Strange cars coming in '11...

[Richard L]

Hugh,

Again you are talking accelerating to highway speeds 0-60 or even 80 mph, and I'm talking about zipping around town at speeds 40 mph and under. The 0-30 acceleration would not be tha much different, but the ability to manuver through traffic would be significant...and that's where the fun comes in driving a little car like that.



As Gary S explained, acceleration onto a highway is usually not an issue even for a car with a 0-60 time of 11 seconds. You do not enter the highway from a dead stop so you are probably doing at least 40mph when you start onto the acceleration ramp. it's all a matter of timing where you merge into traffic and get to a speed either faster or slower so you can slip into the chosen opening. People have been doing it for years a lot of small cars with even slower acceleration times.



...Rich

 

[gary s]

10 scion xb: 0-60 in 7.9 seconds

09 toyota 4runner: 0-60 in 7.1 seconds



as the accel numbers you posted, these numbers have nothing to due w/safety.:banghead:

 

[Richard L]

Hugh,

Again, gary s. hit the nail on the head. Acceleration times have nothing to do with safety. I don't think accelerating to 80 mph on a freeway entry ramp is what normal people consider as safe driving....perhaps that's why you think it's necessary to drive a tank. The most unsafe thing about any vehicle is the NUT BEHIND THE WHEEL.



...Rich

 

[H D]

i never experienced a problem merging with a scion or even a focus onto the hwy.

You never had to accelerate into a row of 18 wheelers doing 70? They don't slow down easily and they don't appreciate people slowly merging in front of them. You can either speed up to get in front of one, or slow down and try to speed up again to get in front of the next one. The Focus does not like doing the former; it can't do the latter. It is dangerous either way. Your third option is to pull over on the ramp and wait for traffic to clear (which it never does in Atlanta) and get that rubber band on the engine twisting at full speed to go from 0-60 before the next wave of traffic.

90HP in a little Scion iQ would give you far better acceleration and stopping than a lifted Tahoe

I only posted those numbers as facts to counter your incorrect statement.

I don't think accelerating to 80 mph on a freeway entry ramp is what normal people consider as safe driving....perhaps that's why you think it's necessary to drive a tank. The most unsafe thing about any vehicle is the NUT BEHIND THE WHEEL.

I always drive the speed limit. 5mph over if necessary to merge, but back to the limit ASA(safely)P. I also drive a Sport Trac, not a tank.



Let's just play out a situation. Tomorrow you are going to be in an accident, no way around it. One of the vehicles is going to be an SUV and another is going to be a Scion iQ. If you drive the SUV, you will be in an accident with an iQ; drive the iQ, accident with an SUV. You will be driving an elderly family member when this happens. Do you get into the SUV or do you take the Scion iQ? This scenario is independent of driver skill, attention, road conditions, etc.

 

[Richard L]

Hugh,

You never had to accelerate into a row of 18 wheelers doing 70?

That's just driver patience and driver skill/common sense...I do it almost everyday. I would not want to merge in between two 18 wheelers unless there was sufficient space regardless of how fast the car was.

I only posted those numbers as facts to counter your incorrect statement.

With thouse oversized tires and a lifte vehicle, you may not be getting those acceleration numbers and again, I was talking about in town acceleration, 0-30 or 40 mph. Also those large tires are tasking your brakes and probably not giving you the acceleration and braking that a stock Tahoe would have. Unless you drive the Tahoe off-road, the only purpose for lifting the vehicle and the larger wheels is to intimidate other vehicles. It has no value in city driving.

I always drive the speed limit. 5mph over if necessary to merge, but back to the limit ASA(safely)P. I also drive a Sport Trac, not a tank.

You previously mention the need to accelerate to 80 mph to get on the freeways? I know that Georgia or Atlanta does not have any 80 mph speed limits...so wouldn't 80 mph be exceeding the speed limits by more than 5 mph?

Let's just play out a situation. Tomorrow you are going to be in an accident, no way around it.

Since we cannot pick or our plan our accidents, the scenario is unrealistic, and we cannot determine which vehicle would preform better in a particular situation. While SUV's tend to fair better in an accident with a smaller vehicle, does not mean the they are necessarily safer. In identical situations the smaller vehicle might be about to steer to avoid the collision or even stop faster to reduce the velocity of the impact.



If both vehciles where going to be hit head on at 70 mph by an 18 wheeler, I don't think it would really matter. Without knowing the exact SUV and the crash test results, it cannot be assumed that the SUV is necessarily safter because it is bigger? And we don't have any crash test data on either of the vehicles in this hypothetical crash.



...Rich

 

[H D]

Unless you drive the Tahoe off-road, the only purpose for lifting the vehicle and the larger wheels is to intimidate other vehicles. It has no value in city driving.

