Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
10-18-2003, 01:41 PM
#301
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:26:03 -0700, Lisa Horton <Lisa@lisahorton.net>
> 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.
> >
> >Introductions seem to be in order: Pete, this is logic, Logic, this is
> >Pete. Do try to keep in touch at the next car purchase time.
>
> What makes you think my purchase was illogical Ms. Horton?
Because you claim to care about the safety of your family, yet you did
not buy the safest type of vehicle.
>
> It's easy to make silly comments such as yours.
Sure, but not as easy as making silly comments like your SUV handling
better than many cars.
>
> It's much harder to back them up.
And even harder if you use logic and facts, good thing you're not trying
the hard thing.
>
> Best of luck.
>
I think it's you and your family that will need the luck, as you roll
roll roll down the road, but not on the wheels.
Lisa
10-18-2003, 01:51 PM
#302
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> > CAFE has effectively limited the weight of passenger vehicles. CAFE has
> > been shown to cost lives for exactly this reason.
>
> This may be true, but CAFE has also saved lives, because forcing vehicles
> to use less fuel helps to reduce pollution, and thus fewer people dying
each
> year
> as a result of pollution-related illnesses. Most likely the lives lost by
> one
> thing are balanced by the other.
>
> Ted
You trade large cars for larger trucks, and you think the net result is less
fuel burned? Here's a clue: if large cars were still unrestricted by CAFE,
those large cars would benefit from some of the same technology that has
allowed all vehicles (SUVs included) to pollute less, per gallon burned.
AND, the large cars would STILL get better MPG compared to the SUVs that
replaced them.
In other words, CAFE has cost lives both by reducing weight of vehicles AND
by causing vehicles to burn MORE fuel, as many people are buying large
trucks for the specific reason that they can not buy large cars
ymore. -Dave
> > been shown to cost lives for exactly this reason.
>
> This may be true, but CAFE has also saved lives, because forcing vehicles
> to use less fuel helps to reduce pollution, and thus fewer people dying
each
> year
> as a result of pollution-related illnesses. Most likely the lives lost by
> one
> thing are balanced by the other.
>
> Ted
You trade large cars for larger trucks, and you think the net result is less
fuel burned? Here's a clue: if large cars were still unrestricted by CAFE,
those large cars would benefit from some of the same technology that has
allowed all vehicles (SUVs included) to pollute less, per gallon burned.
AND, the large cars would STILL get better MPG compared to the SUVs that
replaced them.
In other words, CAFE has cost lives both by reducing weight of vehicles AND
by causing vehicles to burn MORE fuel, as many people are buying large
trucks for the specific reason that they can not buy large cars
ymore. -Dave
10-18-2003, 01:51 PM
#303
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> > CAFE has effectively limited the weight of passenger vehicles. CAFE has
> > been shown to cost lives for exactly this reason.
>
> This may be true, but CAFE has also saved lives, because forcing vehicles
> to use less fuel helps to reduce pollution, and thus fewer people dying
each
> year
> as a result of pollution-related illnesses. Most likely the lives lost by
> one
> thing are balanced by the other.
>
> Ted
You trade large cars for larger trucks, and you think the net result is less
fuel burned? Here's a clue: if large cars were still unrestricted by CAFE,
those large cars would benefit from some of the same technology that has
allowed all vehicles (SUVs included) to pollute less, per gallon burned.
AND, the large cars would STILL get better MPG compared to the SUVs that
replaced them.
In other words, CAFE has cost lives both by reducing weight of vehicles AND
by causing vehicles to burn MORE fuel, as many people are buying large
trucks for the specific reason that they can not buy large cars
ymore. -Dave
> > been shown to cost lives for exactly this reason.
>
> This may be true, but CAFE has also saved lives, because forcing vehicles
> to use less fuel helps to reduce pollution, and thus fewer people dying
each
> year
> as a result of pollution-related illnesses. Most likely the lives lost by
> one
> thing are balanced by the other.
>
> Ted
You trade large cars for larger trucks, and you think the net result is less
fuel burned? Here's a clue: if large cars were still unrestricted by CAFE,
those large cars would benefit from some of the same technology that has
allowed all vehicles (SUVs included) to pollute less, per gallon burned.
AND, the large cars would STILL get better MPG compared to the SUVs that
replaced them.
In other words, CAFE has cost lives both by reducing weight of vehicles AND
by causing vehicles to burn MORE fuel, as many people are buying large
trucks for the specific reason that they can not buy large cars
ymore. -Dave
10-18-2003, 01:51 PM
#304
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> > CAFE has effectively limited the weight of passenger vehicles. CAFE has
> > been shown to cost lives for exactly this reason.
>
> This may be true, but CAFE has also saved lives, because forcing vehicles
> to use less fuel helps to reduce pollution, and thus fewer people dying
each
> year
> as a result of pollution-related illnesses. Most likely the lives lost by
> one
> thing are balanced by the other.
