6 ms·
Just to note the trade-off here: modern cars are much safer in crashes than even cars from ~20 years ago, and the less computer you want, the further back in ti
by dan-robertson 2y ago
Just to note the trade-off here: modern cars are much safer in crashes than even cars from ~20 years ago, and the less computer you want, the further back in time you need to go to find suitable cars. There are nuances to the safety thing: some brands were/are safer, more popular car designs today tend to have some features that may worsen safety (taller cars are less stable, heavier cars handle worse, big heavy cars are worse for pedestrians).
- fouc 2y ago[citation required] I wonder if there's even any citations that can directly show that a 2024 car is "much" safer than a 2004 car. Without relying on NHTSA's safety rating system, which is an indirect proxy at most (and probably has changed multiple times for "reasons"). And without being confounded by changes in regulatory measures.
- plasticchris 2y agoLook at the statistics over time? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_...
- cjrp 2y agoCould that be from other things though? Better tyres, improved safety-barrier technology, etc.?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Reubachi 2y agoI'm struggling to find the original document/page I read on this, but largely, "a car having better parts is due to the road having features that benefit these parts due to generations of studying the way cars behave in that set of circumstances. Autos are designed around and for the roads they will serve, not vice versa. This is the bane of auto manufacturers who want to make one tail light housing for all their cars in all their markets. it's a bit more easy to read data comparing for example safety in Euro market vs American market (there are fundamental differences in safety thoery; lighting, ride heighgt, weight, engine size etc. As opposed to looking at changing trends in one market over 20 years, which are largely stylistic.)
- ldoughty 2y agoI think it depends on what you're trying to gauge for safety. Pre-2000 satedy improvements were heavily about WHEN you get into an accident... Post 2000 it is heavily is heavily DON'T get into an accident, and it's heavily electronic. Anti-lock breaks, lane change vehicle detectors, unintentional lane change warnings, auto-breaking before collisions. I certainly agree with the general vibe that cars do too much now, but I'd rather have a dumbified 2010+ish car
- leoedin 2y agoHow much safer are they? I can totally believe that the crash safety of cars improved hugely in the 90s - that's basically when large crumple zones, computer modelling of crash performance, airbags, seatbelt pretensioners etc were all developed. But 20 years ago was 2005. What's changed on a modern car since 2005? There's obviously a lot more safety features (and these have increasingly been part of the crashworthiness rating cars are given). But if you crash into a wall at 40mph, how much stronger are they?
- bufferoverflow 2y agoThe safest cars basically saturated the safety tests. To the point where car companies are making up their own tests, simulating much more dangerous collisions.
- jdietrich 2y ago>How much safer are they? A lot. Probably the biggest single change was the introduction of the small overlap crash test by the IIHS. It turns out that the standard frontal crash tests are quite unrealistic; in most frontal accidents, the driver swerves to avoid something but clips the corner, rather than just slamming into something head-on. Cars designed to perform well in the standard frontal crash test often performed miserably in the small overlap test. Compare the same model before and after the small overlap test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6s0Oq2SPu48 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6s0Oq2SPu48 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE_EUa3VC48 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE_EUa3VC48
- ornornor 2y agoSurprised at how much the dummy’s head misses the airbag in the 2013 model but hits it almost in the center in the 2016.
- tobyhinloopen 2y agoThe best crash is the one being avoided - I had my modern car save me from slipping 2 times with the ESC. (stability control)
- hnpolicestate 2y agoPerhaps structurally but the tech stuff isn't improving safety. With the absolute slightest bit of fog, excessive humidity, rain or snow by Mazda tells me one of its radar systems isn't operable and to please drive safely.
- tobyhinloopen 2y agoI don't know what Mazda you have, but my Mazda CX-5 2017's radar systems are MUCH more reliable than the Volvo XC40. The CX-5 maybe failed a handful of times in the years I owned it, but the XC40 failed almost every time the weather was bad (rain, cold, mist, etc)