We don't live in the city. The lift was done by her brother before he got a Jeep and her mom got her previous 2wd Z71 and she got her brothers 4wd Z71. He did go offroad. She went back to 32s but didn't like the gap in the wheel wells. If the only reason to have a lifted vehicle and larger tires is to intimidate people (since she does not go offroad, but does use Auto 4wd in rain) could I assume that the only reason to have a Scion is to make people believe you are feeble? Just trying to use similar logic.

You previously mention the need to accelerate to 80 mph to get on the freeways? I know that Georgia or Atlanta does not have any 80 mph speed limits...so wouldn't 80 mph be exceeding the speed limits by more than 5 mph?

I was speaking in general and referring to the habits of most city dwellers around Atlanta. The highest speed limit around me is 55. 10 cars in the same mile is a traffic jam here.

the scenario is unrealistic, and we cannot determine which vehicle would preform better in a particular situation.

Yes it is hypothetical, but not impossible except for the knowing part. I guess you find zero value in philosophy? This kind of exercise is how logical decisions are usually made. You must make decisions with imperfect information all the time. Do you avoid every decision that doesn't provide every tidbit of information? I think you would be a very unproductive person and I don't presume that you are. With the given information, which would you choose?

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Regarding Atlanta traffic...



I drive in and around Atlanta all the time, all hours of the day, with ****** econo rental cars. I feel save. Been in gutless Camrys, and Focuses (Focii), and Aveos, etc. You don't have to be going 80 to merge onto 285, 400, etc. Heck, most of the time when it is congested traffic is going at most 55... so has been this out of towner's experience.



Atlanta highways scare a lot of people (especially visitors it seems). I'm not one of them.



There is no road I've ever been on in the states where I thought I had to get up to 80 quickly to be safe(er). Not a single one.



TJR

 

[gary s]

talk about merging into a line of trac-trailers.

how about the cross bronx & mj deegan expwy's.

scion/lifted truck, it doesn't matter.



[Broken External Image]:

 

[H D]

I figured my posts would continue to be examined sentence by sentence without regard for my overarching theme. Can anyone just answer my practice-in-logic scenario? It will require a bit of inconvenient honesty, but everyone here does know how they would answer that question. That answer is my only point. I don't want to argue specifics, crunch numbers, dig up statistics, etc. I just want to know what logic most people would use faced with that situation. I already know what the answer is; everybody here does, but some don't want to admit it.



Logically, you are going to feel safer in a larger vehicle. That is all I'm trying to get across.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Hugh,



Actually, I don't mean to pull apart your words, and if I have done that I apologize.



I will say one thing, however. When it comes to "feelings", as in "feeling safer", logic isn't the word or justification term I would use.



I would agree that: "Emotionally", or "due to common beliefs", people often tend to "feel" saver in larger vehicles.



I say "often", because I don't like to think in black and white, all-encompassing terms. For example, on a narrow mountain pass most would probably feel saver in a smaller, lower to the ground vehicle than a larger, wider, higher vehicle. Likewise, in high winds one might feel safer in a smaller, lower to the ground vehicle than in a lumbering SUV that gets tossed more in the high winds.



Granted, however, when driving down a busy freeway with large vehicles all around many find comfort in a larger sized vehicle. Still, others might rather trade smaller and more nimble in that situation.



So, yes, I agree, larger does equate to safer for many, and in many conditions. Its a "feeling" though, not "logic", IMHO.



TJR

 

[H D]

Since a large number of vehicles on the road are SUVs, I think there is strong correlation between feelings and logic. In my scenario, feeling safer in the SUV against a Scion is pretty logical, IMO. I would feel safer in a Smart car in an European urban area than I would in Houston, Texas. Can that not be acknowledged as logical?

 

[Les]

Hugh, all makes perfect sense to me. Heard on the radio yesterday a guy in a Smart Car lost control, crossed the median into oncoming traffice and was nailed by an SUV. Guess who walked away and who didn't?

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Hugh,



Feelings and logic are often at odds. Logic is unbiased, unemotional, and completely objective. Feelings, on the other hand, are often none of those things.



Logical thinking based on an understanding of physics would dictate that you risk less potential injury in an accident on a crowded European street when driving a smart car and struck by a similar sized car both going at city speeds than the potential injury if you were in that same smart car on an American highway driving at highway speeds and hit by a large SUV.



That is logic.



However, people often "feel" safer in an SUV or a larger vehicle in cases where logic would indicate otherwise.



For example...a larger, heavier vehicle is often less safe on a congested highway when the need for some emergency maneuver is required (dodge some stray road debris, etc). Though the occupant has a feeling of being safer, the reality is that they are not.



That's all I was saying.



Logic prevails when all is known and quantified for. Feeling more often is the deciding factor when all things are not considered...and one is just basing things on "feelings."



