Car bonnet heights

A pedestrian was killed and a couple of others injured local to me a couple of years ago by a car mounting the pavement on a high street.

The offending vehicle was a Fiat 500.

As a reminder to many on this thread.

Physics exists. The energy of a moving vehicle is a function of its mass and speed.

The force at the impact point is a function of the pressure and the impact area.

Standing on an upside down plug hurts from than one the right way up becayse your same weight gets pushed into a small area. Standing on an upside down plus hurts a child less than an adult because there’s less weight.

The SUVs bad for other party in an accident thing is bad science. Poor driving is. Insufficient attention from drivers and pedestrian is. When they were the heaviest cars on the road it may have been a factor. These days most small electrics are heavier than standard ic suvs. And interestingly still have the same tyre specs as ic Cars despute a lot more weight.

It would also have been worse if it was a Nissan leaf.

50% more more momentum carries into the impact.

The size matters in some accidents, for example in a side impact where a high bonnet could make contact with your upper torso/head but unlikely to make much difference in a rear impact, the weight is much more important. Obviously a Duster is built on a Clio platform so is actually quite a small car, it’s around 6/7” taller than a Clio so not much in it. I’d take a rear impact from a Duster over a 5 series every single day of the week. (I use a 5 series example as it’s a sensible sized family saloon).

Turn it upside down - how many of these journeys aren't actually required?
Yet some more nonsense, it's nothing to do with the size of the car - how many people are run over by a huge lorry? It's the driver, a car is dangerous what ever the size.
Ban people walking looking at their phones, ban hand's free in cars, all cars should be in slience (I've had more near misses with both children fighting in the back!)
Nonsense, take responsibility for your own actions, some people are stupid and unfortunately we are not allowed to ban stupid.

I drove a Clio at the time. The size of the other car absolutely does matter in an accident. And yes fully aware the damage would have been even worse if the idiot who hit me had been driving a Range Rover.

Doesn’t really matter, it’s the energy involved in the collision that’s important, especially given the Duster is pretty low. You’d have come off worse if a heavier car hit you, like a 5 series or something. You’d have a point if it was a full size Range Rover.

What car were you in?

Round mine, the SUV's speed, it can be clear when look, still clear on double check, and then one comes flying round the corner. Sometimes yes it's the pedestrians fault, sometimes it's the drivers fault, sometimes it's no ones fault, but accidents do and will continue to happen, all that we can do is do as much as possible to ensure that when they do, the results are less rather than more harmful.
And it's not just about the weight, as in OP"'s post, it's also about the height.

Or just taking responsibility and don't walking out in front of cars.

You realise a standard EV weigh the same or more than an SUV . .

Is a land-rover Discovery an SUV?

Is a Kia Xceed the same?

What about a Dacia Duster?

Where do you draw the line at what you consider an SUV?

So hardly any pedestrians then 🙄

As for cost . . Its some paint, a few lights and couple of steel poles.

The Welsh government just spent 32 million putting up 20mph signs. Money isn't an issue.

A majority of cars on our primary school drop off are large SUVs - range rovers etc. they also all park as close as humanely (and some illegally) possible to the school including on junctions which means those who are walking have to go into the middle of the road to see before crossing. I drive to school too as we live too far to walk, but I park further away (and drive an estate)

Pp mentioned a ford Kuga, I guess they are SUVs but they aren't huge. There seems to be a sort of standard smallish SUV then then huge ones with big boxy flat fronts.

The Duster is still an SUV. And was much bigger than my car was. My car was a normal, sensibly sized family car.

I don't think you can get rid of them, some people need them for work, or due to a disability etc.

But where the risks are higher, the controls should be tighter. Just like medications, all come with some level of risk, but some more so than others. That doesn't mean we ban all medications, but that the riskier ones are controlled nore carefully in who can have them.

Having to have an advanced driving test, no points on license, having to have had a licence for a certain number of years before getting an SUV could all be options.

Absolutely agree, especially after seeing and SUV write off my car, took corner badly and hit side of my car on drivers side, luckily they hot it at the side bonnet, any further back they would have seriously hurt me or my daughter, who had just got into car and waiting to drive off. They weren't even going that fast, I would estimate max 20mph, and if they can write off a car at that lowish speed, then imagine the harm when they hit a person directly.

Due to them being higher risk, it should be mandatory for them to take an advanced driving test to prove they can handle them - so many seem to struggle to drive and to park them within a space. Like a bus or lorry has to take a specialist test as there is a higher risk when driving a bus/lorry, there should be an extra test for cars over a certain size.

Of course. The point I was making is that there’s no misconception about having to give way to pedestrians waiting to cross, there’s obviously no such requirement. I certainly don’t condone that, at the very least it’s downright discourteous.

Shade17

Should can be equated to must,in reality. You need to be observant and ready to stop, if people are near the crossing zone. If you don't on a test, you will fail. If you knock someone over on a zebra, 99% you will be prosecuted.

In reality most drivers will stop if they see you waiting. I know the law about having to step out before having right of way but not many pedestrians will just step out assuming a driver will stop. It is similar to drivers legally having to give way to pedestrians when turning into a side road, in reality most drivers will carry on and most pedestrians will expect it.

I'm not victim blaming, most accidents are the drivers fault, or just an accident. We can't ban the car.

But, what else do you get rid of? Fast food, alcohol? vapes? If you are sensible whilst being a pedestrian, you will probably be ok.
If you are sensible whilst driving you will probably be ok
It's not 'you' who is the problem its the thousands of other drivers

If road deaths were a virus, we'd call it a pandemic. Stop victim blaming. Motor vehicles are the problem, not the pedestrian

It’s not a misconception, it’s the actual law. Show me where a driver is legally obliged to stop for pedestrians waiting at a crossing. A driver is only obliged to stop for pedestrians already on the crossing. Note the word should in the HC and not must.

So fashion then, they are also easier to get in and out off.

And if you want a laugh, if you define what is or isn't a SUV, higher than average car, boxy style then a Model T becomes an SUV. As does anything from before about the 1950s.
When the fashion changed to lower sleeker cars.

All vehicles are inherently unsafe. Once you get rid of those with high bonnets, what is next?

Do you keep banning until there are none left?

Completely agree, we are sensible enough to know when to cross the road. The vast majority of accidents are that, accidents - no amount of legislation or changing how cars are designed will change this.
Be sensible when crossing the road, don't play chicken whilst attempting to cross dual carriageways, and teach your children the green cross code.
Simple - take responsibility for your own actions and stop blaming other things!

Good luck passing a driving test with that misconception.