War on cars

[opik_bidin]

https://www.afr.com/companies/transport ... 904-p52nr0

New vehicle sales in Australia plunged by 10.1 per cent in August as buyers struggled to obtain finance for cars, extending an industry-wide malaise which has gripped the sector for 17 consecutive months.
--------------------------

safer for the insiders, most are more dangerous for the outsiders
and if you wanna be safe, you can have the racer suit and helmet, proven by , nascar, F1 and Moto GP racers to decrease risk and save lives

1 months of sales.
I cycle with a few in the financial sector, they believe a recession is coming.
No wages growth, prices are rising and people are highly mortgaged. I am no financial expert but I don't disagree with them.
Less money to spend well you don't buy a new car.

The bit in bold is incorrect. Ancap safety ratings include harm caused to pedestrians and vulnerable road users in the event of a collision.
https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings-explained
Our star ratings indicate the level of safety a vehicle provides for occupants and pedestrians in the event of a crash, as well as its ability — through technology — to avoid or minimise the effects of a crash.

ANCAP safety rating assessments extend beyond occupant protection and also look at the likely injury effect on pedestrians and other vulnerable road users. Pedestrian dummies are used to assist vehicle manufacturers develop more 'pedestrian -friendly' vehicle designs.

Looking at how heavy high the cars and how big the pillars are
Newer cars are designed to mitigate injury in a pedestrian impact.

For August
https://www.canstarblue.com.au/vehicles ... ling-cars/

1st Toyota Hilux
2nd Ford Ranger
3rd Toyota Corolla
4th Hyundai i30
5th Toyota RAV4
6th Mazda3
7th Toyota LandCruiser
8th Mazda CX-5
9th Mitsubishi Triton
10th Nissan X-Trail

most in the list are big cars, harder to see what's in front and the pillars, huge risk of forgetting your child in car. heavier than smaller cars so damage the road and takes space more.

Being hit around your feet is different compared to being hit at your chest and head, and children, who are shorter has higher risk as they are shorter, meaning worse impact and less visibility.

what dummies are used? man,woman, children? Does it expand to visibility and used space?

[fat and old]

Heavier than what? Wear out the road faster than what?

This is a common theme of the anti car lobby. New cars are "bigger", "heavier". They wear out the road "faster". Not many, if any at all, ever call these types of claims out. It's "right in front of your eyes". Just look at the modern "SUV's". "They don't fit in car parking spaces".

The one thing that modern "SUV"'s are guilty of is that they are undoubtedly higher than most cars around them, old and new. That's it. They are no heavier than a 1977 Falcon Station Wagon. No longer or wider. Anyone old enough will remember those. Or the HQ-HZ holdens. Even the early E series falcons were only a few hundred KG lighter, 130mm less wide and 120mm shorter. A 1967 Fairlane was 20mm shorter and 80mm less in width....a 4 door car!. Compared to a mid range 4 door 2019 Ranger Ute.

Has it ever occurred to anyone that car parking spaces are getting smaller? Lanes between the bays getting narrower? Believe it, they are. I make these things for a living, and they are smaller now than what they were in 1989. Go out and see how many older bays have been painted over or worn away and then replaced. This shrinking even happens on the roads. Need another lane on your Calder Freeway? Vic Roads did, so narrowed the two they had, lost the emergency lane and viola! Extra lane! Similar thing on Citilink last year. Just lower the limit to 80km/h. Gotta keep it safe, and everyone obeys the limit, aye?

Has it ever occurred to anyone that roads are not built the same everywhere, and that they are not built as well as they were in the 80's for instance? We pay more, but get less? Go out and have a drive or ride over a few bridge abutments...specifically the interface where the road goes from fill to structure. Check a few older types...maybe 50 year old or more. Then a few later types...15 year old or less (In Melbourne...try Eastlink. 11 years old. Or the Ring Road to Hume Fwy overpass.13 years old) . See which ones ride better, have less subsidence. It's criminal what goes on in some projects. Anyone in Melbourne remember what the Ring Road over the old Sunshine tip felt like before the upgrades? Wanna build your Freeway faster? Those pesky 150-200mm consolidated layers causing you lost time? No worries, chuck a heap of 300mm floaters into the mix and you can go 800mm at a time! Find an older area with stone kerb and channel (Inner Melbourne and Sydney have these, Adelaide I'm pretty sure. Don't know about Brissie or Perth....I only drive through them places on my way to somewhere good ). Have a look at the old stones that have been there over 80 or more years. See how they fit? The level? Now go and check any 2000 onwards street reco...I'll bet it's not looking the goods now. We're being taken for a gigantic ride as tax and rate payers. Show me one good C.O.W's, and I'll show you 25 desk bound graduate engineers.

