Green car advocate proves first hand how small cars aren't deathtraps
Despite numerous positive crash test results and assurances from both manufacturers and safety organizations, we still hear people say they'll never trade their bank-safe SUV for one of those little tin cans on wheels. This makes some people wonder what it would take to change folks' minds about automotive safety.
A first-hand account from Nick Chambers, an admitted greenie who blogs for gas2.0.org, slammed his Yaris into a dirt embankment then rolled it three times. He not only lived, but walked away from his crumpled Toyota with little more than a bump and a really sore neck. He also admits that before his little off-road excursion in the Yaris, he wasn't completely sold on small car safety. But now he says, "Yes. Yes I would trust my family to a small fuel-efficient car, and I'm miraculously alive and mostly uninjured... so no, it's not a death trap."
[Source: gas2.0 via Instapundit]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
collegekid13 9:37AM (10/23/2008)
I put a 99 sunfire into a ravine and rolled it four times landing upside down, and walked away.
Reply
Justin 9:49AM (10/23/2008)
Almost exact same thing happened to my friend in a Sunfire...I think it was a 2000. She walked away too with just a few scrapes.
They looked like crap cars, but kept her (and you) safe, so I say bravo.
Mike 10:35AM (10/23/2008)
The message contained in this article is novel only to Americans.
Randy915 4:44PM (10/23/2008)
+1 LOL Mike, good one!
Seminole 9:37AM (10/23/2008)
I wonder if he would have the same tune if he had been hit head on by a full size SUV.
Small cars are getting there though.
Reply
Jeff Fields 9:40AM (10/23/2008)
So he rolled it in dirt - BIZ DEAL! I'd like to see it take a hit from an Escalade to the side. Doubt it would look as intact from a T-Bone.
Reply
Shiftright 11:15AM (10/23/2008)
I'd like to see an Escalade get T-boned by another Escalade and see how safe one would be in it. Weight and size are advantageous in a head-on crash where the extra mass can theoritically absorb greater impact, that is all other factors being equal. By that school of thought we should all be driving cars with battering rams on the front of '74 Eldorado noses on them. The truth is SUVs and trucks aren't engineered to the same standards as cars because they don't have to, and 'smaller' cars (to you) are better engineered to dissipate and absorb high energy impacts.
tekd 3:37AM (10/24/2008)
The Yaris would probably just slide along if it was hit by an Escalade. The real problem with a larger car hitting a smaller one is if it's an impact where all the energy gets transferred into the smaller car, since it has less mass to deal with it. But if the other car is so much lighter that it actually loses traction and starts to move then a lot of the energy just goes into accelerating it.
No, still not as good as being in a larger vehicle with excellent side impact ratings, but some of the energy does get used up by the yaris moving. Now, if the Yaris was in front of a tree when it got rammed by an escalade you'd be screwed.
Timsvtgen1 9:40AM (10/23/2008)
Great Nick, Now for the next test go 60 mph crash it into an F-250 going 40. Then Roll it 3 times. Get back to me. Severe Sarcasm aside, I respect the fact he got out alive and it kept him safe, however smashing into dirt isn't really the Hardest of hits.
Reply
TJ 9:40AM (10/23/2008)
Let me get this straight, he considers it a 'miracle' to be alive, but considers the vehicles safe. Contradiction?
Reply
TJ 9:41AM (10/23/2008)
Forgot to add: dirt embankments do not jump out at you. I won't go read the article, so can someone paraphrase what event led to this mishap?
Tam 9:42AM (10/23/2008)
Come on, Autoblog. What makes you think that people who haven't been convinced by numerous rigorous scientific crash tests and years of statistical evidence, would have their minds changed by single anecdote from some guy on the Internet?
Reply
Justin 9:50AM (10/23/2008)
People are still voting for McCain/Palin aren't they?
TJ 10:12AM (10/23/2008)
People are still voting for Obama/Biden aren't they?
Mino 10:19AM (10/23/2008)
holy s!@# it's gotten political on the interwebs~!
tankd0g 9:50AM (10/23/2008)
Get a car with enough tire contact patch to actually provide traction and you'll crash less!
Reply
JZeke 9:46AM (10/23/2008)
I think the problem is in big vehicle/little vehicle crashes, more than single-vehicle accidents.
Basic physics problem right? Big things make larger smashes than little ones. If you could convince everyone out of their SUVs, then you'd still have the specter of big rigs, work trucks, and all the other large vehicles on the road to change perception about. No reason to hate on big SUVs exclusively.
Reply
sfan 1:23PM (10/23/2008)
Is there any evidence that big-vehicle-to-big-vehicle collisions are any safer than small-vehicle-to-big-vehicle crashes? The fact is that vehicle-to-vehicle crashes at anything other than slow speeds are all very dangerous.
The one major difference is relative height. I would not want to be in a low vehicle colliding with a high vehicle, regardless of the relative size.
JZeke 2:23PM (10/23/2008)
I'm sure it depends on the vehicle.
I've sat through a seminar on large vehicle engineering, and one of the speakers had a study which showed ambulances are the most lethal vehicle on the road per mile traveled, due to their really poor interior design which lead to occupant deaths.
Another seminar I sat through that day was a study on side impact collisions with trucks, specifically determining whether there was a need for side under guard protection in big vehicles. An interesting outcome of that study was most deaths with large vehicles in large collisions came from a vehicle going under the wheels of the larger vehicle.
Steven 9:47AM (10/23/2008)
Is this guy crazy, or is it just me?
Reply