What is Digg?148 Comments
- moyness, on 10/12/2007, -7/+52That's odd, I feel like I have more control over my car when I have great suspension and Tires,Brakes and good steering....not Horsepower... =/
- NicP, on 10/12/2007, -7/+45@borninda818, you are the problem, if everyone bought smaller cars like the civic this problem wouldnt exist. Think of all the people out there that are buying big cars like you to feel "safe", what happens when everyone is driving big cars, will you buy a truck?
- aratika, on 10/12/2007, -8/+35You all should see the accident between the Honda and the guy on a bike. Cars should be banned. Everyone should ride bikes. But then there was this time when a pedestrian was really hurt by this kid on a bike. So everyone should walk. No wait. This one old person didn't watch where they were going and fell down a hole. Everyone should just sit down and be really, really still.
Yeah. - interiot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24What vehicle CAN safely take a 60 mph SUV to the side? Put an SUV on the receiving end, and the results would be nearly as bad.
- chadtatro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24this is ridiculous..my mom died in an accident exactly like this years ago.. car vs car.. doesn't matter what car was broadsided at highway speeds.. any side impact like that will kill you... which is why i hate driving on 2lane highways like that.
keep an eye on those sideroads when you're coming up to them!! - xtr3m, on 10/12/2007, -7/+294x4's belong to mountains.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22I'd like to see something like this with a modern car. Crash safety has been significantly improved in the past 15 years. In fact, Honda takes safety so seriously that it actually takes into account the possibility of the car itself hitting a person outside the car, and engineers their cars with that in mind to minimize damage to the person being hit by the car.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20I like at the end of the article it says "this is a tough car for a tough guy" ha! any pussy can drive that thing, it takes a tough guy to drive a motorcycle.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+30exactly, and 4x4s don't belong on the highways. I dunno how many times some idiot tried to switch lanes in his SUV right into me. Luckily since I drive a honda which has very responsive handling that you can feel, I can easily avoid these morons. You can't see as much around you when your in an SUV. it's like your closed off from the rest of the world. It's no wonder these idiots drive right into people all the time. They have squishy steering so you can't tell what your tires are doing and they turn like boats.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+26@schrodiggity
flawed logic in that action network article, dugg down.
The problem with the logic of the argument has been correctly identified by a number of posters already.
It's kinda like an moron's arms race.
'He has a big car, so I need a big car so I can feel safer/see better/pretend I've got a big knob'
Bob buys one, so Jimbo buys a bigger one, so Eddie buys a bigger one, so Bob upgrades his, so...blah blah
Just from personal experience, most people I meet on the road who don't signal, pull out blindly at junctions, can't accelerate at a reasonable speed and show absolutely NO consideration for other drivers, drive 4x4's.
If you live on a farm, fine. If you live in a city, what the ***** do you think you're playing at, dumbass???
Get a proper car, and get a life. - theOster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19the hell with all of you. i like my gas guzzling beast (http://tinyurl.com/eycro) and the rest of you drivers be damned.
(and you should see me in rush hour :) - lightningrod220, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Well, I guess I should skip SUVs, trucks, vans, and just go and get a semi. Then I'll be safe for sure!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19exsst
cars account for less than 10% of greenhouse gas emmisions most of it is industrial waste. I live in Alaska and we Need big 4x4's just to get around in the winter. even a wrx would bottom out on my driveway. - targetOO, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17Exactly.
If we all drove civics (or equally light cars) we would be fine.
If you actually need a 4x4, fine, keep it on the farm.
Do we really need soccer mom's with all that power? - DontSayFanboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14capwin,
You are incorrect. An SUV requires a greater stopping distance due to the increased weight. Here are some links to back up my claim.
http://www.epinions.com/auto-review-7EEF-162C42E7-3A35479C-prod4
http://www.insurance.com/Article.aspx/Safety_Tips_for_SUV_Drivers/artid/133
http://www.jdpower.com/autos/content/articles/article.asp?id=109
http://www.autotrader.com/research/shared/article.jsp?article_id=3951
http://www.cars.com/go/crp/buyingGuides/Story.jsp?section=Pickup&story=pkupSafe2006&subject=stories&referer=&year=New - nathanielb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Dugg down for inaccuracy. There's a reason they used a '92 Civic. Small, light-weight, and built well before the perceived need for side impact testing. The video you just watched is entirely the reason for today's side-impact standards.
Continuing with that line of reason, they also don't build Land Rovers the same way anymore. In the late '80s to early '90s they were still almost purely off-road vehicles. They even showed the guts of the SUV with what looked to be 4" or more nearly-solid steel framing. Well built, yes. Incredibly heavy, of course. Good luck finding that built within the last few years. It's highly cost prohibitive.
