - xethos 3y ago
    It's not the slant so much as the width - it wouldn't be thick enough, close enough, and leave such poor visibility were it thinner. But it's required to be thicker to survive a rollover without the big heavy body crushing the roof (and occupants). I've driven vehicles that don't have to survive a rollover (a few models of New Flyer diesel bus). The A pillar being slanted or straight makes no difference. It's the thickness that'll block a pedestrian.
- JoeAltmaier 3y ago
  Isn't that just not true? Larger cars have steel cages, stronger supports, higher off the ground. Actual frames, steel shell and not aluminum.
  - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
    And today we find, small cars are simply faking their safety test results: https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/27/business/daihatsu-japan-production-halt-safety-tests-intl-hnk/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/27/business/daihatsu-japan-produ...
cozzyd 3y ago
Yes, it would help to have more pedestrian only streets, ban drive throughs, reduce curb cuts, ban right turns on red, and reduce speed limits in urban areas to more reasonable safe speeds like 15 mph.
michaelmrose 3y ago
Do you mean on average they are safer or inherently? Is that a function of the average on the other side of the collision and most importantly is there data proving your position.
dv_dt 3y ago
Large cars are less agile, making it more difficult to avoid accidents. SUVs in particular are also much more likely to rollover than passenger cars. This makes larger vehicles less safe for their passengers.
- tharne 3y ago
  It really depends on the vehicle. Minivans are quite large and are some of the safest vehicles on the road.
  - cozzyd 3y ago
    I don't really pay attention to cars that much, but while I see utility vans all the time, I rarely see a minivan nowadays. But while minivans won't roll over, they also will almost certainly have longer stopping distances than a sedan.
    - tharne 3y ago
      They've really decreased in popularity. As far as I know there are only a handful of manufacturers even making minivans for the US market: Toyota, Kia, Chrysler, and Honda, and they each only offer a single model last I knew. I'm not sure why no one buys them anymore since from a practical standpoint they offer a lot more space and ergonomics when compared to most SUV's. My only guess in that people have a lot fewer kids these days.
  - thechao 3y ago
    Where's my 550 mile ranged EV minivan!?
  - dv_dt 3y ago
    Minivans are still more likely to rollover than passenger cars, but suvs and pickups at the time of this article rollover in one in four accidents - which is shockingly high. https://www.autosafety.org/formula-predicts-rollover-risk/ https://www.autosafety.org/formula-predicts-rollover-risk/
xboxnolifes 3y ago
I agree. We really need to stop bringing roads through cities.

Pretty slanted. Could write a complementary article: large cars are safer for the passengers. Why don't we keep pedestrians separate from traffic more effectively?

pmontra 3y ago

Pedestrian bridges on every intersection? Cars mandated to use only yet to be digged underground roads? Any other idea?

resoluteteeth 3y ago

Large cars aren't inherently safer for passengers. They are only safer in collisions with other cars that are smaller, at the expense of the safety of the people in the smaller cars. Having an arms race where people buy bigger and bigger cars to be safer in collisions with other cars is really not ideal, because it doesn't improve overall automobile safety on a national level even just for drivers, and it hurts safety for pedestrians.

