Is the risk of driving small worth it?

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by R.I.D.E.

I wish every aggressive large vehicle driver was required to drive a motorcycle with a dump truck all over his arse for two months.

Gary for president!

[Jay2TheRescue]

Its not just the big drivers that are bad. I've seen my fair share of motorcycles weaving in & out of heavy traffic, driving between lanes, and such. I once had a compact car pass me on the shoulder, cut me off, then slam on his brakes, and stopped (While I was driving my fully loaded 1 ton van). Luckily I am used to driving large vehicles, and know how to stop them, plus being in a vehicle where I am in charge of the maintenance helps. Everything I drive has damn good brakes, I make sure of that.

[GasSavers_RoadWarrior]

There was a survey I saw somewhere that said that those who are least confident in their driving skill choose the largest vehicles.

[GasSavers_maximilian]

This thread reminded me of a chart I did a while ago, plotting one's life expectancy versus one's age. The older you get, the more the average goes up because you can factor out those who died younger than you. A little off-topic, but it's quick.



I assume the uptick right at the start is caused by infants with serious health problems. The one in late middle age is maybe bad habits catching up with people.

[Snax]

I actually initiated this thread as sort of a red herring jab at the Smart specifically. They like to tout how safe it is for it's size, but statistically, being the smallest car on the road means that a collision with any other moving car is likely to impart a greater impact force upon the Smart than an impact with a stationary object. E.g., while a 40 mph collision in the Smart against a brick wall may not be fatal because it is a stationary object, the same type of collision with a Mercedes that outweighs it by at least twice as much increases the impact force exactly relative to the weight difference and relative speeds of each vehicle.

In other words, statistically, any collision in the Smart with another moving car/truck/whatever is going to be worse than in nearly any other car one could drive. I suppose the reverse argument could be made for driving a school bus around too though. Clearly, the Smart is a very solid vehicle for it's size, but reality cannot be ignored.

Honestly, I would love to get the diesel version of one, but it simply isn't a practical solution for our family.

[R.I.D.E.]

My two current vehicles. I will probably keep driving small, at least for the foreseeable future.

2002 Insight CVT, averaging 65 MPG. Bought for $10k with 34 k miles.
2001 Toyota Echo, averaging 53 MPG. Bought for $3300 with 71.4k miles.

regards
gary

[bowtieguy]

[QUOTE=Snax;139575]I actually initiated this thread as sort of a red herring jab at the Smart specifically. [QUOTE]

for crying out loud, now i gotta go back and edit my posts!

[shatto]

My Volvo DL had a poor rating. The passanger compartment was too rigid and after the front or back had collapsed as designed, absorbed all the energy of the crash, clear up to the window, there was no more give.
Smart has the same problem. Passanger compartment survives, occupant doesn't.

[Snax]

Perhaps I'm missing a nuance here, but if the passenger compartment does crush, isn't that a bit of a survivability issue as well?

I think in the case of the Smart, there simply isn't much collapse room, but in the case of the Volvo, a slightly more rigid front or back end could perhaps have simply done a better job of mitigating maximum g-force, which short of intrusion into the passenger area is the main thing that kills people.

[shatto]

It was a long time ago, but, as I recall the interior didn't have enough soft stuff to save the occupants. This was before air-bags and energy had to be absorbed by things like kick-panels, doors, dashboard and the like.