This is more a lesson in physics (with object A weighing four or more times that of object B) than a demonstration in auto safety. Way to feed the fears, guys. - ghm101, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Simple, Its an arms race.
Or highway poker.
I see your Honda and raise you an SUV
I see your SUV and raise you a BRDM
http://englishrussia.com/?p=381
Any more for any more? - KLowD9x, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Coupes don't have 4 doors...
- dkmccue, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Nothing like taking a 14 year old movie to prove a point that is no longer valid.
Since that movie was made, cars have been required by law to have side protection beams designed to keep the car from looking like that Civic in a "T-bone" accident.
But, that aside, the SUV's are more rugged by design anyway. It's the difference between body on frame design (SUV) and unibody design (Civic). Think of it this way: The SUV is is like your desk, in that it has several parts put together to create a solid unit, while the Civic is like a Pepsi can, one molded piece of metal.
What happens if you break a piece of your desk (like a leg)? You buy a replacement piece and install it. What happens when you break a Pepsi can? It's broken. You buy a new can.
As for gas mileage state in the post... WTF does the video have to do with gas mileage??????? - jcims, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The accident in the video was the worst case scenario, of course. But even if the roles had been reversed, civic T-boning the SUV at 60MPH, it would still be ugly...not as ugly, but no way am i going to volunteer to ride shotgun in that accident.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9you beat me to it - i agree totally. never mind the fact that there aren't that many impacts as violent as this, and that more and more cars of all types are being fitted with more and better safety equipment.
- bardamu, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11When normal people bought cars and people that actually needed them bought suv's the world was fine. There weren't many bronco 2's around because they are complete overkill for the road. It's when the normal people started buying the Explorers that the problem began. They traded in there efficient accords and minivans for the promise of go anywhere utility. The commercials showed urban families out in the wilds on a weekend jaunt, flying up mountain sides while the children safe in the back watched Barney and the parents sat in air conditioned leather appointed luxury.
Of course these are powerful messages even though most, if they thought about it just the teeniest bit, would know that they are completely false images. Most roads in the mountains are paved and the ones that aren't you’re not going to drive on for fear of messing up your 40k behemoth. So now we have roads filled with these over sized top heavy inefficient complete exaggerations of a vehicle. The people inside are under the false impression that size equals safety. Size is a very bad thing when you have to do an emergency lane change or stop at highway speeds. Most of the time the suv just ends up flipping or worse the person just plows into the car without trying any evasive maneuvers at all. Both are very bad scenarios for everyone involved.
People let me just clue you in. SUV's are unnecessary and very unsafe (for everyone on the roads). Commercials lie and just because your neighbor has a sparkling new SUV doesn't mean you can't think for yourself and buy the car you need for the 90% of the time and make do for the rest. Last but not least if you do have a family and need lots of room they make things called minivans. Minivans are cool and they make sense. If minivans are too big then move to a station wagon. Subaru makes great ones (I've owned 2). But please people drop the SUVs. There are far more compelling reason to buy a car/minivan than an SUV it’s just sometimes you have to look past the hype and think for yourself. - Canth, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13No kidding... We all want to be safe, so lets all drive battle tanks.. Crashes won't hurt us anymore then... Who cares about the polution right?
Or let's all get rid of those SUVs and pickup trucks etc. (really, how often do you NEED those SUV/Pickup capabilities that a sedan/station/minivan doesn't offer? Americans should really take a hard look at Europe where owning a pickup is next to unheard of for regular families. And with the higher gas costs, SUVs are still scarce)
I recently moved to the US, and I drive a Toyota Matrix.. And we're a family of 5 w/dog. We make do. And if I need to haul something, I can either rent a pickup, or borrow the neighbors pickup. (For a lot less money than buying one and paying the gas surcharge)
It's all in the mindset. I *HAVE* to drive that SUV to be cool. Bigger is better..
My ass. - credo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12@dkmccue
The guy is basicly saying You can debate about gas mileage all day, but when it comes to safety, it is a minor issue as you will see in the video.
... which is a point I couldn't agree less with. If we had less 4x4s, then this problem wouldn't exist. - DontSayFanboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9No, accidents will always happen. If everyone drove civics we would have less fatailites. It's pretty much a given that a big heavy object hitting something will cause more damage than a small one. Or would you like to argue physics?
Look, my civic has a 5 star crash rating. It is a very well designed vehicle. But as this video shows, no amount of engineering in the world is going to help if I get broadsided by a SUV. For starters, the SUVs grill stops right about eye level for the driver of the civic. It's really nice for the guy in the truck, sure, but in a side impact, the civic driver will be eating engine.
