Unfortunately, in the car size arms race, bigger and heavier cars are safer for their occupants. "Everyone outside the car be damned" is the expressed preference of US buyers.
I don't think the US consumers are buying the bigger SUV/trucks because they are safer. At best it might be a minor contributing factor. It's primarily a status/identity thing.
The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
41–50 of 816 posts
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#42These are gender-affirming vehicles for a large number of men. Taking them away is a direct attack on their masculinity. When we say, "Men are under attack," it refers to things like this. Regardless of any safety claims, for that reason alone, I don't see it as a politically viable issue.
> These are gender-affirming vehicles for a large number of men. I think people simply do find SUVs (which I don't like) convenient. Many women, including a huge number of moms, do happen to just love SUVs. Both in the US and in the EU. In the EU SUVs are now approaching 60% of all cars sold (59.25% or so, latest numbers). You don't get such a market share by being mostly cars sold to men needing to "gender-affirm".
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm excited that EVs get to avoid CAFE standards, so we get to have small vehicles again. Even though legacy domestic car manufacturers aren't going to be involved, as they practically wrote the CAFE standards that eliminated small vehicles, and there's bipartisan support to tariff EV imports out of existence, there's still enough market demand for multiple domestic startups.
Unfortunately, we still get abominations like the GMC Hummer EV (~9000 lbs, classified as a class 3 medium duty truck). Rumor has it the model has been cancelled after 2026 luckily. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/11/driving-the-biggest-lea... https://www.torquenews.com/17998/i-leased-hummer-ev-because-...
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> These are gender-affirming vehicles for a large number of men. I think people simply do find SUVs (which I don't like) convenient. Many women, including a huge number of moms, do happen to just love SUVs. Both in the US and in the EU. In the EU SUVs are now approaching 60% of all cars sold (59.25% or so, latest numbers). You don't get such a market share by being mostly cars sold to men needing to "gender-affirm".
What are the benefits of an SUV over a minivan though? They seem objectively worse in practically all regards: worse fuel efficiency, worse doors, less cargo space, worse visibility.
They more or less have the capabilities of a small pickup truck, but exchange the bed for more passenger space and inside cargo room. A minivan does have more space, but cannot tow and would immediately get stuck in the first mud patch it sees.
I have no idea why people in the city buy them though (other than snowy regions).
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, we still get abominations like the GMC Hummer EV (~9000 lbs, classified as a class 3 medium duty truck). Rumor has it the model has been cancelled after 2026 luckily. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/11/driving-the-biggest-lea... https://www.torquenews.com/17998/i-leased-hummer-ev-because-...
As long as I get to buy a small vehicle, I don't mind if someone else buys something inefficient. It's better that oversized EVs be on the market than just oversized diesel trucks.
Heavy Toll: America's Huge, Heavy Cars Are Killing More People - https://www.motortrend.com/features/why-americas-roads-keep-... - September 24th, 2024
> More than 40,000 people die on America’s roads every year, making them nearly twice as dangerous per mile driven than those in other rich nations. What’s more, the death rate has increased over the past decade, despite the adoption of more sophisticated passive safety systems and advanced driver assistance systems such as lane keep assist and automatic braking. The number of pedestrians killed by motor vehicles has almost doubled since 2010. Why? “Weight is to blame,” The Economist insists.
> Using data for 7.5 million two-vehicle crashes in 14 American states in 2013–2023, The Economist found that for every 10,000 crashes the heaviest vehicles killed 37 people in the other car, compared with 5.7 for cars of a median weight and just 2.6 for the lightest. The publication estimates that if the heaviest 10 percent of vehicles on America’s roads were roughly 1,000 pounds lighter, fatalities in multicar crashes would fall by 12 percent, saving 2,300 lives a year, without compromising the safety of the occupants of the heavier vehicles.
> “For every life the heaviest one percent of SUVs or trucks saves in America,” The Economist wrote, “more than a dozen lives are lost in smaller vehicles. This makes traffic jams an ethics class on wheels.”
> Of course, what’s behind those grim statistics is simple physics. Force equals mass times acceleration: The heavier a vehicle, the harder it impacts an object at any given speed. The core issue in America is the massive differential between the lightest and heaviest vehicles on its roads (and to be clear, The Economist’s reporting is focused on cars, SUVs, and light-duty trucks, not heavy-duty commercial trucks or semis).
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#46These are gender-affirming vehicles for a large number of men. Taking them away is a direct attack on their masculinity. When we say, "Men are under attack," it refers to things like this. Regardless of any safety claims, for that reason alone, I don't see it as a politically viable issue.
> These are gender-affirming vehicles for a large number of men. I think people simply do find SUVs (which I don't like) convenient. Many women, including a huge number of moms, do happen to just love SUVs. Both in the US and in the EU. In the EU SUVs are now approaching 60% of all cars sold (59.25% or so, latest numbers). You don't get such a market share by being mostly cars sold to men needing to "gender-affirm".
Watch a US truck commercial. The market and the motivating themes are immediately obvious. Besides, drivers literally adorn trucks with prosthetic testicles. That's something that cannot be unseen.
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
> These are gender-affirming vehicles for a large number of men. I think people simply do find SUVs (which I don't like) convenient. Many women, including a huge number of moms, do happen to just love SUVs. Both in the US and in the EU. In the EU SUVs are now approaching 60% of all cars sold (59.25% or so, latest numbers). You don't get such a market share by being mostly cars sold to men needing to "gender-affirm".
"SUV" is too broad a category. A RAV4 is an SUV. It's similarly sized to most of the SUVs I've seen in Europe. And a pedestrian getting hit by one would have a similar experience to getting hit by a sedan. It's nothing like the big Rams, GMCs or F250s with the high front grilles that are becoming more popular while also being far deadlier to pedestrians.
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#48These are gender-affirming vehicles for a large number of men. Taking them away is a direct attack on their masculinity. When we say, "Men are under attack," it refers to things like this. Regardless of any safety claims, for that reason alone, I don't see it as a politically viable issue.
I don't think it's politically impossible. These things are killing children (among many other people). "Giant trucks and SUVs are killing children" seems like a pretty powerful line.
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
>auto braking The thing literally starts braking before my brain can process whats happening.
And finishes long after a similarly-equipped lighter vehicle would.
My vehicle is as safe or safer than older lighter vehicles currently permitted on the road.
Why should the goalposts run off into the distance? Surely I have now met the common definition of "safe". At what point is it enough? This just brings back to Jealousy or some kind of Tall Poppy syndrome again.
Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
And finishes long after a similarly-equipped lighter vehicle would.
Ok and? My vehicle is as safe or safer than older lighter vehicles currently permitted on the road. Why should the goalposts run off into the distance? Surely I have now met the common definition of "safe". At what point is it enough? This just brings back to Jealousy or some kind of Tall Poppy syndrome again.
But, as you're in Australia, I'm not sure your definition of "large" matches the story's or mine. North America has a whole class of huge ass vehicles that are relatively rare elsewhere in the world. Are you driving an Escalade, F-150, or similar?