I could not find any data on a cursory google search, other than the original linked article which mentioned several studies. Perhaps there has yet to be a study done on how dangerous modified/lifted vehicles are (maybe one will be coming soon). A little common sense is called for. I don't know what your lifted truck looks like but I have seen a few that were insanely high and clearly a menace to normal cars.
So, "No, I cannot find anything that demonstrates a lifted vehicle is less safe, but I'm going to stand on what I think must be the case because I don't like those people!" Got it.
You say "clearly a menace," I say "If you can't find data that shows they're actually a menace, don't waste time trying to figure out how to regulate them."
Out of curiosity does your insurance carrier know that your vehicle is modified? Have you read the fine print in your policy?
Ah. You mistake my defense of lifted vehicles with me actually owning one. I don't. My truck may be an inch or two higher due to the 19.5" wheels on it for highway tires (better fuel economy while towing, better tread life, retreadable carcasses), but it's not jacked up, and there are no lifts on the suspension - just better shocks and airbags for load leveling if needed. It's a tow pig that sees relatively few miles a year. It's certainly not an offroader. The wheelbase is long enough that I'd high center over a moderate hill.
The guy I mentioned earlier with the lifted Dodge Ram Charger, he was off-roading on some sand dunes and rolled the vehicle several times, totaling the vehicle and injuring a passenger. He found out that his insurance carrier did not cover the truck off of approved roads. The truck was a total loss and I am told that be paid considerably out of pocket to settle the injury law suit.
Rather irrelevant to the concept of "lifted trucks will run over cars on roads," isn't it? Single vehicle on sand dunes doesn't really help your point.
I don't mean to be a hard ass, I actually would like to do some off-roading myself in the future. I just think that it is reasonable to keep your vehicle close to the way it was designed to operate.
That's fine. It quite limits your off roading capabilities, though.
*shrug* If you think they're dreadfully unsafe, go find some data that says so. "I think they must be therefore they are" is no grounds for policy making.
======
Rather than attempting to force people to drive smaller vehicles through regulation, higher fuel taxes might effectively achieve the same goal. If gas/diesel cost $10/gallon, there would be fewer ridiculous vehicles on our public roads. Maybe to limit the negative impact on businesses that legitimately need to operate large vehicles, we could offer a tax credit, so they could get some of their money back at the end of the year?
Perhaps, but I think all you'd do is manage to annoy quite a few people. Quite honestly, someone buying a $60k truck and dropping $30k on modifications isn't likely to be particularly deterred by having to spend a bit more on diesel.
Your "tax credit" idea will, however, be incredibly hostile to new small businesses that require large vehicles. Step one is surviving to the end of the year, so an annual tax credit is a bit annoying there. And it's not that hard to create your own small business and claim your vehicle is part of it, so for anyone spending enough on fuel, it'll be worth doing such a thing anyway. You'll annoy a lot of people, create yet another layer of government skimming, and almost certainly not accomplish what you think you will.
Syonyk, the F-150 years compared are in this article; they're newer models ('09-'11) with good frontal and side crash scores, ESC, side airbags, etc.
Interesting, thanks. I'd be very interested in how the driver demographics affected this, since in the 2008-2011 era, most Prius drivers I knew were 40+ years old. I don't really feel like doing the analysis though. :)
You seem to miss the flip side of the article, though -
http://www.thecarcrashdetective.com/2015/01/safest-cars-small-large-families-per-iihs-reports.html/ looks at what's *safer* than a Prius.
The Subaru Outback, Subaru Legacy, and Audi A4 are all safer than a Prius, and are all fairly large, heavy cars. So it seems weight may matter, just depending on how it's laid out.
Food for thought, would anyone have an issue with vehicles above a certain size/weight being subjected to a lower speed limit?
Yes. Studies have been done on states that have lower speed limits for large trucks and find no statistically significant difference in accident rates (minor differences in accident types) when trucks are subjected to a lower speed limit, but I find a good bit more annoyance passing through those states vs states where everyone has the same speed limit. So unless your goal is "annoy people with big trucks" or "find a creative way to increase police revenues," it doesn't seem likely to make any difference in safety.
It would make you more responsible for the costs associated with your lifestyle choice . . . costs that are currently paid by everyone else.
::rolleyes:: Right. Because Utopia is everyone crammed into a uniformly shitty little urban apartment. Pass. Thanks. I'll take land where I can grow my own food and don't have to listen to the neighbors arguing at 3AM.
I suppose there is a difference then as I am not in America - if I want to do something that impacts the rest of society negatively there should be a good reason for it. I need to demonstrate a need to own restricted firearms in Canada namely handguns (need to belong to a range and renew my membership annually or demonstrate a credible threat to my safety).
Well, that's a difference. Over in America, at least theoretically, you have to show a credible reason why something should be banned. "Default allow" and all.
If you want to drive around in a contraption that spells instant death to others on the road in a collision, and belches twice the emissions for the rest of us to breath I think you should have to have a use for it beyond commuting to work...
Data. Please, find me the data that shows a huge vehicle "spells instant death to others on the road." I think driving a big truck to work is sort of silly, but if someone wants one, and can pay for it, *shrug* Not my place to step in the way.
I am against unneeded red tape and regulation as much as the next guy...
You really don't seem to be. Maybe you are by Canadian standards. Not familiar with the social views up there.
If only! Imagine how different, say, firearms legislation would be if people had to actually know what they were talking about to legislate it!
We wouldn't get such great comedy about horrifically dangerous barrel shrouds being "the shoulder thing that flips up." :(