Smaller Cars Fail Crash Tests

[realtraveller]

Smaller cars perform poorly in crash tests - Automotive - MSNBC.com

Would you (Have you) bought a smaller car even if it means sacrificing safety for fuel economy?

Looking at it on a purely monetary level, would you risk the huge medical bills and lost income that might be incurred if you're in an accident with a small car or take the risk of not having an accident and saving money on gas? (I've never been in a bad accident, so maybe my risk is small, but there's always that first (and maybe last) serious car accident to think about.

Then there's the 'if it saves just one life it's worth it' school of thought. I'm thinking of this on a more societal level. Obviously if it's my life or the life of my loved ones, I'd be kicking myself to hell and back if I bought a less safe car.

But I wonder if the fuel savings outweighs the medical costs and other costs of serious accidents to society in general of having these smaller cars.

And yes, the roads would be safer for small cars owners if more people drove small cars, but there would still be the danger of veering into a tree or a deer or a truck.

I need a new car. Right now, I can't see that the few hundred dollars I might save on gas is worth the added risk if I were in an accident.

[mjfrombuffalo[$]]

I'm actually considering my first mid-sized sedan but not for fuel or safety reasons - the little old lady I drive to church on Sunday is having problems getting in and out of my low-slung Saturn SL2. I still want good MPG and will go for a lighter (eg composite side-panel) car happily, but I tend to put a lot of space between me and the crazy Lawn Guylanders and their ridiculous SUV's.

[rmthunter]

Of course, if SUVs were banned, it would be a lot safer to drive a small car.

[mjfrombuffalo[$]]

While I don't like SUV's, I wouldn't ban them. At least not until after we've banned the more important stuff, like gum.

[realtraveller]

rmthunter said

Of course, if SUVs were banned, it would be a lot safer to drive a small car.

It would be somewhat safer. But there would still be crashes into lamp posts, trees, deer, trucks, rocks, bridge abutments, dumpsters (my neighbor), mailboxes (my other neighbor) and on and on.

Is the added fuel economy worth the extra risk?

I suppose that's why I oppose banning anything or letting the government get in the way of people's decisions. Let each buyer decide for themselves how much risk they want to take versus how much gas they want to save.

[wivabef]

It's obviously not the size, but the manufacture:

The institute evaluated several minicars (emphasis mine) for their ability to protect people in a severe crash. The 2007 Nissan Versa, which offers standard side air bags, received top scores in frontal, side and rear crash protection.

The 2007 Toyota Yaris with optional side air bags and the 2007 Honda Fit — which has standard side air bags — also got top marks in frontal and side-impact tests.

I own a Sante Fe. In thise parts, that IS a mini car! I can't turn a corner around here without having to nose practically into the middle of the intersection due to the preponderance of Expeditions, Escalades, Suburbans and... make me barf... HUMMERS... There are hummers all over this joint!

This damned planet has to start getting responsible about its fuel usage, Kathy. And sensationalized results from crash tests (which we notice did not include results from SUV's) isn't going to stop my next purchase from being very economical. If I can afford a hybrid, I will.

[jgibson2[$]]

I always look at safety ratings when making a decision about car purchases. We've been in a few crashes, all minor, but my mom used to run into things on a regular basis. Also minor crashes, but it tends to warp your thinking.

Not everyone does, and I don't think you can protect people from all their choices. It is important for the information to be out there so people have it when they decide, though.

[realtraveller]

I'm not in the market yet so I haven't compared crash safety data.

But if I were choosing between a fuel efficient smaller car that did poorly in the crash tests versus a larger car or van that used more gas but had a sturdier frame, roll bars, front and side impact air bags...I'm going with safety over fuel efficiency.

If there were a hybrid 7 passenger minivan with front and side impact air bags I'd go for it.

But my neighbor in his silly little mini Cooper...he probably thinks its cute and he's saving gas but it's about as safe as peddling a Fisher Price car down the freeway.

[wivabef]

Mini Cooper crash ratings

[hadassahchana[$]]

I'm with safety first, too. I just don't assume that bigass SUV= safer ride. And in fact, it doesn't.

People driving or riding in a sport utility vehicle in 2003 were nearly 11 percent more likely to die in an accident than people in cars, the figures show. The government began keeping detailed statistics on the safety of vehicle categories in 1994.

[frazzledspice]

I think that I'd use a variety of criteria--safety and fuel economy would be two of those criteria.

Within car categories, there are safety variations. The safest small car might be safer than some SUV's.

Front and side air bags, anti-lock brakes, etc. all have an impact on safety.

A person driving a very small car is more likely to be driving alone. He or she is probably safer than a 'soccer mom' driving a minivan full of kids (believe me, I've been there, and there are lots of distractions inherent in driving a minivan full of kids.)

Handling is important, too. A zippy little small car might be more responsive and better able to avoid a crash.

None of the cars mentioned in the articles were the best-known small cars--Toyota Corollas, Honda Civics...

I would rather see consumer advocates promoting more safety features in small cars than encouraging people to drive Hummers.

