|
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
"Robert A. Matern" wrote: > > ...Politically motivated propaganda isn't just bad science, it's USELESS as > well. Actually, if you're sending up trial balloons to see how gullible, stupid, or ready for the next legislative step in your political agenda the public is, it could prove useful to a particular political movement, party, presidential candidate, etc. Bill Putney (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with "x") -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Brent P wrote: > > Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety > measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver > demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old > and drive them were younger and driving them. I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different accidents. Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or would they stay the same? Bill Putney (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with "x") -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Brent P wrote: > > Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety > measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver > demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old > and drive them were younger and driving them. I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different accidents. Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or would they stay the same? Bill Putney (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with "x") -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Brent P wrote: > > Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety > measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver > demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old > and drive them were younger and driving them. I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different accidents. Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or would they stay the same? Bill Putney (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with "x") -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Bill Putney wrote:
> > Brent P wrote: > >>Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety >>measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver >>demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old >>and drive them were younger and driving them. > > > I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different > accidents. > > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or > would they stay the same? > Basically, yes. An auto crash is fairly inelastic, the safety of the vehicle occupants will primarily depend on how progressively the vehicles crush. The amount of energy dissipated will increase (dramatically) but the end result will be the same. Since energy increases linearly with increased mass, it ought to scale fairly roughly as you describe it. This is, of course, a fairly simplistic explanation and the crash performance characteristics of the vehicles will be the primary factor in whether the occupants walk away or not. A head-on collision between two identical vehicles is essentially the same thing as a head-on crash into an immovable wall at the same speed; so crash test performance is the best gauge of safety in your scenario. nate -- remove "horny" from my email address to reply. |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Bill Putney wrote:
> > Brent P wrote: > >>Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety >>measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver >>demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old >>and drive them were younger and driving them. > > > I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different > accidents. > > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or > would they stay the same? > Basically, yes. An auto crash is fairly inelastic, the safety of the vehicle occupants will primarily depend on how progressively the vehicles crush. The amount of energy dissipated will increase (dramatically) but the end result will be the same. Since energy increases linearly with increased mass, it ought to scale fairly roughly as you describe it. This is, of course, a fairly simplistic explanation and the crash performance characteristics of the vehicles will be the primary factor in whether the occupants walk away or not. A head-on collision between two identical vehicles is essentially the same thing as a head-on crash into an immovable wall at the same speed; so crash test performance is the best gauge of safety in your scenario. nate -- remove "horny" from my email address to reply. |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Bill Putney wrote:
> > Brent P wrote: > >>Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety >>measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver >>demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old >>and drive them were younger and driving them. > > > I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different > accidents. > > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or > would they stay the same? > Basically, yes. An auto crash is fairly inelastic, the safety of the vehicle occupants will primarily depend on how progressively the vehicles crush. The amount of energy dissipated will increase (dramatically) but the end result will be the same. Since energy increases linearly with increased mass, it ought to scale fairly roughly as you describe it. This is, of course, a fairly simplistic explanation and the crash performance characteristics of the vehicles will be the primary factor in whether the occupants walk away or not. A head-on collision between two identical vehicles is essentially the same thing as a head-on crash into an immovable wall at the same speed; so crash test performance is the best gauge of safety in your scenario. nate -- remove "horny" from my email address to reply. |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
The results aren't linear, but it's safe to say that even with enhanced
safety design, a 2000 lb vehicle won't fare well when hit by something with twice as much mass. There's a limit on what can be achieved with design, simply a matter of physics, no matter what the greens & safety mavens want you to believe. Fact is, many of these small cars aren't even safe in single car accidents. When I worked for VWoA I got close enough to the liability side of the business to realize one of the industry's dirty little secrets was simply "small cars kill". Bill Clinton'e NHTSA released a report in 2000 that concluded the near-mandated downsizing of vehicles through the 80's & 90's had resulted in the unnecessary deaths of over 16,000 people. The study concluded the savings in fuel economy over the same period have more to do with improved engine and systems efficiency than did the reduction in average vehicle weight. All I know is, no kid of mine would be sent off to college in a Dodge Neon or other such death-trap! Greens often try to muddy the water by citing European studies that show a similar fatality rate for their small cars as out larger ones. (I'm surprised wasn't cited in the report,) Comparisons to European statistics are not valid, because they drive far fewer miles than North Americans and there is far less disparity in vehicle sizes on European roads, that is, they drive a lot more small cars than we do. The whole buzz about SUV rollovers is a smokescreen to try & get people scared enough not to buy them. It's a hidden agenda by the greens, who 1) worry about fuel consumption, and 2) want to ban off roading and fear that the more people have off road capable vehicles they more they'll use them. (The latter point was confirmed to me a number of years ago by a Sierra Club official.) Roll overs represent only around 2.5% of all accidents, and have more to do with idiotic driving than design. A few years ago the Corvette had the highest rollover rate per miles driven than any other vehicle. Why? Idiots behind the wheel! "Bill Putney" <bputney@kinez.net> wrote in message news:3F907AED.1237EFE8@kinez.net... > > > Brent P wrote: > > > > Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety > > measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver > > demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old > > and drive them were younger and driving them. > > I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different > accidents. > > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or > would they stay the same? > > Bill Putney > (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > address with "x") > > > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
The results aren't linear, but it's safe to say that even with enhanced
safety design, a 2000 lb vehicle won't fare well when hit by something with twice as much mass. There's a limit on what can be achieved with design, simply a matter of physics, no matter what the greens & safety mavens want you to believe. Fact is, many of these small cars aren't even safe in single car accidents. When I worked for VWoA I got close enough to the liability side of the business to realize one of the industry's dirty little secrets was simply "small cars kill". Bill Clinton'e NHTSA released a report in 2000 that concluded the near-mandated downsizing of vehicles through the 80's & 90's had resulted in the unnecessary deaths of over 16,000 people. The study concluded the savings in fuel economy over the same period have more to do with improved engine and systems efficiency than did the reduction in average vehicle weight. All I know is, no kid of mine would be sent off to college in a Dodge Neon or other such death-trap! Greens often try to muddy the water by citing European studies that show a similar fatality rate for their small cars as out larger ones. (I'm surprised wasn't cited in the report,) Comparisons to European statistics are not valid, because they drive far fewer miles than North Americans and there is far less disparity in vehicle sizes on European roads, that is, they drive a lot more small cars than we do. The whole buzz about SUV rollovers is a smokescreen to try & get people scared enough not to buy them. It's a hidden agenda by the greens, who 1) worry about fuel consumption, and 2) want to ban off roading and fear that the more people have off road capable vehicles they more they'll use them. (The latter point was confirmed to me a number of years ago by a Sierra Club official.) Roll overs represent only around 2.5% of all accidents, and have more to do with idiotic driving than design. A few years ago the Corvette had the highest rollover rate per miles driven than any other vehicle. Why? Idiots behind the wheel! "Bill Putney" <bputney@kinez.net> wrote in message news:3F907AED.1237EFE8@kinez.net... > > > Brent P wrote: > > > > Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety > > measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver > > demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old > > and drive them were younger and driving them. > > I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different > accidents. > > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or > would they stay the same? > > Bill Putney > (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > address with "x") > > > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
The results aren't linear, but it's safe to say that even with enhanced
safety design, a 2000 lb vehicle won't fare well when hit by something with twice as much mass. There's a limit on what can be achieved with design, simply a matter of physics, no matter what the greens & safety mavens want you to believe. Fact is, many of these small cars aren't even safe in single car accidents. When I worked for VWoA I got close enough to the liability side of the business to realize one of the industry's dirty little secrets was simply "small cars kill". Bill Clinton'e NHTSA released a report in 2000 that concluded the near-mandated downsizing of vehicles through the 80's & 90's had resulted in the unnecessary deaths of over 16,000 people. The study concluded the savings in fuel economy over the same period have more to do with improved engine and systems efficiency than did the reduction in average vehicle weight. All I know is, no kid of mine would be sent off to college in a Dodge Neon or other such death-trap! Greens often try to muddy the water by citing European studies that show a similar fatality rate for their small cars as out larger ones. (I'm surprised wasn't cited in the report,) Comparisons to European statistics are not valid, because they drive far fewer miles than North Americans and there is far less disparity in vehicle sizes on European roads, that is, they drive a lot more small cars than we do. The whole buzz about SUV rollovers is a smokescreen to try & get people scared enough not to buy them. It's a hidden agenda by the greens, who 1) worry about fuel consumption, and 2) want to ban off roading and fear that the more people have off road capable vehicles they more they'll use them. (The latter point was confirmed to me a number of years ago by a Sierra Club official.) Roll overs represent only around 2.5% of all accidents, and have more to do with idiotic driving than design. A few years ago the Corvette had the highest rollover rate per miles driven than any other vehicle. Why? Idiots behind the wheel! "Bill Putney" <bputney@kinez.net> wrote in message news:3F907AED.1237EFE8@kinez.net... > > > Brent P wrote: > > > > Large passenger cars come out ahead in every type of post-crash safety > > measure I've seen, including those that are not dependent upon driver > > demographics. And they were also safer when those who are now old > > and drive them were younger and driving them. > > I'm curious: Does this stuff scale linearly? By that, I mean, in two > otherwise identical two-vehicle crashes, one crash comprised of, say a > vehicle that weighs 2000 pounds and the other vehicle at 3500 pounds, > and the second crash with the two vehicles exactly twice (or apply any > ratio you want) as heavy (i.e., 4000 pounds and 7000 pounds as in the > other crash, will the outcome statistically be the same for > corresponding drivers and passengers of both cars in the two different > accidents. > > Another way of asking this is: If everyone in the nation became > convinced that bigger is better and got rid of their existing vehicle > and bought a vehicle that weighed 50% again as much as their previous > vehicle, would the safety statistics change for multiple vehicle > accidents (involving the now 50% heavier-across-the-board-vehicles), or > would they stay the same? > > Bill Putney > (to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > address with "x") > > > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:08 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands