Higher vehicle hoods significantly increase pedestrian deaths, study finds

Post by alan-hn » Wed, Jan 24, 2024, 1:16 PM UTC

twoWhlsGud wrote: post #215

mrguyorama wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consumers just prefer larger vehicles here in the US, and those same preferences are also becoming the norm in other countries. You can't blame the modern Camry being gigantic on the Chicken Tax. You can't blame larger vehicles being associated with luxury on efficiency regulations.

Consumers prefer a vehicle that looks like it'll keep them and their family alive on the streets as given - if some other persons kid ends up dead as a result of their choice - well "whateves". Make the streets less dangerous and they might prefer something cheaper and as a side bonus less deadly to their neighbors.

Post by AlgorithmicTime » Wed, Jan 24, 2024, 1:31 PM UTC

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…

Post by alan-hn » Wed, Jan 24, 2024, 1:36 PM UTC

shiroiuma wrote: post #249

filoleg wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I got to ride as passenger in someone's new Camaro at about that time, and I fully agree: the visibility was absolutely horrendous. I couldn't believe it. How is such a vehicle legal to drive? Does the US not have any kind of auto regulations governing visibility at all?

Post by bombcar » Wed, Jan 24, 2024, 2:07 PM UTC

Shocka1 wrote: post #296

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…

I've noticed this too and this is why I leave at least 5 car lengths in front of me, sometimes even more. I can see around the vehicle in front of me no problem, and can absorb the energy for those rush hour random stops. It seems like 9 out of 10 people follow with less than 3 car lengths, even at 60 to 80mph. This leaves no room for error and anecdotally I've seen it bite people many times. The 5+ car length strate…

Post by bombcar » Wed, Jan 24, 2024, 2:13 PM UTC

manwe150 wrote: post #266

gibbitz wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

FWIW that phenomenon is a geometry thing, not just a fluke. If you are on a collision course with an obstacle at constant speed, than the angle remains constant (as the configuration preserves congruent triangles until impact) and the obstacle can easily remain invisible for a long time, until impact, hiding behind the pillars or even just hidden by the blind spot in your eye if you haven’t moved your head