Impact of SUVs in a crash

[MassiveCars]

Recently there was a terrible accident involving a 2 ton car
What stood out was the mention of the weight of the vehicle
So I did a couple of calcs
An SUV of 1972kg doing 30mph has the same Kinetic Energy of a small car of 1221kg doing 38mph
A larger SUV of 2598kg has the same Kinetic Energy of a small car of 1221kg doing 44mph
All these large SUVs doing 30mph create the same damage as a smaller car doing 38mph to 44mph
There must be enough maths & physics teachers on here to check this out
I did think of mentioning the small car and the big car types ?

But large SUVs (=large weight) are a much more serious danger to kids at 30mph than your small cars at 30mph

There is great emphasis on 30mph, perhaps we should enforce slower speeds for heavier vehicles if safety is the objective

I'm not saying in your particular case, but yes, when your choice to drive a vehicle negatively impacts on the rest of the community, then yes, you should need to justify it, or pay extra.

@manontroppo

I do pay extra:

• it cost more to buy than the average family car
• my VED is higher (despite the actual emissions being lower than a car with the same engine size, it's higher by virtue of being "a van")
• my insurance premium is higher
• if I ever use toll roads the fee is higher

What else should I have to pay "extra" and who exactly should I have to justify my vehicle choice to?

I don’t know why estates have fallen out of fashion so much. Big cars, plenty of space, yes they might still be heavier than a small car but probably not as heavy as an suv and have lower bumpers. I have a big estate, weighs 1500kg.

I'm the opposite - short with short legs! I tend to not be able to see over the bonnet of estate cars 😂 I did look at the Fiat 500L yesterday - it was very strange!!

Driver monitoring systems aren’t always perfect
I drive a truck with an auto braking system on it, I was following a car about 20m behind it the other day when the truck decided to slam the brakes on
the car behind went straight into me
I know he should have been further behind but it was an incident that didn’t need to happen if I was in control I would have braked gentler and slower giving everyone time to react

Absolutely.

It's also worth mentioning that an SUV may well perform ok in a crash test but not relative to an car equivalent. For instance, the Ford Puma is based on the Fiesta platform but with jacked suspension and a higher body. The difference in safety is notable. The same applies to other SUV's from other manufacturers.

SUV's also roll, due to the higher centre of gravity. So whilst a car may skid, an SUV will roll and introduce more dangerous problems for passengers.

People should note that NCAP tests are highly specific and real life is far from. Having worked with people who have spent time in the automotive industry, many just design their cars to perform well in these circumstances, because NCAP stars sell.

If you’re so sure of your argument, why give the max Countryman weight (1760kg) and the minimum Evoque weight (1787kg)? The max weight of the Evoque tops 2157kg.

The mini starts at 1490kg.

So comparing entry level mini and Evoque, there is a 3 quarter of a ton difference. That’s a lot when it’s travelling at 30 mph.

Just one of the reasons I have a SUV:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6430541/Terrifying-moment-31stone-deer-smashes-windscreen-car-Poland.html

Had my DH and DS not been in our SUV when a deer hit them last year they probably wouldn’t be sat next to me on the sofa right now.

There’s also the matter of not being able to get out of my lane in ice and snow without four wheel drive. Not all roads are gritted in the winter.

As usual, there’s a distinct lack of understanding of rural life in this thread.

The only reason we are being pushed SUVs is that in America (one of the largest car markets in the world, and so the driver of design) SUVs are considered trucks - ie commercial vehicle.

This means they pay a lower rate of tax for the emissions and they don’t have to pass the same safety tests
as consumer cars.

All that means the OEMs make more money on SUVs than ‘regular’ cars.

It is, like everything else, all about money.

That's an amazing leap, pardon the pun. From the article:

The stunning creature refuses to slow down as it approaches the wide road before making an enormous leap over the road.

Amazing logic there about the deer not slowing down 😂. What next, teaching deer the green cross code 🤦

I actually live in deer country and the most stupid thing you can do is to drive at that speed. The entitlement is astonishing. If you want to share space with deer, you need to accept that you cannot drive at speeds that'll result in death. I can't imagine how you'd feel killing something so beautiful and an SUV makes absolutely no difference. In fact the height probably makes it worse. My 2 seater would've just driven underneath that for starters.

What car do you drive?

That’s not driver monitoring, that’s auto emergency braking. And the fault was the driver behind - entirely. The systems aren’t perfect, yet, but the only reason you had a crash is because the driver behind wasn’t obeying the 2 / 4 second rule.

