Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 358 posts

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#271

Post by Tanoc »

crote wrote: post #252
saltcured wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cars in the 80s and 90s definitely had more of a "greenhouse" feel to them, with mostly transparent glass and small framing. Due to a mixture of standards, this has changed. The roof cap and pillars have thickened and curved for roll-over protection, and front pillars are also thicker to hold air bags that didn't exist in those older cars. The windows sills are higher up relative to the driver, to improve side-impact…

> Due to a mixture of standards, this has changed. The roof cap and pillars have thickened and curved for roll-over protection, and front pillars are also thicker to hold air bags that didn't exist in those older cars. The windows sills are higher up relative to the driver, to improve side-impact protection. I've heard this argument before, but I'm simply not buying it. Cars like the Honda Civic or Volkswagen Golf ha…

Well... There are a few regulations I know exactly that contributed to this. One was the roof crush rollover standard. I believe it was passed in 2007 and stated that any vehicle must be able to hold up it's entire weight upon it's roof in the even of rolling over and being upside down. The other was the front small overlap test, which hit the vehicle directly in line with one of the front wheels. This shunted the wheel and suspension directly back against the firewall, often completely collapsing the A-pillar. In response A-pillars were thickened and given a much more convex shape at the bottom. Aerodynamics also meant that the windshields are also raked further back. Beyond a specific angle an acute triangle begins to weaken, and the acute angles of many A-pillars and C/D-pillars are well beyond that weakening point, necessitating complex inner structures that one again make them thicker. Since 1996 the IIHS and EuroNCAP have also become more and more stringent with the rear passenger side impact intrusion test, designed to protect children in the event of a side-on collision. One of the unintended consequences of this test was the head restriction height for seats, where cars with higher shoulders (the bottom edge of the greenhouse) in the rear did better in preventing a child's head from escaping the vehicle than cars with even shoulders. This is why only very tall cars seem to have flat shoulders and why small vehicles such as the Mazda3 look like someone canted the entire car forward fifteen degrees.

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#272

Post by Tanoc »

gibbitz wrote: post #224
epage wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With my previous car, I never remember having visibility issues. I then got a 2013. The pillars aie ierfect pedestian blockerr, especially when making turns. I don't see how me doing better in a roll over is better than me running someone over.

I've noticed this in the cars I've had over the past 15 years or so too. We hit a deer two years ago because it was moving perfectly in time with the side curtain airbag laden support column in my field of view. I barely saw it when I hit it even! I understand that rillover accidents have lead to these supports being thicker, but why was the solution not to lower the center of gravity on cars so they are less prone t…

Because changing the center of gravity is an expensive engineering solution. Crossovers came about as a loophole to CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) regulations, as CUVs are considered "light trucks" and are thus tested differently than pedestrian passenger vehicles. Since CUVs had to adhere to that "light truck" designation before the EPA just gave up and let them do whatever, often times that meant they had to have SUV like features such as taller bodies, higher ride heights, and thicker unibodies to enable towing. Lifting an existing sedan platform and creating a subframe for the rear was cheaper than engineering an entirely new platform with a lower center of gravity, and thus that's what they've been doing since 1999. Even as sedans drop like flies leaving only CUVs, SUVs, and trucks, they still engineer them as if they were just adding ride height to a sedan.

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#273

Post by okdood64 »

cyckl wrote: post #241
tasty_freeze wrote: post #55

There is another angle here besides the immediate impact (pun intended) of getting hit by a big truck. I'm nearly 60, but I can remember what it was like learning to drive back in 1980. Before SUVs and huge pickup trucks became common, and before tinting windows to near opacity became a thing, it was possible to see road conditions three cars ahead -- you simply looked through the windows of the car or cars in front…

This is one of the reasons I daily drive a 1990 BMW 325i—the visibility is just unparalleled.

Even with the increase visibility, I'm sure you'd be much safer in a 2020 BMW 3-series. Heck even a 2010.

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#274

Post by HeatrayEnjoyer »

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #163
HeatrayEnjoyer wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully it would have an effect. 95% of the people in these giant walls of steel have no reason to be driving them.

I see. And how have you determined that?

My eyeballs, for one.

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#275

Post by watwut »

sokoloff wrote: post #178
olyjohn wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seating height doesn't help you see over cars when everybody else is also in a crossover at the same height as you.

As compared to a lower car, it absolutely helps. (I used to drive a lowered Alfa Romeo Spider. Sometimes I could see traffic better underneath the lifted trucks in front of me...) I can't control what cars other people buy and drive. I can control what I buy and drive.

Which is why suggested regulation that would control what cars other people buy and drive.

