Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Talking to a passenger involves visual. The article is talking about listening only without the visual component.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Secondly how often when driving and talking to a passenger do you constantly look at the passenger?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
james
Secondly how often when driving and talking to a passenger do you constantly look at the passenger? "...
I would also agree with this! A distraction is a distraction is a distraction!?
Also, I remember reading that the majority of accidents are caused by distractions, with eating food and/or beverage, a majority favorite!
It would not be any comfort (to me anyway) to know that I can be killed or seriously injured due to someone talking on a phone, eating fast or slow food or stooping down to tie ones shoelaces etc, etc,
The real problem? There is no real additional penalty for driving distracted. UNTILL after the accident and usually only at the culpability phase. PERIOD..
I absolutely agree. In the same vein, it's of no comfort to know I can get into an accident or worse because a driver was not driving within the limits of traffic and road conditions or is extrememly aggressive and makes a mistake due to inability to adequately control a vehicle..
Again, this is hidden in plain sight given the NHTSA statistics. When you consider that not long ago they fought tooth and nail to keep the 55 mph national speed limit. They hypothesized that the speed limit change up to 65 mph would literally cause carnage on carnage (both accidents and fatalities rates)
Of course when you combine that with
1 more drivers
2 more cars
3 more trips
4 more mileage
that would be carnage on carnage on carnage. Well all of their worst variables became true.
The problem is the hypothesis was soundly trounced.
They themselves report that the accident and fatality rate is the SAFEST in RECORDED history!!
To boot, in a lot of more remote interstates; the speed limits are more like 70 and 75 mph.
Seems the OHMMMMMMMMMM's never die, despite the almost categorical disproval and the lack of qualifiers.
Just amazing what people will do while driving.
Ken
1. probably felt he was being safe as he was under the speed limit (25 in a 35 zone)
2 cellphone between his ear and shoulder
3. had a charge card in one hand
4. wallet in another
5 gesturing with the hand hold ing the wallet
6 and seemed to be in a very animate with the person on the other line.
I was amazed he could find time to drive.
"What shade of Green are your waiting for?"
Too bad...
An analogy to the way the NHTSA stats are being interperted is like saying WW2 was a safer war than WW1 because as a percentage of total population, less troops died. :confuse:
In that context (how catastrophic to the overall population), that's exactly right and indeed, WWII was less catastrophic. Moving the the context to the civil war, that war was more catastrophic relative to the US population than both WWs.
Everything in context
It's very telling at the safest point in RECORD HISTORY we have the MOST FATALITIES.
What do you think it "tells"?
Even a cursory analysis tells you that many variables have changed over the last 5 or 10 years. Some were cited, above. To claim that one is "responsible" without isolating it is nonsense.
And to claim that, if the overall rate improved, then all variables must have had a positive impact (e.g., raising the speed limit) is also nonsense. It's almost certain that the improvement occurred despite some variables being negative.
For example, The SUV % of the fleet has increased dramatically over the last 10 years (which has a significant negative impact on overall safety), but the overall safety has improved. That's because safety improvements to vehicles, in general, had more impact than the increased % of SUVs. So it improved despite the increase in Inconsiderate SUV purchases :=)
Wow! I am glad you pointed out the SUV situation!! I should have also raised it because that was another so called "killer" situation that was ALSO supposed to bring MORE carnage upon carnage. Also I am glad that after thousands upon thousands of posts on another thread that you have come to the conclusion that while SUV's DO have their accidents injuries and fatalities, the overall rate is still the safest in recorded history.
So if you want to argue that SUVs do present more danger, it would be irresponsible to ignore the.folks that it actually does protect.
Dah!? Of course things have changed They will continue to change. The stats are in a perverse sense the documentation of change. Anybody with a cursory knowledge of accidents will tell you each accident has its own dynamics. Saying that adds adds nothing to the discussion.
While it is true there have been improvements in vehicle safety and it is logical that some if not all of these improvements "conspire" to bring down the volume and rates of accidents injuries and fatalities, there seems to be a lack of longitudinal and qualitative studies tracing the statistical validity of those improvements and the effects affects of its "conspiracy"
One for example is ABS and the canceling of my insurance discount for ABS equipped vehicle. Reason? Citing no statistically significant correlation of lessening of accidents due to the ABS equipped vehicle. Yet I don't think that anyone would argue that this is NOT an improvement. However it is the CORRELATION which does not hold up to scrutiny.