Driver monitoring is coming in soon, and will be able to tell if you’re looking at your phone, or tired, or drunk / high, or having a medical emergency. Initially it will warn you, and eventually it will be used to take over control of the car, making it stop.

@SamanthaCaine I don’t care what the article says, it’s the point about about much damage a deer can cause. My DH was travelling well within the speed limit and he breaked as soon as he saw the deer. A deer hit another, smaller, car on the same road at the weekend. The car was written off. I am hoping that the occupants were OK.

My SUV escaped with a damaged bumper and bonnet. Had my car been lower down, the deer would have gone through the windscreen and hit my DH and DS.

This is the main road between my village and the nearest city. Driving at very low speeds is not an option.

I think most people have an understanding of the difference and why SUV's are needed for some.

But I live in London. The number of MASSIVE suv's here is utterly ridiculous and simply not needed. They are nothing but a status symbol often driven by those who have no idea how to drive them.

@justteanbiscuits but they don’t seem to be able to understand that people who have SUVs sometimes have to drive into towns/cities. I have to five days a week to take my children to school.

Someone up the thread suggested that it should only be farmers that have them!

Driving at a lower speed is an option, you just don't want to.

I live in deer country, the road between our village and the nearest town is routinely subject to deer crossing. And yet collisions are very few and far between, because a) the hazard is signposted and b) everyone generally doesn't drive like a twat.

And whilst we're talking about deer, drivers are far more likely to come across cyclists. Yet you don't seem to care about the impact your car has on someone who's almost guarenteed to come off worse, should you hit them.

But your argument was that the weight was the relevant point, not the use, so you can't have it both ways. Either higher weight = lower speed limits for all vehicles or you're targeting SUV's purely for the reason being they're suv's and not because of weight.

Well, because we don't live in an ultra-liberal society, there's quite a lot people have to justify.....

Your van must clearly have value to you, otherwise I assume you wouldn't pay the financial penalty associated with it.

Ah private school I presume to have to drive that far.

The huge suv's blocking all the commuting roads around me on their way to the local private schools on roads very much not designed for them cause an utter nightmare. 3 times in the past year people driving these, unable to easily see both sides have hit cars parked in my street trying to save that precious 30 seconds on their commute.

@justteanbiscuits no, my DS attends state school and there is no school bus. The public bus doesn’t leave until after nine.

Driving within the speed limit isn't the same as driving to the conditions. Having to brake and escaping death suggests they were driving too fast. A recipe for disaster and again, nothing to do with the type of car. That little car was also driving too quickly most likely.

The speed limits near me are 50mph. Totally ridiculous given the risks. Yet I see people doing 50 when it's completely inappropriate.

I get why you might need one in a rural area but deer aren't one of them. I say that as someone living in deer country for 20 years driving small cars.

But do they fit all the things I need in them? Nope…so I choose an SUV.

Beyond that I’m in the unusual position that my husband has responded to a vehicle rollover crash involving my model of SUV. The woman rolled multiple times and she walked away with minor scrapes and bruises. Coupled that and my old SUV (same type) was donated to the local fire department for training and I witnessed them swearing and cursing while they worked to ‘extricate’ the trading dummy from my vehicle and how hard they had to work to cut through the support posts.

All of those things combined I’ll be fine with my choice. You can choose whatever you want without comment or judgement from me.

My opinion is that if you want to drive an SUV, you should have to take your test again, in an SUV. The medical requirements should be the same as for lorries.

I think this would reduce the number of SUVs on the road. I would also tax PCP and any other finance arrangements, any that does not mean you pay the whole price of an SUV upfront. I think normal sized cars would become more attractive, and the fewer SUVs there would be, the less desirable they would be to anyone.

@justteanbiscuits why would having to drive to school means it must be a private school?

A lot of people seem fixated entirely on pedestrians, which is of course a risk, but certainly not most accidents. However, if that is the main concern, rather than banning larger/heavier vehicles, perhaps we would be better off banning men from driving?

amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/09/male-drivers-three-times-more-likely-road-collisions-pedestrians

And yes, I completely agree- that’s a ridiculous solution, but no more ridiculous than previous.

How can you have different speed limits for different types of vehicle on "normal" urban roads?

Everyone would be held up by SUVs in front of them.

You'd basically be imposing the lower speed limit on everyone.