The Venza is a wagon?? This may be the most controversial thing posted! . (It looks like every crossover out there. Weird)
Keep in mind ive got a subaru mindset and haven't read this thread, but i dont understand the crossover classifications. The small upright suvs built on a car chassis I get...but the ones like the venza (or the outback) just look like a 2000 Taurus wagon with better styling.
That style of "crossover" also got really popular at the same time that all the non luxury brands stopped making anything called a wagon. So. ... yeah. They're station wagons with suv masks on.
I'm with you on this. I think the Volvo XC70 is now considered a "crossover" because station wagon isn't cool. But the old ones are DEFINITELY station wagons. And frankly, the new ones are too.
They have always had legacy sedans. I used to have a legacy wagon. Outback sedans were souped up versions of the legacy. The old outback was built on the frame of the legacy wagon.
Correct. Also I drove a 2000 Subaru outback sedan until I bought my current vehicle which is marketed as a crossover and is actually just a damned station wagon. (Toyota venza)
Also I skipped the middle 2 pages of this clusterfuck so if someone could evaluate my vehicle choices for me and let me know where that places me on the depraved indifference scale i'd be much obliged.
Also, WTF with people asking for statistics that SUVs are more dangerous for others. This research has been going on for 20 years. AS IF John Stossel hasn't discussed this shit on 20/20.
When a pedestrian is hit by a low sports car or coupe, they are likely hit in the legs, and then thrown up over the hood of the car. You might sustain a broken leg and some other injuries, but broken legs are not life-threatening.
Get hit by an SUV and you are going to be hit higher on your body, throwing you to the ground, where you can get run over or sustain torso or head damage from the impact.
Plus, it's super easy to see from an SUV WHILE IN AN SUV. When I'm trying to turn right and a big SUV pulling halfway into the crosswalk so I can't see oncoming traffic... it does no favors to those of us driving small cars.
Also, WTF with people asking for statistics that SUVs are more dangerous for others. This research has been going on for 20 years. AS IF John Stossel hasn't discussed this shit on 20/20.
When a pedestrian is hit by a low sports car or coupe, they are likely hit in the legs, and then thrown up over the hood of the car. You might sustain a broken leg and some other injuries, but broken legs are not life-threatening.
Get hit by an SUV and you are going to be hit higher on your body, throwing you to the ground, where you can get run over or sustain torso or head damage from the impact.
Plus, it's super easy to see from an SUV WHILE IN AN SUV. When I'm trying to turn right and a big SUV pulling halfway into the crosswalk so I can't see oncoming traffic... it does no favors to those of us driving small cars.
The question was whether SUV drivers were more likely or less likely to be involved in accidents, not the damage done when they are in accidents. People need to start reading what's written, rather than going into hysterics over assumptions.
Just to be clear, I'm not justifying my car purchase. I haven't bought a car since the first Bush administration. I drove my father's car until my FIL's car was passed to me. Or I should say small SUVs because I hate Jesus, the planet, and other people.
Just to be clear, I'm not justifying my car purchase. I haven't bought a car since the first Bush administration. I drove my father's car until my FIL's car was passed to me. Or I should say small SUVs because I hate Jesus, the planet, and other people.
Just to be clear, I'm not justifying my car purchase. I haven't bought a car since the first Bush administration. I drove my father's car until my FIL's car was passed to me. Or I should say small SUVs because I hate Jesus, the planet, and other people.
Also, WTF with people asking for statistics that SUVs are more dangerous for others. This research has been going on for 20 years. AS IF John Stossel hasn't discussed this shit on 20/20.
When a pedestrian is hit by a low sports car or coupe, they are likely hit in the legs, and then thrown up over the hood of the car. You might sustain a broken leg and some other injuries, but broken legs are not life-threatening.
Get hit by an SUV and you are going to be hit higher on your body, throwing you to the ground, where you can get run over or sustain torso or head damage from the impact.
Plus, it's super easy to see from an SUV WHILE IN AN SUV. When I'm trying to turn right and a big SUV pulling halfway into the crosswalk so I can't see oncoming traffic... it does no favors to those of us driving small cars.
Erm no. For the third time now: I am looking for data that shows all vehicle related injuries and the type is car that caused it.
Erm no. For the third time now: I am looking for data that shows all vehicle related injuries and the type is car that caused it.
Stop being such a jerk with your unreasonable requests. SUVs are road hogs!
I will say that ANYONE who pulls all the way up and makes it impossible for the person turning right who was already there before them to see if it's clear to turn is a FUCKING JACKASS and at the top of my driving pet peeves list. It is the one thing that is guaranteed to make me start screaming in my car. I wish this behavior was limited to SUVs. I can't even see around a long ass sedan pulling that garbage.
Also, WTF with people asking for statistics that SUVs are more dangerous for others. This research has been going on for 20 years. AS IF John Stossel hasn't discussed this shit on 20/20.
When a pedestrian is hit by a low sports car or coupe, they are likely hit in the legs, and then thrown up over the hood of the car. You might sustain a broken leg and some other injuries, but broken legs are not life-threatening.
Get hit by an SUV and you are going to be hit higher on your body, throwing you to the ground, where you can get run over or sustain torso or head damage from the impact.
Plus, it's super easy to see from an SUV WHILE IN AN SUV. When I'm trying to turn right and a big SUV pulling halfway into the crosswalk so I can't see oncoming traffic... it does no favors to those of us driving small cars.
The question was whether SUV drivers were more likely or less likely to be involved in accidents, not the damage done when they are in accidents. People need to start reading what's written, rather than going into hysterics over assumptions.
Why on earth would that matter? When they are involved in accidents, the damage is greater.
