"Matt Whiting" wrote in
Nothing over 30 MPH, but much above 40 and you are toast no matter what
you drive.


Wrong. Now how about something hitting you?

I've so far avoided the incompetent drivers around me both in my cars and
on my motorcycles. Riding a motorcycle tends to make one a very alert
operator.

Yet the stats show motorcycles to be much more dangerous than cars. Or do
accidents mostly happen to non-alert operators? And you were about to say
about the survivability of collisions above 40 MPH?

Yes, and the BMW is probably the best handling SUV on the market. Compare
a more typical SUV such as an Expedition or Tahoe and the difference
witht he mini is even more dramatic.

Certainly. But the question is whether the difference is enough to make
up for the significant crashworthiness difference.

I only have to avoid one crash to make up the difference. You are basing
your argument on the underlying assumption that a crash is inevitable. I
don't accept that premise.

Many of them are. You're an idiot if you think you're immune. And,
survivability, given enough time and miles, *is* the issue. The difference
between the great driver who avoids every accident and the one who doesn't
is, eventually, luck.

Yes, I'd much rather have my kids in no accident than in a 50 MPH
accident in an SUV.

You might wish to live forever, but that, and your response, are
irrelevant. You *do* have a choice between an X5 and a Mini though.
Which is it and why? You might be a supremely gifted driver and able to
avoid most collisions. Most people aren't *and never will be no matter
how much they try*. FWIW, when I was a poor aspiring racer, many years
ago, I used to trade track time for instruction. The worst crash I have
ever been in was with a student driver. They hit the gas instead of
locking up the brakes. Think cruising at 60 MPH, turning as hard as you
can into the guardrail (from the left lane) and standing on the throttle.
We walked away. My experience, and association with many other
instructors confirms, that, like most human endeavours, only a small
percentage are prodigies. And, to acheive the level of skill required to
drive around a potential accident nearly every time, requires too much
more than good intentions and a bit of training.

It is inevitable that I will die. It is not inevitable that I will be in
an automobile crash. The only wreck I've had was a single vehicle
accident in a VW Beetle where I lost control in heavy snow. I was 17
years old and haven't had an accident since then and that was nearly 30
years ago.

That you can't see the error in your logic is, at once, disturbing and
pedestrian.

Well, I've succeeded for 30 years. I also ride motorcycles, so for me any
car is a big step up in crashworthiness, but a step down in crash
avoidance. Trying to sell me an SUV for crashworthiness reasons is a lost
cause.

Also, you increase the chance of an accident due to roll-over. The last
statistics I saw showed that SUVs were LESS safe then cars, so your
argument simply doesn't hold in the real world.

Cites, please?


I've seen so many near misses that were unavoidable with any amount of
skill. Shot happens. And you're more likely to survive it in a larger
(crashworthy) vehicle. The car in the accident mentioned above was a BMW
3 series "Bauer". Was. A lovely, and rare, 3 series targa. The guy had
told his wife he was going golfing...

You are again equating size with crashworthiness and this simply isn't
correct based on the statistics to date.

No. I'm speaking about crashworthiness, period. Usually it's bigger. Not
always. And, sometimes, like the experience related above, luck plays a big
part.

Given a hundred years to live, and drive, which ride will yield more
survivors?

I'm betting on the mini. Compare the death and accident rates for SUVs
against cars. Cars are already better.


Stats?

Do some research. The last stats I saw were in Consumer Reports, but I
believe they came from NHTSA.

You made the claim. Just cite your stats. You're comparing SUVs and small
(compact & sub-compact) cars, right?

moo