[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('I_Like_Plants', 'S')UVs are MUCH more dangerous for other people on the road. Geez, do some research on this.

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('The_Toecutter', 'S')imple physics.
Momentum = mass x velocity
Impulse = (mass x velocity) / time ... Myself? I'm eventually going to keep a Sawnoff in my Triumph. Any drunk asshole pulls a hit and run and I'll blow their fucking tires out, pull them out of their idiot wagon, and beat the shit out of them.

[The_Toecutter]

But you also have to account for things that happen outside the realm of impulse during collisions. Such as rollovers, the dashboard coming loose and falling on the occupants crushing them, ect. Those cancel out any advantage you have in reducing the rate of change of momentum.

Overall, SUVs are actually less safe than conventional cars due to factors such as unstable handling, rollovers, and overall people driving like idiots in them due to an overly false sense of security. Some of it is the inherent flaws in vehicle design on part of the automakers and bureaucratic incompentence in meaningful regulation, and idiot drivers that don't understand the implications of the vehicle they command.

Perhaps if passing racing school were a requirement for a drivers license in this country, along with a very basic understanding of physics and vehicle dynamics, we'd be better off. Yet at the same time, I also find the very concept of the drivers license itself to be abhorent, as the government should keep the hell out of personal information entirely unrelated to ones driving(ie. National ID cards along with photos, social security numbers, fingerprints in some states, are stepping far beyond their boundaries).

[I_Like_Plants]

EVERYONE in the US considers themself an "above average" driver.

[Roy]

SUVs are safer than cars in a few situations, as you astutely noted Spec.
When the SUV collides with a lighter car, the occupants of the car are much more likely to be injured than in a car/car collision.
There are several reasons. First is the SUVs higher bumper height, which often times is higher than side impact beams on most cars. TBone a car with an SUV and watch the passenger on the TBone side die or become paralyzed.
Second, crush zones -- or lack thereof in most full sized SUVs. The majority of full sized SUVs on the road today share a frame and suspension design with cars built in the 50s. Sure there have been minor improvements such as rack and pinion steering and disc brakes. But a live axle, full frame, and leaf springs is as dated as it gets. Why do you think they're the most profitable vehicle on the lot? That's right, minimal development costs, compared to say a new Chevy Cobalt (POS admittedly). The Cobalt uses independent suspension, a unibody design, crush zones, etc. Crush zones absorb engergy from an impact rather than passing it on to the passenger. Automakers discovered this over 20 years ago and have been implementing it in cars since that time. Full framed vehicles by their nature do not crush very well in impacts, thusly they transfer impact energy to the occupant of the vehicle in SUV hitting fixed or heavier object scenario (or another Big SUV), or in the case of hitting the smaller car the impact energy is mostly transferred to the smaller car. In a car-car accident both vehicles' crush zones serve to absorb the crash energy in such a way as to allow passengers of both vehicles to walk away.

Third, high center of gravity. The tall truck gives the IMPRESSION of safety to the ingorant driver. I've seen many an accident aftermath where a full sized SUV is hit in the side by a car, and the SUV ends up not sitting on its wheels due to the force of the impact from the car. High COG also is a disadvantage in emergency maneuvers.
Jerk the wheel of a Suburban at 40+ and you'd better hang on. Because you're likely going upside down. Most cars simply won't roll on pavement unless they get a wheel into a softer surface (like the shoulder or median).
Personally, I prefer a car because of its abilty to AVOID an accident.
THe SUV is just a symptom of the rugded individualism so prized in our society. Me first, F**K you . You see on the road, at the store, everywhere. I'm a reader of Rec.autos.driving and this issue has been researched and discussed ad nauseum. They use the term MFFY to describe it. LIke the car that cuts to the front of line and expects someone who's been waiting their turn to let in the impatient asshole. MFFY.

I don't agree with it. I don't like it.
Have you read any of the market research data on SUV buyers? IT pretty much confirms the MFFY mindset in most SUV buyers. Check it out. I think it was Chrysler that initiated the study.
I for one feel like the roads will be safer for all users once these antiquated behemoths are off the roads for good. Should the govt do anything? Hell No., Let gas prices do it. Surely it will happen sooner or later.

[I_Like_Plants]

There's a great book out about SUV's called "High And Mighty", Amazon probably has it on sale and your library should have it for free because it's been out a few years and the publicity surrounding it has died down. I highly recommend it.

If nothing else, you'll learn about the "chicken tax".

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('The_Toecutter', 'B')ut you also have to account for things that happen outside the realm of impulse during collisions. Such as rollovers, the dashboard coming loose and falling on the occupants crushing them, ect. ... Some of it is the inherent flaws in vehicle design on part of the automakers and bureaucratic incompentence in meaningful regulation, and idiot drivers that don't understand the implications of the vehicle they command.

