An Taisce sharpens the axe for battle against Electric SUVs

RandomViewer

garo wrote: »

No but I see plenty of these:

https://images.app.goo.gl/azW2bMHvcTGZd8Pd7

Smaller and pointier than the old one and weighs 300 kg less than a Tesla model S which is in the same price bracket, they've sold 381 of them this year which makes me think you live opposite a Landrover dealer.VW Tiguan is the best selling small jeep

https://stats.beepbeep.ie/

JohnC.

My eNiro, which some would call an SUV (but isn’t really) is a whole 4cm taller than my previous Auris hatchback. But apparently one is acceptable and the other a menace.

Del2005

garo wrote: »

Yeah and while crossovers are not as high as full-size SUVs they are still higher than estates so are likely to be more dangerous than them - while not as dangerous as full size SUVs.

I just compared a 2015 Tuscon against a 2017 i30 on the Euro NCAP website. The Tuscon is rated at 71% vs 64% for the i30 on pedestrian safety. So the "big" SUV is safer than the saloon/estate for pedestrians. The 2018 Leaf is only a couple of percent better than a 2014 Qashqai and the 2019 Note is 10% better than the Leaf. The A5 and Q5 are 1% apart.

So the SUVs sold in Europe are either better or slightly lower than the saloon version they are based on for pedestrian safety.



https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/latest-safety-ratings/#?selectedMake=0&selectedMakeName=Select%20a%20make&selectedModel=0&selectedStar=&includeFullSafetyPackage=true&includeStandardSafetyPackage=true&selectedModelName=All&selectedProtocols=40302,34803,30636,26061,24370,-1&selectedClasses=1202,1199,1201,1196,1205,1203,1198,1179,40250,1197,1204,1180,34736&allClasses=true&allProtocols=true&allDriverAssistanceTechnologies=false&selectedDriverAssistanceTechnologies=&thirdRowFitment=false

garo

Very possible that the SUVs in Europe are safer than the ones sold in the US. Thanks for the link to the NCAP website. Reading through the reports it looks like a lot of SUVs that perform well have an "active bonnet" feature that lifts the bonnet when a pedestrian is struck. The cheaper hatchbacks don;t have this and thus perform poorly. I wonder though if this is another mechanism to game the tests a la dieselgate.

Also, I wonder if there is equivalent European data on pedestrian fatality ratio in the real world.

garo

garo wrote: »

Yeah and while crossovers are not as high as full-size SUVs they are still higher than estates so are likely to be more dangerous than them - while not as dangerous as full size SUVs.

Dangerous ? who really cares, I live on back roads and the speed of drivers means all cars are highly dangerous, it's so bad these days I can't take my boys out on the road and feel they are safe.

garo

JohnC. wrote: »

My eNiro, which some would call an SUV (but isn’t really) is a whole 4cm taller than my previous Auris hatchback. But apparently one is acceptable and the other a menace.

Isn't this manufactured outrage? I doubt anyone would find your eNiro a menace. Lots of people seem to just love to complain about the Greens or An Taisce or whatever the latest hippy punching bag is.

garo

Deleted User wrote: »

Dangerous ? who really cares, I live on back roads and the speed of drivers means all cars are highly dangerous, it's so bad these days I can't take my boys out on the road and feel they are safe.

So you all for a 50kmph speed limit on back roads?

markodaly

listermint wrote: »

I did think Mark.
And I stand by it. Skoda superb for example as the same capacity as an X5.

And how much can the Skoda superb tow?
What is its ground clearance?
Does it come in AWD?

People just like driving around in SUVs as a is their right to do so.

As opposed to what, being illegal?

I made a point to no one 'needs' one.

Many people need one,that is why they exist in the first place.
From the farmer who may need to tow a horsebox, to the hobbiest who hits the snow. They are after all a utility vehicle.

Does the mom who drives her only child to school need one?\
No, of course not, but you think everyone is that mom.

Admit you like driving around in it. (That's an ok thing btw, to like something...)

LOL, I cycle more than I drive but yes, try and put me in that box.

garo

What are your feeling on crossovers Mark?

markodaly

garo wrote: »

Yeah and while crossovers are not as high as full-size SUVs they are still higher than estates so are likely to be more dangerous than them - while not as dangerous as full size SUVs.

Do you have any actual stats on this opinion of yours?

NSAman

Thank gawd I don’t have to try and pull horses or livestock with a kona!

It would never manage in the muck and no a hope of getting through the fields when needed.

That’s why you need a Dodge Ram 1500 with hemi 5.3ltr engine 4 wheel drive and 7 feet tall.

An Taisce are seriously a body of people who like to complain.