>
> Ted
You trade large cars for larger trucks, and you think the net result is less
fuel burned? Here's a clue: if large cars were still unrestricted by CAFE,
those large cars would benefit from some of the same technology that has
allowed all vehicles (SUVs included) to pollute less, per gallon burned.
AND, the large cars would STILL get better MPG compared to the SUVs that
replaced them.
In other words, CAFE has cost lives both by reducing weight of vehicles AND
by causing vehicles to burn MORE fuel, as many people are buying large
trucks for the specific reason that they can not buy large cars
ymore. -Dave
> > been shown to cost lives for exactly this reason.
>
> This may be true, but CAFE has also saved lives, because forcing vehicles
> to use less fuel helps to reduce pollution, and thus fewer people dying
each
> year
> as a result of pollution-related illnesses. Most likely the lives lost by
> one
> thing are balanced by the other.
>
> Ted
You trade large cars for larger trucks, and you think the net result is less
fuel burned? Here's a clue: if large cars were still unrestricted by CAFE,
those large cars would benefit from some of the same technology that has
allowed all vehicles (SUVs included) to pollute less, per gallon burned.
AND, the large cars would STILL get better MPG compared to the SUVs that
replaced them.
In other words, CAFE has cost lives both by reducing weight of vehicles AND
by causing vehicles to burn MORE fuel, as many people are buying large
trucks for the specific reason that they can not buy large cars
ymore. -Dave
10-18-2003, 02:52 PM
#305
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Lisa Horton wrote:
>
> P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:26:03 -0700, Lisa Horton <Lisa@lisahorton.net>
>>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.
>>>
>>>Introductions seem to be in order: Pete, this is logic, Logic, this is
>>>Pete. Do try to keep in touch at the next car purchase time.
>>
>>What makes you think my purchase was illogical Ms. Horton?
>
>
> Because you claim to care about the safety of your family, yet you did
> not buy the safest type of vehicle.
>
>
>>It's easy to make silly comments such as yours.
>
>
> Sure, but not as easy as making silly comments like your SUV handling
> better than many cars.
>
>
>>It's much harder to back them up.
>
>
> And even harder if you use logic and facts, good thing you're not trying
> the hard thing.
>
>
>>Best of luck.
>>
>
>
> I think it's you and your family that will need the luck, as you roll
> roll roll down the road, but not on the wheels.
>
> Lisa
Let his SUV hit you head on and see who wins.
>
> P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:26:03 -0700, Lisa Horton <Lisa@lisahorton.net>
>>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.
>>>
>>>Introductions seem to be in order: Pete, this is logic, Logic, this is
>>>Pete. Do try to keep in touch at the next car purchase time.
>>
>>What makes you think my purchase was illogical Ms. Horton?
>
>
> Because you claim to care about the safety of your family, yet you did
> not buy the safest type of vehicle.
>
>
>>It's easy to make silly comments such as yours.
>
>
> Sure, but not as easy as making silly comments like your SUV handling
> better than many cars.
>
>
>>It's much harder to back them up.
>
>
> And even harder if you use logic and facts, good thing you're not trying
> the hard thing.
>
>
>>Best of luck.
>>
>
>
> I think it's you and your family that will need the luck, as you roll
> roll roll down the road, but not on the wheels.
>
> Lisa
Let his SUV hit you head on and see who wins.
10-18-2003, 02:52 PM
#306
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Lisa Horton wrote:
>
> P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:26:03 -0700, Lisa Horton <Lisa@lisahorton.net>
>>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.
>>>
>>>Introductions seem to be in order: Pete, this is logic, Logic, this is
>>>Pete. Do try to keep in touch at the next car purchase time.
>>
>>What makes you think my purchase was illogical Ms. Horton?
>
>
> Because you claim to care about the safety of your family, yet you did
> not buy the safest type of vehicle.
>
>
>>It's easy to make silly comments such as yours.
>
>
> Sure, but not as easy as making silly comments like your SUV handling
> better than many cars.
>
>
>>It's much harder to back them up.
>
>
> And even harder if you use logic and facts, good thing you're not trying
> the hard thing.
>
>
>>Best of luck.
>>
>
>
> I think it's you and your family that will need the luck, as you roll
> roll roll down the road, but not on the wheels.
>
> Lisa
Let his SUV hit you head on and see who wins.
>
> P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:26:03 -0700, Lisa Horton <Lisa@lisahorton.net>
>>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.
>>>
>>>Introductions seem to be in order: Pete, this is logic, Logic, this is
>>>Pete. Do try to keep in touch at the next car purchase time.
>>
>>What makes you think my purchase was illogical Ms. Horton?
