Study: SUV Drivers Cause 55% Worse Injuries To Bicyclists They Hit

[trailgumby]

Moreover, SUVs were the only vehicles in the sample that actually ran cyclists over, while sedans almost universally pushed cyclists up onto the vehicle’s hood or roof. That critical difference, the researchers speculate, has to do with the size and shape of the SUV’s front end

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2023/04/13/ ... -they-hit/

[MichaelB]

Someone needed a study for that ?

[Cyclophiliac]

The study was sponsored by Captain Obvious, I believe. It's a USA study too, some of the SUVs there are bloody scary, they're huge! What's even worse is that a few of them are roaming Australian roads.

[trailgumby]

Someone needed a study for that ?

Agreed, but as you've seen from a number of members here, owners go into denial. Having the truth in the form of objective data on their impacts won't eliminate the human capacity for self-deception but it does provide ammunition for helping to hold the manufacturers of these dangerous, antisocial vehicles to account. It also helps with creating peer pressure to choose better next time.

[redsonic]

The first sentence of that article caught my attention:

Just like pedestrians, bicyclists who are struck by SUV drivers endure significantly more severe injuries — particularly to the head — than those struck by the drivers of smaller cars

I would never have known that it was the drivers doing the striking in the mainstream news media....

[MichaelB]

Someone needed a study for that ?

Agreed, but as you've seen from a number of members here, owners go into denial. Having the truth in the form of objective data on their impacts won't eliminate the human capacity for self-deception but it does provide ammunition for helping to hold the manufacturers of these dangerous, antisocial vehicles to account. It also helps with creating peer pressure to choose better next time.

Data is one thing, but human nature is another.

I’ve seen NOTHING to date that shows anyone altering a vehicular purchase based on potential injury to anyone outside of their car.

I might be wrong though ….

[Mr Purple]

I’ve seen NOTHING to date that shows anyone altering a vehicular purchase based on potential injury to anyone outside of their car.

I might be wrong though ….

I'm pretty sure some SUV drivers buy/modify their vehicles in such a way to maximise potential injury to anyone outside their car. I agree, not 'minimise' though.

My opinion is the predominance of SUVs on our roads is a direct byproduct of people being unable to rationalise properly. 'I have too much stuff' - buy a bigger car and house to fit more stuff. 'I'm overweight and infirm' - buy a bigger car that's easier to get in and out of. 'I occasionally have to carry five passengers and drive on the footpath to better park' - buy a bigger car to do these things.

If anyone had an ounce of sense they'd know the real answer is to throw out some stuff, lose some weight, and tell their kid's mates to find their own way home. But they don't. To me the ultimate sign that someone makes poor life decisions is those families that show up to the park with those little trolleys absolutely crammed full of rubbish. If you feel your young kids absolutely need two fold out soccer goals to play at the park with their mates, I hate to think how much other rubbish you have crammed into your house and car (a pet hate of mine, probably irrational!).

So we end up in an arms race because people are too stupid to throw stuff out. Simple legislation is the answer. I have no idea why registration isn't simply based on vehicle weight. It seems stupid that Landcruisers are pushing three tonnes now and yet pay the same annual registration bill (in Queensland at least) as my 1500kg hatchback.

[jaseyjase]

I'm pretty sure some SUV drivers buy/modify their vehicles in such a way to maximise potential injury to anyone outside their car...

Reminds me of a conversation i had with my old man, he had a GQ patrol fitted with a bullbar (think roo killer)

He always said cars were less likely to pull out infront of him, either out of side streets or turning right across him because they were scared to get hit.

He then switched to a merc and instantly noticed drivers not thinking twice about pulling out infront of him.

An observation more than anything, i can also tell you parallel parking in that beast taught me some skills when i was learner!

[g-boaf]

He then switched to a merc and instantly noticed drivers not thinking twice about pulling out infront of him.

An observation more than anything, i can also tell you parallel parking in that beast taught me some skills when i was learner!

He should have got a G63 6x6 - everyone would give way to 4000kg of that enormous 6x6 machine.

When everyone has Landcruisers, V8 Patrols, GLS Mercs and X7 BMWs, you have to step up the game to something larger.

[Mr Purple]

Yes. The bullbars are just part of the arms race.

Incidentally the one car I've ever owned that people actually respected was my $70 rusted as all buggery 1979 Valiant. It was large, yes, but more importantly it looked so thoroughly disreputable that whoever saw it immediately assumed that the driver a) had nothing to lose, and b) was probably a serial killer.

I don't think anyone ever cut me off in that thing. Which was good, because it had approximately the stopping distance and turning circle as a supertanker. It's in my garage still but I think I've restored it too nicely. I should put some spray on rust on it or something.

[rkelsen]

My opinion is the predominance of SUVs on our roads is a direct byproduct of people being unable to rationalise properly.

Spoken like someone who doesn't have teenage kids or elderly parents.

The station wagon has always been a practical choice for families.

[MichaelB]

My opinion is the predominance of SUVs on our roads is a direct byproduct of people being unable to rationalise properly.

Spoken like someone who doesn't have teenage kids or elderly parents.

The station wagon has always been a practical choice for families.

We had a child (and still have) and don’t feel the need for a humongous SUV that never saw dirt.

[JPB]

The other factor pushing purchasers towards SUVs is the perception they are safer in an accident than a small car. Mass/size = safety.
And that means my SUV must be bigger than yours to keep me safe.

The mega utes are a hazard to me because they make my blood boil.

[rkelsen]

We had a child (and still have) and don’t feel the need for a humongous SUV that never saw dirt.

They're not all made for dirt. And, believe this if you will, some people have more than 1 kid.

[Tim]

The mega utes are a hazard to me because they make my blood boil.

+100

[skyblot]

If you really want to cement the ridiculous nature of SUV's check out "Not Just Bikes" video about the USA market for them. The sheer size of the big ones is eye opening, as is their meager carrying capacity. Cadillac Escalade is the same size as a Sherman tank from WW2.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXM ... tJustBikes

[Mr Purple]

My opinion is the predominance of SUVs on our roads is a direct byproduct of people being unable to rationalise properly.

Spoken like someone who doesn't have teenage kids or elderly parents.

The station wagon has always been a practical choice for families.

I’m the eldest of five. We had a Tarago. And only got that at the 4 kid point. And we never filled that Tarago with as much junk as I see people take to the park with those stupid trolley things (probably not exactly being rich helped).

You are correct in that manufacturers no longer supply options. I love a good station wagon; have you tried buying one these days?

There’s about four to choose from. All up. And each manufacturer seems to have at least four almost identical SUVs. Better profit margins.

[Thoglette]

We had a child (and still have) and don’t feel the need for a humongous SUV that never saw dirt.

This the problem with the term SUV: it is applied to everything from a Suzuki Jimny to the Dodge RAM.
Even a single model name can range from sensible to silly, E.g. the Hilux or Ranger whose base models are staid work utilities but whose “top end” models once “optioned up” are almost a foot wider.And that’s before reaching for the aftermarket bits.

[bychosis]

We had a child (and still have) and don’t feel the need for a humongous SUV that never saw dirt.

This the problem with the term SUV: it is applied to everything from a Suzuki Jimny to the Dodge RAM.

And even worse it also covers the CX3, HRV, Yaris cross etc that are just slightly taller small hatchbacks and all manner of ‘regular cars’ but just taller. No good for hitting the beach or bush tracks, basically just not as low to the ground.

Say SUV to 10 different people and you’ll get answers as different as a Landcruiser and an ASX.

Sure, some SUVs are hulking 4wds but lots are just modern cars.

[g-boaf]

My opinion is the predominance of SUVs on our roads is a direct byproduct of people being unable to rationalise properly.

Spoken like someone who doesn't have teenage kids or elderly parents.

The station wagon has always been a practical choice for families.

We had a child (and still have) and don’t feel the need for a humongous SUV that never saw dirt.

A normal station wagon is more practical anyway in most cases than a modern stylish SUV.

[fat and old]

those stupid trolley things

Spoken by someone who's never made the 500 + m trek down to the beach for a day trip with 2 or more kids under 6!

I am insanely jealous of those people in a retrospective way

On "SUVs" (I think along the same lines as Thoglette here. Define SUV when you're having a say.) I've found that the people most likely to try the intimidation trick in my area are Merc users...MLs, GLS types and Beemer X6 and up types. And I live in a world of twin cab Rangers and Hiluxes. I define intimidation as trying to force an issue.....tailgating, attempted cut offs, swerving towards you etc.

[rkelsen]

You are correct in that manufacturers no longer supply options. I love a good station wagon; have you tried buying one these days?

Yes, I have. You can't.

A normal station wagon is more practical anyway in most cases than a modern stylish SUV.

I'd disagree with that. A 7 seat Kia or Hyundai is quite practical for carrying lots of stuff. We can get the kids and parents (or in-laws) in with all their stuff. Everyone's comfortable, no-one's squashed in.

With the seats down, I've had 4 adult sized bikes in the back... with all wheels still attached.

You can't do either of those things with a station wagon.

Practicality: https://youtu.be/3IZmH31eoz0?t=756

Disclaimer: No connection with the reviewer, but his reviews are usually worth watching.

[g-boaf]

Don't get a busted hip then, because climbing in and out of a SUV is not good. A normal height weight or sedan is okay being not too high.

Most SUVs now have the load area compromised by style, the back must be sloped away to be a "coupe". Cupra Tavascan another example of that just launched today.

You are correct in that manufacturers no longer supply options. I love a good station wagon; have you tried buying one these days?

Yes, I have. You can't.

There are still a few good "real" traditional wagons on sale. And I see Victoria Police seem to have 5 series wagons, so it's obviously possible to get them if you push the issue. And you can also get Alpina 3 and 5 series derivatives in wagon versions. So there is no technical problem, probably just a matter of complaining at the importers loudly enough.

[Mr Purple]

There are a few station wagons still available - mainly performance and high end models:

https://www.drive.com.au/showrooms/best ... st-wagons/

An Octavia RS wagon would be a nice thing. I had the hatch version in an RS and it'd fit bikes in the back without removing a wheel.

[rkelsen]

And I see Victoria Police seem to have 5 series wagons, so it's obviously possible to get them if you push the issue.

Pushing the issue versus stretching the budget... A 7 seat Kia or Hyundai SUV is significantly cheaper, and more capacious.