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('I_Like_Plants', 'E')VERYONE in the US considers themself an "above average" driver.

[Specop_007]

Roy made a good argument and sums it up nicely.

I agree most people in SUV's are assholes. I'm not, because I usually only take the SUV out on my days off. I'm in no hurry and just out to enjoy the day. Go ahead and go in front of me, your obviously in a bigger hurry then me. I think people in the city are trying to portray an image of the rugged outdoorsmen or some such, I'm really not sure. Having grown up in the country myself, I really dont need to try and pass off any image, I WAS an "outdoorsman". Rugged? No, I took my skeeter repeller and tent.

As to full framed vs unibody. That goes beyond simple economics of vehicle devleopment. Full frames can be built with crumple zones, but adidtionally they are built sturdier. If you want to pull 10 or 15,000 pounds you dont do it with a unibody. Additionally, get smacked and your unibody needs MAJOR work whereas a framed vehicle can be easier to repair.
Thats one reason trucks and SUV's (the majority anyways) are full framed. It helps with payload capacity. I have no use for an SUV that has the same towing capacity as my car.

[rs]

Me and my other half did a track day in the UK a couple of months back. While it was mainly about driving sports cars, one of the driving instructors there was kind enough to take me around the track in an SUV.
After that "experience" I personally would never want to drive one, they are just too dangerous. Granted, this was driving at the limit and most people would not be driving them at these speeds, but even so, if I ever was in the situation where I had to make an emergency maneouver I would not want to be in one.

The only "benefit" as previous people have written is you probably stand a better chance of surviving a crash if you hit a smaller car. My thought is you should not be driving in a manner that puts you in this position!!
It is this ludicrous reason why people buy them, the so-called "safety" factor. What happens when everyone has SUV's ? Will we all move over to lorries/trucks then to increase the size "advantage" again !
At least one advantage of Peak Oil will be no more SUV's !

[stepka]

Geez you guys, couldn't anyone say, "glad you're okay!"? Great discussion though.
A few points:
1. Everyone in the car had on a seatbelt, but I don't think it made any difference in that particular accident.
2. I don't think we would have done as well in an SUV, but it's hard to say. When I steered back down into the median, I think the SUV probably would have rolled, since it was very steep down there. Also, the lighter car practically flew across the median.
3. The truck has a 3/4 ton bed, as opposed to a half ton, common to most other SUVs. That makes it inherently more stable. I have driven a half ton, and it feels like it is going to fly off the wheels when going around a curve.
4. Once the summer is over, we hope to not drive it much, but during the summer, we are travelling quite a lot on business, and volunteer activities, and hauling a lot of stuff, and we usually borrowed it for this reason anyway.
5. I have never liked SUVs very much, and there are way too many on the road, but some people really do have a good reason to have them. My grandmother bought hers because she was in the antiques business, and had to haul a lot of stuff between different states. Then she slowed down, and never drove it at all, so it had low mileage for a 98, and all were highway miles. It would be wasteful to throw away a perfectly good vehicle--think of all the energy that was used in manufacturing it.
6. We are very safe drivers. I and my husband have never been in an accident, except for this, we always wear seatbelts, and never talk on a cell phone or eat while driving. I get on to my husband about fooling around with the radio or CD player while driving. Also, we think that people who forget about driving with prevailing conditions in mind are idiots. Someone almost pulled in front of us the other day in a rainstorm because he forgot he had a trailer on the back of his truck and almost couldn't stop in time! We were not amused. Actually idiots drive all sorts of cars and do all kinds of harm in them.
7. The highway patrol told us that the kind of accident we had is very common on that stretch of highway (70 across Missouri), and that most people do NOT walk away, no matter what they be driving. Also, when involving 18 wheelers, they are generally hit and run. So are there too many big trucks on the road? It would really piss me off if I knew the guy was hauling something stupid, like Barbie dolls for Wal-Mart. The fact is, there are too many trucks hauling a lot of stupid stuff. Walk around the big box store, or even the grocery store, tonight, and think about how much of the stuff there is truly necessary to living. Less than 5% I believe. There is much about this crazy society that I won't miss, but much that I will, too. Like food.
8. Our other car is a little bitty Honda. That will be our main form of transportation when not traveling.

[sklump]

Bed made, lie. Nobody put a gun to your head.

Sell it now while you can get something for it.

[The_Toecutter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')lease tell me, exactly what could the government do to make an SUV less likely to roll over? That logic makes no sense. Its simple math, which it obvious your already well aware of. The higher the center of gavity, the more likely to roll over. All the government regulations in the world cant change physics.

[I_Like_Plants]

I think the BMW SUV is the safest vehicle the US safety testers had encountered, ever.
So there are exceptions. Remember the original Hummer was developed to have SUV capabilities without the rollover etc problems, after all, soldiers are getting harder to replace all the time.
But as a general rule, SUVs are not a good decision when a standard sedan will do the same thing you ever do in your SUV which is take the kids to soccer practice etc.