>
>
> Because you claim to care about the safety of your family, yet you did
> not buy the safest type of vehicle.
>
>
>>It's easy to make silly comments such as yours.
>
>
> Sure, but not as easy as making silly comments like your SUV handling
> better than many cars.
>
>
>>It's much harder to back them up.
>
>
> And even harder if you use logic and facts, good thing you're not trying
> the hard thing.
>
>
>>Best of luck.
>>
>
>
> I think it's you and your family that will need the luck, as you roll
> roll roll down the road, but not on the wheels.
>
> Lisa
Let his SUV hit you head on and see who wins.
10-18-2003, 02:52 PM
#307
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Lisa Horton wrote:
>
> P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:26:03 -0700, Lisa Horton <Lisa@lisahorton.net>
>>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.
>>>
>>>Introductions seem to be in order: Pete, this is logic, Logic, this is
>>>Pete. Do try to keep in touch at the next car purchase time.
>>
>>What makes you think my purchase was illogical Ms. Horton?
>
>
> Because you claim to care about the safety of your family, yet you did
> not buy the safest type of vehicle.
>
>
>>It's easy to make silly comments such as yours.
>
>
> Sure, but not as easy as making silly comments like your SUV handling
> better than many cars.
>
>
>>It's much harder to back them up.
>
>
> And even harder if you use logic and facts, good thing you're not trying
> the hard thing.
>
>
>>Best of luck.
>>
>
>
> I think it's you and your family that will need the luck, as you roll
> roll roll down the road, but not on the wheels.
>
> Lisa
Let his SUV hit you head on and see who wins.
>
> P e t e F a g e r l i n wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:26:03 -0700, Lisa Horton <Lisa@lisahorton.net>
>>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.
>>>
>>>Introductions seem to be in order: Pete, this is logic, Logic, this is
>>>Pete. Do try to keep in touch at the next car purchase time.
>>
>>What makes you think my purchase was illogical Ms. Horton?
>
>
> Because you claim to care about the safety of your family, yet you did
> not buy the safest type of vehicle.
>
>
>>It's easy to make silly comments such as yours.
>
>
> Sure, but not as easy as making silly comments like your SUV handling
> better than many cars.
>
>
>>It's much harder to back them up.
>
>
> And even harder if you use logic and facts, good thing you're not trying
> the hard thing.
>
>
>>Best of luck.
>>
>
>
> I think it's you and your family that will need the luck, as you roll
> roll roll down the road, but not on the wheels.
>
> Lisa
Let his SUV hit you head on and see who wins.
10-18-2003, 03:00 PM
#308
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Check out the "Highway Loss Data Institute" web site. This is an insurance
industry clearing house that compiles crash cost data on all vehicles. They
compile and compare things like claims cost for after-crash vehicle repairs,
and claims costs for injuries. This is real world data, in other words, it
compares costs of real crashes, not just some formulas, and it's apolitical.
In these studies SUVs in general have far lower costs for medical claims
than do small cars. Small cars often have medical claims costs 3-4 times
higher than do SUVs and larger cars & trucks.
"Marc" <whineryy@yifan.net> wrote in message
news:t9v1pv4mjmhav7rnvhc6uei5ekqcjkpbj9@4ax.com...
> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >> I really should have known what with all the x-posted groups that this
> >> would be yet another "SUVs REALLY REALLY are safe, 'cause the salesman
> >> told me so!" thread and should have bitten my tongue. Fingers.
Whatever.
> >
> >I knew it was going to be another SUVs are not safe because CR told me
> >so thread. I'm biting my sandwich.
>
> Right. CR, the IIHS, the NHTSA, FARS, and every other place that crashes
> vehicles or keeps stats. But then, don't let the facts get in the way of
> your fantasy.
>
> Marc
> For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"
industry clearing house that compiles crash cost data on all vehicles. They
compile and compare things like claims cost for after-crash vehicle repairs,
and claims costs for injuries. This is real world data, in other words, it
compares costs of real crashes, not just some formulas, and it's apolitical.
In these studies SUVs in general have far lower costs for medical claims
than do small cars. Small cars often have medical claims costs 3-4 times
higher than do SUVs and larger cars & trucks.
"Marc" <whineryy@yifan.net> wrote in message
news:t9v1pv4mjmhav7rnvhc6uei5ekqcjkpbj9@4ax.com...
> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >> I really should have known what with all the x-posted groups that this
> >> would be yet another "SUVs REALLY REALLY are safe, 'cause the salesman
> >> told me so!" thread and should have bitten my tongue. Fingers.
Whatever.
> >
> >I knew it was going to be another SUVs are not safe because CR told me
> >so thread. I'm biting my sandwich.
>
> Right. CR, the IIHS, the NHTSA, FARS, and every other place that crashes
> vehicles or keeps stats. But then, don't let the facts get in the way of
> your fantasy.