Ireland through taxation and vrt have never allowed the safety features which have been developed, to be available on most new cars. People just cannot afford these advancements as the vrt is prohibitive in many cases.

Wanderer78

NSAman wrote:

Thank gawd I don’t have to try and pull horses or livestock with a kona!

I somehow doubt they were designed for that!

Lumen

NSAman wrote: »

Ireland through taxation and vrt have never allowed the safety features which have been developed, to be available on most new cars. People just cannot afford these advancements as the vrt is prohibitive in many cases.

Which optional safety feature have you not chosen to buy because of VRT?

People should be able to choose the car they want and not have to listen to People tell them which car they feel they should be driving.

Lumen

Deleted User wrote: »

People should be able to choose the car they want and not have to listen to People tell them which car they feel they should be driving.

You don't have to listen to anyone, you just have to pay extra.to compensate for the negative externalities.

But I don't know why I'm attempting a logical debate with a climate change denier.

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

You don't have to listen to anyone, you just have to pay extra.to compensate for the negative externalities.

But I don't know why I'm attempting a logical debate with a climate change denier.

So you have something against People now who don't believe in Anthropogenic climate change ?

liamog

Mod Note: If you want to discuss general climate change, the EV forum is not the place, back on topic Lumen/Mad_Lad

garo

markodaly wrote: »

Do you have any actual stats on this opinion of yours?

No I haven't found them yet. My inference is that since all US studies and stats show that height of the bonnet is a factor in pedestrian safety something that has a bonnet higher than a sedan but lower than a full size SUV will rank between the two in terms of harm. I am open to contrary evidence.

Del2005

garo wrote: »

No I haven't found them yet. My inference is that since all US studies and stats show that height of the bonnet is a factor in pedestrian safety something that has a bonnet higher than a sedan but lower than a full size SUV will rank between the two in terms of harm. I am open to contrary evidence.

My last post has the Euro NCAP ratings which shows that our SUVs are similar or better than a saloon car for pedestrians.

liamog

I'm looking at the EuroNCAP ratings, for 2019 top 10 vehicles for pedestrian safety were as below, 5 of the top 10 are compact SUVs/Crossovers, it certainly appears that crossovers (which is what most people buy here as an SUV) aren't inherently more dangerous for pedestrians.

1. MB CLA
2. BMW 3 Series
3. Toyota Corolla
4. Toyota RAV4
5. Lexus UX
6. Ford Kuga
7. VW T-Cross
8. Mazda 3
9. Skoda Scala
10. Nissan Juke

ELM327

NSAman wrote: »

Thank gawd I don’t have to try and pull horses or livestock with a kona!

It would never manage in the muck and no a hope of getting through the fields when needed.

That’s why you need a Dodge Ram 1500 with hemi 5.3ltr engine 4 wheel drive and 7 feet tall.

An Taisce are seriously a body of people who like to complain.

Ireland through taxation and vrt have never allowed the safety features which have been developed, to be available on most new cars. People just cannot afford these advancements as the vrt is prohibitive in many cases.

A real workhorse Ram comes with a 6BT not a hemi but that's another story.


If you look at the difference in cars for sale here vs in NI you'll see that your argument is true and borne out. Try buying even a puny 2l petrol here and you pretty much can't.

garo

Del2005 wrote: »

My last post has the Euro NCAP ratings which shows that our SUVs are similar or better than a saloon car for pedestrians.

Lab test ratings are not stats. Pardon me but after dieselgate I would like to see some real world evidence of collisions involving pedestrians rather than lab test ratings.

Also, I think the use of the term crossover for most SUVs sold here is imprecise. A crossover can be compact, subcompact or full-size. Anything that has more creature comforts than a truck-platform-based SUV and/or shares a platform with a passenger car can be a cross-over. Including this behemoth:

garo

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/08/15/restrict-twice-as-deadly-suvs-in-u-k-cities-urge-transport-data-scientists/


UK doesn't do stats by car type - I wonder why - but does collect stats by engine size and there seems to be a clear correlation. I'd love to see Euro area stats on this.

liamog

Ok, so your only evidence that SUVs are more dangerous is a dataset that doesn't collect the vehicle body type?
I'm not An Taisce have any responsability when it comes to drivers choosing large SUVs in the US. Versus the far more common smaller vehicles used in Ireland.

