Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why do people drive unnecessarily large cars?

1151618202142

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 366 ✭✭boardsdotie44


    "egomaniacs to flaunt their wealth,"

    Agree, but what makes matters even worse is that it is not wealth, its loans :)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,578 ✭✭✭Cordell


    A top spec large SUV complete with active safety systems (collision avoidance, blind spot sensors) is a lot more safer than an entry level supermini, to all road participants including pedestrians and cyclists. So if you're advocating for safer roads you should advocate for mandatory active safety systems including gradually banning older cars that don't have them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 540 ✭✭✭Murt2024


    If you have the money then why not, some people will work all their lives and die with millions in the bank as they refuse to spend the money on anything like nice cars, clothes, house upgrade, travel etc.

    You only live once and if you have the money then why not. I know single men that have worked until retirement with a pension and still refuse to spend money and known to be tight arses completely.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,915 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    I'm not challenging those claims but is there any actual study that shows it to be true that the new tech safety features actually make it safer to vulnerable road users?

    I would also point out that a collision involving a "top spec large SUV" will still more likely to result in a worse outcome for a vulnerable road user given the increased weight & momentum along with a higher front compared to an entry level supermini. To suggest that a Ford Ranger with various safety bells and whistles is safer for a vulnerable road user than a standard VW Polo or similar surely is delusional. Picture your young kid walking or on a bike getting hit head on - which of the two vehicles would you prefer to be involved?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,779 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    False equivalence surely - you don't need a top spec large SUV to get collision avoidance and blind spot sensors. You can get these on smaller cars.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,578 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Do we really need a study to accept that an accident that was completely avoided is safer than the one that wasn't?

    It's not any kind of equivalence, I'm just pointing out that the most important issue in making roads safer is to avoid accidents. And when accidents don't happen the car size becomes irrelevant from the safety perspective.

    Basically - if you want safer roads, ask for mandatory safety systems, that's what makes the most important difference. If you are just bothered by other people's choices then at least be honest about it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,779 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    They're crashes, not accidents. If we want to reduce them, let's stop using language designed to avoid any accountability for the drivers who cause them.

    Technology can certainly help, but with technology that was restricted to the big, luxury brands 10 years ago now being available on very standard, mainstream cars, it's not really about size. It's certainly not an excuses for buying SUVs, which have certain inherent risks around visibility and impact compared to smaller cars.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,915 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Do we really need a study to accept that an accident that was completely avoided is safer than the one that wasn't?

    Let me rephrase the Q: is there a study that shows that vehicles with these actually make a make the roads safer for vulnerable road users when compared to vehicles without?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 194 ✭✭BP_RS3813


    "Accidents" (Crashes) will always happen though. You can reduce the amount of them sure via new tech but human error will always occur as they are the primary controller of the vehicle - collision sensors, etc are secondary.

    I'd rather be hit my a mini then an SUV.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,578 ✭✭✭Cordell


    I'd rather not be hit at all. The safety rating on pedestrian protection is only marginally better for the Mini vs Land Rover, something like 77 vs 72%. And then if we go for the older Mini it's actually safer to be hit by the new Land Rover.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 428 ✭✭pale rider


    people drive them because they want to and for many other reasons.

    Personally I like my cars, have bought many new ( and said I never would again ) and many used, I’m retired now and in my first new SUV and love the height, visibility and access in/out, each to their own, too many people attempt to shame people on their car choices, two fingers to each of them, we drive what we like in this country !



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,578 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Yes there are studies showing that these systems make the roads safer, how can they not?

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457522001221



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,915 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    how can they not?

    I did preface my question with "I'm not challenging those claims" so no need to be defensive.

    I do note in your link that:

    For pedestrian detection systems to successfully prevent pedestrian fatalities, they need to work under the conditions where deaths commonly occur. Low light and high speed are key risk factors in pedestrian deaths (Kim et al., 2010, Sullivan and Flannagan, 2002, Tefft, 2013). Less than half of all U.S. pedestrian crashes in 2019 occurred in the dark, but more than three-quarters of pedestrian fatalities were under dark conditions with 35% of deaths occurring in the dark without overhead street lighting.

