SUV Deathtraps

[rodgerd]

So, which do you think would do better in a crash test? A Ford F150 or a Mini? You might be surprised.

Also of note is that based off US crash stats, the safest cars appear tpo be predominantly mid sized (in US terms) like the Camry. And that the Remuera Tractors are not only often less safe (tell the soccer mums!), but far, far more lethal to others.

[SPman]

So, which do you think would do better in a crash test? A Ford F150 or a Mini?

Dependant totally on circumstances, surely. A Mini would be better able to avoid a crash. Most SUV's (that I've driven) dont handle all that well and would be more inclined to not avoid a crash.

Now I'll tread the article!

[James Deuce]

In any accident, the heavier vehicle is more likely to kill the occupant of the lighter vehicle, irrespective of safety ratings or testing. Kinetic energy is no respecter of theory or design.

[rodgerd]

In any accident, the heavier vehicle is more likely to kill the occupant of the lighter vehicle, irrespective of safety ratings or testing. Kinetic energy is no respecter of theory or design.

Of course. I mean, a rusty badly designed light truck will always do better than a well-designed, immaculate car. *rolls eyes*

You might want to read the actual crash data (from real life collisions) and suchlike the article links to.

[Jackrat]

I agree with jim and trust nobody that quotes stat's.
No offence intended.

I drive a two ton Nissan patrol and know what the out come will be if some body runs into it.Full chasis,not one of these pretend part time SUV things.The handling thing will always be an issue but the people driving 4x4s have to be aware of that,Or made aware.
I don't drive my Nissan like it was a compact, plus it has up graded suspension.
To me the biggest issue with large vehicules of any type is the way in which they are driven.It never fails to amaze me that some owners are not aware of the greater roll over potentual of a high vehicule.
My own 4x4 it not really an SUV as it is an older full chasis thingy that was made before shiney bull bars became a status symbol.Damn I even drive it off road every day.Mud?? What's with that huh??
Hmmmm,can we say Possum borne.
Wonder what he would say about stat's an studys.

PS, Sounds rather callous for sure, but I am and have been a biker since before I could hold a licence.I already know all about which vehicules are most likely to be fatal to me in an accident,any of them.when I am in my 4x4 I don't really care about that part of the issue.Car drivers don't give a damn about me when I'm on me bike an I don't give a damn about them when I'm in my 4x4.As for bikers we have had to live with it since day dot.

[Hitcher]

In any accident, the heavier vehicle is more likely to kill the occupant of the lighter vehicle, irrespective of safety ratings or testing. Kinetic energy is no respecter of theory or design.

Ye cannae change the laws of physics Jim(2)!!

Och aye, beam me up Scottie...

[FROSTY:Me]

i get to drive a lot of different vehicles every day. Something you guys need to know is that almost without exception those tractors take a shit load of stopping. Youd have thought -big truck big brakes--but nope .
And yep they rarely handle--one exception is th 3.0 terrano 99 on
as for safety Id pick the mini any day

[Motu]

These tests just show that the SUV has no crumple zones - so if I run into a brick wall with my Pajero I'm going to be worse off than the guy who does the same thing in a Civic....but if I run into the Civic I might hurt him,but I'll be ok....if I run over Jack on his XS650,he won't be able to get up and thump me.

[FROSTY:Me]

yea but if he does you better hope like heck the central locking works

[Lou Girardin]

SUV's one saving grace is that they regularly kill their drivers.

[wkid_one]

It will be interesting to see when the 'bullbar' rules come in to effect. Meaning the drivers need to ensure when fitting after market BB's that they comply with the vehicles crumple zones and occupant restraint systems. This will see most of them have to have Airbag sensors.

In saying the statement about most SUV's killing their occupants. This is changing - this was largely due to 4WD's being built on a ladder chassis - which in an accident transfers most of the force of the accident in to the cabin of the vehicle as it has no crumple zones. HOwever - if you have read the latest mags - most of the SUV's now are going for the monocoque chassis the same as in cars which means they can incorporate crumple zones in to the vehicles with the same dynamics as cars. THis chassis also improves the road holding ability of the vehicles.

Personally - I would always buy an SUV over a car...

[Hitcher]

It will be interesting to see when the 'bullbar' rules come in to effect. Meaning the drivers need to ensure when fitting after market BB's that they comply with the vehicles crumple zones and occupant restraint systems. This will see most of them have to have Airbag sensors.

In saying the statement about most SUV's killing their occupants. This is changing - this was largely due to 4WD's being built on a ladder chassis - which in an accident transfers most of the force of the accident in to the cabin of the vehicle as it has no crumple zones. HOwever - if you have read the latest mags - most of the SUV's now are going for the monocoque chassis the same as in cars which means they can incorporate crumple zones in to the vehicles with the same dynamics as cars. THis chassis also improves the road holding ability of the vehicles.

Personally - I would always buy an SUV over a car...

Bull bars should be banned. Their sole purpose is to intimidate other road users or maim pedestrians. They impart no useful protection to the vehicles on which they are fitted, other than saving plastic fittings and paintwork. We aren't living in the Australian outback where we need to protect our vehicles from wandering stock or kangaroos -- and even in those circumstances, an aluminium bull bar (with as much tensile strength as a banana) would be piss useless.

[Jackrat]

Bull bars should be banned. Their sole purpose is to intimidate other road users or maim pedestrians. They impart no useful protection to the vehicles on which they are fitted, other than saving plastic fittings and paintwork. We aren't living in the Australian outback where we need to protect our vehicles from wandering stock or kangaroos -- and even in those circumstances, an aluminium bull bar (with as much tensile strength as a banana) would be piss useless.

I agree that BB have no use in town but they have a lot of use on the land and I'm fucked if I should be constrained by the odd chance that some fuckwit townie is going to run into me.As for your comment about running into a kangaroo or wandering stock,I've done both an my bars saved me from a heap of damage.
Ands for your comment about intimidating other road users and maiming pedestrians.Christ we have to defend motorcycling from this type of crap,now we get the same crap from bikers.The same thing applys to both,,If their so fucken bad,how come I'm not dead already???.
After all I've owned four 4x4s and over twenty bikes,,so were's the trail of destruction??
Shit go by a Toyota corolla and watch out for the boogie man.

[White trash]

Shit go by a Toyota corolla and watch out for the boogie man.

I own a Corolla and am the "Boogie man"

[James Deuce]

Of course. I mean, a rusty badly designed light truck will always do better than a well-designed, immaculate car. *rolls eyes*

You might want to read the actual crash data (from real life collisions) and suchlike the article links to.

I say, that is a bit of a rude reply. I did read your links and you may want to try casting the net a bit wider before you base your belief system on one article.

It doesn't matter how rusty or badly designed the light truck is, it will always transfer more energy to a smaller vehicle. The occupants in both vehicles may die and the larger may well be less safe, but my statement still stands. You are more likely to die if you are the occupant of a vehicle that is physically smaller, both in dimensions and mass.