Yeah, there are bigger cars out there now. And they have a big slice of the market. Until I see historical data over 40-70 years I'm not going to say cars are getting bigger as a rule tho. What were the top 10 sellers in 2009, 1999, 1989, 1979, 1969? Show me the combined weight of the top 10. Gimmee some DATA!!!!

And to blame the "big SUV's" solely for the deterioration of our roads, or acceleration of same is too simplistic. Lots of things have changed, and not for the better.

[warthog1]

[
For August
https://www.canstarblue.com.au/vehicles ... ling-cars/

1st Toyota Hilux
2nd Ford Ranger
3rd Toyota Corolla
4th Hyundai i30
5th Toyota RAV4
6th Mazda3
7th Toyota LandCruiser
8th Mazda CX-5
9th Mitsubishi Triton
10th Nissan X-Trail

most in the list are big cars, harder to see what's in front and the pillars, huge risk of forgetting your child in car. heavier than smaller cars so damage the road and takes space more.

Being hit around your feet is different compared to being hit at your chest and head, and children, who are shorter has higher risk as they are shorter, meaning worse impact and less visibility.

what dummies are used? man,woman, children? Does it expand to visibility and used space?

Compare the hilux to an old one the mazda 3 to an older version etc etc.
The newer versions are all more pedestrian friendly.
They test them with dummies and rate them based on the results. (What is your proposed alternative?)
Ergo design does take into consideration the safety of others.
This is without taking into consideration the collision avoidance technology such as automatic brake assist and electronic stability control.
http://www.howsafeisyourcar.com.au/Safe ... y-Braking/
Yes there is plenty that is bad about the automotive industry but vehicle safety is definitely improved in terms of designed safety features.
It is automobile therefore it is bad is not always the reality.

[find_bruce]

As I understand it there is not a linear relationship between road wear & weight, or more accurately, tyre load. Instead wear is minimal until the tyre load gets to a certain level, depending on road design, whereupon it becomes an inverse squared relationship.

One of the reasons most highways etc are so expensive to build is that they are designed so that they can withstand the maximum tyre load without significant wear.

[fat and old]

Don’t forget, the stiffer your suspension the greater the wear on the road. Boy racer types like Vos and Thoglette are over contributing, whereas the soft sprung 4wders like me and Warty are doing things right by our neighbours.

[warthog1]

Don’t forget, the stiffer your suspension the greater the wear on the road. Boy racer types like Vos and Thoglette are over contributing, whereas the soft sprung 4wders like me and Warty are doing things right by our neighbours.

The 'trol with a lift and 33's isn't exactly pedestrian friendly though.
Still, I only use it for towing and touring.
I love it's rugged simplicity for remote area travel. Gets me the hell away from the crowds
I commute and do my daily driving in a 2006 suzuki swift lol

[opik_bidin]

[

what dummies are used? man,woman, children? Does it expand to visibility and used space?

They test them with dummies and rate them based on the results. (What is your proposed alternative?)

read first mate

[fat and old]

He is referring to "Reference Man" Warty.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... ar-crashes

[Comedian]

... airbags...
Absolutely and unequivocally they are a life saver.

Like bike helmets save lives?

Just being facetious really. Years ago We did upgrade to a car with airbags and abs brakes after a friend walked away from a nasty crash with a minor burn on his thumb from the airbag gasses. Given the option I’d have the extra safety features.

Airbags and bike helmets are very similar .. with one little difference .. the airbags actually significantly increase occupant safety. Unlike helmets - they can also be easily proven to do so in crash tests**.

** vehicle crash tests routinely test the most common forms of injury producing crashes. The certification for helmets test an uncommon occurrence. The most significant cause of death for cyclists (being hit by a car) is not part of the helmet certification test.

[bychosis]

... airbags...
Absolutely and unequivocally they are a life saver.

Like bike helmets save lives?

Just being facetious really. Years ago We did upgrade to a car with airbags and abs brakes after a friend walked away from a nasty crash with a minor burn on his thumb from the airbag gasses. Given the option I’d have the extra safety features.

Airbags and bike helmets are very similar .. with one little difference .. the airbags actually significantly increase occupant safety. Unlike helmets - they can also be easily proven to do so in crash tests**.

** vehicle crash tests routinely test the most common forms of injury producing crashes. The certification for helmets test an uncommon occurrence. The most significant cause of death for cyclists (being hit by a car) is not part of the helmet certification test.

Indeed, but the ‘one accident, airbags, no death’ argument fits well with the ‘cracked my helmet - life saved’ arguments. Not scientific.

[opik_bidin]

This is without taking into consideration the collision avoidance technology such as automatic brake assist and electronic stability control.

if you choose the right car and they take care of the bugs
https://www.motor1.com/news/306384/bmw- ... rian-test/

either way, you still can't completely trust it, because, remember, real world isn't a controlled experiment

[Comedian]

Like bike helmets save lives?

Just being facetious really. Years ago We did upgrade to a car with airbags and abs brakes after a friend walked away from a nasty crash with a minor burn on his thumb from the airbag gasses. Given the option I’d have the extra safety features.

Airbags and bike helmets are very similar .. with one little difference .. the airbags actually significantly increase occupant safety. Unlike helmets - they can also be easily proven to do so in crash tests**.

** vehicle crash tests routinely test the most common forms of injury producing crashes. The certification for helmets test an uncommon occurrence. The most significant cause of death for cyclists (being hit by a car) is not part of the helmet certification test.

Indeed, but the ‘one accident, airbags, no death’ argument fits well with the ‘cracked my helmet - life saved’ arguments. Not scientific.

I see what you are saying an agree with you.

The interesting thing about car crash testing is they have in the past run the same cars with and without airbags. The difference is impressive if the vehicle crash is within the airbag parameters. If the energy is below they don't trigger, in the range all good, over and you're just a bag of munced juice.

[warthog1]

[

what dummies are used? man,woman, children? Does it expand to visibility and used space?

They test them with dummies and rate them based on the results. (What is your proposed alternative?)

read first mate

Ditto. The important point is they do test them and rate the safety based on a simulated pedestrian. Ergo newer cars are designed to be safer for pedestrians through testing in a manner that older cars were not.
We are talking about new vs old cars here remember. The testing is there now where it wasn't in the past. You can quibble about the size of the mannikin used. The fact is it is used now and wasn't previously.
https://www.core77.com/posts/69907/Insi ... pe-of-Cars

I note you ignored collision avoidance systems entirely.
Edit I see you have attempted to dismiss it in a seperate post

[warthog1]

This is without taking into consideration the collision avoidance technology such as automatic brake assist and electronic stability control.

if you choose the right car and they take care of the bugs
https://www.motor1.com/news/306384/bmw- ... rian-test/

either way, you still can't completely trust it, because, remember, real world isn't a controlled experiment

Your assertion was that new cars aren't safer for vulnerable road users than old cars. The inference was safety considerations were only a cynical attempt by the automotive industry to sell cars.
Patently untrue. Collision avoidance isn't perfect but it certainly works better than none at all.

We should all drive 1970s era cars because they were so much safer.
It's all marketing this pedestrian friendly car design, bring back drum brakes and chrome bumpers and all will be well.

[fat and old]

https://www.core77.com/posts/69907/Insi ... pe-of-Cars

Interesting point raised there I hadn't thought of previously.

Some cars have shorter hoods, and in those instances, taller pedestrianscan die by smacking his or her head on the windscreen or A-Pillar

So I have a greater risk of head injury if I'm hit by a small Mazda2 than a larger Mazda CX9?


Gee....there's unlimited scope for back and forth when manning the ramparts!

[mikesbytes]

https://www.core77.com/posts/69907/Insi ... pe-of-Cars

Interesting point raised there I hadn't thought of previously.

Some cars have shorter hoods, and in those instances, taller pedestrianscan die by smacking his or her head on the windscreen or A-Pillar

So I have a greater risk of head injury if I'm hit by a small Mazda2 than a larger Mazda CX9?


Gee....there's unlimited scope for back and forth when manning the ramparts!

. That's actually correct, where the head strike occurs affects your probability of survival. A longer bonnet means that at the same speed you are more likely to hit your head on the softer flat-er bonnet than the more inclined harder windscreen. It's been shown that reducing the speed limit by 10kph significantly increases the Ped's chance of survival and this is largely to where the head strikes.

