rgr22j

I agree completely. One thing that would have been helpful is if they plotted the data for only two-car collisions, separated by weight and by vehicle class. If weight were the dominating factor, we would see a nice, fairly linear correlation between fatality rate and weight. If it were linear enough, class of vehicle would not even be necessary.

Obviously there is some correlation between class of vehicle and weight. However, if we posit that a large sized car weight approximately as much as a mid-size SUV, we can already see that the correlation between weight and "safety" (as determined by number of fatalities) is not a strong one. In fact, as I remember, all things considered one is 6% more likely to die in an SUV than in a car. The unsettling conclusion is that this number will probably rise, as SUVs as a whole are generally newer (and held to higher safety standards) than the aggregate of cars. Worse, according to driver statistics SUVs are primarily driven by the safest drivers: married, male, and middle-aged.

As an aside, one of the most dangerous drivers is not necessarily a single, female, college-aged driver (though from personal experience it may seem like it), but actually young male drivers. Youth trumps all it seems. But the really interesting data point is that for young male drivers, the lighter the car (to a point), the lower the accident rate. It seems that young males driving Metros are more aware of the relative danger they face and adjust driving behavior accordingly, moreso than young males driving SUVs or sports cars.

But, in good fun, if you'd like to tweak your local campus feminist, one last interesting piece of data is that if you hold miles driven constant (males drive most of the miles in the USA), women are 33% more likely to be in a two-car traffic accident and 17% more likely to be involved in damage to property. However, as a disclaimer, I do not hold any responsibility to damage done to your person (even if, amusingly, done by automobile) if you use this fact. As a secondary disclaimer, in general, the safest female drivers (married, middle-aged, with children) drive a far smaller percentage of total miles driven by women than the safest male drives do of men. Statistically, if populations were held constant, I have a strong feeling that women are just as safe drivers as men. It's just that more of the dangerous women drivers are out there compared to men. As a final disclaimer, in general, you are still more likely to be hit by a man (or have your property damaged by a male driver), because in general men drive much more of the miles in the States than do women. Whew. I hope I've sufficiently put out enough disclaimers to disprove any accusations of chauvinism! I don't think women are worse drivers than men, but I have to admit that quite a bit of fun can be had occasionally tweaking the radical campus feminist.

It's not only safer in collisions with other vehicles, but collisions with stationary objects. Having a 7700 pound Escalade is probably overdoing it if you're worried about hitting a tree or guardrail at a reasonable speed, but I, for one, would hesitate in buying a 2000 pound Metro, even if everyone else were. I am not an arrogant enough driver to assume that I will never hit anything on my own accord, no matter the circumstances. Thankfully I have not hit anything yet, but I wouldn't lay any money out saying I won't. If I were a betting man, I would bet on the next woman I see over me on who is the better driver.

We have to remember that the amount of energy imparted from the offending car into yours is proportional to mass (which is proportional to weight), and proportional to the square of velocity. So a car traveling twice as fast and weighing the same will contribute twice as much energy into the collision as an SUV traveling the same speed but weighing twice as much.

This does not mean that, in an imminent collision, speed up, to swing the equation further in your favor (as that simply adds more energy into the mix). Instead, if you assume you are not the one at fault, the speed and mass of the other vehicle is beyond your control. More, if you are the one being hit, most likely you don't have much time to reduce your speed. Thus the only variable in your control is the weight of the vehicle: roughly speaking, the more mass to absorb the energy between you and the leading edge of the force being projected into your vehicle, the safer you will be. It works for both sides: we can replace metal relatively cheaply; lives are irreplaceable.

The problem is that, being higher, an SUV crashing into your vehicle is less likely to hit something big and energy-absorbing, like your engine. A bumper isn't necessarily going to be enough to do the job. The fundamental problem is crash incompatability.

-- Alvin

PS: Prince: I'm positive you meant it as an abbreviation; it was completely obvious while reading your post. You mentioned you moved here from Europe, so I didn't think you were aware. Just didn't want you to be accused of being a racist when clearly you are not!