A recent study from the US has found that children are eight times more likely to be killed in a collision involving an SUV or pick-up truck than they are in a crash in which a standard passenger car is involved.

Published in the Journal of Safety Research (link is external), the study comes at a time when such vehicles are getting increasingly large, and as SUVs make up an increasingly large proportion of new cars sold especially in affluent urban areas.

Many are bough by parents, with SUVs being seen – and widely promoted – as the perfect vehicle for families with children, but researchers from the University of Illinois in Springfield have established that they are posing an increasing danger to kids, or at least those on the outside of the vehicle.

Co-authors Micky Edwards and Daniel Leonard analysed collision and hospitals admission data in Illinois from 2016-19 for the study, which was funded by the funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Illinois Department of Public Health.

They cross-analysed the types of vehicles involved in crashes in which the victim was a pedestrian or cyclist against the outcome for the patient, with one of their chief discoveries being that SUVs were the type of car that led to the most serious injuries, as well as deaths, and in particular when a child was involved.

For example, in 62 per cent of collisions with a child on foot or on a bike, a passenger car was involved, and 19 per cent of fatalities happened following such a crash; SUVs by contrast were involved in much fewer collisions – 16.9 per cent – but were the vehicle involved in fully 40 per cent of the fatal ones.

The co-authors said that the study underlined “the high cost of large motor vehicles on pedestrian and pedal cyclist injury severity, fatalities, and hospital charges,” adding that “once more, the most vulnerable among us seem to bear the greatest burden.”

Factors behind the greater risk that SUVs present to children in particular include their size – it is not uncommon to see pictures on social media of children or even adults dwarfed by an SUV they are standing next to, and such photos also serve to underline another issue, namely the highly restricted visibility such vehicles typically afford compared to smaller cars.

Their sheer size and weight is of course another factor affecting the severity of crashes involving SUVs and vulnerable road users.

https://road.cc/content/news/suvs-8-times-more-dangerous-kids-walking-or-cycling-295527

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://road.cc/content/news/suvs-8-times-more-dangerous-kids-walking-or-cycling-295527

Don’t drive an SUV, then.

Funny how you’re concerned about vehicle deaths, but not by deaths caused
by cyclists.

--
Spike

the little onion | 723 posts | 44 min ago
1 like

There is a massive SUV that is driven to the gates of our local primary school every morning and afternoon, to drop off Little Miss Precious Who Can't Possibly Walk Half A Mile. The bonnet is so high that pretty much any of the pupils under the age of about 9 could be stood right in front of the car, and be totally invisible to the driver. It's a fatality waiting to happen..

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> the little onion | 723 posts | 44 min ago
> 1 like

> There is a massive SUV that is driven to the gates of our local primary
> school every morning and afternoon, to drop off Little Miss Precious Who
> Can't Possibly Walk Half A Mile. The bonnet is so high that pretty much
> any of the pupils under the age of about 9 could be stood right in front
> of the car, and be totally invisible to the driver. It's a fatality waiting to happen.

Tell us again what happens to vehicles the drivers of which do something
that you don’t agree with.

Mirrors and panels seem to spring to mind in this regard.

--
Spike

eburtthebike | 3512 posts | 7 min ago
0 likes

This is probably due to several factors, amongst which will be risk compensation; drive a massive, safe for the occupants vehicle and you're going to take that little bit less care. Maybe if all SUVs had seat belts and air bags removed and the legendary 14" rusty bayonet in the middle of the steering wheel, things might change. It really is time we looked at road safety from the perspective of everyone, not just those in the car.

Reminds me of the woman who was involved in a crash driving an SUV where the occupants of the ordinary car died; her response was to buy a bigger SUV.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> eburtthebike | 3512 posts | 7 min ago
> 0 likes

> This is probably due to several factors, amongst which will be risk
> compensation; drive a massive, safe for the occupants vehicle and you're
> going to take that little bit less care. Maybe if all SUVs had seat
> belts and air bags removed and the legendary 14" rusty bayonet in the
> middle of the steering wheel, things might change. It really is time we
> looked at road safety from the perspective of everyone, not just those in the car.

What a great idea!

The 14” rusty bayonet could be attached to the stems of bicycles; it might
help cyclists keep their heads up and so see where they are going -
two-thirds of bicycle crashes involve mo other vehicles.

> Reminds me of the woman who was involved in a crash driving an SUV where
> the occupants of the ordinary car died; her response was to buy a bigger SUV.

