Small Cars Get Poor Results

[MJS]

Thought this was interesting, especially in todays economy. Of course, IMHO, despite the economy, the supposed good gas milage, and all of the other stuff people say about these cars, they're ugly, and I personally wouldn't spend .02 on one.

Of course, I love this part:

"Schembri said the test simulated a "rare and extreme scenario" and noted that the fortwo had received solid ratings from the government's crash test program. The fortwo has received top scores from the Insurance Institute in front-end and side crash tests against comparably sized vehicles but in the front-end tests against the C Class, the institute gave the mini car poor marks."

and...

"Automakers who manufacture the small cars said the tests simulated a high-speed crash that rarely happens on the road. They also said the tests rehashed past insurance industry arguments against tougher fuel efficiency requirements. The institute has raised questions about whether stricter gas mileage rules, which are being developed by the government, might lead to smaller, lighter vehicles that could be less safe."

So....those crashes rarely happen on the road?? Supposedly, the test was at 40mph head on crash. Hmm...well, not every crash happens at 40 and not every crash is head on, but nonetheless, IMO, no matter where that car is hit, the person(s) inside are not going to fare well.

Additionally, I have to wonder how well those cars travel in the snow. I mean, there're some states that get monster storms, and unless you have 4wd, you're probably not getting anywhere. What is the room in the back like? Is there even a back seat? How comfortable are rearseat passengers going to be? Is this a family car?

For me, I'll stick with my SUVs. A Nissan Pathfinder and Mazda Tribute.....neither I or my wife have yet to get stuck in a snow storm, backseat passengers can ride comfortably, I can fit 3 people in the back, the seats go down to make transporting large items easy, and my dog, who usually goes everywhere with us, of course depending on the circumstances, he has pleanty of room as well.

 

[grydth]

In Central New York, where you can get over 12 feet of snow in a Winter, an SUV makes perfect sense. Not planning to give mine up.

But the area my wife lives in gets about a tenth of that snowfall, and when they do everything closes for days. So the terrific mileage she gets from her Yaris makes sense for her, too.

Yes, the Mrs should avoid a head on with a Hummer while driving her Yaris, but I would be equally wise to not challenge a train.

 

[Gordon Nore]

"Schembri said the test simulated a "rare and extreme scenario" and noted that the fortwo had received solid ratings from the government's crash test program. The fortwo has received top scores from the Insurance Institute in front-end and side crash tests against comparably sized vehicles but in the front-end tests against the C Class, the institute gave the mini car poor marks."

The Smart fortwo has performed well in a number of crash tests. The Tridion Cell -- essentially a built-in roll cage -- takes quite beating. I've rented a number of Smarts including the more recent 451 gasoline version which is the North American model, and the pre-2007 450 Diesel, which had been in Canada for several years.

Here's a test done on a British motoring show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJHpUO-S0i8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fprofile_video_blog%3Fsid%3D949C264DA7036045%26id%3DF3B0D61710D87553&feature=player_embedded

I'm planning on buying a 451 next time I trade in. Missus has the new Elantra wagon for our road trips, and I really just need half-a-car to get to and fro each day.

 

[girlbug2]

You can paint the picture as the small cars being unsafe in a crash with the bigger vehicles. Another way to say it is, the larger vehicles are a bigger threat to other vehicles than small cars.

 

[Carol]

My Honda CR-V has been perfect for me. Its a smaller SUV, but its got enough oomph to get through a Snow Hampshire winter. Its big enough to carry a few friends comfortably and have plenty of room for suitcases and gear bags. Its not a tank, and it gets really good mileage. Mine will hit 100K soon and I plan on keeping it for another 100K.

 

[Sukerkin]

That was "Fifth Gear" by the way and the presenter was Tiff Needell, who knows quite a lot about crashing ... Mulsanne Straight anyone .

 

[Gordon Nore]

That was "Fiith Gear" by the way and the presenter was Tiff Needell, who knows quite a lot about crashing ... Mulsanne Straight anyone .

