Are increased fuel prices going to lead to more road deaths?
Discussion
Bear with me on this theory, in the long run the MAJORITY of people are going to buy smaller cheaper cars because of the increased fuel costs, now while I accept safety is increasing in small cars, they are still small cars!
So collisions that would have been injury only, now would result in death, were also going to end up with lorrys increasing in size to move more for less fuel which will be a contributing factor, not to mention more motorbikes (use very little fuel, only way to have some fun as fuel prices increase?!)
If you remember 5th gear found that the smart held up remarkably well at 70MPH but the occupants would have died due to the forces involved
Bigger Cars may crumple more, but this absorbs the force of the impact, plus they will punch through or over smaller cars:
Is this paranoid crap or do I actually have a point here?? Your thoughts?
So collisions that would have been injury only, now would result in death, were also going to end up with lorrys increasing in size to move more for less fuel which will be a contributing factor, not to mention more motorbikes (use very little fuel, only way to have some fun as fuel prices increase?!)
If you remember 5th gear found that the smart held up remarkably well at 70MPH but the occupants would have died due to the forces involved
Bigger Cars may crumple more, but this absorbs the force of the impact, plus they will punch through or over smaller cars:
Is this paranoid crap or do I actually have a point here?? Your thoughts?
k it, it would cost a 0.1 litres of fuel to get back up to speedPetrolhead_Rich said:
If you remember 5th gear found that the smart held up remarkably well at 70MPH but [b] the occupants would have died due to the forces
Um, pretty much any car's occupants would die if the car hit an immovable object head on at 70mph. Generally I think smaller, lighter, cars are safer, as long as the other cars around are also small and light. Plus, smaller cars tend to have a greater feeling of speed, so I suspect average speeds would drop and the number of fatalities along with. Speed may not be what causes most accidents, but it does have a very large effect on the likelihood of people surviving them.
Only a very small proportion of fatal accidents involve lorries.
I'd say increasing fuel prices will drive down the number of road deaths, overall.
Edited by kambites on Wednesday 19th January 13:04
Surely therefore more risk of collisons between small cars if everyone has one. Let's face it, if you're hit by a juggernaut in anything, you're brown bread.
In addition, smaller cars largely mean better awareness of the extremities and better visibility and they can dodge more....maybe.
In addition, smaller cars largely mean better awareness of the extremities and better visibility and they can dodge more....maybe.
I think potentially it may force families into a car that is a size too small but given cars have got a lot safer I dont think it is quite that disastorous, having seen that video of a little Renault Modus mullering a big Volvo.
I know the scrappage wasn't popular and was very flawed, but it did get a lot of older gen cars off the road to be replaced by safer new ones, so potentially that has saved a couple of lives.
I know the scrappage wasn't popular and was very flawed, but it did get a lot of older gen cars off the road to be replaced by safer new ones, so potentially that has saved a couple of lives.
The more fuel prices go up, the less people will spill diesel on the road, and therefore motorcycling will become safer.
The more fuel prices go up, the less people will be inclined to buy 4x4s, therefore the less likelihood of going under a car rather than over it.
The more fuel prices go up, the less people will be inclined to make stupid, pointless journeys, therefore the less chances of having an accident in the first place.
You could play this game all day making as many unsubstantiated claims as you want!
The more fuel prices go up, the less people will be inclined to buy 4x4s, therefore the less likelihood of going under a car rather than over it.
The more fuel prices go up, the less people will be inclined to make stupid, pointless journeys, therefore the less chances of having an accident in the first place.
You could play this game all day making as many unsubstantiated claims as you want!
No i dont believe fuel prices will lead to more deaths. It will be fine as lots of people make the switch to smaller cars so there will be predominantly small cars thus small cars crashing into small cars.
The problem the OP suggests has already occured over the last 10 years with the big move towards 4x4s so when a 4x4 meets a smart car there is total carnage when 4x4 meets 4x4 there is total carnage simply because (nearly) 2 tonne vehicles hitting anything is going to cause serious amounts of damage.