In the 1950s someone I know was in an AFV driving on an autobahn, when they
felt a slight bump. They stopped and got out of the vehicle, only to see a
total wreck of the car that had collided with them. Perhaps for their next
trip they they took an MBT.

--
Spike

Rendel Harris replied to the little onion | 3134 posts | 10 hours ago
2 likes

I recall a survey (in the US but holds good for here I'm sure) a couple of years back in which parents were asked if they would be prepared to trade off a 50% improvement in safety for their children in their vehicle if it meant the vehicle was 50% more dangerous for other children either on the street or in other vehicles, IIRC over 80% said yes. People are generally pretty selfish and doubly so when their offspring are concerned, that's why civilisation requires laws and regulations, something sadly missing from vehicle regulation at present.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rendel Harris replied to the little onion | 3134 posts | 10 hours ago
> 2 likes

> I recall a survey (in the US but holds good for here I'm sure) a couple
> of years back in which parents were asked if they would be prepared to
> trade off a 50% improvement in safety for their children in their vehicle
> if it meant the vehicle was 50% more dangerous for other children either
> on the street or in other vehicles, IIRC over 80% said yes.

It is said that we are only nine meals from anarchy. Should that come about
- for example the EMP from a 1 megaton detonation 200 miles above the North
Sea would wipe out most of the electronics in the country with the
subsequent collapse of ‘society’ - you’ll really see what people will do to
look after themselves and their families.

> People are generally pretty selfish and doubly so when their offspring
> are concerned, that's why civilisation requires laws and regulations,
> something sadly missing from vehicle regulation at present.

You’re joking! Vehicle design and testing is very highly regulated! Unlike
bicycles, of course.

--
Spike

They might be safer overall because most road crashes involve cars because they're the dominant life form there (flipping themselves over, driving into immobile things or hitting each other). Without a shred of evidence I'll swallow the manufacturer's hints that they're safer than other cars (bigger is better, right?). So therefore as long as SUV drivers are not disproportionately driving into inanimate objects and on average SUVs don't have far fewer occupants than other cars, SUVs for safety!

I have seen some studies saying that they're not so good for vulnerable road users when they hit them. That doesn't happen much compared to single car / vehicle-on-vehicle crashes so again unless SUV drivers are hunting down vulnerable road users more than the average car driver those can be ignored too.

Hoorah for the SUV! Never mind the externalities, where do I get one? Just wait until the ads pop up on road.cc I guess?

swldx...@gmail.com [Prince* Del Boy Mason] wrote:

> Rendel Harris replied to the little onion | 3134 posts | 10 hours ago

> I recall a survey (in the US but holds good for here I'm sure) a couple of years back in which parents were asked if they would be prepared to trade off a 50% improvement in safety for their children in their vehicle if it meant the vehicle was 50% more dangerous for other children either on the street or in other vehicles, IIRC over 80% said yes. People are generally pretty selfish and doubly so when their offspring are concerned, that's why civilisation requires laws and regulations, something sadly missing from vehicle regulation at present.

What?

The law should ensure that vehicles are less safe for their occupants
than they easily can be?

Are you quite right in the head?

[That was rhetorical. The answer is "No".]

[* Apparently, Prince Del Boy doesn't sweat. He might well be be a
long-lost member of the Royal Family.]

QUOTE: They cross-analysed the types of vehicles involved in crashes in which the victim was a pedestrian or cyclist against the outcome for the patient, with one of their chief discoveries being that SUVs were the type of car that led to the most serious injuries, as well as deaths, and in particular when a child was involved. ENDS

Due to the fact that sociopathic knobheads drive them who don't care about the people they kill as long as they are "safe".

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> QUOTE: They cross-analysed the types of vehicles involved in crashes in
> which the victim was a pedestrian or cyclist against the outcome for the
> patient, with one of their chief discoveries being that SUVs were the
> type of car that led to the most serious injuries, as well as deaths, and
> in particular when a child was involved. ENDS

<snip>

Using the data from the report…

In 62% of car collisions with a child on foot or on a bike, some 19% result
in a fatality.

Therefore, the the percentage of deaths per collision is given by 0.62 *
0.19 = 0.1178 or 11.78%

For SUVs, the figures are 16.9% and 40%.

Therefore the the percentage of deaths per collision for SUVs is given by

0.169 * 0.40 = 0.0676 or 6.76%

The message is clear: SUVs are nearly TWICE AS SAFE as other cars.