They do some fun spots on that show -- another story about the iCar and a double-decker Smart fortwo.

 

[MJS]

I dont know, I guess I am also looking at safety as a deciding factor on what I buy as well. I mean, I don't care how good these cars are on gas and how eco-friendly they are, I care about whether or not I stand a chance of walking away from a crash or being killed. Now, this isn't to say that I couldnt end up dead in an SUV, but seeing that these cars look like something you'd see a group of midgets getting out of at the circus, I think I'll take my chances with something larger.

Of course, the other thing people always say is that the big, evil SUVs are roadhogs and the drivers are reckless. Ok...and if I had a dollar for every small car that I saw driving fast, weaving in and out of traffic, I'd be a very rich man.

 

[Sukerkin]

SUV drivers are reckless and inattentive, at least on roads that are barely wide enough for them to fit in a lane and have those mystical things called "Corners " (something of an innovation in America I'm given to understand). I reckon it's that false sensation of safety and superiority that comes from sitting 'on high' in something so big that makes people drive so badly when they're in one.

Maybe there should be a special category of license to drive one? After all, they're generally on a scale with many light goods vehicles these days.

As hinted above, we've started getting them over here on British roads now, as it seems that ordinary 4x4 tanks just aren't big enough for the school run. Trying not to get run into on a 'British scale' roundabout by some woman taking her precious brat to school in a Dodge RAM is not my idea of a fun start to the day. At least if she crashes into me in a Nissan Micra I stand a chance of getting out of the incident alive.

 

[jks9199]

It's simply physics. In any crash, with all else being relatively equal -- the bigger car is gonna win. This is actually the right application of the formula Force is equal to Mass times the square of the velocity. In the "standardized crash" used by the various testing groups -- big cars will always come out as "safer."

However, that's not taking into account things like crumple zones, the designed safety cage of a modern car, restraints, and other factors that balance it out. The car may be trashed -- but the occupant is often safe. In fact, sometimes safer than the folks in that big car, who end up bouncing around the car.

As to individual driving behavior... That's an individual problem. "The goal of traffic enforcement is to obtain voluntary compliance." I've seen -- and corrected crappy and stupid driving in people driving everything from semis down to motorcycles. (Personally -- stupid driving on a motorcycle is, in my opinion, a case of Darwinian selection at work. 'Cause I don't often get to ticket it until the rider is in ER.) The biggest problem with SUV drivers is that many simply don't realize they're driving something bigger than the car they're used to... Others assume that they're bigger -- so they have the right of way.

The biggest threat to safe driving today? DRIVER DISTRACTION

Hands down. Cars today have more distractions in them for drivers, and more people assume that they can successfully multi-task while driving (which is already a demanding multi-tasking skill)... They yak on cell phones, send text messages, tune radios & MP3 players, fuss with the GPS unit, and more. Meanwhile, they're more cut off from the environment around them than ever before; cars are so soundproofed that emergency vehicles are actually using new gadgets (like The Rumbler) to penetrate through to the driver. And, as they're more cut off and distracted -- they drive worse and worse and with less and less regard for other drivers.

 

[grydth]

Well, you know you need to have both vehicles available to do a comparison.....

Not long after I made the post above, a very large black pick up truck with two big Confederate flags flapping, cut in front of the car our youngest son was driving in Evansville and tore its bumper clean off...... but we don't know about the truck damage because this splendid macho icon FLED THE SCENE..... drove off like the stinking coward he is without even checking to see if the kids he hit were okay (they were).

 

[Rich Parsons]

They do some fun spots on that show -- another story about the iCar and a double-decker Smart fortwo.

I dont know, I guess I am also looking at safety as a deciding factor on what I buy as well. I mean, I don't care how good these cars are on gas and how eco-friendly they are, I care about whether or not I stand a chance of walking away from a crash or being killed. Now, this isn't to say that I couldnt end up dead in an SUV, but seeing that these cars look like something you'd see a group of midgets getting out of at the circus, I think I'll take my chances with something larger.

