[manuelabeledo]

> Cars are in fact larger partially due to advanced safety features, in particular doors, pillars etc. have gotten a lot thicker over the last 25 years.

I would like to see a citation on this. Car doors have gotten larger partly because there is so much more stuff going on there than 20-30 years ago, mostly a bunch of new electronics. They are also larger because, well, the cars are larger.

> ... you're probably better off in a crash without a seatbelt in a bus than in the highly safety rated mini the bus crashes into.

This is obviously not a fair comparison. I would be safer in a tank as well. Fact is, a current generation Toyota Camry is effectively safer than an early 2000s F-150.

[avar]

> I would like to see a citation on this.

E.g. [1] has a decent overview of the side impact saga for the Euro NCAP since 1997. I'm less familiar with how the American version has kept up.

In any case most mass market American cars target the Euro NCAP's safety tests, so it affects car design across the pond too.

> [...]mostly a bunch of new electronics.

I can't think of any electronics in doors than weren't there in 1995.

Powered windows have gotten more common, but if it weren't for safety considerations the thickness of doors should have reduced since then, as all the electronics involved are smaller now.

> Fact is, a current generation Toyota Camry is effectively safer than an early 2000s F-150.

Probably, but some quick internet searching reveals that if you add the weight of one person to the modern Camry it's probably heavier than the 2000s F-150, or thereabouts.

What I was referring to is that crash safety tests don't account for crashes between differently sized vehicles.

That's probably intentional, as regulators don't want to cause an arms race towards ever bigger cars.

1. https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/53189/19-0278-the-development...

[manuelabeledo]

> I can't think of any electronics in doors than weren't there in 1995.

Electronic locks, speakers, electronic bits of heated mirrors, airbags, etc. were absolutely not that common in the average 90s car.

Also, car dimensions are generally larger because we ourselves have become larger and taller. This becomes exceedingly obvious when comparing European cars in the past 40 years. If we look at the last 15 years, the trend is to make larger, more spacious cars, to the point where most firms are betting on SUVs over sedans.

> What I was referring to is that crash safety tests don't account for crashes between differently sized vehicles.

They do, though. What would be the point of testing a car safety measures only against cars of its size? In fact, there are plenty of videos out there of crash tests between sedans and trucks.

> That's probably intentional, as regulators don't want to cause an arms race towards ever bigger cars.

Uh? Manufacturers have been steadily increasing the size of cars in the past 20 years. Each Camry generation is larger than the previous one, and has nothing to do with regulators, it’s just that buyers want spacious cars.

[avar]

> ... were absolutely not that common in the average 90s car.

Yes, but we're not talking about what's more common, but about how recent regulatory changes affected car design.

You can look up luxury models of mid or late 90s cars, and they had all those features. Now look at the same models today.

> car dimensions are generally larger because we ourselves have become larger and taller.

This is mostly due to changed regulations. Look at e.g. a 1980 model of a Toyota Corolla:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Corolla_(E70)

If you wanted to make a car with the same outside dimensions today you could barely cram two people in it, due to all the mandatory crumple zones etc.

Of course consumer demand is also part of it, but in some cases car manufacturers are still making 1980s design cars today (e.g. the 79 series Toyota land cruiser), they're just outlawed in Europe due to safety, pollution etc. regulations.

> In fact, there are plenty of videos out there of crash tests between sedans and trucks.

I'm talking about official safety ratings, e.g. this in the Euro NCAP:

https://www.euroncap.com/en/vehicle-safety/the-ratings-expla...

Although as that page explains the particular bias I had in mind was "fixed" in 2020, now it's a 1400 kg mobile trolley, so heavier cars are tested somewhat more realistically.

[manuelabeledo]

> ... we're not talking about what's more common, but about how recent regulatory changes affected car design.

Well, no. You said that cars are larger because of safety regulations.

But the obvious rebuttal to this is that larger cars have been trending upward for decades, and the most obvious proof of this is the decline of the sedan in favor of the SUV.

> You can look up luxury models of mid or late 90s cars, and they had all those features. Now look at the same models today.

These were larger cars than the average as well. The 90s Mercedes E-Class doors were significantly larger and heavier than the ones in a Toyota Camry.

A current generation Mercedes E-Class is also larger than the one from 30 years ago, mostly because it has gone through a significant increase in interior space. Again, this is not something only Mercedes has done to their line, all automakers have gone down the same route.

> If you wanted to make a car with the same outside dimensions today you could barely cram two people in it, due to all the mandatory crumple zones etc.

That car is roughly the same size of a Volkswagen Polo, which fits 4 people, and holds pretty much the same volume in the trunk. The Polo has an five star EURONCAP rating. Hell, even the SMART Fortwo is a pretty safe car, and it's mostly plastic.

Yes, small cars exist and are safe too, but people just like larger cars better.