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('The_Toecutter', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')lease tell me, exactly what could the government do to make an SUV less likely to roll over? That logic makes no sense. Its simple math, which it obvious your already well aware of. The higher the center of gavity, the more likely to roll over. All the government regulations in the world cant change physics.

[The_Toecutter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f it wasnt for the fact the TDI Toureg is 60 THOUSAND DAMNED DOLLARS I would have one.

[Specop_007]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('The_Toecutter', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f it wasnt for the fact the TDI Toureg is 60 THOUSAND DAMNED DOLLARS I would have one.

[hanrahan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('The_Toecutter', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')lease tell me, exactly what could the government do to make an SUV less likely to roll over? That logic makes no sense. Its simple math, which it obvious your already well aware of. The higher the center of gavity, the more likely to roll over. All the government regulations in the world cant change physics.

[The_Toecutter]

In America, the saying is "all hat, no cattle". Most of the SUV drivers here are either nancyboy metrosexuals who never head offroad, old farts in midlife crisis who never head offroad, security moms who never head offroad, all of which don't seem very happy when you confront them with the consequences of their fuel use and vehicle choice that everyone shares, most of which commute in this vehicle alone. According to the American Lung Association, air pollution in the U.S. is responsible for more than 50,000 premature deaths each year. Add in all the subsidies this overbloated government gives big oil, all the military protection given to oilfields and pipelines, and a gallon of gas would end up costing over $5/gallon to make up the difference, and that SUV might cost 2 or 3 times more than a conventional car due to the extra materials for construction and pollution associated with its manufacture that inevitably ends up contaminating our air and drinking water. Would people have to compensate society for the damage to society associated with their vehicle choice, we might see mass transit take hold again along with more efficient vehicles(Not necessarily smaller or slower. Take a look at electric car technology lately).

I would like to see society shift more towards mass transit and bike, with cars for racing, SUVs for offroading, and pickup trucks for farming. A society which is reliant on cars for transit and makes them a necessity is downright stupid. What reduced numbers of cars there will be in the future out of necessity, why not offer electric vehicles to consumers instead of gas chuggers? The technology came for 200+ miles cruising range, musclecar-like acceleration and top speed, and battery life in excess of 250,000 miles nearly a decade ago. But the auto industry experimented, saw that all cars they offered were leased, and noted there were no tuneups, oil changes, servicing, engine repairs, or routine maintenance, got scared, and did all the could to fight public adoption of that technology in the state of California. The oil industry, wanting an oil shortage during peak, saw a threat to their profit margins since the fuel for cars today in America account for 45% of their oil consumption, so they bought out the first battery patents that allowed EVs to become possible.

I respect SUV drivers who actually use their vehicle for its intended purpose: sport. That's what they're for, offroading, mudding, not to piss away needlessly without any purpose precious resources that can't be replenished and are necessary to the continuance of a post-industrial living standard and threaten the sustainability of the human race on Earth(Fun is a purpose unto itself, while transportation is as well but transportation can be provided by non-automotive means). Same with cars. If I can, I'm never going to own a car that seats more than two people, and if I ever have a family, do all I can to get my family reliant on mass transit, bikes, ect, and if that's not possible, I'll be damn sure to build the car used and manufacture the fuel that powers it. The car I will have will be relegated to sport whenever commuting without it becomes practical(Today, that is obviously not the case, no mass transit and all, so I will be using it after it's finished until further notice.).

Unfortunately, mass transit in this country is lacking. Depending on how peak oil carries itself out, we could have mass transit in place and no fuel means very few cars and thus biking becomes much safer than today(If you've ever been on a bicycle and clipped by the passenger-side mirror of some asshole in an SUV going 50 mph, you will understand what I'm talking about.). I'd love to actually be able to realistically commute 15 miles to my campus via bike, but cars in the number they are currently at along with the danger associated with getting killed and the fact that you have to be constantly vigilant surely makes that bike commute a 3 hour one instead of the 45 minute one it should be. A bike with a faring can easily and comfortably be pedalled to 20 mph under pure human power at a liesurely pace. I'd prefer that to a car by far for commuting, keeping the car for the racetrack.

But that is not America today, and given the path we're headed, we probably won't have mass transit post peak, so the bulk of the population may lose mobility altogether(I'll have that elecric sports car by then built, and a portable wind generator to charge it with when it's parked, but the bike will take care of 99.9% of my needs assuming things go smoothly, and if not, the car will get me the fuck out of the city with no fuel worries!)

[Aedo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('stepka', 'G')eez you guys, couldn't anyone say, "glad you're okay!"? Great discussion though.