Engineers Design Safer SUV

vex24 writes "Engineers from the Union of Concerned Scientists have unveiled blueprints for a "safer, more fuel efficient" SUV using "off-the-shelf technology". Looks like good stuff if the big automakers decide to pay attention."

Comments

Safer? For whom?

[GuyMannDude]

Engineers from the Union of Concerned Scientists have unveiled blueprints for a "safer, more fuel efficient" SUV using "off-the-shelf technology".

I didn't RTFA but I'm going to take a wild guess here that "safer" refers to improving the protection to the driver and not minimizing the damage/destruction/injury/death done to the poor, hapless soul who gets rammed by one of these overpowered vehicles when driven by a soccer-mom or yuppie chattering away on their cell phone.

GMD

Re:Safer? For whom?

[setzman]

The article mentions safety features to protect not only the driver of the SUV, but other drivers as well (lower bumpers). It does not minimize the threat of a moron behind the wheel on their cell phone, which often happens in smaller vehicles as well. Today, had I assumed that a young female yapping on her cell phone and reaching for something across the car was going to stop and let me walk across the street (as required by drivers on campus), I would have been run down and unable to post this.

SUVs and Fuel Efficency

[Henry V .009]

"Concept-form only" means that we have no idea how safe this vehicle will actually be. SUVs are already safer than most vehicles. The rollover danger you hear about only make up a small fraction of accidents, and can be avoided by safe driving practices.

The Government should not be making decisions about which vehicles consumers can choose to drive. Politicians get sidetracked about actual safety of vehicles because environmentalists spread misinformation about safety. This sort of thing kills people. If you would like the US to start using less fossil fuels, the price of gas will have to go up. This can be done with a tax. It will also happen inevitably when world oil supplies start to run out. It is possible that we have already hit world peak oil production in 2000. Like, that's all, folks.

Re:SUVs and Fuel Efficency

[Anonymous Coward]

Rollovers are a small fraction of accidents, but they are also one of the most likely to kill or injure the driver and passengers in the car, truck, or SUV.

"Although rollover crashes are rare as a type of crash, the death toll from these crashes accounts for a third of all highway motor vehicle deaths, and is sixty percent of the deaths in SUVs." - From Public Citizen's SUV Safety Page

Here is some more information about SUV's and Rollovers.

Obviously, Public Citizen has an agenda, just like most anything you'll read about SUV's and safety. But failure to understand the safety of the vehicle you drive is one of the things that kills people.

--A SAAB Driver

Re:SUVs and Fuel Efficency

[skookum]

SUVs are already safer than most vehicles

What part of "triple the fatality rate for rollovers", "poorer handling", and "longer stopping distance" did you not understand? SUVs are not safer than most vehicles, that's the whole point of all this madness.

Re:SUVs and Fuel Efficency

[RedWizzard]

SUVs are already safer than most vehicles.

Maybe for the SUV occupants, and even then it's debatable. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that they have higher single car accident rates (with more severe results), and are less safe than cars in accidents involving other large vehicles. They are safer in an accident with a car, but only at the cost of a vasting increased danger to occupants of the other vehicle.

Re:They've already made this product

[mellon]

This new design has pretty good features both for rollover protection and for protecting passengers in other cars on the road. You do know that most SUV deaths are passengers of SUVs, not the people they hit. SUVs are unfortunately quite dangerous vehicles to drive.

Some of the major improvements - unibody design, with crumple zones. Lower bumper, which makes rollovers less likely since it will hit the bumper of the other car, not go over the other car. Better roll cage, so when it does roll the passengers are protected. Better seat belts. Lots of good stuff. You should really read the article before commenting on it...

Re:They've already made this product

[tessaiga]

You do know that most SUV deaths are passengers of SUVs, not the people they hit.

I disagree, there are plenty of studies out there showing that two-vehicle collisions involving SUVs and regular cars have a higher fatality rate for the people in the cars compared to car-vs-car collisions. Shouldn't be surprising; the US Fatality Analysis Report explains this by pointing out the obvious fact that "People in lighter vehicles are at a disadvantage in collisions with heavier vehicles."

Running a quick check on the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (HTML version here) shows that in multiple-vehicle accidents, cars had a 0.047% fatality rate, versus 0.021% (less than half!) for SUVs. Unfortunately the report doesn't track the class of the "other" cars in any given collision, but I suspect that in SUV-vs.-passenger car collisions, the statistics get even worse for the cars.

One other minor quibble:

Lower bumper, which makes rollovers less likely since it will hit the bumper of the other car, not go over the other car.

From the article:

The Guardian comes with a unibody steel frame, a stronger, crumple-resistant roof, seat belts that cinch automatically in a rollover, lower bumpers to protect other drivers in a crash, and a seat-belt reminder that emits a noise until all passengers are belted.

The lower bumpers are to protect other cars ... SUVs have a nasty tendency to ride over other cars in a collision and squish them. (A friend of mine had half his Japanese import squashed in a collision with an SUV.) Rollovers are typically single-vehicle accidents, caused by cornering too fast. SUVs are notorious for having their center of gravity too high.

Re:Exactly...

[lymond01]

"People want them."

The point of this research is that people can HAVE them, basically the exact same car, exact same functionality...but it'll be safer and more fuel efficient, cost a hair more, and can be done RIGHT NOW with today's technologies.

Why isn't it being done? Million dollar question right there.