Are smaller cars more dangerous compared to medium sized cars, for example if you are in an accident would you suffer more serious injuries in a Toyota Corolla or Mazda 3 or small hatchback compared to a medium sized sedan such as a Toyota Camry
Are Small Cars More Dangerous?
cranswick on 15/02/2023 - 14:35
Last edited 15/02/2023 - 17:21 by 2 other users
Last edited 15/02/2023 - 17:21 by 2 other users
Comments
- 1
- 2
Sounds like OP could be a Smallist.
But a smaller car is harder to hit?
Be small. Go fast. Live forever!
But some would say, one inch longer one inch stronger. I am referring to large suv in comparision.
But one inch longer, one inch limper, talking about the engine…
F=ma brah
Less mass, higher deceleration on impact
This. Best safety is in 2.5 tonne frame based 4wd, like Prado.
I thought you said like *Potato
I certainly did not, lol
depends what you call "safety" - a 2.5 tonne frame based 4wd, like Prado will roll over far easier than most small cars.
Rolling over is not on my worry list, collisions are, especially head on ones. The rest is survivable in most cars.
@[Deactivated]: not if you roll over in front of that B Double :) or you slide into a pole roof first or go over the cliff etc…
@[Deactivated]: i think other parts of the design are in the equation rather than just big and heavy. I lived in a junk yard as a kid and it remember some collisions where the car didnt look too damaged but people were killed as the engine moved back on them and some in which the car was mashed and the person walked out ok.
other features like all the fancy airbags also helped - the design of the car, crumple zones ect
i believe rigidity can be disadvantageous in some cases as the force of the shock is transferred to the person
to bounce of other ideas of the thread, size doesnt seem to be everythingas the engine moved back on them
I bet it was small car. Prado will be hit mostly on frame, it sits 50-60cm above the road already. Engine is even higher. Plus steel bulbar.
@[Deactivated]: just regular sedan it was in europe so not so many prados zooming around and even fewer bullbars :)
The poor handling of a Prado might offset some of the safety gains though. The weight and extra crash structure will definitely help in collisions with (non-fixed) objects.
Plenty of research has been done into this topic, OP should just do some googling.
definitely rather hit a skippy in a prado than a yaris or camry.
@entropysbane: Assuming you hit it. Prado might be worse for those drivers who swerve - they might be more likely to roll and end up wrapping themselves around a tree.
It's also worth noting that with a tall vehicle like a Prado you are more likely to kill pedestrians and cyclists.
Likely the ideal vehicle is something a bit lower, designed just for the road but still with significant weight and crash structure. Perhaps an all electric SUV with low COG (assuming the batteries don't blow up).
@bigbadboogieman: You jest but in some ways handling is more important for bad drivers. Yanking the wheel at 100kph is guaranteed to go badly in most off road vehicles.
@nigel deborah: If you are need to buy a prado a prime consideration is clearance. As for roll risk, a Yaris, or even a bus is just as likely to flip at 100 kms if you swerve. Most country people just don’t, opting to take out skip. (Ps most country people would be doing more than 100 kmh anyways)
Not everyone lives with 10kms of the CBD and prado is the least consideration in the country, next would be a 70 series landcruiser or hilux (by country, I mean outside Range Rover range of the city). as well as space, clearance and wet dirt capability, the range of a prado at 1200-1400 km is also important.And don’t get me started in the appalling idea of having an EV 4WD in country where you are likely to hit a roo. Definitely not fit for purpose, in fact that would be unsafe for many reasons if living in our wide brown land.
An EV sedan might be a great option for city drivers, but an appallingly bad decision for regional people.@entropysbane: I understand what you're saying, and I'm not commenting on which is better/worse for any use case or discouraging anyone from buying a 4x4. Simply which is safer. All high-clearance vehicles have a high centre of mass, which causes them to handle worse (weight transfer affects steering and can cause oscillations) and be much more prone to rolling.