The difficulty is convincing people like for example my step mum who once owned a Ford Ka, it was cheap+economical an since most of her journeys are alone it was perfect. When someone crashed into the Ka in a 4x4 the response was, I NEED a 4x4 because then I am safer, she still complains about increased fuel consumption and will not accept that a Toyota corrola is far cheaper to run and has a better NCAP rating than her RAV which SHOULD make it a much better solution.
dave
The problem the OP suggests has already occured over the last 10 years with the big move towards 4x4s so when a 4x4 meets a smart car there is total carnage when 4x4 meets 4x4 there is total carnage simply because (nearly) 2 tonne vehicles hitting anything is going to cause serious amounts of damage.
The difficulty is convincing people like for example my step mum who once owned a Ford Ka, it was cheap+economical an since most of her journeys are alone it was perfect. When someone crashed into the Ka in a 4x4 the response was, I NEED a 4x4 because then I am safer, she still complains about increased fuel consumption and will not accept that a Toyota corrola is far cheaper to run and has a better NCAP rating than her RAV which SHOULD make it a much better solution.
dave
LuS1fer said:
In addition, smaller cars largely mean better awareness of the extremities and better visibility and they can dodge more....maybe.
Im my limited experience, it's always seems to be the tiny Altos and Pandas that go right to the other side of the road when going around an obstacle, leaving a gap big enough to get another car through. Bigger cars/drivers are happier to get closer. Perhaps because they've had more experience of squeezing into tight gaps. Maybe its just an illusion. I do wonder if, with the smaller cars, whether the demographic that buys them for their small-car features (easier to park, light controls, etc.) are perhaps less skilled as a result of settling for the easy option each time.aka_kerrly said:
No i dont believe fuel prices will lead to more deaths. It will be fine as lots of people make the switch to smaller cars so there will be predominantly small cars thus small cars crashing into small cars.
The problem the OP suggests has already occured over the last 10 years with the big move towards 4x4s so when a 4x4 meets a smart car there is total carnage when 4x4 meets 4x4 there is total carnage simply because (nearly) 2 tonne vehicles hitting anything is going to cause serious amounts of damage.
The difficulty is convincing people like for example my step mum who once owned a Ford Ka, it was cheap+economical an since most of her journeys are alone it was perfect. When someone crashed into the Ka in a 4x4 the response was, I NEED a 4x4 because then I am safer, she still complains about increased fuel consumption and will not accept that a Toyota corrola is far cheaper to run and has a better NCAP rating than her RAV which SHOULD make it a much better solution.
dave
So two people in citroen saxo's hitting each other at 60MPH is going to be the same as two BMW 7 Series hitting each other at 60MPH???The problem the OP suggests has already occured over the last 10 years with the big move towards 4x4s so when a 4x4 meets a smart car there is total carnage when 4x4 meets 4x4 there is total carnage simply because (nearly) 2 tonne vehicles hitting anything is going to cause serious amounts of damage.
The difficulty is convincing people like for example my step mum who once owned a Ford Ka, it was cheap+economical an since most of her journeys are alone it was perfect. When someone crashed into the Ka in a 4x4 the response was, I NEED a 4x4 because then I am safer, she still complains about increased fuel consumption and will not accept that a Toyota corrola is far cheaper to run and has a better NCAP rating than her RAV which SHOULD make it a much better solution.
dave
I know which one I would rather be in!
Small car vs tree/wall - I think there will be a big difference there!
doogz said:
Could argue that a small car will have a better chance of braking in time, or swerving to avoid said object, due to the fact it's lighter and more nimble.
Could argue about it all day tbh, there is no defining factor that contributes more than anything else, to every accident, they're all different.
In the event of an actual accident occurring then you want nice big crumple zones, and you don't get that luxury in a small car.Could argue about it all day tbh, there is no defining factor that contributes more than anything else, to every accident, they're all different.
Petrolhead_Rich said:
aka_kerrly said:
No i dont believe fuel prices will lead to more deaths. It will be fine as lots of people make the switch to smaller cars so there will be predominantly small cars thus small cars crashing into small cars.
The problem the OP suggests has already occured over the last 10 years with the big move towards 4x4s so when a 4x4 meets a smart car there is total carnage when 4x4 meets 4x4 there is total carnage simply because (nearly) 2 tonne vehicles hitting anything is going to cause serious amounts of damage.
The difficulty is convincing people like for example my step mum who once owned a Ford Ka, it was cheap+economical an since most of her journeys are alone it was perfect. When someone crashed into the Ka in a 4x4 the response was, I NEED a 4x4 because then I am safer, she still complains about increased fuel consumption and will not accept that a Toyota corrola is far cheaper to run and has a better NCAP rating than her RAV which SHOULD make it a much better solution.
dave
So two people in citroen saxo's hitting each other at 60MPH is going to be the same as two BMW 7 Series hitting each other at 60MPH???The problem the OP suggests has already occured over the last 10 years with the big move towards 4x4s so when a 4x4 meets a smart car there is total carnage when 4x4 meets 4x4 there is total carnage simply because (nearly) 2 tonne vehicles hitting anything is going to cause serious amounts of damage.
The difficulty is convincing people like for example my step mum who once owned a Ford Ka, it was cheap+economical an since most of her journeys are alone it was perfect. When someone crashed into the Ka in a 4x4 the response was, I NEED a 4x4 because then I am safer, she still complains about increased fuel consumption and will not accept that a Toyota corrola is far cheaper to run and has a better NCAP rating than her RAV which SHOULD make it a much better solution.
dave
I know which one I would rather be in!
Small car vs tree/wall - I think there will be a big difference there!
If you then factor in the difference the size of the car makes when hitting pedestrians then small cars win again. Would you rather be hit by a Range rover or a Ka at 30mph - the sheer size combined with tall flat front of a RR would do far more damage to you than the lower slanted front of a KA.
I think they will say the same due to:
1) a 10% reduction in deaths as the "mean road speed" falls (people drive slower, less agressively, more economically, so mean speeds fall, and energy of the impact falls by the square of speed)
unfortunately balanced by:
2) 10% increase in death from 2 factors, a) people being run over by silent electric cars, and b) people electrocuting themselves trying to DIY fix their electric car.... ;-)
1) a 10% reduction in deaths as the "mean road speed" falls (people drive slower, less agressively, more economically, so mean speeds fall, and energy of the impact falls by the square of speed)
unfortunately balanced by:
2) 10% increase in death from 2 factors, a) people being run over by silent electric cars, and b) people electrocuting themselves trying to DIY fix their electric car.... ;-)
doogz said:
Mr2Mike said:
doogz said:
Could argue that a small car will have a better chance of braking in time, or swerving to avoid said object, due to the fact it's lighter and more nimble.
Could argue about it all day tbh, there is no defining factor that contributes more than anything else, to every accident, they're all different.
In the event of an actual accident occurring then you want nice big crumple zones, and you don't get that luxury in a small car.Could argue about it all day tbh, there is no defining factor that contributes more than anything else, to every accident, they're all different.
Swings and roundabouts.
aka_kerrly said:
True to an extent but as NCAP scores prove there are many small cars that have high ratings and the evidence from 5Th Gear when they crashed a 15 year old Volvo into a Modus the conclusion was you would have been better off in the Modus which is half the size and far lighter.
Woah, hold on! NCAP ratings are assigned in car classes. A 5* Supermini might not be as safe as a 3* 4x4.http://www.euroncap.com/Content-Web-Page/0f3bec79-...
Edited by carl_w on Wednesday 19th January 20:18
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff