- This topic has 215 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
sdduuuude.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 14, 2009 at 9:27 AM #381216April 14, 2009 at 9:35 AM #380594
CoronitaParticipant[quote=Noob]To me, this is an issue of relativity. While it is absolutely true that wieght is an important factor in survivability, it is only true in a relative sense. It isn’t the absolute wieght of the vehicle that makes it safe (or dangerous), its the relative wieght of the vehicle compared to the one its going to hit.
The problem is that there are huge cars on the road, and a growing number of tiny ones. Its the disparity that creates the danger. If we all drove tiny cars, we would all be safer. The problem only exists when one person decides that its his right to drive a tank at the expense of everyone else’s safety.
To me, this safety issue, coupled with the geopolitical consequencies of relying on unfriendly people for our engery and with the ecological consequences of the lager vehicles, its a no-brainer to outlaw SUVs and mandate vehicle size.[/quote]
It’s not just about weight. It’s also about size. Not suggesting everyone go out and buying H2’s. But, it’s a no brainer that a smart for two goes airborne if it collides into most cars out there on the road.
The only other issue is fuel efficiency or lack there of. That’s a separate problem to solve (one for the car makers). And as some larger cars have proven, you do have options to buy a larger car and get decent efficiency…especially if you go the TDI route.
April 14, 2009 at 9:35 AM #380867CoronitaParticipant[quote=Noob]To me, this is an issue of relativity. While it is absolutely true that wieght is an important factor in survivability, it is only true in a relative sense. It isn’t the absolute wieght of the vehicle that makes it safe (or dangerous), its the relative wieght of the vehicle compared to the one its going to hit.
The problem is that there are huge cars on the road, and a growing number of tiny ones. Its the disparity that creates the danger. If we all drove tiny cars, we would all be safer. The problem only exists when one person decides that its his right to drive a tank at the expense of everyone else’s safety.
To me, this safety issue, coupled with the geopolitical consequencies of relying on unfriendly people for our engery and with the ecological consequences of the lager vehicles, its a no-brainer to outlaw SUVs and mandate vehicle size.[/quote]
It’s not just about weight. It’s also about size. Not suggesting everyone go out and buying H2’s. But, it’s a no brainer that a smart for two goes airborne if it collides into most cars out there on the road.
The only other issue is fuel efficiency or lack there of. That’s a separate problem to solve (one for the car makers). And as some larger cars have proven, you do have options to buy a larger car and get decent efficiency…especially if you go the TDI route.
April 14, 2009 at 9:35 AM #381055CoronitaParticipant[quote=Noob]To me, this is an issue of relativity. While it is absolutely true that wieght is an important factor in survivability, it is only true in a relative sense. It isn’t the absolute wieght of the vehicle that makes it safe (or dangerous), its the relative wieght of the vehicle compared to the one its going to hit.
The problem is that there are huge cars on the road, and a growing number of tiny ones. Its the disparity that creates the danger. If we all drove tiny cars, we would all be safer. The problem only exists when one person decides that its his right to drive a tank at the expense of everyone else’s safety.
To me, this safety issue, coupled with the geopolitical consequencies of relying on unfriendly people for our engery and with the ecological consequences of the lager vehicles, its a no-brainer to outlaw SUVs and mandate vehicle size.[/quote]
It’s not just about weight. It’s also about size. Not suggesting everyone go out and buying H2’s. But, it’s a no brainer that a smart for two goes airborne if it collides into most cars out there on the road.
The only other issue is fuel efficiency or lack there of. That’s a separate problem to solve (one for the car makers). And as some larger cars have proven, you do have options to buy a larger car and get decent efficiency…especially if you go the TDI route.
April 14, 2009 at 9:35 AM #381103CoronitaParticipant[quote=Noob]To me, this is an issue of relativity. While it is absolutely true that wieght is an important factor in survivability, it is only true in a relative sense. It isn’t the absolute wieght of the vehicle that makes it safe (or dangerous), its the relative wieght of the vehicle compared to the one its going to hit.
The problem is that there are huge cars on the road, and a growing number of tiny ones. Its the disparity that creates the danger. If we all drove tiny cars, we would all be safer. The problem only exists when one person decides that its his right to drive a tank at the expense of everyone else’s safety.
To me, this safety issue, coupled with the geopolitical consequencies of relying on unfriendly people for our engery and with the ecological consequences of the lager vehicles, its a no-brainer to outlaw SUVs and mandate vehicle size.[/quote]
It’s not just about weight. It’s also about size. Not suggesting everyone go out and buying H2’s. But, it’s a no brainer that a smart for two goes airborne if it collides into most cars out there on the road.
The only other issue is fuel efficiency or lack there of. That’s a separate problem to solve (one for the car makers). And as some larger cars have proven, you do have options to buy a larger car and get decent efficiency…especially if you go the TDI route.
April 14, 2009 at 9:35 AM #381231CoronitaParticipant[quote=Noob]To me, this is an issue of relativity. While it is absolutely true that wieght is an important factor in survivability, it is only true in a relative sense. It isn’t the absolute wieght of the vehicle that makes it safe (or dangerous), its the relative wieght of the vehicle compared to the one its going to hit.
The problem is that there are huge cars on the road, and a growing number of tiny ones. Its the disparity that creates the danger. If we all drove tiny cars, we would all be safer. The problem only exists when one person decides that its his right to drive a tank at the expense of everyone else’s safety.
To me, this safety issue, coupled with the geopolitical consequencies of relying on unfriendly people for our engery and with the ecological consequences of the lager vehicles, its a no-brainer to outlaw SUVs and mandate vehicle size.[/quote]
It’s not just about weight. It’s also about size. Not suggesting everyone go out and buying H2’s. But, it’s a no brainer that a smart for two goes airborne if it collides into most cars out there on the road.
The only other issue is fuel efficiency or lack there of. That’s a separate problem to solve (one for the car makers). And as some larger cars have proven, you do have options to buy a larger car and get decent efficiency…especially if you go the TDI route.
April 14, 2009 at 9:40 AM #380584CoronitaParticipant[quote=qwerty007]Here we go again with simpleton bias. First they changed the way fuel efficiency is measured so the Smart car suddenly doesn’t look so efficient anymore, and now they’ve done a crash test that shows it up in the worst possible light. This little car, is a Mercedes project, went through very rigorous testing, and has been in use in Europe for years. While you might feel safer riding an elephant in the jungle, it’s going to dump a lot of s*** in your back yard. Aside from that the probability of this type of accident happening is remote, and can be more effectively avoided simply by upping the driving test standard, more road safety awareness, and improving road markings, signage etc etc. For example, there are 13 times more fatal accident in the US than the UK, which has a very tough driving test, and government backed road safety awareness schemes. The days of the gas guzzler are pretty much numbered. To me it is incredible that a failing auto industry so out of touch with reality, is still wielding its sword at shadows. [/quote]
I just think it’s ironic that for some piggies that depend on the economic “data” that points to downward trend, that it’s equally difficult for piggies to accept the “data” and simple laws of physics to accept that these smaller cars are *not* safer…
Heh heh, selective belief. Same sort of selective belief that is going to corner some folks into perpetually thinking the sky is falling.
As far as the 13 times more accidents than europe. Yes, but that’s because europe has much more strigent requirements for getting a license. I would say a significant portion of americans wouldn’t have a driver’s license if the tests mandated here were like in europe.
The days of the gas guzzlers are numbered. But so are the days of smaller cars when the MPG of larger cars are made to go up as required by regulations (CAFE here). As far as Prius’ are concerned, owners are never going to recoup the premium they spent on those compact cars, let alone pay the cost of replacing the battery when it dies.
