Supercharger

Active Safety:

Good acceleration, braking and cornering performance.
All-Wheel-Drive is a plus.


Passive Safety:

All else being equal, larger and heavier vehicles are safer than smaller, lighter ones in a crash. Larger, heavier cars absorb less of the total crash energy than do other cars, at the smaller cars’ expense. This, in turn, helps to better protect the bigger vehicles’ occupants.

In a front or rear crash, the higher bumper on many SUVs hits a typical car above the car’s bumper line, exerting its force into weaker portions of the smaller car. In a side impact, the impacted vehicle, when smaller, will fare badly whether it’s hit lower down or higher up.

Toadman

If this is from an ad for the fugly Honda Element, I ain't biting. I'd rather take a bumper to the chin than drive that most foul car/truck/fridge/whatever..

KyngNothing

Good point, let's ban large vehicles, they're obviously unsafe

Heck, even a tiny car can kill a motorcyclist.. let's ban all cars...

but motorcycles can go fast, that kills too, let's ban all internal combustion engines!! :D

Elara

They're only safer for those driving them. There are two types of vehicles I wouldn't be caught dead driving- 1)Minivan, and 2)SUV. If I need to haul stuff, I'll use a pickup. If I'm driving, give me a sports car/sedan.

Of course, no offense to those who do drive SUVs and minivans- they're fine, if you like that sort of thing.

Rich

If only it were that easy. What about larger, heavier vehicles in single vehicle accidents? They're no better than a small car there. Rollovers have the highest rate of death for those involved, and typically small cars are less prone to roll over. Even with the same car, tire choice and maintenance play a significant role. Air bags and various forms of computer stability control and other aides play a major role in accident avoidance. Driver ability and (far more important) how aggressively they drive are huge factors. The list goes on and on and on...

Please don't take offense at this, but what was the point in starting this thread? I don't get it.

Keeper

This is deceiving. If vehicle A that hits vehicle B, vehilce A is subject to the same amount of force, regardless of vehicle A's size. If vehicle A is larger than vehicle B, it exerts more force on vehicle B. The total force is increased by the larger vehicle, and that force is exerted on vehicle B. But that total force involved in the collision doesn't really matter to vehicle A -- only the force exerted on vehicle A by vehicle B.

If vehicle A is larger but not well engineered, it could very well be more dangerous to it's occupants than the occupants in vehicle B. Generally the reason why safety is perceived to be greater is because there is more material/surface alrea present to absorb the force of impact. The extra momentum of the larger vehicle does reduces the force of impact exerted on the larger vehicle's occupants, but if the structure of the vehicle collapses and hits the occupant the increase in mass won't do anything for them.

This is true. That's why there are laws regarding the position of bumpers on SUVs and the ride heights of cars and trucks.

The difference in height is not very significant in front/back collisions.

In a front end collision, you have the bumper, the hood, and a bunch of solid objects between the firewall and bumper. The solid objects can absorb a bit of the force, but they can't move very far (most engine bays are packed). Usually most of the force is eaten up by the hood and bumper.

The back of a vehicle often sits MUCH higher than the front. In a rear end collision, the odds of an SUV driving over the back of the car is very low. The crumplezones and bumpers in the rear sides of the car absorb a large part of the impact. Some of the impact is absorbed by the trunk lid, but not as much as you'd see with the hood of the car.

In a side impact, a car is designed to absorb as much of the impact is possible (you wouldn't believe how much space there is between the outside and inside of a vehicle) up to a certain point, and then just let the car get pushed. I general, you don't want to be in a side impact ever, regardless of your vehicle's size -- they're the most dangerous/lethal type of collision. That being said, the height regulations of the front bumper of an SUV should always put it under the height of your windows.

If you get hit in the side by a lifted truck, you're screwed. The top of the car + side glass + any pillars offer very little protection. Any passengers on that side are likely to be seriously injured.