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#276

Post by steve_gh »

crote wrote: post #258
rhuru wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common sense is the first casualty when any topic has political bias to it. This comment demonstrates that. Large vehicles are important part of American economy and mostly driven by blue collar workers doing their work. For example things like plumbing, construction site work etc. Now a days environment scientists and engineers too drive these large vehicles as they are very important for their day to day work. Not…

> Large vehicles are important part of American economy and mostly driven by blue collar workers doing their work. For example things like plumbing, construction site work etc. The problem is that this argument is demonstrably not true . Trucks vastly outnumber blue collar workers, and most blue collar workers would be better served by a Volkswagen Transporter or a Mercedes-Benz Sprinter. You're not seeing those in t…

So in my professional life I work optimising operations for large fleets of maintenance workers.

The UK Zero Emission Vehicle Mandate (ZEVM) is setting annual targets for the sale of new EVs in the UK, including vans. The govt stick is large penalties against motor manufacturers for non compliance. Fleet operators are beginning to come under pressure because they can't buy new ICE vans as they are not being made, forcing a transition to EVs.

This is an issue, because the traditional work van (Ford Transit or similar) has about a 150KwHr battery. So you can't do a full recharge on a 1 Phase 7Kw charger in less than 20hrs. And most of these vans have sat outside the drivers house at night so they can go straight yo the first job in the morning.

At the moment the answer looks like data science (but hey I'm a data scientist). With better data on root caused of problems, and on what equipment is actually where, we are able to get much better at knowing what the right tools and parts are for each job. And that enables the vans to carry less stock, which in turn enables us to reduce the van size down to something more like a Berlingo, which has a smaller battery and can be charged overnight on a household EV charger.

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#277

Post by steve_gh »

drewcoo wrote: post #74
KennyBlanken wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time I see someone behind the wheel of the absolute largest SUV a company offers, it's a small woman. Even as far back when SUVs first became a thing, I noticed that the smallest moms at school at the biggest SUVs. They love the "might" that a huge vehicle gives them.

> Every time I see someone behind the wheel of the absolute largest SUV a company offers, it's a small woman With tiny dogs. Maybe they're the preferred vehicle of tiny dogs.

In the UK we call these "Chelsea tractors".

9lIe a large vehicle more suited to offload conditions being driven short distances round highly affluent areas by people who wouldn't know the countryside if it bit them on the arsenal.

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#278

Post by closewith »

olyjohn wrote: post #135
closewith wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ease of entry alone, especially for the elderly or with young children, is an incredible advantage. What it sounds like is that crossovers don't offer advantages that appeal to you.

My grandma has a minivan. It's way better than a crossover for ease of getting into. The floor height is nice and low so she doesn't have to step way up into it. The roof height is high so she doesn't have to scrunch in. It's easier to strap in car seats, it's easier to load your kids into. It's not a marketing joke like crossovers are. What it sounds like, is that you didn't actually shop very hard for the right veh…

Minivans, at least in my market, are more or less double the price of crossovers, so they're not like-for-like.

You're very dismissive in your comments here. I wonder if some self reflection is in order here.

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#279

Post by tomaskafka »

Nifty3929 wrote: post #217
tomaskafka wrote: post #208

It seems that no one has yet posted the famous article linking SUVs to immaturity and low self esteem, so here we go. > Car companies managed this remarkable feat because they ran—and continue to run—quite possibly the most sophisticated marketing operations on the planet. They knew what people really wanted: to project an image of selfish superiority. And then they sold it to them at a markup > Who has been buying S…

Judgement and condescension are unlikely to change minds or behavior, or add anything else of value. It will only make people wonder who really has an issue with immaturity and low self esteem.

Those words are the characteristics that the actual SUV marketers see in their data and user behavior :).

Re: Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

#280

Post by axpy »

filoleg wrote: post #150
matsemann wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every year, loads of kids die because a family member runs over them by accident in the driveway, a parking lot etc. With these huge cars, you don't properly see around them, and 360 cameras and sensors will not make up for all of that. So yeah, "safety".

A lot of those car manufacturers just don’t care, and it isn’t exclusive to large cars either (though the damage they can do is obviously much higher, making them more dangerous to pedestrians). I like sports cars, so I tried test driving a Camaro about 5 years ago. You would think that visibility on a rather small and fast 2-seater would be at least better than on an average SUV. It was singularly the worst car I’ve…

A Camaro is not a small 2 seater by any means, it’s a rather big muscle car. If you want to experience what a small 2 seater feels like, try a Miata or a Cayman. Those 2 have outstanding visibility. Many sports car have bad visibility due to the mid engine blocking the rearview.
Post reply on HN