Ask the Car People.SM


Death of the body-on-frame SUV?

118 messages,  Last post on Apr 17, 2012 at 4:51 PM

You are in the SUVs Forum.

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Tahoe, Honda Pilot, Isuzu Trooper, Ford Expedition, Dodge Durango, Ford Freestyle, Volvo XC90, SUV

Messages Page 10 of 12

#89 of 118 Re: Vehicle Safety [jim314] by explorerx4

Jun 14, 2009 (5:14 pm)

Replying to: jim314 (Jun 14, 2009 6:01 am)
traverse v6 (cuv) has a curb weight about 100 lbs more than a trailblazer ext v8 (suv).
it is making an assumption that the the 'frame' of an suv is not designed to handle a collision in any manner different than a cuv.

#90 of 118 Re: Vehicle Safety [motorhead15] by bobw3

Jun 17, 2009 (10:14 am)

Replying to: motorhead15 (Jun 13, 2009 6:36 pm)
"putting your family's safety before that of complete strangers"
 
Actually the "strangers" I'm thinking about are my brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins, neighbors, co-workers, etc..., who actually mean something to me, but then you're more concerned with yourself and the dog sitting beside you...hmmmm. And yes I know that anyone who thinks of others is called a "socialist."
 
Now let me go back to my Prius forum with rest of the socialists

#91 of 118 Re: Vehicle Safety [explorerx4] by jim314

Jun 17, 2009 (11:25 am)

Replying to: explorerx4 (Jun 14, 2009 5:14 pm)
The real heart of the matter is that people who drive heavy, stiff vehicles shouldn't be castigated as totally unconcerned about the safety of the occupants of other vehicles.
 
And people who drive body-on-frame SUVs shouldn't claim that those who drive more fuel efficient and less menacing vehicles don't care about the safety of their family or other occupants of their vehicle.
 
It's a continuum. These are all legal vehicles. But the fact is that the era of cheap petroleum is coming to an end. To preserve our economy and our natural resources we may have to enact tax policies that discourage the discretionary high consumption of petroleum.

#93 of 118 Re: Vehicle Safety [jim314] by bobw3

Jun 18, 2009 (10:02 am)

Replying to: jim314 (Jun 17, 2009 11:25 am)
"These are all legal vehicles"
 
Just because something is legal doesn't make it right...eg smoking in offices was legal even though at the time the 2nd hand smoke was killing co-workers, but it took years for the legal system to catch up with what was right. Car pollution standards that were legal 30 years ago that made the air unbreathable in many cities are now illegal. Again, it takes a long time for the legal system to get in line what society feels is the right thing to do.
 
Obviously people can drive whatever legal vehicle is out there. My point is not to castigate everyone drive a giant SUV, but just encourage them to think outside their box... My hope is that MPG standards will get so high that manufacturers will have to reduce the size of vehicles they produce just to meet the MPG standards. That will create the twofold benefit of less gas usage and less big cars competing wtih the small ones.

#94 of 118 Re: Vehicle Safety [bobw3] by tidester

Jun 18, 2009 (11:08 am)

Replying to: bobw3 (Jun 18, 2009 10:02 am)
but just encourage them to think outside their box... My hope is that MPG standards will get so high that manufacturers will have to reduce the size of vehicles
 
That's not encouraging people to think outside their box, that's forcing them into yours. But I still think we should relegate the political discussion to another venue. hint, hint!
 
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper

#95 of 118 Re: Vehicle Safety [bobw3] by wlbrown9

Jun 18, 2009 (12:12 pm)

Replying to: bobw3 (Jun 18, 2009 10:02 am)
I'm waiting for the Plug In Hybrid extended range SUV/CUV. One of these would cut my petro usage about 75% and NOT require that I downsize. 50 to 100+ MPG would be easy for me with an average daily comute of 40 miles. http://www.rasertech.com/news/raser-in-the-news/msnbc-reports-electric-hummer-in- -washington-dc

#96 of 118 Re: Vehicle Safety [bobw3] by dieselone

Jun 18, 2009 (1:00 pm)

Replying to: bobw3 (Jun 12, 2009 5:02 pm)
I really don't want to get into a pi$$ing match over how evil SUV's and their owners are, but I don't care what anyone drives or what others think of what I drive. I've had several SUV's over the years because I choose to tow a boat and a travel trailer. Plus we often bring our daughters friends along so, I occasionally have 6-8 people in the Expe. I like the SUV over a truck because it has a much better suspension for everyday driving, plus the extra room for passengers. But if the "high and mighty" econo car crowd win and make the SUV extinct, I'll just buy a diesel 3/4 ton truck and continue to use my boat and RV.
 