The net effect of all impacts is that the impact from an SUV traveling at the speed limit is more like that of an impact of a car going 25-50% over the speed limit (obviously this percentage varies depending on the weight of the SUV). All a person driving an SUV does is increase the risk of injury in an accident for those around them. It does not protect them anymore than a car does.

Supercharger

IIHS Frontal Offset Crash Test Rating - Midsize Luxury Cars:

1. Mercedes C-Class .... (Best)

2. Volvo S80

3. Lexus ES300

4. Lexus IS300

5. Saab 9-5

6. BMW 3-Series

7. Volvo S60

8. Jaguar X-Type

9. Audi A6 ................... (Worst)


http://www.hwysafety.org

Supercharger

IIHS Overall (Front & Side Impact) Crash Test Rating – Small SUVs:

1. SUBARU FORESTER ………………………….. (Best)

2. HYUNDAI SANTA FE

3. HONDA CR-V

4. FORD ESCAPE
4. MAZDA TRIBUTE

5. JEEP WRANGLER

6. HONDA ELEMENT

7. SATURN VUE

8. MITSUBISHI OUTLANDER

9. LAND ROVER FREELANDER

10. SUZUKI GRAND VITARA/VITARA
10. CHEVROLET TRACKER

11. TOYOTA RAV4 ……………………………….. (Worst)


IIHS side impact test (right photo)

FamilyGuy

About 42,000 people are killed each year in a car accident in the US (use google to look it up). Since the US population is around 280 million, that works out to 1.5 deaths per 10,000 people per year.

That's not a high risk, but it's a thousand times more likely than, say, winning the lottery.


The US government at National Traffic and Highway Safety Administration tests crashes as a head on frontal collision and side collision from a sedan. The National Insurance Institute which was already mentioned used to test for offset head on collisions.

I bought myself a Chevy Impala because it had 5 passenger and 5 driver from the government in front impacts, 4 for the driver and 4 for the back seat passenger in government side impacts, and an acceptable rating from the insurance institute in the offset crash. My wife bought a Honda CRV because it was 5 stars across the board and rated good in the offset crash.

Well, the insurance institute started testing side impact crashes assuming that the other vehicle is a pickup or tall SUV. It turns out that, now that cars are offering better frontal impact protection, that the pickup/tall SUV side impact is the most deadly kind of crash. Frontal impacts are more common, but thanks to safer cars they are less deadly.

The CRV sucked, and I bet the Impala doesn't do much better when they test it. So my wife and I bought two cars for their top notch safety ratings, only to discover that they aren't that safe in the deadliest kind of crash. I'm really happy now.

wakeech

sounds like the maximum fender height needs some serious relegation here, eh boys??

FamilyGuy

I don't get that mindset. I don't care if the Minivan is a goobermobile of the highest order. If it's the best vehicle for the job, why not use it?

If you use your pickup bed more than once a year, or take your SUV off road from time to time, cool. That's the vehicle for you, and I respect your purchase. I'm not trying to flame anyone.

But minivans get a bad rap for being boring and ugly, when the fact is that they're very practical. To me, practicality is important.

When I stop at a restaurant and see a 55 year old woman rappel out of her Ford Excursion parked next to the Cadillac Escalade driven by a business executive, I can't help but think that both of them are idiots. They could have saved thousands of dollars on the vehicle, thousands more on the insurance, and thousands more on gas by getting something smaller. If they got a decent minivan or station wagon, they wouldn't give up any passenger space or much cargo space in the bargain.

The people who drive SUVs for the hell of it can keep their Ford Explorers, Acura MDXs, Cadillac Escalades, Toyota Sequioas, BMW X5s, and Chrysler Pacificas. When I need more space, I'll look into a Honda Odyssey or maybe a Kia Sedona and put the rest of my money away towards a few vacations in Cancun, or an earlier retirement, or a sports car I can drive when I don't need to cart people around.