I didn't suggest an EV off road vehicle, I suggested a EV SUV designed for the road (low clearance) - nothing to do with it being electric, only that they tend to be heavy, large (big crash structure) yet maintain very low centre of mass. Ignoring the potential dangers of batteries and any specific safety features on individual models, that might make them some of the safest family vehicles on the road.
Animal encounters account for 5% of the road death toll (not an insignificant amount at all) and a minority of those are due to the actual impact but rather what happens before/after, where it has led to rolls and road departures. It's definitely worth considering the on-road handling of your vehicle if you are concerned with safety.
down forget the steel bullbar.
you can easily bend it back into shape with a bit of pipe after you have sorted the yaris who got in front of you.
F=ma brah
That is the LAW !!!
Respect its Authoritah!
Actually E=1/2mv^2 The kinetic energy released on collision would be highly dependent on your speed. Yes, mass is a factor, but also depends on the structural design and safety rating..
Safer being in a Hummer hitting a Camry head on
Safer being in a B-double hitting a Hummer head on
Safer being in a BelAZ 75710 hitting a B-double head on
GET OUT OF THE FKING WAY JV. YOUR BELAZ IS ON THE TRACK THAT MY FREIGHT TRAIN IS ABOUT TO RUN OVER!!!
Safer being in a Captiva cos it'll be stuck in the driveway
You mean Craptiva?
Camry: keeps driving, oil light briefly flashes
Id argue you would more likely to be in accident involving a Toyota Camry.
Have a look at Dash cam Australia youtube channel and count the Camrys
Would that be affected by the high number of Camrys on the road?
Amongst other factors …
Or the high number of years the drivers have been on this planet for
And being popular with Uber drivers, that spend a lot of time driving.
…and how they drive…
Nah utes and pickups are number one
Utes are the clubhouse leader for losing it at an intersection and mounting the curb.
Yeah, that's why no one makes anything smaller than a Humvee…
InB4 all the bogans turn up saying crap like "classic not plastic" and trying to tell everyone how they just don't build cars like they used to.
I like to show this old gem every time someone says that older cars were built tougher.
Wow, good thing they don't make cars like they used.
Old cars were built to protect the car. New cars are built to protect the passengers.
Crashing a vintage car was heart breaking to watch. Now I need a scotch.
Got T-Boned in a Corolla. I'm sure I would have suffered the same injuries if I was driving a Camry.
T-boned
Hope you're okay D:
Yeah I'm fine. Happened ten months ago. Sore neck and back for a few days. Only recently officially replaced the car … with another Corolla :D
Wrong, if you were in a Camry you would of missed it, and Caused someone else to have a T-bone.
ps. glad you are ok.
A Volvo you mean.
I miss my old Volvo's. Someone once drove into it the side of it when it was parked (I was actually on the other side of the car looking at the tyres with the mechanic). They weren't going that fast but they hit it hard enough for it to lurch sideways about 10cm+.
Walk around and see the corner of their car all crumpled and destroyed and quickly look at my car…tiny dent on the back door. Mechanic couldn't believe the difference in damage between the cars.
@[Deactivated]: My father had a VK (if memory serves) Commodore as a work car at one stage (Calais possibly, cant remember exact details). It was in for service, and thet gave him a Volvo 244 sedan as a courtesy car.
Dad was t-boned by a drunk driver who ran a red light at ~80km/h, straight into the driver's side B-pillar. Dad was sore but alive. He couldn't get out of the car though, the other car was wedged into the driver's side doors, and the passenger side was all buckled as the passenger safety cell had transferred a lot of the crash energy across the car into the far side (as it was designed to do - Volvo were years ahead in this sort of thing to almost all other manufacturers except Saab and Mercedes Benz at that time).
After they separated the two cars at the scene of the accident with a tow-truck, they were able to open the driver's door to get him out. It wouldnt close properly again into the mangled B-pillar, but the front hinges still operated fine.
Oddly, Dad's owned Volvos ever since.
Got Boned in a Corolla once.
Depends where you're hit, maybe rear and front the sedan maybe..a little safer.