Well my insurance company believes the contrary as a discount is given. In fact, if there is no correlation why is ABS standard on almost every vehicle. Why include a feature that costs more but has no benefit? Maybe because it really does make a difference. Not having a statistical correlation or not being able to prove it and not making a difference in the real world are two different things.
Maybe our fellow poster Mr. Ruking1 can disable the ABS on his cars and tell us if it makes a difference or not. My guess is you won't, because I'm not sure you really believe the "statistical evidence". Which brings me back to: "Lies, damn lies and statistics".
Maybe my insurance company knows something these statistical studies don't show?
Actually in the 250,000 miles that I had it, I didn't need the ABS function even once. A lessor point is I have not needed ABS in all my ABS equipped vehicles. The other fact of the matter is not many folks function the ABS on some regular basis so they will know what it truly feels like under those more extreme conditions. Also most folks from a feeling a perceptual level thing ABS is only to keep the wheels from locking up in a panic stop. While this is true, the main reason for the ABS is to be able to hard brake and STEER around a potential obstacle.
I have sent one daughter to high performance highway driving school. I also have high performance driving experiences. They make it a point to demostrate how a vehicle operates with and without ABS . Then they put ones butt in the seat so that ONE can demostrate this knowledge. In fact I make sure she has recently tested her ABS and she does this with absolute glee.(on an SUV no less
So to me that is like conceptually understanding how to do a 180 and 360 and multiples and reveling in the knowledge that you will do the right thing without practice when it should happen.
So when was the last time you functioned your ABS system either for real or for testing purposes?
The statistics would indicate the VAST majority of drivers DO NOT function their ABS.
I think you also misunderstand my posting,if your conclusions are any gauge. Also my insurance company insures world wide. So in that sense they have other than USA experiences.
So yes, I do miss the discount
Actually, you have it backwards. Few saw it coming beforehand. But in fact, SUVs have turned out to be less safe than average for their occupants and even worse for their unfortunate collision partners.
...you have come to the conclusion...
You should stick to commenting on your own conclusions, your accuracy rate might be higher.
...each accident has its own dynamics. Saying that adds adds nothing to the discussion.
Probably not, so why are you the one to bring it up?
In any case, you offer no rebuttal to my point.
...you have come to the conclusion...
You should stick to commenting on your own conclusions, your accuracy rate might be higher. "...
Actually it is spot on! Suv's are actually safer OVERALL. Do they present a greater roll over potential? Absolutely !. If one thinks you can drivean suv like a sports car and then be surprized when doing that greatly increases the chances of rollover,is really only fooling themselves. The NHTSA statistics do not dispute that and even insurance rates take that into account.
So for example my SUV costs less to insure than any of my so called safe cars like Honda Civic and or VW Jetta.
It just doesnt reinforce your pot shot style of attempting to shoot down almost everything and taking almost no real position.
..."Probably not, so why are you the one to bring it up? "...
In case you forgot, YOU brought it up and made the statement!!?? I guess you forgot?
"..."Actually, you have it backwards. Few saw it coming beforehand. But in fact, SUVs have turned out to be less safe than average for their occupants and even worse for their unfortunate collision partners.
...you have come to the conclusion..."
and ruking1 responded:
"You should stick to commenting on your own conclusions, your accuracy rate might be higher. "...
Actually it is spot on! Suv's are actually safer OVERALL. Do they present a greater roll over potential? Absolutely !. If one thinks you can drivean suv like a sports car and then be surprized when doing that greatly increases the chances of rollover,is really only fooling themselves. The NHTSA statistics do not dispute that and even insurance rates take that into account.
So for example my SUV costs less to insure than any of my so called safe cars like Honda Civic and or VW Jetta. "
Ruking's position is validated by the old ABC phony GM truck scam. Even after the "gas tank problem" was identified, insurance companies reported that full size pickups (including the ones from GM) had a lower death rate in collisions than ANY car. Size does matter gentlemen.