The ironic thing here is that an appropriately designed bull bar could improve pedestrian safety as it will change where the head strike occurs

[warthog1]

Indeed, but the ‘one accident, airbags, no death’ argument fits well with the ‘cracked my helmet - life saved’ arguments. Not scientific.

Who has made that argument?

[bychosis]

Indeed, but the ‘one accident, airbags, no death’ argument fits well with the ‘cracked my helmet - life saved’ arguments. Not scientific.

Who has made that argument?

Perhaps I misread, it’s a long way back now. Whatever I read indicated that the poster had seen an incident and determined that the airbag did actually save a life. This is often wheeled out in helmet debates as you know.

While I don’t disagree that airbags are effective, someone who is not trained in understanding the impacts etc and is unable to determine the injury differences in the exact situation with and without airbags cannot say that a death would have occurred if there was no airbag. Just because an airbag went off does not mean a life was saved. It probably means the injury was less though.

[warthog1]

Perhaps I misread, it’s a long way back now. Whatever I read indicated that the poster had seen an incident and determined that the airbag did actually save a life. This is often wheeled out in helmet debates as you know.

While I don’t disagree that airbags are effective, someone who is not trained in understanding the impacts etc and is unable to determine the injury differences in the exact situation with and without airbags cannot say that a death would have occurred if there was no airbag. Just because an airbag went off does not mean a life was saved. It probably means the injury was less though.

I mentioned an impact with a tree where I'm confident the airbags saved this woman's life. I was going to post a photo of the mangled wreck but it was too much of a pita.
Anecdotal true, but I've been a paramedic since 2002 and seen multiple fatalities and non fatalities. (That was one I have a photo of)
Where they make the biggest difference is side impact from my observation.
I am confident enough with what I have seen that my 18 and 19 year old kids won't be driving a car without side airbag protection.
No I am not trained to analyse the difference, but ime the difference in outcome is stark particularly with respect to side impact where there is no crumple zone and the occupant otherwise strikes the structure of the car.
Yes there are other design improvements in addition to airbags, but my understanding is they do test the efficacy of the safety features during impact testing in the vehicle design.
It works from what I have seen.
You are correct it is not scientific though.

[mikesbytes]

Yeh thinking that airbags don't improve occupant safety is misguided. To a large extent it boils down to preventing or slowing the head strike

I read once that antilock brakes didn't improve safety as drivers who had them tended to drive more aggressively (no data backing up the article, like most articles). It could be that as side intrusion gets more common that we will see more aggression in cutting thru gaps in the traffic because they feel more protected. How many of us have had to heave on the brakes to avoid t-boning a motorist... like all of us... and that was when driving...

[find_bruce]

Haven't seen anything more recent than 2009 The Long-Term Effect of ABS in Passenger Cars and LTVs

ABS has close to a zero net effect on fatal crash involvements. Fatal run-off-road crashes of passenger cars increased by a statistically significant 9 percent (90% confidence bounds: 3% to 15% increase), offset by a significant 13-percent reduction in fatal collisions with pedestrians (confidence bounds: 5% to 20%) and a significant 12-percent reduction in collisions with other vehicles on wet roads (confidence bounds: 3% to 20%). ABS is quite effective in nonfatal crashes, reducing the overall crash-involvement rate by 6 percent in passenger cars

I have not seen anyone able to explain why there is an increase in cars running off the road with ABS.

Electronic stability control was supposedly going to fix that, but I haven't seen any data on whether it has.

On the topic of airbags, the 2009 study had to adjust for the decrease in fatalities due to airbags, but this is in the US where seatbelt use is significantly lower.

[RobertL]

I have not seen anyone able to explain why there is an increase in cars running off the road with ABS.

Is it because it has become a more widely-chosen method of suicide these days?

[g-boaf]

I have not seen anyone able to explain why there is an increase in cars running off the road with ABS.

Is it because it has become a more widely-chosen method of suicide these days?

I think so, sadly.

[bychosis]

I have not seen anyone able to explain why there is an increase in cars running off the road with ABS.

Is it because it has become a more widely-chosen method of suicide these days?

Quite possibly. There is also
- more driver distraction,
- more insulated from the road so you don’t feel extra speed,
- better handling, leading to higher speed when things go wrong
- more power, thus more speed
- the whole risk compensation thing. The more safety you have he more you need.
And probably plenty more.

[find_bruce]

I readily accept they are all possibilities, but is there anything more concrete than anecdata on these explanations?