Side prob about same.
You made me remember a friends parents car, it was a Mitsubishi 360 sedan I think, or 300?
It was the weirdest thing, because when you opened the door the entire thing literally looked like it was 3 inches thick. Honestly I remember it because I thought it was so weird, roughly half the thickness of all other car doors I had seen. I don't think that sedan would be too safe if you were hit from the side.
Username checks out
380, which replaced the Magna?
Depends. If an out of control speeding truck slams into you or not?
Also, a white car is better than a black car. Easier seen at night.
Just don't speed.…a white car is better than a black car. Easier seen at night
I usually only see the lights of other vehicles at night, not the colour.
Easier seen at night.
Easier seen at day.
FTFY
The matt grey one's in the rain, during the daytime, that insist on driving with there lights off are the hardest to see.
And a red one goes quicker.
What colour does the army paint its vehicles? Whatever colour the scenery is. Because they want them to blend in and not be seen. That tells you what the least likely to be noticed and visible colour is during the say. Browns and greens where the scenery is brown and green. Sand coloured where the scenery is sand. Etc.
And car crash statistics confirm is the same for cars.
Interestingly is works the same for being detected speeding. Radar doesn't have much range, but laser speed detection devices have quite extraordinary range these days. But if the police officer operating it doesn't notice you car until you get closer to him because of the colour of your car blends into the scenery, you are more likely to notice him and slow down before he can get a reading.
Gotcha. Green car for speeding through farmland. Orange car for speeding in the outback, blue car for speeding along waters edge.
This is the way
Get the red car for when you go to hell!
No!
Some small cars are quite safe. Eg: Porsche. But they are expensive as well.Eg: Porsche
It's probably got well designed crumple zones, etc, but it's low, flat and shaped like a wedge/ramp. I can't say that I've seen it happen, but I can imagine a 4WD or truck going on top of it in a rear ender or a head-on (whereas a bigger and boxier car might have a better chance of being "pushed" away).
I drive a similar-shaped car and that's something that's on my mind when I drive around large vehicles.
Saw the aftermath of a crash like this years ago whilst walking to work one morning - there was a 4WD flipped on it's roof and a small car with a fair bit of crumpling on the bonnet and roof. Workmates said the 4WD went up the tiny car's bonnet like a ramp and flipped. Both drivers walked away ok and the small car held up really well for what happened to it.
..the 4WD went up the tiny car's bonnet like a ramp and flipped.
Was the tiny car a porsche? I'm wondering whether the engine being under the front bonnet in a non-porsche makes a difference (perhaps stops the bonnet from collapsing under the weight of a 4WD?).
Maybe it'd be a good thing for them to go up over you like a ramp? Deflect the crash energy? Haha
You certainly wouldn't want the impact to rip off the whole upper cabin…
Eg: Porsche
But if you get rear ended then you have 250kg of engine trying to make it's way into the cabin??
No, the engine sits very low to start with, and is designed to slide underneath the passenger compartment in that sort of accident.
Ok didn't know that cool.
I also thought since the the way the porsche is shaped if a larger taller car crashed into it from the front or back the large car would kind of go on top of the porsche with the porsche acting like a ramp.
It also has to go a long way to get from behind the back axle and into your back.
A much greater distance than a front engined car vs your feet.
Are smaller cars more dangerous compared to medium sized cars.
No. Cars are not dangerous they are inanimate, it’s the drivers that are dangerous.
Is it safer in a bigger car? Depends on the crash, but likely not by a big margin. Safety cells are pretty good.
Then again, if a large car and a small car hit and bounce off “out of control” the smaller car is going to get pushed further off its line and likely be harder to regain control.
End of the day, it’s the driver, not the vehicle that is the biggest contributor to safety.
Cars are not dangerous they are inanimate…
Seen a runaway car with no driver before? haha
I cannot control the driving skill of those around me
And if you watch Dash Cam Aus, you'll see how bad aussie drivers are, like no difference with drivers from a third world country!
