View Single Post
  #11  
Old October 4th 05, 01:55 PM
Bob Chilcoat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Having driven around at least five wouldbe accidents over the years, in
everything from a Buick Riviera, Mini, Renault Fuego, and Porsche 356, I
disagree. Perhaps maneuverability PLUS driving skill and experience trumps
crashworthiness (I have Skip Barber training and some autocross experience).
At any rate, I'd always rather avoid the accident entirely than have one.
:-)

That said, if the accident is truly unavoidable, having a bit more metal
around you is certainly nice. Sort of like the BRS parachute debate: Do
you want to have the ultimate backup to use that one time the wings fold, at
the expense of reduced payload all the time and the increased temptation to
push the limits a bit more often.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Happy Dog" wrote in message
.. .
"Bob Chilcoat" wrote in

Having had a Mini in the 70's, I would rather be driving one of those
than any SUV anytime. The ability to AVOID the accident in the first
place is always better than just surviving one.


I doubt that maneuverability trumps crashworthiness. I suspect that the
most important maneuverabilty feature of small cars is the shorter
stopping distance. Driving around an accident situation is usually a
pretty tough challenge. And, when it comes to taking a hit, most small
cares, and certainly small cars from the 70s don't fare so well.

moo




--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Peter Duniho wrote:

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
. ..

A factor that cannot be determined is how many accidents are avoided by
smaller vehicles due to their greater maneuverability.


Many factors are difficult or impossible to determine using current
statistical data gathering.

However, as in aviation, driver error is fundamentally the root cause
of most accidents. I find it amusing to see so many people (not just
in this newsgroup either) argue about which vehicle is "safer" when
first of all they haven't even agreed on what "safer" means, but more
importantly when most of those drivers need a "safer" vehicle because
they and everyone else on the road refuse to drive safely in the first
place.

Yes, it is unfortunate that to the auto crowd, especially folks in
government or the IIHS, that "safety" is defined as "crash worthiness"
rather than "capable of crash avoidance."


Matt