Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are you happy you didn't sell your SUV?
122 messages, Last post on Apr 15, 2009 at 5:57 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 2:38 pm) C'mon, Larry. This stuff is fuzzy social science: interesting as far as it goes, but nothing that will stand up to close scrutiny. It's an op ed piece with a few footnotes. (If you've spent much time on the campus of a large university, you'll notice how insecure social scientists are when their work is compared to that of real scientists - like physicists or chemists.) Here's another perspective on Bradsher's "research": Is Big Bad?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 2:38 pm)  i'm in #3, wanted wagon all weather/bad road capabilties/no drama. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 2:38 pm) Did I mention I like to sit upright when I drive. I cannot do that in many cars built today. As my head touches the headliner.
|
|
|
Replying to: jimbres (Jan 15, 2009 3:10 pm) Moreover, the largest SUVs, those over 5,000 pounds (e.g., Ford Expeditions, Chevy Tahoes, and Toyota Land Cruisers), had a lower rate than any other class of vehicle available: 92. The poorest-performing SUV category was the smallest: The under -3,000 pound vehicles, such as the 1997 Geo Tracker. The death rate for this class, 195 per million, was more than double that of the biggest SUVs. But even these models outperformed minicars, whose death rate of 249 per million was the worst of any vehicle (unlike their fuel efficiency, which is tops). The smallest SUVs have been upsized over the years, moreover, and so there are practically no new SUV models in this least-crashworthy category. In short, SUVs are probably as safe or safer than cars as a class. Moreover, those who choose the most despised SUV models (the largest ones) for safety reasons are not making a mistake. So that is another important option Bradsher left out of his analysis, Survival. I don't want to be the victim of a runaway hybrid that has short circuited and accelerates at full speed into my vehicle. 
|
|
|
New Report Says Ford Escape Hybrid Taxis Are Unsafe in Accidents Maybe little SUVs are not safe after all  I think I will hail a Crown Vic thank you very much.. The ongoing battle over the safety of hybrid taxicabs took another turn today as the Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade released another study, this time disparaging the safety of the Ford Escape Hybrid in accidents and especially in rollovers when fitted for taxi use. The report comes on the heels of several high-profile rollover accidents involving Ford Escape Hybrid taxicabs, which have resulted in the total loss of the taxis and the hospitalization of drivers and occupants. In the report, engineer and crash-reconstruction expert C. Bruce Gambardella reviewed a specific rollover crash involving an Escape Hybrid taxi and found that the side-curtain airbag failed to deploy normally because there wasn't enough room between the Taxi and Limousine Commission-mandated partition and the roof of the vehicle. The report also found the partition interfered with the seatbelt because it changed the mounting point of the seatbelt, and that the partition had come loose during the crash and could have resulted in a major head injury had there been a passenger in the front seat. In comparing the accident with a similar scenario involving a Ford Crown Victoria taxi, Gambardella found that "the Ford Crown Victoria, due to its wide track and very low center of gravity, would have been very unlikely to rollover." In his professional opinion, Gambardella said, "If a Ford Crown Victoria had been involved, the accident would have been a simple fender-bender." Don't ride in a hybrid taxi |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 15, 2009 4:45 pm) Hmm, now that you mention it, maybe that's the reason I drive my '85 Silverado these days, more often than I drive my '00 Intrepid. It's just more comfy IMO. Easier to get into and out of. And sitting high up the way it does, the seat gives me good thigh support in spite of the fact that there's really not much room to stretch my legs. Something about the shape of the seat hits my back just right, too, whereas my Intrepid forces me into a bit of a slouching position. I've actually noticed that about many modern cars...very poor lower back support...unless you spring for power lumbar support, I guess. I have to take my 84 year old grandmother to the doctor for checkups and such on occasion, and she can actually get into the truck more easily than she can the Intrepid. Some of the newer trucks and SUVs might be worse than my Silverado, though. We tried to get her in my friend's '06 Xterra once, and she had trouble, mainly because of the position of the running board. And my Mom & stepdad have a 1998 Expedition that Grandmom always hated. Hard to get in and out of, plus neither of them could park it worth a damn, so if they ever went anywhere they'd park way out in the empty area of the parking lot and walk! |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 15, 2009 5:23 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: explorerx4 (Jan 15, 2009 5:58 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 15, 2009 5:18 pm) But I can't sit still when someone claims that everyone who buys an SUV is an unhappily married bad driver. There's about as much real science behind that claim as there is behind the horoscope column in your local weekly classified ad throwaway. That's the kind of thinking that I'd expect from evolution-denying religious nuts. If you ask 25 people why they bought a particular car or truck, you'll probably get at least 20 different answers. People are complicated. |
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 15, 2009 7:07 am) The oldest was getting a break on insurance when he didn't have his car at college. This year he has it there and insurance almost tripled. I now pay $545 a year for liability only on a '99 for him. When he first got his liscence, I found out that a 16 yr old on any car with full coverage was $2400 a year, so the kids don't get newer cars that need full coverage. Especially if they don't take care of them.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are you happy you didn't sell your SUV?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
