Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
10-17-2003, 09:55 PM
#151
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Nate Nagel wrote:
> P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
>> On 17 Oct 2003 08:52:47 -0700, dianelos@tecapro.com (Dianelos
>> Georgoudis) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If you care about your personal safety then, clearly, the best
>>> strategy is not to use a SUV but to use a mid-size or large passenger
>>> car.
>>
>>
>>
>> I care not only about my safety, but the safety of my family, so I
>> bought a very safe SUV.
>>
>> Go figure.
>>
>
> Obviously, then you *expect* to wreck, as you've apparently traded
> handling for crash safety.
>
> What are you doing reading rec.autos.DRIVING then?
nate....didn't you notice that this whole thread is cross-posted to 5
different NGs? just because you're reading r.a.driving doesn't mean
everyone else is....and besides. from all my experience, everyone who
has wrecked a car was certainly driving....
john
> P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
>> On 17 Oct 2003 08:52:47 -0700, dianelos@tecapro.com (Dianelos
>> Georgoudis) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If you care about your personal safety then, clearly, the best
>>> strategy is not to use a SUV but to use a mid-size or large passenger
>>> car.
>>
>>
>>
>> I care not only about my safety, but the safety of my family, so I
>> bought a very safe SUV.
>>
>> Go figure.
>>
>
> Obviously, then you *expect* to wreck, as you've apparently traded
> handling for crash safety.
>
> What are you doing reading rec.autos.DRIVING then?
nate....didn't you notice that this whole thread is cross-posted to 5
different NGs? just because you're reading r.a.driving doesn't mean
everyone else is....and besides. from all my experience, everyone who
has wrecked a car was certainly driving....
john
10-17-2003, 09:58 PM
#152
Guest
Posts: n/a
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?
yes. it is linear, because a car's kinetic energy KE = 1/2 * mass *
velocity^2. mass is a linear term, so proportionally heavier cars are
the same. speed is a different story...it is exponential, meaning a
little more speed can do a LOT more damage.
john
>
> 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?
yes. it is linear, because a car's kinetic energy KE = 1/2 * mass *
velocity^2. mass is a linear term, so proportionally heavier cars are
the same. speed is a different story...it is exponential, meaning a
little more speed can do a LOT more damage.
john
10-17-2003, 09:58 PM
#153
Guest
Posts: n/a
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?
yes. it is linear, because a car's kinetic energy KE = 1/2 * mass *
velocity^2. mass is a linear term, so proportionally heavier cars are
the same. speed is a different story...it is exponential, meaning a
little more speed can do a LOT more damage.
john
>
> 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?
yes. it is linear, because a car's kinetic energy KE = 1/2 * mass *
velocity^2. mass is a linear term, so proportionally heavier cars are
the same. speed is a different story...it is exponential, meaning a
little more speed can do a LOT more damage.
john
10-17-2003, 09:58 PM
#154
Guest
Posts: n/a
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?
yes. it is linear, because a car's kinetic energy KE = 1/2 * mass *
velocity^2. mass is a linear term, so proportionally heavier cars are
the same. speed is a different story...it is exponential, meaning a
little more speed can do a LOT more damage.
john
>
> 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?
yes. it is linear, because a car's kinetic energy KE = 1/2 * mass *
velocity^2. mass is a linear term, so proportionally heavier cars are
the same. speed is a different story...it is exponential, meaning a
little more speed can do a LOT more damage.
john
10-17-2003, 10:08 PM
#155
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Approximately 10/17/03 18:44, John T. Waisanen uttered for posterity:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly squat
>> when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than you (like
>> a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
So buy a Porsche Cayenne Turbo and get a nimble vehicle that
weighs over a coupla tons.
--
My governor can kick your governor's ***
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly squat
>> when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than you (like
>> a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
So buy a Porsche Cayenne Turbo and get a nimble vehicle that
weighs over a coupla tons.
--
My governor can kick your governor's ***
10-17-2003, 10:08 PM
#156
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Approximately 10/17/03 18:44, John T. Waisanen uttered for posterity:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly squat
>> when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than you (like
>> a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
So buy a Porsche Cayenne Turbo and get a nimble vehicle that
weighs over a coupla tons.
--
My governor can kick your governor's ***
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly squat
>> when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than you (like
>> a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
So buy a Porsche Cayenne Turbo and get a nimble vehicle that
weighs over a coupla tons.
--
My governor can kick your governor's ***
10-17-2003, 10:08 PM
#157
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Approximately 10/17/03 18:44, John T. Waisanen uttered for posterity:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly squat
>> when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than you (like
>> a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
So buy a Porsche Cayenne Turbo and get a nimble vehicle that
weighs over a coupla tons.
--
My governor can kick your governor's ***
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly squat
>> when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than you (like
>> a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
So buy a Porsche Cayenne Turbo and get a nimble vehicle that
weighs over a coupla tons.
--
My governor can kick your governor's ***
10-17-2003, 10:26 PM
#158
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
John T. Waisanen wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly
>> squat when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than
>> you (like a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
> john
>
No, just to *predict* what other drivers are going to do and *avoid*
being collected by them. Works pretty well so far.
nate
--
remove "horny" from my email address to reply.
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly
>> squat when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than
>> you (like a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
> john
>
No, just to *predict* what other drivers are going to do and *avoid*
being collected by them. Works pretty well so far.
nate
--
remove "horny" from my email address to reply.
10-17-2003, 10:26 PM
#159
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
John T. Waisanen wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly
>> squat when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than
>> you (like a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
> john
>
No, just to *predict* what other drivers are going to do and *avoid*
being collected by them. Works pretty well so far.
nate
--
remove "horny" from my email address to reply.
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly
>> squat when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than
>> you (like a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
> john
>
No, just to *predict* what other drivers are going to do and *avoid*
being collected by them. Works pretty well so far.
nate
--
remove "horny" from my email address to reply.
10-17-2003, 10:26 PM
#160
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
John T. Waisanen wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly
>> squat when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than
>> you (like a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
> john
>
No, just to *predict* what other drivers are going to do and *avoid*
being collected by them. Works pretty well so far.
nate
--
remove "horny" from my email address to reply.
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but with the metro you would not have the extra weight which
>>> generates more momentum
>>>
>>
>> Only helps you if you collide with another vehicle. Does exactly
>> squat when you hit something immovable, or significantly larger than
>> you (like a semi)
>>
>> I'll take my cars light and nimble, thanks, so I don't wreck at all.
>
>
> sounds like nate has an amazing ability to control where other cars
> go....just because your car is light and nimble doesn't mean the guy who
> hits you when you're waiting to turn left is driving a car that is light
> and nimble.
>
> john
>
No, just to *predict* what other drivers are going to do and *avoid*
being collected by them. Works pretty well so far.
nate
--
remove "horny" from my email address to reply.