Bigger is safer

[Lazarus]

I thought this was interesting marketing device. If tiger say it then it has to be true.

I looked for the safety rating on the Buick and it's 5 stars which I thought was the best but it did not make the list. I wonder if it's prone to rollover?

[DifferentPointofView]

I think the term should change to,

Bigger is safer in a head on crash, as long as they are equally as safe in a single wall-crash.

I'd like to be in the heavier car in a head on crash, but that's just me. Semi drivers have an easy time in those head on collisions with smaller cars.

[zjrog]

I've been very impressed with the video of a Smartcar hitting a barrier at 70MPH... But still wonder how it would fare against my F150 Supercrew. Don't get me wrong, I'd drive a Smart car.

[tasdrouille]

Here's a very interesting paper on the subject.

One impediment to increasing the fuel economy standards for light-duty vehicles is the longstanding argument that reducing vehicle mass to improve fuel economy will inherently make vehicles less safe. This technical paper summarizes and examines the research that is cited in support of this argument, and presents more recent research that challenges it. We conclude that the research claiming that lighter vehicles are inherently less safe than heavier vehicles is flawed, and that other aspects of vehicle design are more important to the on-road safety record of vehicles. This paper was prepared for a workshop on experts in vehicle safety and fuel economy, organized by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, to discuss technologies and designs that can be taken to simultaneously improve vehicle safety and fuel economy; the workshop was held in Washington DC on October 3, 2006.