The fact of the matter is that you truck people just come across as selfish *****. As long as you are safe, that's all that matters. That's what you really mean when you say SUVs are safe. Buy the biggest suit of armor that you can, because then you don't have to be careful. As long as the other guy loses the crash, then you win. Look at how ***** up that civic got. Score one for the big guys.
The SUV has become the symbol of a scared driver. Can't buy a small car because then I might get hurt. ***** smog. ***** the visibility of other drivers. ***** other people. As long as you feel safe, right? The morons are the drivers I see every morning driving to work in their huge Explorers talking on the cell phone and thinking that they bought a safe car. - lburgguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I drive a wimpy Miata, a bicyclist could injure me.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It didn't have many left after that crash, though.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12brainwashed into thinking people in SUVs talk on cellphones? no that's just what I SEE every day, you know with my eyes, try using them next time you change lanes or pull out onto the highway and maybe that bigrig won't turn you into radiator flak.
- Nowherenearhear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@thealphaone
No offense, but your sport car wouldn't stand a chance where I used to live. I don't care how skilled you think you are as a driver. After a big snow, your car simply wouldn't have the clearance to make it from my old house to the roads that they actually plow.
Some people need 4x4, some people don't. There are a lot of people who drive SUVs who don't need them, but don't try to infer that NOBODY needs an SUV. - DontSayFanboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8GDM...
I'm not sure where you live, but in my area, 90's civics ARE representative of the majority of cars on the road. I swear I can go outside and point out more beater compacts than anything else out there. I live in the city.
Of course, if I go up into the suburbs, I can find a healthy amount of scared soccer moms driving "safe" SUVs, talking on their cell phones, playing DVDs for the kids, and weaving around with their high center of gravity, poor braking distance and decreased visibility.
Wouldn't want to worry about getting in an accident, now would we? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -16/+21Er....what does this have to do with gas mileage, exactly?
I don't know too much about economic policy, but the NHTSA gets more than it requests for a budget right now, and both seem like a healthy amount of money.
(about $800 million vs $700 million):
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/transportation.html
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/nhtsa/whatis/BB/2006/pages/totlFundingChart.htm
Also from the first link is data about auto fatalaties, and things seem to be getting better, not to mention that this video features very old cars. So your histrionics seem a little unfounded from here. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10I choose to avoid accidents instead of driving like nothing can hurt me. sure a SUV will take out a civic going 60 but someone in a civic would see the SUV coming. some idiot in an SUV not paying attention (talking on their cell) get's nailed by another SUV like in this video they would be dead too. fersher, buddy. or some spoiled bitch in her Hummer can't see ***** threw those tiny windows, cuts off a BIG RIG or a tanker. she's dead too.
- GMD1987, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Saying 4x4 belongs to the mountains is like saying broadband belongs to the government.
What do you need all that bandwidth for? Something illegal probably, right? - OCedHrt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Not really. The Toyota absorbed all the impact, which is why it disintegrated. Your Buick absorbed nothing, rather you just got lucky that most of the impact got converted into angular momentum that spun your car around. If the Buick absorbed any impact, it would have been damaged a lot more. A car's frame does not magically absorb impact, it takes damage from the impact it receives, and in the Honda's case, got annihilated. Just because the Honda hit the Buick, does not mean it takes no impact; the impact force is split both ways.
If the Honda had hit more center on, the impact would have been transferred to the Buick and then to the passengers/air bags. - itsmekirby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Why not implement maximum kinetic energy standards? Larger vehicles=slower maximum speeds, smaller vehicles=higher maximum speeds by the 1/2mv^2 relationship. Then all vehicles could be engineered to withstand a certain energy level of a crash and we wouldn't have this arms race occurring on our streets.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4What makes you think a politican would be caught dead in a Civic for anything but a photo-op?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5how about next test, SUV vs Tanker truck or Train. Ever see a motorcycle get hit by a train?
- flightgamer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You can talk all day about global warming and high gas prices, etc but I have my wife and son in an SUV with full airbags. There are no guarantees of protection in life but if God forbid something happened I would know that I did what I could. In a perfect world I would like everyone to have to ride in little, tiny slow cars but that is not the real world and until that law passes I will take care of my own.
One dad's opinion. - Ruffy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I've been in a side impact crash. In a Pontiac G6. Now we were doing 40. I cant tell you what the other car was doing(Chevy Tahoe... Yes a SUV) but it was doing at least 60
The Tahoe ran a stop sign full speed and slammed into the drivers side. I was in the passenger seat.
Now both the driver and I survived. My friend got bruised up, But we both walked out of the accident. Both cars were totaled. it's just how cars are made now, the tahoe crumpled into something that looked like an accordian.