The cycling world don’t like it up ‘em…🙄

--
Spike

QUOTE: They cross-analysed the types of vehicles involved in crashes in which the victim was a pedestrian or cyclist against the outcome for the patient, with one of their chief discoveries being that SUVs were the type of car that led to the most serious injuries, as well as deaths, and in particular when a child was involved. ENDS

They're also a bugger for rolling over and crashing on corners.

QUOTE: SUVs also had the highest rollover rate for passenger vehicles in injury crashes -- 12 percent, as compared to 7 percent for pickups, 4 percent for vans and 3 percent for passenger cars. ENDS

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE: They cross-analysed the types of vehicles involved in crashes in
> which the victim was a pedestrian or cyclist against the outcome for the
> patient, with one of their chief discoveries being that SUVs were the
> type of car that led to the most serious injuries, as well as deaths, and
> in particular when a child was involved. ENDS
>
> They're also a bugger for rolling over and crashing on corners.
>
> QUOTE: SUVs also had the highest rollover rate for passenger vehicles in
> injury crashes -- 12 percent, as compared to 7 percent for pickups, 4
> percent for vans and 3 percent for passenger cars. ENDS

AND STILL SUVs ARE THE SAFEST

…see published data…

--
Spike

Given the proper circumstance, any kind of vehicle can roll over. However, taller and narrower vehicles, like sport utility vehicles (commonly called SUVs), have added instability from a higher center of gravity, and are more prone to these types of accidents.

SUV rollover accidents are among the most dangerous types of accidents that can occur on the road. Although rollover accidents only account for about three percent of serious vehicle accidents, those that do occur account for thirty percent of those killed while riding in passenger vehicles.

In a rollover accident, the occupants are thrown violently about the vehicle, resulting in an elevated risk of serious head and neck injuries. In cases where somebody is thrown from the vehicle, the ensuing impact has a high probability of being fatal.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> SUV rollover accidents are among the most dangerous types of accidents
> that can occur on the road. Although rollover accidents only account for
> about three percent of serious vehicle accidents, those that do occur
> account for thirty percent of those killed while riding in passenger vehicles.

> In a rollover accident, the occupants are thrown violently about the
> vehicle, resulting in an elevated risk of serious head and neck injuries.
> In cases where somebody is thrown from the vehicle, the ensuing impact
> has a high probability of being fatal.

Sounds like we need to equip SUVs with side protection, air bags, and seat
belts.

Who’da thunk it?

This guy is a RZRBRN. Not.

🙄

--
Spike

QUOTE: More than 280,000 rollover accidents are reported each year in the United States. Over 58,000 people are injured in SUV rollover accidents each year. SUV rollover accidents increase the likelihood of serious injuries by more than 36%. Over 90% of SUV rollover accidents involve a single vehicle.ENDS

IN OTHER WORDS, DRIVING TOO FAST FOR THE CONDITIONS.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE: More than 280,000 rollover accidents are reported each year in the
> United States. Over 58,000 people are injured in SUV rollover accidents
> each year. SUV rollover accidents increase the likelihood of serious
> injuries by more than 36%. Over 90% of SUV rollover accidents involve a single vehicle.ENDS

> IN OTHER WORDS, DRIVING TOO FAST FOR THE CONDITIONS.

AND WHY BLAME THE CAR?

EVEN CYCLISTS GO TOO FAST FOR THE CONDITIONS.

Just think of Dalston and Didsbury.

--
Spike

Sport utility vehicles (SUVs) have been criticised for a variety of environmental and safety-related reasons. They generally have poorer fuel efficiency and require more resources to manufacture than smaller vehicles, thus contributing more to climate change and environmental degradation.

Their higher center of gravity significantly increases their risk of rollovers. Their larger mass increases their momentum, which results in a larger braking distance and more damage to other road users in collisions. Their higher front-end profile reduces visibility and makes them at least twice as likely to kill pedestrians they hit. Additionally, the psychological sense of security they provide influences drivers to drive less cautiously or rely on their car for their perceived safety, rather than their own driving.

A high centre of gravity makes a vehicle more prone to rollover accidents than lower vehicles, especially if the vehicle leaves the road, or if the driver makes a sharp turn during an emergency maneuver. Figures from the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show that most passenger cars have about a 10% chance of rollover if involved in a single-vehicle crash, while SUVs have between 14% and 23% (varying from a low of 14% for the all-wheel-drive (AWD) Ford Edge to a high of 23% for the front-wheel-drive (FWD) Ford Escape). Many modern SUVs are equipped with electronic stability control (ESC) to prevent rollovers on flat surfaces, but 95% of rollovers are "tripped", meaning that the vehicle strikes something low, such as a kerb or shallow ditch, causing it to tip over.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sport utility vehicles (SUVs) have been criticised for a variety of
> environmental and safety-related reasons. [IT IS ALLEGED THAT] They
> generally have poorer fuel efficiency and require more resources to
> manufacture than smaller vehicles, thus contributing more to climate
> change and environmental degradation.