Last year the 3 of the top 5 cars in Ireland were Tucson, Tiguan and Qashqai. These are the types of car we commonly refer to as a crossover.
I don't think there are any common SUVs on sale here that are based on Truck platforms.

liamog

I'm looking at the RSA analysis of fatal collisions in 2019 https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Fatal%20Collision%20Stats/Provisional_Reviews_of_Fatal_Collisions/RRD_Res_20191231_RSAProvisionalReviewFatalities31December2019_03Jan2020.pdf
It's showing that pedestrian fatalities is going down, whilst the number of SUVs is going up.
I don't think the correlation is due to the vehicle types, but pedestrian safety is a focus for all passenger vehicles. What we should see is an increase in injuries with a corresponding decrease in fatalities, this is a sign that the pedestrian safety measures built into a car are working. The pedestrian avoidance equipment should be reducing the overall number of incidents.

There has been a 36% decrease in pedestrian fatalities (-15), a 20% decrease
in passenger fatalities (-4) and an 11% decrease in cyclist fatalities (-1) in 2019
compared to 2018.

frozenfrozen

Stop texting while driving and do your best to not run pedestrians over as well, just as a general rule. Doesn't matter what you're driving

Wanderer78

frozenfrozen wrote:

Stop texting while driving and do your best to not run pedestrians over as well, just as a general rule. Doesn't matter what you're driving

Or maybe turn the phone off while driving

garo

liamog wrote: »

Ok, so your only evidence that SUVs are more dangerous is a dataset that doesn't collect the vehicle body type?
I'm not An Taisce have any responsability when it comes to drivers choosing large SUVs in the US. Versus the far more common smaller vehicles used in Ireland.

Last year the 3 of the top 5 cars in Ireland were Tucson, Tiguan and Qashqai. These are the types of car we commonly refer to as a crossover.
I don't think there are any common SUVs on sale here that are based on Truck platforms.

I am just trying to have an open discussion about evidence. I asked for contrary evidence to my initial claim. I was given the EuroNCAP site which I thanked the poster for. I raised doubts about those lab tests and have asked for real world data. The only evidence I provided is from the US because Europe it seems believes in lab-tests over collecting real data.

Anyway this has gone way off-topic. The original post picked out one line on electric SUVs in a long article. Then climate change deniers and hippy punchers jumped in. It is best that I stop here.

Normal One

The only electric SUV on sale here is the Tesla Model X which drops the anchors if it sees anything resembling a pedestrian in the way, before the driver even had a chance to see them. Therefore it's safer to pedestrians than any non-electric SUV, and An Taisce are barking up the wrong tree.

liamog

Normal One wrote: »

The only electric SUV on sale here is the Tesla Model X which drops the anchors if it sees anything resembling a pedestrian in the way, before the driver even had a chance to see them. Therefore it's safer to pedestrians than any non-electric SUV, and An Taisce are barking up the wrong tree.

I'd argue that the e-Tron, i-Pace and EQC also fall into the bracket of SUV.

Lumen

Normal One wrote: »

The only electric SUV on sale here is the Tesla Model X which drops the anchors if it sees anything resembling a pedestrian in the way, before the driver even had a chance to see them. Therefore it's safer to pedestrians than any non-electric SUV, and An Taisce are barking up the wrong tree.

They're barking up a future tree. The argument is that assuming the passenger vehicle fleet continues to electrify, if people continue choosing SUVs then the resource usage from electrified SUVs will have a negative impact, just as with current SUVs powered directly by fossil fuels relative to non-SUVs powered by fossil fuels.

Normal One

liamog wrote: »

I'd argue that the e-Tron, i-Pace and EQC also fall into the bracket of SUV.

Yes I forgot about them... do they have pedestrian emergency braking too? I bet the 1.0l $hitboxes that the likes of An Taisce want us in don't.

Lumen

Normal One wrote: »

Yes I forgot about them... do they have pedestrian emergency braking too? I bet the 1.0l $hitboxes that the likes of An Taisce want us in don't.

It is perfectly possible to create a tall-ish, spacious and efficient vehicle, as demonstrated by the Model Y, which achieves nearly the same efficiency as the Model 3. Also the latest Model S, which whilst not tall is very heavy.

Nobody would call a Model Y or S a "1.0l $hitbox".

The efficiency issue is with cars like the etron, which is an electron guzzler. What benefit does that inefficiency bring? Better soundproofing, apparently. And that's it.

liamog

Probably, I'd check on EuroNCAP but they can't be trusted because it's a lab :P

Pretty much all new cars come with AEB now, even the MG ZS EV which is one of the cheapest new EVs on the market.

Lumen

liamog wrote: »

Probably, I'd check on EuroNCAP but they can't be trusted because it's a lab :P

Pretty much all new cars come with AEB now, even the MG ZS EV which is one of the cheapest new EVs on the market.

There's more to safety than braking systems.

There were some videos doing the rounds maybe a year ago of EVs doing swerve tests. From what I recall the Kona/e-Niro (which I think is a great car btw) coped much worse with changes of direction than the Model 3.