As for dangers on the road, obviously, I understand the physics of my 6000lb SUV broad siding a Civic. But, if a larger SUV like a Expedition/Tahoe/Suburban are so dangerous, how come they are so cheap to insure? I pay less than $60/mo on my 07 Expedition for full coverage with a 500k liability policy and $500 deductible. You'd think if the actuaries could prove that my driving a 6k lb SUV would mean I'm more likely to kill a family in a compact car, my rates would be much higher. I'm paying far less than I did for any car, and I have more liability coverage than I did then.
 
I did T-bone a person in a Grand Am with a Nissan Pathfinder about 6 years ago. I hit them right on the drivers door. I was going about 30mph (I was in an unfamiliar area and didn't see the stop light until I was basically in the intersection and it was raining (no question it was my fault). My air bad did not go off and she walked away unscratched. Did total her car though and did 7k damage to my 01 Pathfinder. You'd think by listening to this board, my accident should have killed the poor lady I hit.

#97 of 118 Re: Vehicle Safety [bobw3] by rockman59

Jun 18, 2009 (6:51 pm)

Replying to: bobw3 (Jun 03, 2009 4:40 pm)
Luckily large body on frame SUVs are selling less every year, so you're right Americans are making their choices, and more smartly now too for everyone.
____________________________________________________________________
That may be true but I just read an article yesterday saying that the dealers are selling every SUV and pickup on their lots. Supply is short because of the GM/Chrysler situation. Likewise, the prices on used Suburbans, etc are on the rise again.

#98 of 118 Vehicle Safety by motorhead15

Jun 19, 2009 (8:48 am)

Jim,
 
It’s easier to control the rate of deformation of a uni-body vehicle than a full frame vehicle, which is probably a good thing in a low speed impact. Taking the Chevrolet Traverse, which someone earlier said does not have a frame. The weight listed on the Traverse is about 5,000 pounds. According to a certified “CAT” scale, the weight on my Expedition with a full tank of fuel and me in it is right at 6,000 pounds. In a collision with a stationary wall at 40 mph, the Traverse has lower crash forces transmitted to the driver than the Expedition, but this is with the vehicle striking a fixed object. Both vehicles are rated five stars for the frontal crash into the wall test. If the Expedition and Traverse hit each other in a head on collision at the same speed say 45 mph, the Expedition driver will incur lower crash forces because of it’s heavier weight than the driver of the Traverse. Additionally, if you look at the Traverse side collision numbers on http://www.safercar.gov you will see that the Traverse has worse numbers than the Expedition but still garners a five star side crash rating. Where the full frame vehicle comes into it’s own is in a severe two vehicle collision. Remember, in a frontal type collision, you want the front of the car to deform as much as possible up to the point of intruding into the passenger compartment. Some of the newer full frame vehicles have dimpled or weakened portions of the front part of the frame to help with deformation in a frontal collision. Remember that crumpling is good up to a point then you want deformation to stop completely, again before any intrusion into the passenger compartment occurs.
 
Framed vehicles such as full size SUVs and full size pickup trucks are built on a heavy steel frames so they can handle heavy loads. I’m not sure we will see the death of the body on frame vehicle because there will always be a need for a vehicle that can haul a five-ton trailer such as a boat, camper etc. and that takes a steel frame vehicle. Nobody will argue that heavier vehicles don’t have a huge safety advantage over smaller lighter vehicles in a high crash force accident. A strong steel frame just adds a greater degree of protection from intrusion into the passenger compartment. There will always be accidents that are so severe that no vehicle would offer sufficient protection.
 
By the way I found this video from IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) which is worth watching:
 
CRASH TESTS DEMONSTRATE THE INFLUENCE OF VEHICLE SIZE & WEIGHT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmUBgTHppv8

Messages Page 10 of 12

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement