Comments on: IIHS study reveals deadliest vehicles

By: Get Real

Get Real — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:20:33 +0000

These are the same people that said that the Astro in CRASH TESTS were horrible and dangerous.

They reported the entire front end collapsed and killed the driver.

NOW IT’S SAFE ????

Can these people think ????????

By: Ian

Ian — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 02:55:11 +0000

So what… NEON, Caviler, 350Z, Mustang among the lowest. Anyone surprised here??? raise your hand…

By: CTS DRIVER

CTS DRIVER — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:36:21 +0000

my sister in law had a 2 door blazer and drove it like crap, she rear ended everything everywhere all the time, one day after my brother picked it up from the shop and traded it for a used s-40. damn she was pissed, its kind of funny we tell her he did it because it has the w (weather button for the traction controll)
button for women drivers.

By: hateful83

hateful83 — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:05:27 +0000

This is a good one. So the bigger vehicles have a lower death rate while the smaller ones are the opposite. Who would’a thought?

By: jamaicandude

jamaicandude — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 05:57:43 +0000

I think it has more to do with how you drive a car than how crash worthy it is. I know safe vehicles are important, so nobody try & bite my head off. That’s not my point. The point is that if you have a really bad accident… say a head-on collision with a semi at 50 miles per hour, it doesn’t matter what the hell you’re driving. You’ll be lucky to live at all.

By: wcnhl57

wcnhl57 — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 15:46:44 +0000

ZerO

Your a genius, obviously if there is less cars created, there would be less crashes, right?

The IIHS is the biggest reserach and testing firm for car safety. Do you REALLY think that they would be stupid enough to not recorrect for differences in volume. Complete ignorance for you to think you solved the magic key, and how stupid these guys are to make a mistake like that.

By: Rompn4x

Rompn4x — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:04:12 +0000

Nevermind I just saw the Mazda B-series on the list… same thing as a Ranger

By: Rompn4x

Rompn4x — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:02:05 +0000

Anyone notice that almost all of the deadliest are small cars? I wonder how 2wd Rangers did in the test… On another note love how people bash on anything American when they are behind a computer screen, but in real life I don’t hear a peep from them. Seems funny to me =P

By: global_lightning

global_lightning — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 00:57:03 +0000

In case any of you are interested, here’s a link to the study:
http://www.iihs.org/sr/pdfs/sr4204.pdf

Some interesting facts:
The study focused only on driver deaths, no passenger data was compiled
- SUV’s had consistently higher deaths than passenger vehicles in the same weight category, and except for light trucks, pickups did even worst
- The larger and heavier vehicles had overall lower rates, with some notable exceptions
- Overall deaths have dropped 30% since the mid 90′s
- Some cars were singled out for their failings, in particular the Ford Excursion, Ford Taurus stationwagon, Ford F-150 (I see a pattern here…)

By: A4

A4 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:56:09 +0000

theres only one american car in the lowest category because all the old people buy asian piles of crap. The only thing im surprised by is that buick didnt make the list 4 times.

By: kayne001

kayne001 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:22:27 +0000

55amg

to answer your question NO

By: Renton

Renton — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 21:55:36 +0000

teens are the worst drivers, and they drive the shittiest cars. they pack the most people in them to magnify the death rate.

go teens!

By: global_lightning

global_lightning — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 19:34:13 +0000

I believe there’s a correlation between age of drivers and number of passengers in the vehicle. Teens tend to have more accidents when they are carrying more than just themselves, which is leading some states to restrict the number of passengers a teen can drive. Note most of the vehicles in the high death category are popular with younger drivers. It would be interesting to see the breakout of driver vs passenger deaths for each of these vehicles.

By: BAMF

BAMF — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:42:09 +0000

Anyone else notice that the convertible version of the Mitsubishi Eclipse is safer than the Coupe? Thats crazy.

By: nowei

nowei — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:33:27 +0000

There are some serious flaws with this study, though. If it’s just based off of what vehicle people were driving when they died it doesn’t take into consideration the factors surrounding the crash.

For example, I could see blazers being purchased by people who live in areas of the united states with more extreme weather (regardless of how well the vehicle is actually equipped to handle said weather), and could thus be subject to move weather-related collisions.

It could also be that the average person buying a 10k sunfire or cavalier doesn’t live in the same kind of area as a person buying a G35 or a 7-Series. And nicer neighbourhoods aren’t often located close to industrial areas, which would have a higher volume of larger vehicles.

So it’s not only what you drive and how you drive it, but also where and when you drive it. Besides, do you have any idea how many 16 year-old kids drive around with wreckless abandon in their parents’ chevrolet astro?

By: davebo

davebo — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:28:30 +0000

GetReal: You’re right, statistically you won’t die, you’ll probably just kill a Cavalier full of teenagers

By: Get Real

Get Real — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:11:54 +0000

Stupid research, I see people driving like idiots all the time and I fully expect THEM to die one day.

They defined my Excursion as too big and I will die.

By their definition every driver of an 18-wheeler is going to die.

By: Oldsmobile

Oldsmobile — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:02:34 +0000

The blazer is 2WD and is the 2-door which is more top-heavy and shorter. Plus young males tend to drive 2-door blazers (not very well apparently).

By: gsh

gsh — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:42:18 +0000

any care to explain the blazer? im not aware that blazers make good racers.

By: atro

atro — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:28:03 +0000

“Take the Infiniti G35, for example. Its death rate is just 11 per million vehicles. Compare that to the nearly identical Nissan 350Z, whose death rate is a whopping 193 per million.”

the g35 in ths list is the sedan…

you’re comparing apples to oranges…

you guys rock most of the time, but you can be way off as well.

By: lotusfire

lotusfire — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:24:08 +0000

Davedo is right, if there are only half a million G35s in the survey and 5 1/2 people died, that still counts as 11/million.

By: davebo

davebo — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:01:16 +0000

Zer0: “There are less crashes in them because THERE ARE LESS OF THESE CARS ON THE ROAD.”
But the study is how many deaths per million vehicles made.

By: Zer0

Zer0 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:56:15 +0000

This study was a waste of time.

By: Zer0

Zer0 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:55:28 +0000

You have to look at how this study is conducted also.
There are less deaths in more expensive cars, because there are less crashes in them, of course.

There are less crashes in them because THERE ARE LESS OF THESE CARS ON THE ROAD.

It’s easy to have a high number of crashes that involve a high volume vehicle.

By: CTS DRIVER

CTS DRIVER — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:39:36 +0000

Take the Infiniti G35, for example. Its death rate is just 11 per million vehicles. Compare that to the nearly identical Nissan 350Z, whose death rate is a whopping 193 per million.

doesnt this line above explain it all, same car basically with different kinds of drivers, i dont see many g35 ricers, but do see alot of 350z racers though.

By: Random Jerk

Random Jerk — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:37:27 +0000

It’s NOT that expensive cars are all that much safer, its the demographics of the DRIVERS who can afford the expensive cars are. OLD WEALTY RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE, you know – the ones who are always driving to slow for you…

By: Random Jerk

Random Jerk — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:26:20 +0000

I would agree that overall this information as presented is not enough to make a judgment on the actual safety of these vehicles. However, you could certainly makes some assumptions:

The “safest” cars are typically expensive/luxury (old drivers) or minivans/SUVS (family transportation).

The “deadliest” are inexpensive/small (inexperienced young people) or sports oriented (wanna be Schumachers who kill themselves).

I’d say the only surprise would be the Blazer at the top of the deadliest list.

By: lolrax

lolrax — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:18:54 +0000

Other than the astro, it seems that it almost comes down to vehicle expense. Compare the sticker prices on the top list to the vehicles on the bottom. Its survival or the richest.

By: 55amg

55amg — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:07:09 +0000

yes more to do with whos driving these cars. Anyway, note that theres only one american manufacturer in the least deaths bit. I wonder of that has to do with the American cars handling

By: Don

Don — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:00:31 +0000

more like “vehicles with riskiest drivers”