The driver of the tahoe got banged up enough to warrant hospital stay.
This whole 4x4/suv vs smaller car is a moot point these days with modern cars..
do some research on http://safercar.gov/ when choosing a car.
- aratika, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10Yes. It is okay. Because if we run out of gas we'll simply smash up hippies in giant grape press things and run cars on fermented hippie juice.
- DontSayFanboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4because you want to kill someone in a civic?
- lbytesxk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It appears that you lack the capacity, mental or otherwise, to comprehend you should mind your own business and not, for example worry about what other people drive.
Sick of little ***** think they know everything. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4And if the Civic was the one running a red light?
Why would the driver of the SUV go to prison? - bantamw, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7So it's OK to damage the environment with a Hummer which does 7 mpg and never does anything apart from taking Britney to high school and back home, when you're safe if you annihilate someone in a toyota prius doing 60mpg?
Mights as well drive an armoured car. ;-)
Problem here is that if the USA carries on the way it's going with gas guzzling cars, there won't be any driving 4x4's in 15 years time because there won't be any fuel to feed them.
Plus already there's issues because the US gas price is what, $2.20 per gallon or so? I wish!
Try paying the 1gbp per litre we're paying here at the moment - that works out $6.80 per gallon for regular gas and about $7.00 per gallon for diesel. (with exchange rate of $1.80 per gpb) - Nowherenearhear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@dontsayfanboy
Actually, thealphaone (the guy I replied to) specifically said that eteyemd didn't need a 4x4. Lots of other people on here also claim that everyone should drive a smaller car so that everyone is on even terms in a crash. One person even offered a scenario where everyone drove Civics. No one car is right for everyone. That's why there is a market for a large variety of vehicles.
But it's nice of you to say, "Most people don't live in such an area, so it's kind of a moot point." So the MANY people who don't live in the city/South don't count? I never saw anywhere in the article that excluded people in snowy, rural areas.
That being said, there are lots of people who don't need large vehicles but buy/drive them anyway. It would be nice if they were more practical, but it's not my right to tell them how to spend their money. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Kinda selfish statement don't you think?
How about I t-bone you with my benz.. Wanna bet that your top-heavy beast will save you as your car rolls over? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2A blazer is about the simplest vehicle to flip. If he drove a suburban or Tahoe, I wouldn't have made my assertion. While I can't say 100% that he would flip, the odds are certainly not in his favor. Those older SUV's were death traps. I think that the year he references even has those wonderful defective seatbelts that had a tendency to come undone in accidents.
- DontSayFanboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Right, and SUV owners should take note that rollovers are the most dangerous collisions. Still think that truck is safer than the civic?
http://www.safetyforum.com/rollover/
* More deaths result from rollovers than from side and rear crashes combined.
* The greatest number of rollovers occur in sport utility vehicles.
* SUVs have a rollover rate that is 2-3 times higher than the average passenger car.
http://www.emagazine.com/view/?3032
* SUVs rollover 37% of the time in fatal crashes, compared to 15% for passenger cars
* Rollover crashes accounted for 53 percent of all SUV occupant deaths in single-vehicle crashes in 1996 - teCh0010, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Many of the people spouting that no one has the need for an SUV a projecting their needs in a vehicle onto other people.
I have twins in booster seats and a 1 year old in a car seat. Two boosters and a car seat won't fit in the back seat of a compact. All the stuff they require won't fit in the trunk.
We go to the lake 6 - 7 times a year and take the dog. Now we need a minivan. Damn, the minivan won't tow a 5500 pound boat. Guess what, I need an SUV with third row and a V8.
My wife has the shortest commute so she drives the SUV and I drive a Toyota Camry on my 25 mile one way commute every day. - nickconsumtion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This video frightens me. Many years ago, videos similar to this (crash tests rigged to show large cars destroying small ones... why not reverse the test and see how different the outcomes would be, for starters) created the mistaken impression in America that small cars were death traps and large cars were safe. That never went away and now we have a fleet that is far too large (causing even greater safety problems, not to mention the environmental and geopolitical consequences). Europe, by and large, hasn't suffered the same problems. But I'd hate to see this video be the beginning of the SUV-ization of Europe.
Here's the best article ever written on the subject:
Big and Bad
By Malcomn Gladwell
http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html
"The S.U.V. boom represents, then, a shift in how we conceive of safety—from active to passive. It's what happens when a larger number of drivers conclude, consciously or otherwise, that the extra thirty feet that the TrailBlazer takes to come to a stop don't really matter, that the tractor-trailer will hit them anyway, and that they are better off treating accidents as inevitable rather than avoidable." -
Show 51 - 100 of 144 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is