Subject:
|
Re: SUVs (was Re: What age does buying lego become embarrassing?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 15 Jul 2000 02:30:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
642 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jeff Thompson writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mark Herzberg writes:
> > I see nothing wrong SUVs. People are just complaining because they are so • big,
>
> Well, I find the idea that people are buying them, in part, because
> they are safer in collisions due to their mammoth size, to be
> a *little* disturbing. It's like an arms race, safety via
> momentum. Of course the more massive, better-armored vehicle
> will win in a collision. But the more and more massive the
> vehicles get, the more risky it gets for the econo-boxes.
One thing I would be curious about is if there is a higher rate of fatality in
humongous SUV vs humongous SUV than between say two mid-size cars (I wouldn't
be surprised if two sub-compacts in a collision causes more fatalities due to
the reduced amount of distance between the occupants and the edge of the
vehicle, but at some point I would expect the total energy of the crash would
start to outweigh that - and note that the distance between the edge of the
vehicle and the occupants may follow the cube-root of the weight, while the
energy of the crash linearly follows the weight).
I'd also be curious as to how much affect the rollover affect has (though the
largest SUVs presumably have much less rollover factor than things like the
Samurai and Trooper which got so much press from Consumer Reports).
What I find disturbing is more the "me first" attidude that seems so often
expressed in our country today. For many people, SUVs are just one expression
of this (and I don't begrudge at all the folks who have a pickup truck because
they regularly haul large loads for their home, nor do I begrudge the folks
who actually take their SUVs off road [but laugh hysterically at all the SUVs
in the median after a snow], or the folks with several kids [or other reasons
to tranport lots of people] who have a large vehicle). I also have to plead to
having owned full sized vans for several years (and my father has always had a
van for my whole life, though the first few years it was just a VW minibus). I
actually find a van much more practical than a truck for most uses (except
hauling dirt etc and large furniture). The carying capacity is generally far
more (especially number of people haulable vs gas mileage - I have taken 5-6
people for weekend trips). They may even be easier to park (people were
constantly amazed at the spots I could pull into - there's a real advantage of
being able to see most of your front bumper, and having the front wheels so
close to the front of the vehicle [heck, I bet you could get a VW minibus into
a tighter spot than most subcompacts - its front wheels are even closer to the
front than a Chevy van's]).
Of course I would like to see the situation resolved by applying real costs
(for example, if the large vehicle really does have a noticeable effect on
injuries sustained by the other guy, liability insurance should be higher). I
am curious as to how we might get from here to there wrto environmental
protection (once costs are properly distributed, environmental protection
should come much easier, but just disbanding the EPA before we get there is
going to leave us in a mess).
Frank
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
80 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