cozzyd 3y ago
They also will typically stop slower and are often more vulnerable to rollovers...
Scoundreller 3y ago
It’s also a matter of comfort. Cities including mine are drunk on putting speed humps everywhere. But obviously they’re not “tuned” for each vehicle size. A coupe/sedan needs to slow down to half the speed limit to go over, while a larger vehicle with a suspension and tire sizes to match can take them at speed. Same story for potholes, which of course are worsened by heavier vehicles while small vehicles pay the price. Literally encouraging an arms race when it comes to vehicle size.
- kemayo 3y ago
  "Large cars let me ignore speed humps" sounds exactly like prioritizing the occupants of the car over the safety of others...
  - Scoundreller 3y ago
    My main beef is that the speed humps should be navigable at the speed limit of the road they’re installed on. And they are, but only for larger vehicles on my ass for slowing down to go over them in my sedan.
    - cozzyd 3y ago
      That is certainly not the intent
      - Scoundreller 3y ago
        But it is the outcome. And yet another driver in the adoption of ever larger vehicles.
- chrisco255 3y ago
  This is almost entirely suspension based. I currently have an F350 but drove an off-road edition Tacoma for a long time. The Tacoma is half the weight and significantly smaller than the F350, and it would take speed bumps like they were nothing because of the offroad tuning, whereas the F350 is quite difficult to drive at fast speeds and takes bumps pretty harshly due to its weight and stiffer suspension designed for hauling.
chrisco255 3y ago
Pedestrians aren't getting killed more often because cars are bigger. They're not being seen due to low visibility from A pillar designs. SUVs used to be quite boxy and large in the 90s and early 00s (think 90s Ford Explorer, Chevy Suburban, etc), but began to take on a more streamlined, car-like look in the late 00s / early 10s. As a result of this design shift to crossovers, the A column gets slanted and blocks a wide field of view that especially affects drivers when making left turns. This coupled with a higher ride height means pedestrians aren't getting seen, especially at night. If you look at the stats, virtually the entire increase in pedestrian deaths over the last 10 years has occurred at night.
- cozzyd 3y ago
  I think cars getting taller also doesn't help (pop over the hood vs. trampled underneath), but I'm not sure...
  - chrisco255 3y ago
    That "pop over the hood" theory is incorrect. If a car is moving at deadly speed you will not simply roll over a cars hood unharmed. You're still taking a 3000+ pound hit at 30 or more miles per hour, and you will most likely be embedded into the forward crush zone and subsequently flung forwards after the driver brakes in response. At any rate, it's largely left-turning, night driving vehicles that are causing the increase in deaths in North America. These pedestrians are being struck at an angle rather than head on.
    - cozzyd 3y ago
      Probably a Hollywood-induced myth
- xethos 3y ago
  It's not the slant so much as the width - it wouldn't be thick enough, close enough, and leave such poor visibility were it thinner. But it's required to be thicker to survive a rollover without the big heavy body crushing the roof (and occupants). I've driven vehicles that don't have to survive a rollover (a few models of New Flyer diesel bus). The A pillar being slanted or straight makes no difference. It's the thickness that'll block a pedestrian.
JoeAltmaier 3y ago
Isn't that just not true? Larger cars have steel cages, stronger supports, higher off the ground. Actual frames, steel shell and not aluminum.
- JoeAltmaier 3y ago
  And today we find, small cars are simply faking their safety test results: https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/27/business/daihatsu-japan-production-halt-safety-tests-intl-hnk/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/27/business/daihatsu-japan-produ...

cozzyd 3y ago

Yes, it would help to have more pedestrian only streets, ban drive throughs, reduce curb cuts, ban right turns on red, and reduce speed limits in urban areas to more reasonable safe speeds like 15 mph.

michaelmrose 3y ago

Do you mean on average they are safer or inherently? Is that a function of the average on the other side of the collision and most importantly is there data proving your position.

dv_dt 3y ago

Large cars are less agile, making it more difficult to avoid accidents. SUVs in particular are also much more likely to rollover than passenger cars. This makes larger vehicles less safe for their passengers.

tharne 3y ago
It really depends on the vehicle. Minivans are quite large and are some of the safest vehicles on the road.
- cozzyd 3y ago
  I don't really pay attention to cars that much, but while I see utility vans all the time, I rarely see a minivan nowadays. But while minivans won't roll over, they also will almost certainly have longer stopping distances than a sedan.
  - tharne 3y ago
    They've really decreased in popularity. As far as I know there are only a handful of manufacturers even making minivans for the US market: Toyota, Kia, Chrysler, and Honda, and they each only offer a single model last I knew. I'm not sure why no one buys them anymore since from a practical standpoint they offer a lot more space and ergonomics when compared to most SUV's. My only guess in that people have a lot fewer kids these days.
- thechao 3y ago
  Where's my 550 mile ranged EV minivan!?
- dv_dt 3y ago
  Minivans are still more likely to rollover than passenger cars, but suvs and pickups at the time of this article rollover in one in four accidents - which is shockingly high. https://www.autosafety.org/formula-predicts-rollover-risk/ https://www.autosafety.org/formula-predicts-rollover-risk/

xboxnolifes 3y ago

I agree. We really need to stop bringing roads through cities.