NTSB may want to consider regulating the size of new trucks and SUVs, which are disproportionately causing deaths and damage, instead of inventing new problems for themselves.
No, the reaction by truck manufactures (Ford, etc.) was to switch from a "passenger car" chassis, which is regulated under CAFE, to a "light truck" chassis, which isn't. Remember that the PT Cruiser was classified as a "light truck". I think we can all agree that in no way shape or form would the average person believe the PT Cruiser was a truck.
> Under CAFE, vehicles can be labeled “passenger cars” or “light trucks”, with the latter category required to meet less stringent standards for fuel economy and CO2 emissions. A decade ago, the Chrysler PT Cruiser was the most egregious example of this.
> Big trucks and SUVs are often more comfortable for larger people.
This plays some part in it. I am fairly tall, and have longer legs, and there are sedans that I simply cannot fit into because they do not have enough room for my legs. Nevermind a coupe of any kind.
I do have a pet theory that part of the problem with bad drivers, especially inattentive drivers is that they're far too comfortable in their cars. They sit in a big cushy drivers seat with gods-knows-how-many adjustment zones, in-seat heating, cooling..massage even. Driving becomes a time to relax rather than a time to concentrate.
Around here we have these trucks that have giant wheels and they are jacked up like 8 feet. I see no practical use with these lifted trucks and are impossible to see around.
I've wondered if fines should scale with vehicle weight. Specifically, fines designed to prevent or reduce the damage caused by collisions. In theory, a 6000lb truck going 70 mph would be twice as destructive as a 3000lb car at the same speed.
I can’t imagine this is within the purview of the NTSB, who focus on individual safety features, rather than vehicle dimensions.
Dimensions are usually the domain of the licensing bodies that license drivers, where license classes dictate acceptable vehicle dimensions. If you want change, start there to up the licensing requirements for monstrously large passenger vehicles.
This is obvious nonsense. Larger vehicles are so much safer to their occupants that it overwhelms the very minor marginal risk increase to non-occupants from larger vehicles.
People who complain constantly about large vehicles almost never have a logical case, or even understand why they have proliferated so much in the last decade (Obama admin emissions regs).
Given the chance in an environment not distorted by emissions regs, most people will use cheaper, less safe cars, but there is no net safety upside.
> but that gets largely nullified if everyone is in a bigger car.
This is not true - the collision between two large vehicles is safer than the collision between two small vehicles.
If you are colliding at a given speed, you want as much crumple zone between you and the other mass as possible.
> That leads to an arms race with no benefit to anyone and massive costs.
It has safety benefits to everyone. As for other net costs, consumers seem to think that (after factoring in emissions regs-induced distortions), large vehicles are net better.
Interestingly, the large trucks and SUVs seem to be partially the result of fuel efficiency regulations.