from Hacker News

Americans' love affair with big cars is killing them

by avyfain on 9/1/24, 5:18 PM with 413 comments

• by xwall on 9/1/24, 6:19 PM

  Key Ideas: Heavier vehicles are safer for their occupants but more dangerous for others: The weight of a vehicle is a critical factor in car crashes, with heavier vehicles causing more fatalities in other cars, pedestrians, and cyclists.

  The heaviest vehicles kill more people than they save: Analysis of crash data shows that for every life saved by the heaviest 1% of SUVs and trucks, more than a dozen lives are lost in other vehicles.

  Weight advantages have changed little over time: Despite improvements in safety features, the weight advantage of heavier vehicles has remained relatively constant, with heavier vehicles still causing more fatalities in lighter vehicles.

  Carmakers prioritize consumer preferences over safety: Manufacturers are producing increasingly heavier vehicles, driven by consumer demand for larger, more powerful cars, despite the safety risks to others.

  Regulators are ill-equipped to address the issue: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's rating system focuses on occupant safety, not the safety of other road users, and tax policies subsidize heavier vehicles.

  Public awareness and concern are growing: Surveys show increasing concern about the size and safety of SUVs and pickup trucks, with researchers and policymakers starting to take notice.

  Electrification may exacerbate the problem: The shift towards electric vehicles, which tend to be heavier than their internal-combustion equivalents, may increase the weight of vehicles on the road, further amplifying the safety risks.

• by PaulHoule on 9/1/24, 5:32 PM

  I hate sounding like a broken record but my belief is that car makers are more excited about XXXXL cars in American than car buyers are. The media is consistently complicit in covering this up, sounding like the brainwashed soldiers in The Manchurian Candidate

  It's not to say that we don't like big cars because we do, but walk into a car dealership looking for a small car and they will tell you they are out of stock of new ones of the model you want because the factory washed out in a flood but then they have 100 SUVs in a row unsold that nobody wants to buy made in the same factory. Your only choice is a used return that somebody sold back to them yesterday afternoon.

  Go into a dealership looking for an S car and they will try to sell you an L, go in looking for an M and get an XL and so forth. If you drive out with a $25,000 car when you could could of driven out with a $50,000 car they perceive it as a $25,000 loss! No wonder mainstream car brands can't sell electrics.

• by chaboud on 9/1/24, 6:33 PM

  This is a regulatory incentive problem, plain and simple:

  1. CAFE standards use different rules for cars and light trucks. It’s a protectionist move that strongly pushes manufacturers to find ways to get CUV’s on the road instead of hatch backs and sedans. 2. And CAFE uses a “footprint formula” that relaxes standards for larger vehicles. 3. Compound that with a side impact test that started at 3,015 lbs (high) and then was amplified by the (private) IIHS test raising their sled weight (4,200 lbs?) to reflect average fleet weight, which turns into an arms race.

  In the end, people respond to incentives, and we get the cars we regulated for.

• by bradley13 on 9/1/24, 6:56 PM

  Easy fix: If you want less of something, tax it. The race to ever bigger vehicles has many costs, from road wear to (now we know) human lives.

  You pay an annual registration fee for your vehicle. Make that fee go up dramatically for heavier vehicles. If you pay, say, $100 for a car under a ton, make it $1k for up to two tons, $10k for 3 tons, etc..

• by toddmorey on 9/1/24, 6:35 PM

  Germany has a ratio of 3.9 deaths per 100,000 people, while America's ratio is 12.4 per 100,000—essentially 4x higher. And they have the autobahn. Not like they are driving slower.

• by kpmcc on 9/1/24, 6:21 PM

  As impractical as it may be, I think the only answer is to limit the size of vehicles, either through taxation or an outright ban. Larger vehicles are worse for pretty much everything and many of the costs are externalized.

• by OutOfHere on 9/1/24, 6:29 PM

  It's not just the kill rate. It's also how much more toxic tire dust pollution the heavier vehicles put out.

• by tqi on 9/1/24, 6:26 PM

  One thing that surprised me is that when the article talks about "big cars", I had initially assumed they meant the ubiquitous family crossover SUVs (RAV4 / CRV and the like) that have more or less completely replaced the family sedans. However the curb weight of those vehicles is more or less the same as sedans (all hovering around 3K lbs). What they actually meant is essentially just heavy duty pickup trucks, which are closer to 5K lbs.

