How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
squirm
Posts: 1515
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:53 am

How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by squirm » Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:33 pm

For example, a new Camry vs a new Volvo S60. The Volvo is safer in terms of crash test worthiness. However the Volvo costs more. I'm always undecided and perplexed about weighing those differences. I've known some people that have been pretty banged up in a car wreck, on the other hand, want to be realistic.

What do you do when shopping for a vehicle?

WHL
Posts: 789
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by WHL » Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:38 pm

I don't worry about it. I would never buy a Kia or Honda Fit or anything else tiny / super cheap. I'm certain the difference in safety features is negligible.

User avatar
jwblue
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 11:24 am
Location: Irvine, CA

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by jwblue » Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:43 pm

Is your city a high traffic area?

Are you a good driver?

If the answer to those questions is no, then I wouldn't worry about it.

squirm
Posts: 1515
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:53 am

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by squirm » Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:45 pm

Hello
Yes, high traffic and I commute a lot and carpool with wife. I consider myself a very good driver w/ little risk (you'd see me in the slow lane, headlights on).

Cyclone
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:48 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Cyclone » Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:51 pm

I was a volunteer Emergency Medical Technician in my hometown, and I have been in several serious accidents (not my fault). It doesn't matter how or where I drive if the other drivers aren't paying attention to safety. I don't think it's worth saving a few pennies driving a smaller or cheaper car - my life is worth more to me than that.

User avatar
jwblue
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 11:24 am
Location: Irvine, CA

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by jwblue » Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:05 pm

It sounds like it would be worth it to pay a little more just for peace of mind.

tacster
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 11:08 am
Location: Limbo.

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tacster » Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:24 pm

Cyclone wrote:I was a volunteer Emergency Medical Technician in my hometown, and I have been in several serious accidents (not my fault). It doesn't matter how or where I drive if the other drivers aren't paying attention to safety. I don't think it's worth saving a few pennies driving a smaller or cheaper car - my life is worth more to me than that.
I don't agree with this sentiment. I believe it matters a lot to drive defensively and always try to be prepared for other drivers to do something stupid or reckless. That's how I get my peace of mind, not by paying extra for supposed safety features.
INSERT PITHY QUOTE HERE

Dave76
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 9:05 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Dave76 » Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:30 pm

squirm wrote:
What do you do when shopping for a vehicle?
I'm cheap and prefer old cars. So, to make up for the lack of modern safety features, I buy large (eg. 1985-1989 Lincoln Town Car). It works for me.

imperialman67
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:25 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by imperialman67 » Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:41 pm

WHL wrote:I don't worry about it. I would never buy a Kia or Honda Fit or anything else tiny / super cheap. I'm certain the difference in safety features is negligible.
The tiny (by your definition) as far as safety I would maybe agree to, but not your statement of "super cheap"
2013 Kias rate quite well with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety with the 2013 Optima being a top safety pick

User avatar
stemikger
Posts: 4918
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:02 am

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by stemikger » Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:43 pm

Dave76 wrote:
squirm wrote:
What do you do when shopping for a vehicle?
I'm cheap and prefer old cars. So, to make up for the lack of modern safety features, I buy large (eg. 1985-1989 Lincoln Town Car). It works for me.
This is a myth. The older cars big or small don't have the modern crumble zones. In the older cars you take the impact not the car.
The sub-compacts of today are actually safer than the big cars of 20 years ago.

Also, more lifes are saved by seatbelts, airbags and improvements on how a car absorbs impact than by car size.
Choose Simplicity ~ Stay the Course!! ~ Press on Regardless!!!

Dave76
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 9:05 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Dave76 » Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:52 pm

stemikger wrote:
Dave76 wrote:
squirm wrote:
What do you do when shopping for a vehicle?
I'm cheap and prefer old cars. So, to make up for the lack of modern safety features, I buy large (eg. 1985-1989 Lincoln Town Car). It works for me.
This is a myth. The older cars big or small don't have the modern crumble zones. In the older cars you take the impact not the car.
The sub-compacts of today are actually safer than the big cars of 20 years ago.

Also, more lifes are saved by seatbelts, airbags and improvements on how a car absorbs impact than by car size.
I think I'd be better protected in a 1985 Lincoln Town Car than a 1985 Chevrolet Sprint. That's why I prefer large.

On a side note -- The 1975-1993 Volvo 200-series cars have huge crumple zones.
Last edited by Dave76 on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ourbrooks
Posts: 1575
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 4:56 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by ourbrooks » Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:54 pm

A lot depends on what you mean by safety. Crash tests evaluate how well a vehicle would do after it has crashed; it doesn't evaluate how well a vehicle avoids crashes. A vehicel with lousy brakes might still get great crash test results.

Another way to look at things is by whether a particular make of vehicle is involved in more or fewer crashes than average. Unfortunately, the raw data is confounded by the fact that different classes of drivers prefer particular makes and models of vehicles. Here's one attempt to separate out the factors: http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Arc ... report.pdf One finding they report is that minivans are the safest type of vehicle, possibly, because they are driven mostly by women. Luxury cars also do well, probably because they tend to be driven by older drivers.