Which indicates car rates are higher. Except you'd need to look at the percentage of cars on the road vs SUVs to get a clearer picture of the data.
THANK YOU! This is what I was looking for.
According to the table, in 2009, out of 9.5 mil injury crashes, 5.2 mil involved passenger cars and 1.6 mil involved something called "utility" (I'm assuming that means SUV). Does that suggest that SUVs are more likely than sedans to cause harm? Anyone know how many passenger cars were on the road in 2009 vs SUVs?
Erm no. For the third time now: I am looking for data that shows all vehicle related injuries and the type is car that caused it.
Stop being such a jerk with your unreasonable requests. SUVs are road hogs!
I think it's an unreasonable request in that it's requesting a very specific demographic that doesn't seem to be out there without crunching numbers from various sources. I, for one, am not going to do all that math. Math can suck it.
The data is out there, but you'd have to pull it from the census and from various insurance websites.
You can't just say, "Well it didn't happen because you can't back it up!" That's not true, neither side can back up their assertion.
Which indicates car rates are higher. Except you'd need to look at the percentage of cars on the road vs SUVs to get a clearer picture of the data.
THANK YOU! This is what I was looking for.
According to the table, in 2009, out of 9.5 injury crashes, 5.2 mil involved passenger cars and 1.6 mil involved something called "utility" (I'm assuming that means SUV). Does that suggest that SUVs are more likely than sedans to cause harm? Anyone know how many passenger cars were on the road in 2009 vs SUVs?
I'm trying to find it. The only other census tables I've found lump all the passenger vehicles into one lump. Without seeing the raw data, I can't answer your question. (I probably wouldn't be able to with the raw data either because I bet it's huge.)
Correct. Also I drove a 2000 Subaru outback sedan until I bought my current vehicle which is marketed as a crossover and is actually just a damned station wagon. (Toyota venza)
Also I skipped the middle 2 pages of this clusterfuck so if someone could evaluate my vehicle choices for me and let me know where that places me on the depraved indifference scale i'd be much obliged.
It's NOT an unreasonable request when every single one of these convos turns on "but SUVs are death machines." If that's the argument, then back it up with data!
The question was whether SUV drivers were more likely or less likely to be involved in accidents, not the damage done when they are in accidents. Â People need to start reading what's written, rather than going into hysterics over assumptions.
Why on earth would that matter? When they are involved in accidents, the damage is greater.Â
The question was whether SUV drivers were more likely or less likely to be involved in accidents, not the damage done when they are in accidents. People need to start reading what's written, rather than going into hysterics over assumptions.
Why on earth would that matter? When they are involved in accidents, the damage is greater.
The question was asked because people said they could see better in their SUV, and therefore we're able to avoid accidents. But thank you for making us see the light on whether questions matter. I now have to go find my eyes, as they've rolled right out of my head.
It's NOT an unreasonable request when every single one of these convos turns on "but SUVs are death machines." If that's the argument, then back it up with data!
You wanted a very specific data set.
If we're looking at the severity of crashes involving SUVs with cars, that's out there.
If we're looking at the severity of crashes involving SUVs and rollovers, that's out there.
There doesn't seem to be much out there in regards to SUV vs. sedans in frequency and severity of crashes that breaks it down into what you need.
It's a question of risk assessment. At some point, a vehicle type less likely to get into an accident in the first place might very well be the safer option even if when it does get into an accident, it causes more damage. I'm not sure what that point is and thus, why heyjude and I are asking if anyone knows.
And I'm not trying to get someone else to figure it out. I just thought I would ask if anyone knew if that aspect had been studied recently.
Yep, it's this right here than gets me: "But even when the two vehicles are of similar weights, outcomes are still better in the SUVs," he says, "because in frontal crashes, SUVs tend to ride over shorter passenger vehicles, due to bumper mismatch, crushing the occupant of the passenger car."
So sure, the SUV driver is going to be fine, but the driver of the sedan is fucked. I don't care if crossovers are built on a "car frame." They still sit higher than sedans. They do more damage to the other party to a crash as a result.
And the fact is that very few people genuinely NEED an SUV or a crossover. If you have a lot of kids, yes, you may need a minivan.
But if you have a family of four or fewer and find a standard/full sized sedan is insufficient for your daily needs, you should probably re-evaluate a lot of things.
This is the part of the debate where everyone comes in and states that their life absolutely positively demands an SUV. Then you find out they live in Naperville.
I look like I care, but as long as an suv.isn't parking in a compact space or taking up two spaces at once, I rarely even notice.
Pixy...I thought you drove prius for some reason. Get a subaru. Pzev and o waste landfills as I know you have good environmental concerns
I drive a 2001 Mazda 626. I've had it from almost the very beginning of it's life. I got it before I really got into caring about cars and the environment.
Why on earth would that matter? When they are involved in accidents, the damage is greater.
Which is also true for semis. And your point....?
Semis aren't usually seen in pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. But hey, if anyone has statistics about how often a semi drives down a residential street or through a commercial district with a lot of sidewalks...
Semis aren't usually seen in pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. But hey, if anyone has statistics about how often a semi drives down a residential street or through a commercial district with a lot of sidewalks...
You are defining a narrow scenario which wasn't what was asked.
I'm still not finding the numbers for 2006. (FTR - my issue isn't with SUV safety. I'm mainly concerned about the environmental impacts.)
I think they're related. The less safe the roads are for pedestrians and cyclists, the fewer people will walk and bike, which is good for the environment.
And when everyone around you buys an SUV and contributes to an unsafe environment, at some point you give in so you're not the only one driving a regular car, and you wind up using more gas.