TJR

 

[H D]

Logical thinking based on an understanding of physics would dictate that you risk less potential injury in an accident on a crowded European street when driving a smart car and struck by a similar sized car both going at city speeds than the potential injury if you were in that same smart car on an American highway driving at highway speeds and hit by a large SUV.

That is precisely my point. I didn't mean for feeling and logic to get mixed in the process. Poor diction, I guess. Knowing that there are more large vehicles on U.S. streets, you can logically deduce, even with a limited knowledge of physics, that you would be safer in the U.S. if you were driving an SUV.



My assertion holds true, even <b>if only</b> because there are more large vehicles around us.



The opportunities for being involved in an accident with a large vehicle are greater in the U.S. It also outweighs the consequences of not avoiding a hazard in the road, IMO. Let's use the example of a hazard on an interstate. While true that you may more easily avoid the hazard in a smaller car, what if that is not a possibility? What if you have vehicles to either side of you making swerving to miss an impossibility? Now, would you rather go over a tread of tire in a Scion or would you rather be in an SUV? We can sit and come up with all kinds of situations all day where one vehicle would be better suited than another. That's not what I am trying to do. I am trying to get to the idea that overall, you are going to be better protected in a larger vehicle.



Overall, an SUV is more logical in the United States <b>at this point in time</b>. Perhaps 20 years from now we will have more compact vehicles than large ones (which is probably going to be true). At that time, small cars will be a good choice. Consider yourself ahead of the curve if you'd like.

 

[Richard L]

Les,

Would it have made any difference if it was the driver of the SUV who lost control, crossed the median, and hit an 18 wheeler.



Hugh,

People die in accidents every day and they drive both large and small vehicles. And there are all kinds of causes including simply not wearing a seat belt. And there are an endless number of accident scenarios that makes it impossible to determine which vehicle would fair better.



Your scenario about a hypothetical accident and to choose a vehicle is not logical. Nearly all new vehicles are crash tested and rated for passenger compartment intrusion. They are tested against immovable objects head on and corner impacts as well as against side impacts by a moving object. They do not test how a vehicle will fair against larger or smaller vehicles because there are so many other variable like weight, bumper height, etc. A head on crash with a Ford Explorer might results in a completely different outcome that the same head on crash with another vehicle of similar size and weight.



Yes there was a time that larger vehicles provided their drivers with some level of comfort that they were safer in the big vehicle if they were involved in a crash. However, over the years the crash testing has found that larger vehicles may not be as safe as people believe. Many large vehicles have been given poor ratings in crash tests and many smaller vehicles are getting better crash test ratings because the manufacturers know that many people perceive the small cars are less safe than larger vehicles.



In a simple head on collision, the larger vehicle will have more weight and momentum than the smaller vehicle and will typically suffer more damage That's just physics. However the smaller vehicles are getting much more ridgid passenger compartments and with other safety features like 10 air bags, the passengers survivablitly is much better.



You should also notice that as gas prices increase, and manufacturers keep down sizing the SUV's there will be less and less of them on the roads in the coming years and there will be more and more little cars like the Scion.



And in closing, remember that I am talking about driving the little car in the city where 98% of the accidents are minor fender benders at less than 30 mph. Once you get up to speeds over 50 MPH your chances of survival drop dramatically regardless of what size vehicle you are driving.



You cannot assume because there are a lot of SUV's on the road that you will more than likely have an accident with an SUV.



...Rich

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Hugh,



I have a "feeling" I would rather hit a pothole at highway speeds with a Scion than I would a Gen 1 ST with original tires and shocks.



I say that, because I've experienced the latter, and the result was a vehicle that was almost uncontrollable. I have the feeling that most any other vehicle would fair better.



I still disagree with the blanket statement htat SUVs are the more logical vehicle to drive in the US today. From a crash safety standpoint for certain types of crashes, sure, there is an advantage in bigger. But logic alone would indicate that the liklihood of a crash is minimal, and that the liklihood of a crash with a serious injury is even smaller. Furthermore, true logic (boolean logic) would indicate that the only real way to avoid an injury due to an MVA is to simply not drive or ride in a car. But, we won't likely stop driving. The reason: because we are illogical people. There are those that won't fly, or that white-knuckle the entire flight when they do for fear of crashing...yet they are far more likely to get killed in a MVA on the way to or from the airport. Illogical.



Logic isn't the reason for SUV driving, or larger car driving. Nope, the real reason is "feeling."



Drive what you want, what you can afford, what you enjoy. Drive responsibly. Drive with your seatbelt on. Logic would dictate if you do all these things the difference of driving a larger vehicle or a smaller vehicle will likely NEVER be an issue for you.





P.S., Hugh, thanks for keeping this civil, as I am trying to as well. We wouldn't want the powers that be to freeze this thread. LOL!