Harry
In my observations, those one cell phones appear to be continuously distracted for a much longer period of time than those smoking, eating, changing the CD, or doing personal grooming. Even those talking to others in the car interrupt their conversations more often when traffic changes . That latter is likely because those in the car are aware of the suroundings more than the person at the other end of the cell phone conversation. It is the duration of the distraction that makes cell phones more dangerous.
Harry
Sorry, the NHTSA data shows otherwise. Large SUVs are safer for their own occupants (but much less safe for everyone else) but mid size SUVs (the majority of SUVs) are less safe. Check the data. If you still come to the wrong conclusion, that's your problem, I won't debate it.
...in collisions...
Most fatalities are not in collisions. Why you would select only one class of accident and ignore the others is beyond me.
The vehicle with the worst fatality rate is a pickup.
SUVs ARE NOT SAFER
Yes, overall statistics do show that SUVs in general have lower death rates than sedans (particularly in multi vehicle collisions).
However, the devil is in the 'in general' part. The Explorer is the largest selling SUV (unless it has plumetted very recently). The base model 2WD showed 187 deaths per million registered years, which puts it amongst the worst in terms of safety.The 4WD version had 134. The top selling sedan, Camry, had 56 deaths per million. The Solara version of Camry had 27, amongst the best.
So the top selling SUVs which make up a big part of the SUV market show death rates of 187/86 (Explorer and Trailblazer respectively). I couldn't find what the third best selling was.
The top selling sedans show death rates of 56/58/67 (Camry/Accord/Civic resp). All the data is for 2004.
http://www.hwysafety.org/srpdfs/sr4003.pdf
The 'SAFE' SUVs are Toyota 4Runner (12), Lexus RX 300 (17) and the Toyota RAV4 (18). As you can see from the trends, none of these safest SUVs are the most wanted in the average SUV buyer's mind (for perspective, ALL these three put together sold approx. 290,000 vehicles in 2004, the Explorer alone sold 340,000 in the same period).
Which gets me thinking, may be its better to bring about equality. Its like the gun control arguments rite, some people having guns is dangerous for others so everyone should have guns (I would argue that letting no one have guns would make most sense but I don't make the laws
Hmmm, I can visualize my next vehicle.... A monster truck.. May be then I can just drive over and smash these inconsiderate SUV people and the cell-phone and latte jugglers.. Lets see how safe and comfortable they feel on the roads then...
One doesn't need ABS, but it allows you to do one thing that cars without it can't. Stomp on the brakes and steer around an obstruction without your wheels locking up.
In fact ABS probably saved me from totaling my car recently as I had to come to a panic stop and steer around a roadside object. Actually I have to say the combination stability control and ABS saved my hide. If these electronics save ones butt once, it can save one thousands and thousands of dollars in repairs and keep the insurance lower.
Seems worth it to me.
Sheer stupidity? I had s similar experience a while back. Driving down I-55 for whatever reason this one guy shot past me cut me off and started to slow down. Well I merged over got past him and went on my merry way when it happened again. I don't know what this jerks problem was but he repeatedly kept racing to get in front of me cutting me off then slowing down. Now here is the kicker, he was driving a car with dealer plates. I called the dealer told them this story, a week or so later I got a letter from them apologizing and letting me know that the sales man no longer worked for them.
But to make matters worse, they turned that letter into a sales pitch offering me "incentives" to purchase my next car from them (a make that is far down on my list of cars to purchase).
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Some bad science here on your part. If you really want to see which is safer do not pick and choose one or two cars from each class and say here you go. The question is what is the rate per vehicle class, not by one or two models.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I do think that looking at the best selling vehicles is more relevant than the class itself. I don't think it matters too much if a generally less safe class has a few good performers, if those performers simply don't sell.
The inconsiderate nature is further brought out when you talk about multi-vehicle collisions. Notice how when people point out that small occupants are actually more at risk in multi vehicle collisions, the owners of a specific class point out so what, we are safe, what is others die.
Snakeweasel,
If you look at the second half of my posting which has the sales figures, you would understand why I pointed out the best sellers. A typical buyer sets out to buy something, is bombarder with the fact that SUVs are safer than sedans. So he/she goes an buys an SUV. However, most of them end up buying an SUV which is significantly more UNSAFE than the sedans most people are buying.