Now you could argue that the Model 3 is a "performance car" with more sophisticated suspension, but the job of changing direction is made much easier by its lower centre of gravity.

I would definitely feel more confident in an accidenty situation in a Model 3.

Now of course there's the argument that people tend to risk-equalize by driving close to the limits of whatever car they drive, and I don't know how to process that argument, except that my Model 3 is cheaper to ensure that either my four year old Kia or my 15 year old Honda.

frozenfrozen

to be fair lumen my sv650 was cheaper to insure than my car

liamog

Lumen wrote: »

There's more to safety than braking systems.

There were some videos doing the rounds maybe a year ago of EVs doing swerve tests. From what I recall the Kona/e-Niro (which I think is a great car btw) coped much worse with changes of direction than the Model 3.

I'm not entirely sure where you are going with this, in terms of pedestrian safety I think the AEB systems and other pedestrian impact mitigation measures are quite important. Car design is important here, low bonnets don't lend themselves to pedestrian safety, it's one of the reasons new Mini's are so big at the front.

Lumen

liamog wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure where you are going with this, in terms of pedestrian safety I think the AEB systems and other pedestrian impact mitigation measures are quite important. Car design is important here, low bonnets don't lend themselves to pedestrian safety, it's one of the reasons new Mini's are so big at the front.

I guess I'm just saying that mitigation systems, whilst useful, don't equalize the safety performance of taller, heavier cars with lower, lighter cars.

garo

Normal One wrote: »

The only electric SUV on sale here is the Tesla Model X which drops the anchors if it sees anything resembling a pedestrian in the way, before the driver even had a chance to see them. Therefore it's safer to pedestrians than any non-electric SUV, and An Taisce are barking up the wrong tree.

liamog wrote: »

Probably, I'd check on EuroNCAP but they can't be trusted because it's a lab :P

It's got the Tesla Model X on a 72% pedestrian rating. So there's that
e-Tron and i_pace are the same and EQC just a bit higher at 75%.

ted1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Dangerous ? who really cares, I live on back roads and the speed of drivers means all cars are highly dangerous, it's so bad these days I can't take my boys out on the road and feel they are safe.

I care and any sane person would care.

garo

liamog wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure where you are going with this, in terms of pedestrian safety I think the AEB systems and other pedestrian impact mitigation measures are quite important. Car design is important here, low bonnets don't lend themselves to pedestrian safety, it's one of the reasons new Mini's are so big at the front.

You have got this backwards. Low bonnets absolutely do contribute to pedestrian safety. A low bonnet would strike a pedestrian in the legs and they would fall on to the bonnet/windshield. A high bonnet would strike the pedestrian in the legs and then a fraction of a second later in the pelvis and chest causing far more damage.

ted1

ted1 wrote: »

I care and any sane person would care.

Blame the car not the driver lol

liamog

garo wrote: »

You have got this backwards. Low bonnets absolutely do contribute to pedestrian safety. A low bonnet would strike a pedestrian in the legs and they would fall on to the bonnet/windshield. A high bonnet would strike the pedestrian in the legs and then a fraction of a second later in the pelvis and chest causing far more damage.

A low bonnet sweeps the legs leading to increased head impact which can be more fatal. The Model 3 has a explosive bonnet which helps mitigate the impact.

eagerv

liamog wrote: »

A low bonnet sweeps the legs leading to increased head impact which can be more fatal. The Model 3 has a explosive bonnet which helps mitigate the impact.

I wonder if the black band on the ID.3 is something similar? It seems to have a bit of give if impacted..

NSAman

Lumen wrote: »

Which optional safety feature have you not chosen to buy because of VRT?

Add a few thousand of optional extras to get night vision, add another few thousand for many cars to get pre-sense, lane assist (have had this on cars here for years), extra for cruise control with distance and speed monitoring. Add extra for autonomous driving ... hate to say it.....there is VRT on all these features... its called taxing safety.

By the way, I get 90% of those as standard on my cars here... and to order them here is not subject to more tax....(well the secondary tax, the tax on the registration, not just the Value added sales Tax)...

Lumen

NSAman wrote: »

Add a few thousand of optional extras to get night vision, add another few thousand for many cars to get pre-sense, lane assist (have had this on cars here for years), extra for cruise control with distance and speed monitoring. Add extra for autonomous driving ... hate to say it.....there is VRT on all these features... its called taxing safety.

By the way, I get 90% of those as standard on my cars here... and to order them here is not subject to more tax....(well the secondary tax, the tax on the registration, not just the Value added sales Tax)...

tldr: none