You say that, but have you actually been a passenger in some of the third world countries you have in mind? Or second world or even first world?
I drove in those couple of third world countries for almost 2 years each one, so I can tell how BAD drivers here are, only difference is mostly they signal here before changing lanes (mostly) and not cut you off entirely.
@kiwiyonip: I’ve only driven a little in a developing country. In Aus we expect the rules to be followed and to be able to drive at the speed limit. If you screw up or don’t follow the rules we get really annoyed. Traffic is faster, but largely more ordered and predictable.
In developing countries the rules are just a bit of a guide and you drive slower to accomodate everyone else bending the rules. It’s more chaotic, but at slower speeds.
I’d guess that frequency of incident is lower in Aus, but consequences are higher than developing countries. Potentially similar ‘risk’.
Last 20 years been involved in 3 accidents. All in Mazda 3 sedan size cars.
Pushed into truck in front at traffic lights - no injury, no airbag deployed
Someone ran a red and took out all of the car before the front wheels - minor twisted wrist from the jolt, air bag deployed
Someone backed into me at intersection - no injury, minor damage3 in 7300 chance (4%) if you use a daily count, obviously a lot less if you use kilometers travels (per Tesla fans) or even less if per seconds traveled.
Obviously check ANCAP too. Interesting note in ANCAP a Smart Fortwo is about the same points scored as Corolla / Golf of the same year so size may not count.
Maths check:
3 in 7300 chance = 0.04% not 4%
Thanks.
Another thing to consider is a lot of ANCAP's criteria measures crash prevention and not just crash protection. Safety tech accounts for a lot of the rating.
My theory is yes. (does not apply to being T-boned, though it may due to surface area)
Imagine being hit by a truck (B-double), you have a lot less surface area for the shock to be absorbed in a small car compared to a bigger car, more likely to have more severe injuries. Yes i know crumple zones exist, but it makes more sense that a bigger car would absorb the impact more and be able to protect you more. Also think how far back the back of the car is in a camry, compared to a corolla. Same goes for the front.
TLDR: yes
Monash University has analysed police-reported crashes for more than 9 million vehicles across Australia and New Zealand.
Based on this analysis, they publish each year their list of Used Car Safety Ratings, giving each car a rating out of 5.
I understand that these driver protection ratings are based on how safe you will be if you crash while driving the car.
The lead researcher asserts: "The driver of the worst scoring vehicle is over eight times more likely to be killed or seriously injured than the driver in the best scoring vehicle,”
I had a quick look at the ratings, and large SUVs (especially European ones) seem to be the safest bunch. Light (tiny) cars like Holden Barina or Toyota Yaris are categorically unsafe if crashed.
Note that the model alone does not always tell you whether the car is safe. It also depends on the year of the model. For example, Honda Civic 2001-2005 scores 1 star, while Honda Civic 2016-2020 scores 5 stars.
I had a quick look at the ratings, and large SUVs (especially European ones) seem to be the safest bunch. Light (tiny) cars like Holden Barina or Toyota Yaris are categorically unsafe if crashed.
It actually doesn't take into account the chances of getting hit as a result of presenting a larger surface area. Would you like to be driving a large SUV and getting your rear quarter caught be a B double or would you like to have a near miss with a Yaris?
All these are IF you get hit. You need to reduce your chances of getting in an accident in the first instance.
and all those cars that missed the accident are not on the list. So it's very flawed
2001-2005 Civics would almost fit inside the passenger compartment of a 2016-2020 Civic - like many models, Civics have grown massively over the years.
the original 1972 Civic was a tiny 2 door hatchback about 3.5m long - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Civic_(first_generation)
the 2023 Civic seems to be about a third longer at nearly 4.7m
increasing size has been associated with increasing profits for the manufacturers - it doesn't cost much more to make, but they can ask a significantly higher price
Unfortunately this report is useless for question we asking here.
Ouch my Integra is one star. Though it's a sporty car, I would imagine overall people who drive them might be more reckless, so perhaps not totally accurate.
- 1
- 2
sure