[moocatdog]

There is an interesting article in today's New York Times which describes the latest findings by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

While acknowledging differences within categories the general results were summed up as follows:

The traffic safety agency reported last week that there were 16.42 deaths of S.U.V. occupants in accidents last year for every 100,000 registered S.U.V.'s. The figure for passenger cars was 14.85 deaths for each 100,000 registered; pickups were slightly higher than cars at 15.17 deaths per 100,000, while vans were lowest at 11.2 occupant deaths for every 100,000 registered.

Before I'm accused of posting this as a blanket indictment against all S.U.V.'s, let me specify that the sport utility vehicle death rate is elevated by the inclusion of midsize units (avg. weight 4,000 lbs.). Looking only at the largest S.U.V.'s (5,100 lbs. avg.) the article ranks them as the third safest, just behind minivans and large passenger vehicles (3,600 lbs.avg.), and in front of midsize passenger vehicles such as the Prius (3,000 lbs. avg.). So, although weight alone does not determine a vehicle's safety, heavier S.U.V.'s are considerably safer than lighter S.U.V.'s.

You may need to register to read the story, but a link to the full article can be found on the front page:

http://www.nytimes.com

Drive happy,
Moo

 

[Hep]

This report doesn't surprise me. In Minnesota, when there is snow and ice, the SUV's just don't slow down as they should. They provide more than their share of vehicles in the ditch.

It's nice to see in the report the decline in traffic fatalities overall. Cars are getting safer.

The full report is here.

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30 ... elease.pdf

 

[kenlacy]

So your saying my Burban is a safer vehicle than the Prius

 

[Daniel]

A more telling figure would be number of deaths per million miles driven (or any other suitable distance) rather than number of deaths per 100,000 vehicles registered. At 12 mpg you can't afford to drive as far as you can at 55 mpg. A vehicle that's driven only half as many miles should have only half as many deaths if the two are equally safe. So the figures published there are meaningless unless you know that all the vehicle types are driven the same number of miles annually on average.

It may well be that the heavier SUV's appear safer because they get such bad mileage that their owners cannot afford to drive them very far.

 

[moocatdog]

(sic)

So your saying my Burban is a safer vehicle than the Prius

The study says that, statistically, vehicles in the same category as your Suburban are safer than vehicles in the same category as the Prius. However, since you don't own a Prius, the pertinent information would be that, statistically, minivans are a safer choice for transporting a large family than a vehicle such as your Suburban.

A more telling figure would be number of deaths per million miles driven (or any other suitable distance) rather than number of deaths per 100,000 vehicles registered. At 12 mpg you can't afford to drive as far as you can at 55 mpg. A vehicle that's driven only half as many miles should have only half as many deaths if the two are equally safe. So the figures published there are meaningless unless you know that all the vehicle types are driven the same number of miles annually on average.

It may well be that the heavier SUV's appear safer because they get such bad mileage that their owners cannot afford to drive them very far.

Daniel,
I see your logic, but the study used a mileage comparison to support its conclusions as well. I didn't post the entire article because it was rather long.

Drive happy,
Moo

 

[richard schumacher]

It gets better. The Bush Administration doesn't want us to know any details about defective cars and parts: http://consumeraffairs.com/news04/nhtsa_secrets.html

 

[moocatdog]

It gets better. The Bush Administration doesn't want us to know any details about defective cars and parts: http://consumeraffairs.com/news04/nhtsa_secrets.html

Interesting. Look at this statement from the article you referenced:

[National Highway Traffic Safety Association] says keeping the data secret is part of a trade off, ensuring that it will continue to get honest, accurate data from carmakers.

IMO, complete transparency would better ensure that the data is honest and accurate.

Drive happy,
Moo

 

[kenlacy]

It may well be that the heavier SUV's appear safer because they get such bad mileage that their owners cannot afford to drive them very far.

Seriously - this has to be about the weakest statement I have ever heard from you! Example - I put on about 20,000 miles per year - at 14 mpg I spend around $2500 on gas in a year. Your Prius, at 50 mpg, will cost you around $750. Over 12 months thats around $150 per month. Now take the average midsize car or Minivan that gets 25 mpg, thats around $1400 per year or a $90 difference monthly. Hardly enough to curb manys driving habits.

I don't doubt that it affects some people, but to put a blanket statement on SUV owners that they can't afford to drive them very far - is pitiful - maybe you should look into politics - you have a flare for bs.

 

[kenlacy]

Moocat - unfortunately a Minivan is out of the question as it would have a hard time pulling 6 people and a trailer with 5000 lbs. I was just playin around anyways. Hence the after my original statement.

 

[Daniel]

Ken: Your offensive tone aside, deaths per X miles driven is a meaningful figure. Deaths per X vehicles registered is not, unless corrected for number of miles driven.

 

[kenlacy]

I don't question the validity of the point you made about miles driven being a comparison point.

Just that you have an obvious dislike for people who would own San SUV.