User avatar
jeffyscott
Posts: 7372
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by jeffyscott » Sun Mar 10, 2013 5:42 pm

squirm wrote:For example, a new Camry vs a new Volvo S60. The Volvo is safer in terms of crash test worthiness. However the Volvo costs more.
Honda Accord has "good" scores across the board, just like the Volvo, but price would be comparable to the Camry. Also there are 8 other moderate priced midsize models that at least meet the IIHS top safety pick+ criteria: http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=30

So you can quite easily get about the same level of safety, without paying Volvo's price. Toyota appears to have some work to do on their design, with regard to small overlap crashes.
press on, regardless - John C. Bogle

reggiesimpson
Posts: 1610
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by reggiesimpson » Sun Mar 10, 2013 6:34 pm

I bought my 97 Lincoln Town car (new) for the safety of my family. I still drive it.

tj
Posts: 2242
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 12:10 am

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tj » Sun Mar 10, 2013 6:42 pm

I was surprised when my '11 Civic had better safety ratings than my '04 Monte Carlo. The latter being much larger.

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Sun Mar 10, 2013 6:49 pm

imperialman67 wrote:
WHL wrote:I don't worry about it. I would never buy a Kia or Honda Fit or anything else tiny / super cheap. I'm certain the difference in safety features is negligible.
The tiny (by your definition) as far as safety I would maybe agree to, but not your statement of "super cheap"
2013 Kias rate quite well with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety with the 2013 Optima being a top safety pick
Many do not know that IIHS safety ratings and picks are not to be compared across size categories according to the IIHS. Same goes for NHTSA ratings, according to NHTSA.
Last edited by tadamsmar on Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Fallible
Posts: 6569
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Fallible » Sun Mar 10, 2013 6:50 pm

Don't know if you've checked out Consumer Reports, but here are a couple good links on car safety, best cars new and used, and pointing out that ultimately, "the driver is the critical factor."

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars ... /index.htm
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012 ... /index.htm
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Sun Mar 10, 2013 6:58 pm

squirm wrote:For example, a new Camry vs a new Volvo S60. The Volvo is safer in terms of crash test worthiness. However the Volvo costs more. I'm always undecided and perplexed about weighing those differences. I've known some people that have been pretty banged up in a car wreck, on the other hand, want to be realistic.

What do you do when shopping for a vehicle?
Hard to do in dollars and cents, since you would have to put a price on the life of a loved one. I look at it as a kind of insurance.

A new mid-weight like the Camry, or even an older one with electronic stability control (ESC) is where I draw the line on cars I buy.

But I still have a 2000 CRV w/o ESC as my lightly driven second car that is a serious rollover risk.

Field data indicates that ESC prevents about 1/3 of fatalities. Side air bags are 10 time less important in terms of fatalities.

ESC is standard on all cars as of the 2012 model year.

Khanmots
Posts: 1233
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Khanmots » Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:01 pm

tacster wrote:
Cyclone wrote:I was a volunteer Emergency Medical Technician in my hometown, and I have been in several serious accidents (not my fault). It doesn't matter how or where I drive if the other drivers aren't paying attention to safety. I don't think it's worth saving a few pennies driving a smaller or cheaper car - my life is worth more to me than that.
I don't agree with this sentiment. I believe it matters a lot to drive defensively and always try to be prepared for other drivers to do something stupid or reckless. That's how I get my peace of mind, not by paying extra for supposed safety features.
Jumping on this just because an accident was labeled the fault of the other driver doesn't mean it was unavoidable. False equivalency :)

Personally I'm more concerned with how responsive a car is to my inputs than it's crash test rating; I'd far rather not be in the accident in the first place. That said, I'm not going to buy something that is going to turn into a pancake, sometimes there really is no avoiding it. Like everything there's a compromise to be reached, but given the current state of car safety I'd be far more concerned with avoiding soft steering or transmission lag (if an auto) or an unstable suspension setup than dithering about the difference between a 4star or 5star rating.

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:30 pm

tacster wrote:
Cyclone wrote:I was a volunteer Emergency Medical Technician in my hometown, and I have been in several serious accidents (not my fault). It doesn't matter how or where I drive if the other drivers aren't paying attention to safety. I don't think it's worth saving a few pennies driving a smaller or cheaper car - my life is worth more to me than that.
I don't agree with this sentiment. I believe it matters a lot to drive defensively and always try to be prepared for other drivers to do something stupid or reckless. That's how I get my peace of mind, not by paying extra for supposed safety features.
Are you prepared to brake all 4 tires independently when other drivers do something stupid or reckless so that you can make a more extreme avoidance maneuver without skidding out of control than you otherwise could without braking all 4 tires independently?

Do you even know how to get prepared to do this?

tacster
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 11:08 am
Location: Limbo.