So a person thinks he/she is chosing a safer vehicle and actually end up doing the reverse and still thinks he is safe. That is the contradiction I wanted to point out. So whereas anyone may have any views, numbers show that a good ~40% of the SUV driving population is more unsafe than 40% of the sedan driving population (in both single and multi-driver collisions). And the sedan people pay less for gas and take up less space. Ok, so who's making the smart choice?
ANyways, I realize that someone who believes that those SUVs are safe will continue to do so. I wish happy driving to all those Explorer owners who drive believing that they are driving the safest thing on the road. I just have one small request. I understand that we small coupe people are akin to irritating ants or bugs on the road. PLEASE be a little considerate towards us. We will definetely not survive it if wou come and ram into us. Mercy. Thanks!
I recount this story because there was an article in our local newspaper today regarding cell phone use while driving. It cited work done by Professor Steven Yantis of Johns Hopkins University. Yantis works in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences. He states: "Directing attention to listening effectively turns down the volume on input to the visual parts of the brain. The evidence we have right now strongly suggests that attention is strictly limited - a zero sum game. When attention is deployed to one modality - say talking on a cell phone - it necessarily extracts a cost on another modality, in this case, the visual task of driving."
I think that most would agree that driver conversations with passenger(s) in a vehicle also detracts from driving just as cell phone usage does. Wonder if any data or studies that show what percent of drivers guilty of causing an accident were pre-occupied with a conversation with passenger(s). Don't know if police try and determine this, assuming at least one person alive after accident. Of course there are many accidents caused by drivers without passengers who were not drunk, asleep nor using a cell phone.
Some drivers forget that driving is a priviledge and that 100 percent of their resources and attention should be devoted to operating the vehicle.
Oh, come on...as Barry White once said, "There's no way they could have made two".
...make yourself some popcorn and follow that link.
Good lord, the mess on all those keyboards and mice!
There's a certain vehicle class that seems more prone to idiotic behavior in such conditions
You don't like them? Grab some popcorn!
:=)
I was being tailgated by a Rav4 driver as I was listening to the radio program discussing the relative safety of SUVs.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Another anecdotal. If an TLC suv tailgates me at precisely 1 car length back and a VW Jetta tail gates me 1 car length in a side by side comparison, who is driving more aggressively?
"Distraction and superficiality must be combated, which in an instant can ruin one's own future and that of others. Life is precious and unique: It must always be respected and protected, including with correct and prudent conduct on the roads."
Hard to believe eh? Actually I'd be a lot more tolerant if they were driven better. Around here on a slick rainy day, all of the aggressive jerkily driven vehicles seem to be midsize and larger SUVs, and fullsize pickups.
Can driving a vehicle with bad styling be considered inconsiderate? I had the misfortune of driving behind and beside a Mitsu Endeavor today, and if left me a little nauseated. I hate the fender flares and it has one of the most unhappy rear ends in the industry.
I see some states are banning cellphone use by teen drivers. Funny...the blabbing idiots I see are most always well out of their teens...
It is not that there arent other distractions while driving the car. Talking to people in the car and reaching out to the stereo all create distraction. But I have noticed (again pulling myself in as an example) that one does tend to slow down a bit when talkin with others inside. However, people do not necessarily consciously change their driving when they start talking on the phone.
I frequently notice peopl talkin on the phone swaying in and out of their lanes or taking a much wider turn than usual. I stopped talking on the phone after a very scary incident. I got a phone call while I was driving on I95 on a busy day and my girlfriend was also saying something to me. I was in the leftmost lane and out of an urge to slow down a bit to carry on with my conversation I started shifting into the middle lane. What I never realized was that I was in the blind spot of a trailer and that guy had his blinkers on and was moving into the middle lane too. Out of the corner of my eye I suddenly noticed that and swerved back violently into my lane. A fraction of a second more and I would have been crushed under the semi.
I do not use the phone while in the car these days. I do know that it is an inconvenience to remain out of touch but if you must, please get one of those handsfree things and DO NOT hold the phone in one hand. It is not just other people we create trouble for but also put our own lives in danger!