Of course, the other thing people always say is that the big, evil SUVs are roadhogs and the drivers are reckless. Ok...and if I had a dollar for every small car that I saw driving fast, weaving in and out of traffic, I'd be a very rich man.

MJS,

SUV have bad accidents because many of them have 4x4 or all wheel drive. This means they are more stable and people are not used to the body roll and reaction at certain speeds. In Europe there is an AWD vehicle that is considered very safe. But it has a high insurance value. Not because it gets stolen but because people push it through the corners and when it looses its' connection the accidents are very bad.

As JKS also states distraction is a major concern and depending upon data sources is listed as number one cause for accidents.

If all the vehicles get smaller than having the smaller vehicles would make sense for safety as well. But as long as you have the larger vehicles then it has to be a concern for family. I know guys use them as commuters vehicles but do not put their family in them, even if tehy are only taking one.

As to being green, in the US, we travel to get to work and travel to visit people and places, and travel in our vehicles to just travel. Much of this travel is on the highways.

The old fuel economy labels were run at the 1976 55 mph maximums, with a minimum amount of time to 60 mph to get a pass in there. This was not real world. Consumer Reports last year ran an article on this. The North American companies were always the closest to the label.

I took a recent trip to Florida, on the way their I was passed by 8 Toyota Prius'. The problem is that I drive a traffic speeds on the highway. The speed I did was about 75 mph to 80 mph. They passed me at this speed. My V6 Firebird in 5th gear (manual) was getting 29 mph in the hills of Tenn and 30 to 31 mph the rest of the time. Label is 30 mph. The vehicle rolled over to 110,000 miles on the trip. I have only replaced one coil and plugs associated with that coil, and the rest on the engine is original. I still get this type of fuel economy. But the Prius above 55 mph has the little 4 cylinder running to move the engine. The electric motor has to spin at such a high speed at these vehicle speeds. The vehicle is not that effecient at that speed. It gets worse fuel economy that the vehicle I was driving.

Even though my vehicle is Ultra Low Emissions, it is a sports car and even though at that highway speed I get as good or better fuel economy, but the Prius is considered to be "GREEN" and my little sports car is a negative "FEEL" to it in the press and general population.


Even though I work for a major US auto maker, I always tell people, buy and drive the vehicle you feel comfortable in physically and also comfortable in making the payment. Enjoy it and drive it.

 

[MJS]

SUV drivers are reckless and inattentive, at least on roads that are barely wide enough for them to fit in a lane and have those mystical things called "Corners " (something of an innovation in America I'm given to understand). I reckon it's that false sensation of safety and superiority that comes from sitting 'on high' in something so big that makes people drive so badly when they're in one.

Well, I will admit, there are some crazy SUV drivers. I recall a snow storm right around Christmas time. Traffic was crazy, the highway was gridlock, and yet those with 4wd thought they could still drive as if the roads were dry. Oddly enough, I saw a number of crashes that day, many involving SUVs. I don't think I'm high and mighty driving one, and I still drive normally. I just think that again, while those small eco-cars may get 50mpg, some people are viewing that as the sole deciding factor in a purchase, and forgetting the other important things.

 

[MJS]

MJS,

SUV have bad accidents because many of them have 4x4 or all wheel drive. This means they are more stable and people are not used to the body roll and reaction at certain speeds. In Europe there is an AWD vehicle that is considered very safe. But it has a high insurance value. Not because it gets stolen but because people push it through the corners and when it looses its' connection the accidents are very bad.

As JKS also states distraction is a major concern and depending upon data sources is listed as number one cause for accidents.

Oh, I agree. You definately have to drive with a bit more caution. Driving an SUV like you would a car that is lower to the ground is an accident waiting to happen. And the distraction....I love those people who are so involved in their cell phone convos. that they cut you off, and are so friggin clueless as to what happened. You hit the horn and they look at your with this dumb *** look, you just wanna slap them across the head a few times.

The old fuel economy labels were run at the 1976 55 mph maximums, with a minimum amount of time to 60 mph to get a pass in there. This was not real world. Consumer Reports last year ran an article on this. The North American companies were always the closest to the label.

I took a recent trip to Florida, on the way their I was passed by 8 Toyota Prius'. The problem is that I drive a traffic speeds on the highway. The speed I did was about 75 mph to 80 mph. They passed me at this speed. My V6 Firebird in 5th gear (manual) was getting 29 mph in the hills of Tenn and 30 to 31 mph the rest of the time. Label is 30 mph. The vehicle rolled over to 110,000 miles on the trip. I have only replaced one coil and plugs associated with that coil, and the rest on the engine is original. I still get this type of fuel economy. But the Prius above 55 mph has the little 4 cylinder running to move the engine. The electric motor has to spin at such a high speed at these vehicle speeds. The vehicle is not that effecient at that speed. It gets worse fuel economy that the vehicle I was driving.

Even though my vehicle is Ultra Low Emissions, it is a sports car and even though at that highway speed I get as good or better fuel economy, but the Prius is considered to be "GREEN" and my little sports car is a negative "FEEL" to it in the press and general population.


Even though I work for a major US auto maker, I always tell people, buy and drive the vehicle you feel comfortable in physically and also comfortable in making the payment. Enjoy it and drive it.

Now those are some numbers that are interesting. I wonder what the makers of the green cars would have to say about that.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Now those are some numbers that are interesting. I wonder what the makers of the green cars would have to say about that.

I think they would state that the have marketed within the laws of the US.


My problems are with CARB (* California Air Resource Board *) and how they do not treat the companies the same. For proof just look at how Toyota's volume increased in the last few years and the number of recalls issued. Including a couple of years they recalled more vehicles than built that year by them. CARB targets GM as they were the largest production company for the USA. It is nice that California looks out for the rest of the country, but that is another point. GM gets 100% inspection of OBD requirements within 90 days of going to production. The number 2 gets 85% of all application inspected within the first year of its' release. The number three gets less. It is staffing levels. But it gives the public a poor impression of the US makers as they were number one and number two and number three for many years. So when they would get inspected three or four years later, they could easily state they have a new release so it is fixed there, and then another 3 to 4 years could go by before confirmation.

(* Of course I will asked how do I know this? I work for GM, but I have had a supplier in the past that was 50% owned by Toyota and the product they made and sold to Toyota and other car companies that GM picked up and used did not pass the firest review with CARB, but it was already in this country for years under other products. With CARB threatening fines, the supplier made the changes I request up front, and they were confused as they had done what they did for us for all other companies. *)

Perception is the market. Perception is how the data is presented. The same Consumers Report article that I quoted above, also had on the same two pages another article that stated when buying vehicles go for the Stickers as the best way to get fuel economy. They used a bolder print and and shaded background to draw it out and make it look like a highlight for the other article. The perception is what sells the vehicles.

I talked to someone today, who drives GM and Chrysler products through his driving life time. He has borrowed a Honda from the mechanic fixing his car. His car has 150k+ miles and the Honda has 110k+ miles. He cound not see where the Honda a compariable car for size and engine was any better, and the mechanic's personal vehicle was not in better shape than his.


It is perception.

If you have had a good perception and good expereince you continue to have a good perception.

I know others that have had both, and while the described vehicles to me both US and Japanese made they had an expectation of perfection from the US even though they knew it was a POC when they bought it in their own words. The Japanese vehicles that were also bought as POC's were "nice" cars abd I could see that their perception going in was that other likes it when ti was new so it must have been good at some time, so it is good now. Even though he told how much money he put into it and it was less than the US, he did not see his own shading per his own perceptions. He also discussed a new US Car he bought and he loved it in his own words, which he did not say about the Japanese comparable new vehicles he has bought. But, even though he had a recent good experience, his perception and the perception of may others, is bad so it was bad.


In the end, compare and this year that car company will be a little better, and next year it will be someone else. They are all real close in quality and usually cost as well. Which is why I said what I said above, drive the car and see how it fits you and your own needs. Then buy the one that best fits your requirments and cost, and enjoy it.