    …but the report concludes that…

    However, there was not evidence that that the system was effective in dark conditions without street lighting, at speed limits of 50 mph or greater, or while the AEB-equipped vehicle was turning.

    Anyhow, I am reminded of the clip where a road safety expert described how the best safety feature in a car would be a big pointy spike sticking out of the steering wheel - no driver is going to risk driving in a manner that might cause the need for a sudden stop.

    I'm also aware that cars with some/all of these features still end up crashing into VRUs so might there be an over-reliance on the tech features (kinda similar to some drivers stupidly following their Sat Nav down a narrow boreen)?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 194 ✭✭BP_RS3813


    "Two fingers to each of them, we drive what we like in this country" is a great attitude to vulnerable road user safety....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,578 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Yes over reliance and even abuse of these systems is possible but that's a whole different conversation. But the main thing is that they do work, and they will get better and cheaper, and they are what will make the roads safer. EuroNCAP certainly believes that so they will not award 5 stars to cars that don't have these systems.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,445 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i'll go back to my point again that the physical size of a vehicle has road safety implications, even when it's not driving towards you, or even when it's stationary. especially in urban areas.

    an illustration; i'm not tall, but in the mid 80s i'd have been able to walk through any car park in a shopping centre and would have had a clear view over 95%+ of the cars parked in that car park - for any approaching cars. and the motorists driving those approaching cars would have had a good chance of seeing me.

    now, that phenomenon is long gone. pedestrians can't see over those cars and the motorists can't see the pedestrians till they step out from behind them.

    and when you add cyclists to the mix - who are frequently moving at the same speed, or faster, than urban traffic, that increases that effect.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 194 ✭✭BP_RS3813


    Exactly, when people say these giant SUVs give increased road visibility, they are talking about other cars and road signs, not vulnerable road users.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,057 ✭✭✭Burt Renaults


    It also goes some way towards explaining why people who drive SUVs are hated by so many. Add "we drive how we like" onto that, and it pretty much sums them up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,402 ✭✭✭mulbot


    Is that not true for any large vehicle though, Renault traffic van, ford transits, box vans. You can't see over them.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,445 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    It is, yes. But if you go from a situation where maybe one in every ten vehicles is like that, to one in every two...



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,402 ✭✭✭mulbot


    Yep, don't think we see that ratio though, head up the naas, road or the quays in Dublin any work morning, there's a lot more vans etc on the road than SUVs. You just need to be extra careful if your around any of these bigger vehicles I suppose



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,057 ✭✭✭Burt Renaults


    They serve a purpose. An SUV, unless it has four-wheel-drive and is being driven on a dirt track, does not. Their height is a big problem, especially in car parks, since most people who drive them don't seem to be able to reverse-park.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,402 ✭✭✭mulbot


    I agree, and I don't see the need for them most of the time, but I think some people like bashing SUVs, the "can't see over them" is a nonsense argument if the same person doesn't mention vans etc in the same way. You need to be safety conscious regardless.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,057 ✭✭✭Burt Renaults


    I find not being able to see over them is a big issue in supermarket car parks. Yes, vans pose the same problem (whether they're reversed or driven in), but there aren't as many of them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,548 ✭✭✭boardise


    It's just as well 'they' don't tax idiocy or you'd be in right trouble.😁



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,402 ✭✭✭mulbot




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,057 ✭✭✭Burt Renaults


    When you're exiting a parking space, it's useful to be able to see whether there are any cars or pedestrians about to pass.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,275 ✭✭✭Busman Paddy Lasty


    Reverse parking should be compulsory. This will sort out being able to see pedestrians and driver having visibility too.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,478 ✭✭✭circadian


    If you genuinely need more space and these features buy an estate. In my recent search for cars, I found that SUVs were lacking in boot space in particular, are less efficient and the only genuine advantage they have is when someone has special needs and requires a higher seated vehicle.

    I swear we'd all be better off if estates were the go-to for families rather than deceptively small SUVs.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 428 ✭✭pale rider



    My car has an NCAP rating of 5 for pedestrian safety, it was an important point when I selected what I wanted to buy , you may know 5 is the highest available test rating by NCAP.

    What is your owns cars rating for pedestrians safety as you clearly must prioritise pedestrian safety yourself given your comment ?



Advertisement