• by darkteflon on 9/1/24, 10:36 PM

  Australia’s changed for the worse over the past 30 years as well. SUVs used to be the exception in urban areas, now they’re everywhere - usually with a single occupant.

  I saw an old Hummer H2 on the road the other day. They used to appear gargantuan to me. This time, what struck me was that it no longer looks shockingly larger than anything else on the road.

  There’s a real boiling frog vibe to inner city traffic. It’s so bad - so jammed up and so dirty - but we’re completely inured to it. It’s my fervent hope that the next generation - or perhaps the one after that - will think it very weird indeed to live and work alongside the byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion.

• by penguin_booze on 9/1/24, 7:09 PM

  Sadly, there's no more a thing called Americans' problem. Like an STD, what are later realized as problems, usually start in the US and then spread across the globe. Not that the rest of the world doesn't have their own crap, but because US media and culture is (one of) the the loudest, what's seen in America is often interpreted as cool and then copied rather readily and quickly. Guns seem to be buckling the trend so far, however.

• by avyfain on 9/1/24, 5:19 PM

  http://archive.today/faiXa

• by tmnvix on 9/1/24, 8:20 PM

  How much of this is consumer choice and how much is actually driven by manufacturers shaping the market in response to bad emissions regulation (CAFE)?

  When I was younger and regularly getting around on a bike, I used to view people in large, high vehicles with contempt. I don't anymore. I see them as victims of an industry that lacks moral responsibility.

  A quote from a GMC designer around the time this ridiculous SUV mania was taking hold:

  "I remember wanting it to feel very locomotive - like a massive fist moving through the air"

  It might not be obvious to Americans, but I find it very telling that American made vehicles are almost always the most 'aggressive', and often marketed that way. Why is that?

• by welzel on 9/2/24, 1:57 PM

  There is a simple solution for this problem: increase the payout for people who are affected by overweight vehicles.

  Have a law, define a target weight + speed and then make it REALLY expensive to insure or kill people with your car.

  Also in the law: if you drive around without insurance, the car is instantly taken away from you, as it is a weapon to conduct a crime :-)

  Still people will drive big cars around, but the market will limit the number of people who can pay for it. And of course: new cars only and when ownership is transferred. No additional tax for existing owners.

  The market would solve this problem VERY VERY quickly.

• by carabiner on 9/1/24, 8:07 PM

  This was all caused by the CAFE emissions standards that allow cars with bigger footprints to emit more. Nobody wants bigger trucks, and in the Tacoma community it's a standard refrain to bemoan just how fucking big they've gotten. They aren't compact trucks anymore. They're midsize today. Compact trucks do not exist.

• by amai on 9/1/24, 9:18 PM

  Relevant YouTube Video:

  NotJustBikes: These Stupid Trucks are Literally Killing Us

  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35202168

• by jasonmarks_ on 9/1/24, 6:49 PM

  > In total, our dataset includes millions of crashes across 14 states between 2013 and 2023.

  A great source of data for this topic is the Fatality and Injury Reporting System Tool (FIRST) [a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration product]. Link: https://cdan.dot.gov/query

  It has more data (covers all states) although VIN numbers do not appear to be in the dataset.

• by acd on 9/1/24, 6:53 PM

  Let's consider the energy efficiency of moving a vehicle weighing about 2000kg to transport a person who weighs around 100kg. That's a ratio of vehicle to person of about 20:1.

  A potential solution would be to give heavier cars worse crash ratings. This approach would take into account not only the safety of the occupants of the car but also the occupants of other vehicles.

• by hintymad on 9/1/24, 10:25 PM

  I was wondering if real investment into public transportation and the associated infra will help solve this issue. When I travel in some Asian and European countries, I really don't feel the need for a big car (a small one can still help). But in the US, a big SUV or a van is a godsend. Kids are happier. The wife is happier. Trips are easier. There are just so many benefits to have a big car...

  And the key word is "real investment". not the ones for California to build its high-speed railway, 7 EV charge stations for 7.5 billion dollars, or $300M for high-speed internet yet no family has got it

• by userbinator on 9/1/24, 8:34 PM

  Big cars with horrible visibility combined with idiots (both in and outside of the car) who can't pay attention to where they're going because they're addicted to their media-consumption devices.