[CITATION NEEDED]

> [IT IS ALLEGED THAT] Their higher center of gravity significantly
> increases their risk of rollovers. Their larger mass increases their
> momentum, which results in a larger [LONGER] braking distance and [IT IS
> ALLEGED THAT] more damage to other road users in collisions. Their higher
> front-end profile reduces visibility and [IT IS ALLEGED THAT] makes them
> at least twice as likely to kill pedestrians they hit [ALTHOUGH THE
> MECHANISM WAS NOT EXPLAINED]. Additionally, [IT IS ALLEGED THAT] the
> psychological sense of security they provide influences drivers to drive
> less cautiously or rely on their car for their perceived safety, rather
> than their own driving.

> [IT IS ALLEGED THAT] A high centre of gravity makes a vehicle more prone
> to rollover accidents than lower vehicles, especially if the vehicle
> leaves the road, or if the driver makes a sharp turn during an emergency
> maneuver. Figures from the US National Highway Traffic Safety
> Administration show that most passenger cars have about a 10% chance of
> rollover if involved in a single-vehicle crash, while SUVs have between
> 14% and 23% (varying from a low of 14% for the all-wheel-drive (AWD) Ford
> Edge to a high of 23% for the front-wheel-drive (FWD) Ford Escape). Many
> modern SUVs are equipped with electronic stability control (ESC) to
> prevent rollovers on flat surfaces, but 95% of rollovers are "tripped",
> meaning that the vehicle strikes something low, such as a kerb or shallow
> ditch, causing it to tip over [JUST LIKE OTHER VEHICLES IN THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES]

--
Spike

Vehicles have become an integral part of transportation and daily lives. Although car designs have improved to make them safer, they still present a risk. Each year, there are approximately 1.35 million fatalities due to car accidents. This alarming information is perhaps why the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes a goal to halve the number of deaths and injuries from traffic crashes.

When buying a vehicle, people tend to focus on matters of design, performance, and costs. While these are important factors, consider safety first. Car accidents vary widely, and some vehicles are more prone to some kinds of accidents than others. You need to understand the unique safety risks your vehicle presents.

Sport utility vehicles (SUVs) are among the most popular types of cars these days. Within ten years, the number of SUVs in operation increased from 35 million to 200 million. People love these heavy-duty vehicles not only because they offer high performance, but because their size provides psychological security.

But the size of SUVs can be misleading in terms of safety, particularly when it comes to rollover accidents. While they only occur in about 3 percent of all serious crashes, rollovers are responsible for 30 percent of people killed in passenger accidents. And it just so happens that SUVs, which seem safer, actually are at the highest risk of rollover.
How Vehicle Rollovers Occur and Why SUVs Are More Prone to Rollovers

Any vehicle can rollover. However, vehicles such as SUVs, pickups, and vans are more susceptible, given their narrower, taller build. As such, they are top-heavy and have a higher center of gravity, which reduces balance and stability.

Any sideways pressure on an SUV while navigating a turn shifts the center of gravity to one side, increasing the potential for a rollover. The lateral forces on your vehicle increase along with your speed and the angle of any turn you make. Sharp turns cause a significant shift in the center of gravity, which leads many drivers to overcorrect in the other direction, creating a “pendulum effect” that decreases control. As it continues, the more the vehicle will swerve and may lead to a rollover.

Single-vehicle rollovers, however, are not usually caused by the loss of steering control alone. The major risk comes when the swerving vehicle encounters an object that catalyzes the loss of balance like a pothole, curb, or a roadside shoulder. This kind of rollover is called a “trip,” whereas “untripped” rollovers are not caused by hitting any obstruction and tend to occur at higher speeds with drivers attempting more aggressive change-in-direction maneuvers.
Common Types of SUV Rollover Accidents

Though rollover accidents make up a small proportion of total accidents, they account for a high percentage of fatalities. The National Highway Safety Administration reports that, in a recent year, close to 35 percent of passenger vehicles’ fatalities resulted from vehicle rollovers.