[mtomm[$]]

I drive both types. I have an older Toyota 2WD pickup I drive to and from work and around town, basically everywhere I go daily. It is great for the fuel economy and fine for me and 2 of the kids but really blows for driving in the snow.

I also drive a Suburban (not my choice, husband's) and I must say when the roads are snowy or if I need to get in and out of someone's unplowed driveway (which happens quite frequently in the winter) I'm very, very grateful to have it.

I also would hate to give up the Suburban because I can take my family and both my parents with me when we are travelling to and from events or my other family. Keeping my parents off the road is a big SAFETY factor and everyone should be grateful I can do it in the Suburban. It sucks for fuel economy and to make matters worse it is a diesel.

I don't want to give up either vehicle and I'd hate for my Suburban to be banned. I don't know if it is safer but the 4WD is lovely in deep snow.

I'm not sure where the Jeep Wrangler fits in. Personally I think they are a total joke, lightweight pieces of crap that get bad gas mileage. I never drive it.

[jgibson2[$]]

Large vehicles serve a purpose. You'd use as much gas hauling 10 people in minis as you would in a Suburban, providing you have all the optional seats.

IMHO, most of the overturned SUV's are a result of driver error. I see dimbulb drivers who think that the 4WD will protect them on ICE. They go flying past me at 20+ MPH over the posted speed limit when most of the cars on the road are going 20 MPH under. I occasionally catch up to one that's landed on its roof as a result. We don't often get real snow here, but when we do, I miss my little Toyota 4WD station wagon. The one time I ever got stuck in that thing, I tossed a handful of crackers under each tire and off I went.

[cristina1]

I don't know about here in PA, but in NY, we'd have snow storms where I couldn't take the Nissan Sentra out without it getting stuck, even with front wheel drive and snow tires. The car had no power to push itself through 6 inches or more of snow, and in Upstate NY, that happened mostly every snow storm.

My neighbor had four kids and a station wagon. Her problem was that in order to put all of her children in her car, she had to open the trunk and have her oldest sit facing backward on the pop up rear seat, with her legs extended to the very back of the vehicle. I can't imagine how mangled that child would have been in the event of another car hitting her, even if it were just a minor accident.

When we were kids, our parents just crammed us into the backseat of any car. Now, families with three and more kids truly benefit from an SUV with a third row seat. Even in my Explorer, my oldest son is squished between the two car seats. And, the middle seat has no shoulder belt, so he rides in the third row seat for the most comfort and safety.

To get a car to take on the loads that SUV's do, the gas will be still a problem. What we need, rather than the "ban all SUV's" talk, is how to make an efficient vehicle that can handle the snow, the kids, and not struggle trying to drive up a mountain (PA driving at it's finest). Hybrids seem to be a good start. And we have to remember that these vehicles are going to take time to make it mainstream. Anyone not able to purchase new is going to have to wait a few years at least.

[realtraveller]

I most often carry four people in my minivan, but many times, I'm carrying five or six.

We're off to snow country in a couple of days. With the kids, the luggage and the ski gear, I couldn't do the trip with a small car. And it's really not economical to have two vehicles when one will do.

[mjfrombuffalo[$]]

...so what you're saying is you weren't really in the market for any of these mini cars anyway?

[realtraveller]

Yeah, with all the considerations, I pretty much ruled them out. I would consider a long wheel based, 7 passenger, front and side impact air bagged minivan hybrid. But I don't think those are being made.

And while I'd like a Prius or something like it for the times I just drive around town by myself (it would save gas) it simply isn't worth having an extra vehicle with the thousands it would cost plus the added insurance and license fees just to save a few hundred on gas per year.

A friend of mine has a Prius and likes it, but also has a minivan for longer travel with kids. So she really isn't saving either money or the environment. She may save a bit on gasoline, but there's all the greenhouse gases that were used in manufacturing that extra vehicle that would have been saved if she had just one car.

[frazzledspice]

Kathy, when I was flying down to a family wedding in September, I read an article about the Saturn Vue. They have smaller size hybrid SUV's that are reasonably priced (I believe about $20,000.)

I filed it away in my head for future use. After years of driving minivans, I bought a mid-size car to celebrate my freedom from soccer-mom-dom, but sometimes my hubby and I do miss having a car with more storage space....

Well, when we arrived in Florida, we saw that my brother-in-law and sister-in-law had both purchased his and hers Saturn Vues. We took a ride in my BIL's, and I think it's a good compromise vehicle.

They didn't have hybrids, but that's what we'd consider...

[wivabef]

I used to love my 1987 Subaru wagon when I lived in NH. Lots of space in the rear, able to seat 5 and four wheel drive on demand.

I don't need that here in Maryland (where it's better to just stay inside when it snows as there are too many who don't know how to drive on the road in bad conditions).

There are certainly some people who need bigger vehicles. There are times I would love a mini van for the extra seats.

But I would never consider that just because a car is small it is less safe. Nor would I consider that just because a vehicle is large it is safe. There are too many factors to consider.

[cristina1]

As they say, size does not matter. It holds true in crash tests, too.

[pippadaisy[$]]

Wait... there are extra seats in a minivan???