• by tinyhouse on 9/1/24, 6:24 PM

  It's not a love affair. Once there are large vehicles on the road, you cannot afford putting yourself at greater risk by not having a large vehicle yourself.

• by GBond on 9/3/24, 4:37 PM

  The US Truck buyers likes to hate on the Honda Ridgeline (too car-like), but it is the most American choice: https://www.motor1.com/news/723746/honda-ridgeline-more-amer...

• by whateveracct on 9/1/24, 6:54 PM

  I just went to Navy Pier in Chicago and the size of cars people in the parking garage was just embarrassing. It really made them look stupid.

• by euroderf on 9/2/24, 8:49 AM

  Would it be so hard to introduce higher speed limits for tinier vehicles ? That might motivate people to trade "down".

• by CHB0403085482 on 9/2/24, 12:38 AM

  Also "How USA Fire Departments Are Getting People Killed". Summary: forcing bad road design to accommodate giant fire trucks cause more car collisions

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2dHFC31VtQ

• by blackfawn on 9/2/24, 1:11 PM

  One thing people often miss when talking about US cars getting bigger, particularly "small" trucks, is government regulation: https://youtu.be/azI3nqrHEXM

• by ocean_moist on 9/1/24, 10:12 PM

  As someone who drives a small somewhat sporty car I've almost died from a suburban mom in a Yukon or similar vehicle more than once.

  Also it is sad to see the disappearance of wagons from the US market. There is no better family car than an E55 AMG.

• by kristianp on 9/1/24, 9:24 PM

  Are these trucks are built with cheap chinese steel? Perhaps a tariff on steel would help. Also how can people afford such enormous beasts? People don't seem to realise how much money theor cars cost when paid off via a loan.

• by prirun on 9/2/24, 2:16 PM

  I think the car manufacturers became truck manufacturers because:

  1) it allowed them to bypass the 70's fuel economy regulations, which applied to cars but not trucks (nor SUVs)

  2) their profit margin was higher on trucks than cars

• by dathinab on 9/1/24, 8:46 PM

  in a lot of ways including unexpected ways

  e.g.. their love for humongous wide hard to maneuver fire fighting vehicles (and their over use in situations which shouldn't require a fire truck/engine) implicitly block a lot of improvements and often lead to forced wider lanes and other street design aspects which by now are well known to hugely contribute to more deadly accidents

• by xnx on 9/1/24, 7:09 PM

  I think the calculation for the buyer goes something like this:

  1) Big cars are safer for their occupants

  2) Nothing else matters more than that

• by seanw444 on 9/1/24, 6:30 PM

  Still driving my truck, sorry.

• by xqcgrek2 on 9/1/24, 8:39 PM

  The solution is easy. Humans shouldn't be the ones driving cars.

• by djaouen on 9/1/24, 7:32 PM

  Not me. I am American and I don't even have a license!

• by fennecfoxy on 9/2/24, 12:12 PM

  It's happening everywhere though, SUV sales are way, way up. 99% of people don't need a car like that.

  I went from NZ watching (medium sized, even!) utes climb literal mountains in rural areas to the literal flatland of London/Europe, watching people bound their way down narrow medieval lanes in a city in range rovers and defenders - 1 person per SUV.

  We're so doomed, lmao.

• by Zigurd on 9/1/24, 7:38 PM

  Big heavy pedestrian-killing trucks are just one facet among many of popularizing selfish, oafish, violent, thoughtless individualism as a culture underlying political beliefs that otherwise lack a connection to culture. Anti-vaxx, and other quack medicine is another such phenomenon. You only need to consider the 12 lives lost for every life preserved to see how shortsighted this is: unless you plan to live in your giant truck 24/7, you could be one of those 12.

  It's disturbing to see comments that celebrate and excuse wallowing in that subculture.

• by SubiculumCode on 9/1/24, 6:25 PM

  Imagine a large truck, like Ford Super Duty F-450, but even heavier because its electric, and with the acceleration of a Tesla.

  Now imagine a testosterone filled teen driving it on the freeway after a couple of beers and wants to show off.

• by baxuz on 9/1/24, 6:18 PM

  re-gu-la-tion~

• by SubiculumCode on 9/1/24, 6:19 PM

  ...and killing people in small cars.