Seems that when it comes to guns, religion and politics, many here can't speak without getting their virtual panties in a twist.





TJR

 

[H D]

You cannot assume because there are a lot of SUV's on the road that you will more than likely have an accident with an SUV.

I never made that assumption. I do assume that because there are more SUVs on the road in the U.S. than in other countries, your chances of having an accident involving an SUV is increased.

Drive what you want, what you can afford, what you enjoy. Drive responsibly. Drive with your seatbelt on. Logic would dictate if you do all these things the difference of driving a larger vehicle or a smaller vehicle will likely NEVER be an issue for you.

That is exactly what I do. I choose a vehicle for its ability to meet my needs/desires. I want vehicles that meet my budget, look good, and give me pleasure to drive. Safety is of minor concern since I know how to do math. Gas mileage is of no concern since I simply budget what is necessary. My concerns with safety and gas mileage are apparent in my ownership of a Sport Trac and '69 Cougar. I am aware of the rollover risks of the Sport Trac and poor gas mileage. I'm also aware of lack of safety features in a '69 Cougar and the huge thirst for gas it has.



I own a Sport Trac because I want 4 doors, be able to go offroad, throw a deer in the bed, and I like the styling. I own a Cougar because (to me) it looks good, sounds good, feels good and I derive pleasure from driving it. I do not own a compact car because they currently don't fulfill any of my needs/desires.



I would still rather be in an SUV in an accident with another SUV than a small vehicle in an accident with an SUV. Still only one person has admitted that in an accident involving an SUV, they would rather be in another SUV. I actually am amazed by this.



Stop skirting around the point and come out straight and quote this and say that you actually believe what you are asserting:

Should the situation arise that I was in an accident with an SUV, I would rather be in a compact car than an SUV.



Or at least this one:

Should the situation arise that I was in an accident with an SUV, I believe I would have no more risk of injury in a compact car than the driver of the SUV.



No need to compare which SUV or which car, or road conditions, accident circumstances, angles, blah blah blah. Can you simply quote one of these sentences and say you firmly believe it?

Hugh, thanks for keeping this civil, as I am trying to as well. We wouldn't want the powers that be to freeze this thread. LOL!



Seems that when it comes to guns, religion and politics, many here can't speak without getting their virtual panties in a twist.

I don't think I've ever convinced anybody of anything by insulting them. Not that I'm even trying to convince anybody here, I'm really just distracting myself occasionally from a paper I'm writing about public administrators and the moral sense/responsibility.



People listen harder when you speak softer.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Hugh,



I would rather be in an SUV than in a small car, when hitting just about anything, or when being hit by just about anything. I will admit that.



The disconnect that you and I have is that you seem to think that by me admitting that it is also an admission that I would feel safer, in general, in an SUV.



I wouldn't and I don't.



For me, safety is linked pretty much to control. I submit that most people feel safer when they feel they are in control, or in more control.



However, through the years, as I have gotten a little more abstract in my thinking, I have subscribed to the belief that control is an illusion. It is something we think we have, but it really doesn't exist. Control is something we rationalize as having to help us through our day to day lives. Safety, or the feeling of safety is another such illusion.



Control, like safety which control should provide, to me, don't really exist...not in any absolute manner anyways. We think we are safe, but the reality is, anything can happen at any time. Life is fragile, and what keeps things moving on this planet is largely a series of events that are at the largest scale so chaotic that predicting them is rather pointless. At best, there are degrees of safety and degrees of control, but there is never complete safety, nor complete control.



Now, that's not to say that I invite danger. I still look before crossing the street. I still lock my doors. I still use my seatbelt, and I still drive safely and conscientiously.



But am I really "safe", or for that matter that much "safer" in one vehicle versus the other? Statistics based on rates of incident might say I am. But they tend to be information that feeds that rationalization and the illusion, IMHO.



So, though I would rather be in a bigger car in an accident, and I would rather have my seatbelt on rather than off in same, I really don't have any belief that I am really that much safer in one situation versus the other.



TJR

 

[Les]

Would it have made any difference if it was the driver of the SUV who lost control, crossed the median, and hit an 18 wheeler.

Absolutely, and that's the point Hugh is making. Bigger is Better...

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Les,



You answer "absolutely" as if it WOULD make a difference in that specific scenario.



I agree there might be a difference.



There might be a difference in the amount of vehicle disintegration, the extent to which your body is mangled, and the difficulty of extracting your dead carcass from one accident to the other.



But in either case, head-on with an 18-wheeler, smart car or SUV, DEAD is still DEAD. All other differences seem secondary to me, and not that interesting.



And that is my point... There may be SAFER, there may be BETTER, but there is no truly SAFE, and for many situations that people think of (the worst-case scenarios) it really doesn't make that much of a difference in what is important.



TJR