>
> Marc
> For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"
10-18-2003, 03:00 PM
#309
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Check out the "Highway Loss Data Institute" web site. This is an insurance
industry clearing house that compiles crash cost data on all vehicles. They
compile and compare things like claims cost for after-crash vehicle repairs,
and claims costs for injuries. This is real world data, in other words, it
compares costs of real crashes, not just some formulas, and it's apolitical.
In these studies SUVs in general have far lower costs for medical claims
than do small cars. Small cars often have medical claims costs 3-4 times
higher than do SUVs and larger cars & trucks.
"Marc" <whineryy@yifan.net> wrote in message
news:t9v1pv4mjmhav7rnvhc6uei5ekqcjkpbj9@4ax.com...
> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >> I really should have known what with all the x-posted groups that this
> >> would be yet another "SUVs REALLY REALLY are safe, 'cause the salesman
> >> told me so!" thread and should have bitten my tongue. Fingers.
Whatever.
> >
> >I knew it was going to be another SUVs are not safe because CR told me
> >so thread. I'm biting my sandwich.
>
> Right. CR, the IIHS, the NHTSA, FARS, and every other place that crashes
> vehicles or keeps stats. But then, don't let the facts get in the way of
> your fantasy.
>
> Marc
> For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"
industry clearing house that compiles crash cost data on all vehicles. They
compile and compare things like claims cost for after-crash vehicle repairs,
and claims costs for injuries. This is real world data, in other words, it
compares costs of real crashes, not just some formulas, and it's apolitical.
In these studies SUVs in general have far lower costs for medical claims
than do small cars. Small cars often have medical claims costs 3-4 times
higher than do SUVs and larger cars & trucks.
"Marc" <whineryy@yifan.net> wrote in message
news:t9v1pv4mjmhav7rnvhc6uei5ekqcjkpbj9@4ax.com...
> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >> I really should have known what with all the x-posted groups that this
> >> would be yet another "SUVs REALLY REALLY are safe, 'cause the salesman
> >> told me so!" thread and should have bitten my tongue. Fingers.
Whatever.
> >
> >I knew it was going to be another SUVs are not safe because CR told me
> >so thread. I'm biting my sandwich.
>
> Right. CR, the IIHS, the NHTSA, FARS, and every other place that crashes
> vehicles or keeps stats. But then, don't let the facts get in the way of
> your fantasy.
>
> Marc
> For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"
10-18-2003, 03:00 PM
#310
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Check out the "Highway Loss Data Institute" web site. This is an insurance
industry clearing house that compiles crash cost data on all vehicles. They
compile and compare things like claims cost for after-crash vehicle repairs,
and claims costs for injuries. This is real world data, in other words, it
compares costs of real crashes, not just some formulas, and it's apolitical.
In these studies SUVs in general have far lower costs for medical claims
than do small cars. Small cars often have medical claims costs 3-4 times
higher than do SUVs and larger cars & trucks.
"Marc" <whineryy@yifan.net> wrote in message
news:t9v1pv4mjmhav7rnvhc6uei5ekqcjkpbj9@4ax.com...
> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >> I really should have known what with all the x-posted groups that this
> >> would be yet another "SUVs REALLY REALLY are safe, 'cause the salesman
> >> told me so!" thread and should have bitten my tongue. Fingers.
Whatever.
> >
> >I knew it was going to be another SUVs are not safe because CR told me
> >so thread. I'm biting my sandwich.
>
> Right. CR, the IIHS, the NHTSA, FARS, and every other place that crashes
> vehicles or keeps stats. But then, don't let the facts get in the way of
> your fantasy.
>
> Marc
> For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"
industry clearing house that compiles crash cost data on all vehicles. They
compile and compare things like claims cost for after-crash vehicle repairs,
and claims costs for injuries. This is real world data, in other words, it
compares costs of real crashes, not just some formulas, and it's apolitical.
In these studies SUVs in general have far lower costs for medical claims
than do small cars. Small cars often have medical claims costs 3-4 times
higher than do SUVs and larger cars & trucks.
"Marc" <whineryy@yifan.net> wrote in message
news:t9v1pv4mjmhav7rnvhc6uei5ekqcjkpbj9@4ax.com...
> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >> I really should have known what with all the x-posted groups that this
> >> would be yet another "SUVs REALLY REALLY are safe, 'cause the salesman
> >> told me so!" thread and should have bitten my tongue. Fingers.
Whatever.
> >
> >I knew it was going to be another SUVs are not safe because CR told me
> >so thread. I'm biting my sandwich.
>
> Right. CR, the IIHS, the NHTSA, FARS, and every other place that crashes
> vehicles or keeps stats. But then, don't let the facts get in the way of
> your fantasy.
>
> Marc
> For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"