April 14, 2009 at 9:40 AM #380857CoronitaParticipant[quote=qwerty007]Here we go again with simpleton bias. First they changed the way fuel efficiency is measured so the Smart car suddenly doesn’t look so efficient anymore, and now they’ve done a crash test that shows it up in the worst possible light. This little car, is a Mercedes project, went through very rigorous testing, and has been in use in Europe for years. While you might feel safer riding an elephant in the jungle, it’s going to dump a lot of s*** in your back yard. Aside from that the probability of this type of accident happening is remote, and can be more effectively avoided simply by upping the driving test standard, more road safety awareness, and improving road markings, signage etc etc. For example, there are 13 times more fatal accident in the US than the UK, which has a very tough driving test, and government backed road safety awareness schemes. The days of the gas guzzler are pretty much numbered. To me it is incredible that a failing auto industry so out of touch with reality, is still wielding its sword at shadows. [/quote]
I just think it’s ironic that for some piggies that depend on the economic “data” that points to downward trend, that it’s equally difficult for piggies to accept the “data” and simple laws of physics to accept that these smaller cars are *not* safer…
Heh heh, selective belief. Same sort of selective belief that is going to corner some folks into perpetually thinking the sky is falling.
As far as the 13 times more accidents than europe. Yes, but that’s because europe has much more strigent requirements for getting a license. I would say a significant portion of americans wouldn’t have a driver’s license if the tests mandated here were like in europe.
The days of the gas guzzlers are numbered. But so are the days of smaller cars when the MPG of larger cars are made to go up as required by regulations (CAFE here). As far as Prius’ are concerned, owners are never going to recoup the premium they spent on those compact cars, let alone pay the cost of replacing the battery when it dies.
April 14, 2009 at 9:40 AM #381045CoronitaParticipant[quote=qwerty007]Here we go again with simpleton bias. First they changed the way fuel efficiency is measured so the Smart car suddenly doesn’t look so efficient anymore, and now they’ve done a crash test that shows it up in the worst possible light. This little car, is a Mercedes project, went through very rigorous testing, and has been in use in Europe for years. While you might feel safer riding an elephant in the jungle, it’s going to dump a lot of s*** in your back yard. Aside from that the probability of this type of accident happening is remote, and can be more effectively avoided simply by upping the driving test standard, more road safety awareness, and improving road markings, signage etc etc. For example, there are 13 times more fatal accident in the US than the UK, which has a very tough driving test, and government backed road safety awareness schemes. The days of the gas guzzler are pretty much numbered. To me it is incredible that a failing auto industry so out of touch with reality, is still wielding its sword at shadows. [/quote]
I just think it’s ironic that for some piggies that depend on the economic “data” that points to downward trend, that it’s equally difficult for piggies to accept the “data” and simple laws of physics to accept that these smaller cars are *not* safer…
Heh heh, selective belief. Same sort of selective belief that is going to corner some folks into perpetually thinking the sky is falling.
As far as the 13 times more accidents than europe. Yes, but that’s because europe has much more strigent requirements for getting a license. I would say a significant portion of americans wouldn’t have a driver’s license if the tests mandated here were like in europe.
The days of the gas guzzlers are numbered. But so are the days of smaller cars when the MPG of larger cars are made to go up as required by regulations (CAFE here). As far as Prius’ are concerned, owners are never going to recoup the premium they spent on those compact cars, let alone pay the cost of replacing the battery when it dies.
April 14, 2009 at 9:40 AM #381093CoronitaParticipant[quote=qwerty007]Here we go again with simpleton bias. First they changed the way fuel efficiency is measured so the Smart car suddenly doesn’t look so efficient anymore, and now they’ve done a crash test that shows it up in the worst possible light. This little car, is a Mercedes project, went through very rigorous testing, and has been in use in Europe for years. While you might feel safer riding an elephant in the jungle, it’s going to dump a lot of s*** in your back yard. Aside from that the probability of this type of accident happening is remote, and can be more effectively avoided simply by upping the driving test standard, more road safety awareness, and improving road markings, signage etc etc. For example, there are 13 times more fatal accident in the US than the UK, which has a very tough driving test, and government backed road safety awareness schemes. The days of the gas guzzler are pretty much numbered. To me it is incredible that a failing auto industry so out of touch with reality, is still wielding its sword at shadows. [/quote]
I just think it’s ironic that for some piggies that depend on the economic “data” that points to downward trend, that it’s equally difficult for piggies to accept the “data” and simple laws of physics to accept that these smaller cars are *not* safer…
Heh heh, selective belief. Same sort of selective belief that is going to corner some folks into perpetually thinking the sky is falling.
As far as the 13 times more accidents than europe. Yes, but that’s because europe has much more strigent requirements for getting a license. I would say a significant portion of americans wouldn’t have a driver’s license if the tests mandated here were like in europe.
The days of the gas guzzlers are numbered. But so are the days of smaller cars when the MPG of larger cars are made to go up as required by regulations (CAFE here). As far as Prius’ are concerned, owners are never going to recoup the premium they spent on those compact cars, let alone pay the cost of replacing the battery when it dies.
April 14, 2009 at 9:40 AM #381221CoronitaParticipant[quote=qwerty007]Here we go again with simpleton bias. First they changed the way fuel efficiency is measured so the Smart car suddenly doesn’t look so efficient anymore, and now they’ve done a crash test that shows it up in the worst possible light. This little car, is a Mercedes project, went through very rigorous testing, and has been in use in Europe for years. While you might feel safer riding an elephant in the jungle, it’s going to dump a lot of s*** in your back yard. Aside from that the probability of this type of accident happening is remote, and can be more effectively avoided simply by upping the driving test standard, more road safety awareness, and improving road markings, signage etc etc. For example, there are 13 times more fatal accident in the US than the UK, which has a very tough driving test, and government backed road safety awareness schemes. The days of the gas guzzler are pretty much numbered. To me it is incredible that a failing auto industry so out of touch with reality, is still wielding its sword at shadows. [/quote]
I just think it’s ironic that for some piggies that depend on the economic “data” that points to downward trend, that it’s equally difficult for piggies to accept the “data” and simple laws of physics to accept that these smaller cars are *not* safer…
Heh heh, selective belief. Same sort of selective belief that is going to corner some folks into perpetually thinking the sky is falling.
As far as the 13 times more accidents than europe. Yes, but that’s because europe has much more strigent requirements for getting a license. I would say a significant portion of americans wouldn’t have a driver’s license if the tests mandated here were like in europe.
The days of the gas guzzlers are numbered. But so are the days of smaller cars when the MPG of larger cars are made to go up as required by regulations (CAFE here). As far as Prius’ are concerned, owners are never going to recoup the premium they spent on those compact cars, let alone pay the cost of replacing the battery when it dies.
April 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM #380604jimmyle
ParticipantI drive a Prius so I am aware of how small my car compared to other vehicles on the road. All I can do is drive defensively. I think a safe driver in a Prius is probably more safe than a maniac in an SUV going 80+ MPH.
One thing that skewed the safety data toward the big SUVs is that 90% of drivers under 22 drive small/compact vehicles and obviously these young and distracted kids have much higher accident rate compared to soccer moms in SUVs.
April 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM #380877ParticipantI drive a Prius so I am aware of how small my car compared to other vehicles on the road. All I can do is drive defensively. I think a safe driver in a Prius is probably more safe than a maniac in an SUV going 80+ MPH.
One thing that skewed the safety data toward the big SUVs is that 90% of drivers under 22 drive small/compact vehicles and obviously these young and distracted kids have much higher accident rate compared to soccer moms in SUVs.
April 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM #381065ParticipantI drive a Prius so I am aware of how small my car compared to other vehicles on the road. All I can do is drive defensively. I think a safe driver in a Prius is probably more safe than a maniac in an SUV going 80+ MPH.
One thing that skewed the safety data toward the big SUVs is that 90% of drivers under 22 drive small/compact vehicles and obviously these young and distracted kids have much higher accident rate compared to soccer moms in SUVs.
April 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM #381113ParticipantI drive a Prius so I am aware of how small my car compared to other vehicles on the road. All I can do is drive defensively. I think a safe driver in a Prius is probably more safe than a maniac in an SUV going 80+ MPH.
One thing that skewed the safety data toward the big SUVs is that 90% of drivers under 22 drive small/compact vehicles and obviously these young and distracted kids have much higher accident rate compared to soccer moms in SUVs.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.