Data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) suggests that tripped rollovers account for 95 percent of single-vehicle rollovers. Such accidents occur when the vehicle strikes an object on the road, or leaves the road and the tires dig into soft soil. Common types of tripped rollover accidents include:
1. Soft Soil Rollovers

The actions of other drivers, pedestrians, or even animals may require a driver to perform collision avoidance maneuvers. This may force a driver off the road. Compared to tarmac—the substance road surfaces are made of—soil on the roadside is often softer. If it’s too soft, the tires may dig in, causing the vehicle to trip.
2. Ramp/Guardrail Rollovers

Ramps and guardrails are used as markers and protection against collisions by cars from different lanes. However, when performing collision avoidance measures, they can create a significant risk of a rollover. This risk is greater depending on other circumstances. For instance, if you are driving down a two-lane road and an emergency forces you to veer to the right, you cannot avoid driving into the ramp or guardrail. In such a case, and depending on the speed and sharpness of your turn, you might end up in a trip rollover.
3. Steep Slope Rollovers

Steep slope rollovers by SUVs often occur in off-road environments. As the driver slowly navigates the car downhill, they may misjudge the slope’s steepness when making a turn. When this happens, it’s easy for the vehicle to topple and roll downhill.

In other situations, the vehicle can topple over if the slope is too steep going uphill. As the steepness increases, the center of gravity will be higher, and the car can fall backward.
4. Sideway Skid Rollovers

In some cases, the rear tires of your SUV may lose traction, causing the vehicle to skid. This is called fishtailing, and it can cause the vehicle to hit roadside barriers or curb, leading to a rollover. Such accidents often occur when the roads are wet or icy.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

<Big snip of unattributed article>

🙄

--
Spike

Evidence of SUV rollover risk is well-documented. In fact, during the 1980’s and 1990’s, the SUV came under fire for not only its propensity to guzzle gas but for very real and well-substantiated safety concerns. In several documentaries, CBS News depicted the SUV’s tendency to rollover when negotiating certain turns and/or evasive maneuvers.

In 2000, the SUV rollover controversy was renewed when a massive recall of defective Firestone tires used on SUV’s was initiated. In that instance, the Ford Explorer, one of America’s most popular and affordable SUV’s, was the culprit.
The Cause of SUV Rollovers

SUVs are prone to rollover when the vehicle’s center of gravity is disrupted. Technological improvements and driver use modifications have reduced the incidents of SUV Rollover but these accidents still occur on US highway and rank among the most deadly accident types.

Because SUVs are higher above the road than other passenger vehicles, they are more prone to rollover accidents. The vehicle’s center of gravity can be disturbed when the SUV moves off the paved road or when the vehicle’s tires are out of balance.

As the tires are pivotal in supporting the SUV’s center of gravity, there is more pressure on them than with other motorized vehicles. Many experts believe the SUV is only as safe as its tires.

Another contributor to SUV rollovers is defective materials deployed during the manufacturing process. In other words, your SUV may look safer than it really is because inferior materials may have been used in offshore manufacturing facilities.

swldx...@gmail.com [Prince Del Boy, who doesn't sweat] wrote:

> SUVs are prone to rollover when the vehicle’s center of gravity is disrupted. Technological improvements and driver use modifications have reduced the incidents of SUV Rollover but these accidents still occur on US highway and rank among the most deadly accident types.
>
> Because SUVs are higher above the road than other passenger vehicles, they are more prone to rollover accidents. The vehicle’s center of gravity can be disturbed when the SUV moves off the paved road or when the vehicle’s tires are out of balance.
>
> As the tires are pivotal in supporting the SUV’s center of gravity, there is more pressure on them than with other motorized vehicles. Many experts believe the SUV is only as safe as its tires.

....or its windscreen wipers.

Tall vehicles

Generally, the taller a vehicle is, the greater chance it has of rolling onto its side or top during an accident. This means many pickup trucks, SUVs and crossover vehicles present an enhanced rollover risk.
Bald tires

To work effectively, tires must have sufficiently deep treads. Not only do healthy tires allow you to maneuver your vehicle, but they also keep your car, truck or SUV on the ground. If your tires require replacement, you may be in danger of having a rollover accident.
Modified cars

It is not uncommon for car enthusiasts to add some aftermarket modifications. Depending on the modification, though, altering your vehicle may make it less safe. If you tinker with your suspension or add a lift kit, for example, your car may lose much of its stability.

If you are in the market for a new vehicle, it is advisable to consider rollover risk. Ultimately, though, if you sustain a major injury in a rollover crash, you may have grounds to pursue substantial financial compensation.