Quote:
Originally Posted by ksa8907
Yeah, but their tests dont mimic the real world. The civic may have a 5 star rating when it hits a barrier, but what about a suburban traveling at the same speed? Small cars just dont have the same amount of crumple area and heavier vehicles typically fair better than lighter ones.
|
Small cars don't need as much crumple area because they are smaller and can be more easily stopped with less crumple area ... Assuming the larger vehicle even has a crumple area to begin with (by that I mean an area that is actually designed to crumple in a collision, not just a larger distance between front bumper and driver which can't crumple), then that crumple area would
have to be larger in order to be as effective as the smaller car's crumple area simply because the larger (heavier) vehicle takes more energy to stop. Good ol' physics!
So what about the suburban traveling at the same speed? 1) it's more difficult to control than the lighter, more nimble vehicle so it's more difficult to avoid the accident to begin with, 2) it would be more difficult to stop the greater mass after it collides with something (meaning more opportunity for something REALLY bad to happen, like a rollover), and 3) if it isn't designed to the same safety standards as the smaller car (anything heavier than 5,500lbs does not need to meet the stricter safety standards of vehicles under 5,500lbs, and a 2012 suburban is over 5,800lbs) then more of that impact energy gets transferred directly to the occupants. All of which means there is less chance for survival in the larger vehicle than the smaller one. Granted, there are exceptional cases where being in the larger vehicle might be a benefit, but looking at the odds I'd much rather bet on the lighter vehicle.
For the Dodge, if it is a heavier vehicle, then the crumple area (and other collision aspects) would have to be of a superior design compared to a similarly sized but lighter vehicle for the Dodge to be safer in either IIHS tests or the real world since it will take more energy to stop it ... and the handling would also need to be superior so that the average driver would have more of an opportunity to avoid the accident (either by simply slamming on the brakes or by doing a basic avoidance maneuver). I'm going to be pessimistic and guess that neither is true.
And for the rest of that heavier vehicle's life (when it's not getting into unavoidable accidents every other day), it has to schlepp around all that extra heft for no discernible benefit to the driver, the occupants, or the rest of the world... why?? Because of this silly "bigger is gooder" myth?? Will we ever learn??