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tacster » Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:25 pm

tadamsmar wrote:
Are you prepared to brake all 4 tires independently when other drivers do something stupid or reckless so that you can make a more extreme avoidance maneuver without skidding out of control than you otherwise could without braking all 4 tires independently?

Do you even know how to get prepared to do this?
I am prepared to drive defensively. That is more important than any gee-whiz safety technology built into the car.
INSERT PITHY QUOTE HERE

Fallible
Posts: 6569
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:44 pm
Contact:

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Fallible » Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:50 pm

tacster wrote:
Cyclone wrote:I was a volunteer Emergency Medical Technician in my hometown, and I have been in several serious accidents (not my fault). It doesn't matter how or where I drive if the other drivers aren't paying attention to safety. I don't think it's worth saving a few pennies driving a smaller or cheaper car - my life is worth more to me than that.
I don't agree with this sentiment. I believe it matters a lot to drive defensively and always try to be prepared for other drivers to do something stupid or reckless. ...
I learned the hard way that driving is probably the most dangerous thing we do simply because we don't know what's out there - and everything is out there and out of our control. Add to that our own mistakes, minor and rare if we're truly careful drivers, but still there. Driving defensively is really the best way to try to avoid accidents. As for my car, it's the safest I can afford.
Bogleheads® wiki | Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle

jysharma
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:42 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by jysharma » Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:56 pm

Hi,
Take a look at the below website for a in-depth look at safety analysis on cars done by a non profit in Connecticut.
http://www.informedforlife.org/
I found it very informative and plan to use it to determine the safest car I can afford the next time I am in the market.
Yogesh

ourbrooks
Posts: 1575
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 4:56 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by ourbrooks » Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:11 pm

jysharma wrote:Hi,
Take a look at the below website for a in-depth look at safety analysis on cars done by a non profit in Connecticut.
http://www.informedforlife.org/
I found it very informative and plan to use it to determine the safest car I can afford the next time I am in the market.
Yogesh
What will determine the actual safety records of different vehicles will be whether they appeal more to women or to men. Men have about 1.5 times the accident rate of women. The stellar safety record of the Honda CR-V 2005-2008 (http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4605.pdf) is probably more due to the gender balance of the purchasers than to any intrinsic properties of the vehicle.

Atilla
Posts: 1263
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Atilla » Sun Mar 10, 2013 9:34 pm

The price I put on vehicle safety? I drive a two and a half ton brick full frame SUV that gets 17 MPG combined city/highway. I want the knucklehead who hits me to be the crumple zone. Not me.
The Village Idiot - here for your entertainment.

Cyclone
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:48 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Cyclone » Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:03 pm

Hey, it's no joke. No matter how carefully you drive, anyone can be in an accident. I started as a volunteer when I was 14 years old, believe it or not. I saw the aftermath of plenty of accidents, and I can still smell the blood. Sorry if that's a little graphic. You can't control everything, but one thing I can control is the type of car I drive.

gkaplan
Posts: 7034
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by gkaplan » Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:12 pm

I have been driving for about fifty years. Among my cars have been VW Beetles, a Toyota Tercel (twenty-six years), and now a Honda Fit since Thanksgiving weekend 2007. Somehow I have managed to survive.
Gordon

Gleevec
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 11:25 am

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Gleevec » Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:30 pm

Your all metal Buick/Ford from the 80s is NOT safer than a modern sedan with. Just because your car is made of metal and gets 10mpg, that doesnt mean it protects you-- all it means is that all the force of the collision is conducted directly to you through the engine block.

Cars are designed to crumple for the passengers safety, because by absorbing the impact in the materials that leads to deformation of the chassis, that force is NOT passed on to the passengers.

1. Modern cars help you avoid accidents better: ABS, traction control, lane/collision warning signals
2. Modern cars take the force of the impact away from the passenger and instead deform materials: crumple zones, multi-point restraints, airbags

I would much rather be in a 2013 Honda Accord than a 1988 Cutlass Supreme. The Honda may look like plastic taking on steel, but the Honda will protect you way better.

BTW this month's Consumer Reports has care safety ratings on the newer cars

User avatar
BrandonBogle
Posts: 2110
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:19 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by BrandonBogle » Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:45 pm

My mother's 99 Corolla was crushed on three sides by three vehicles on an Interstate at highway speeds. She has injuries, but they thought they were removing a lifeless body when tearing the car open. She was revived in the ambulance on the watt other ER. After seeing the car, it truly was a miracle she survived at all. The injuries she sustained, while major, are not life threatening. The safety enhancements of newer cars would have likely alleviated much of her injuries. It is because of this that she now drives a 2010 IS.

For the Op, if the S60 doesn't stretch my budget, I would spend the extra money for it. In fact, I've been thinking of the very same car later this year when the redesigned 2014 is released (though I will test drive an ES as well). I'll likely snag a S60 T5 AWD at a good price then.
Last edited by BrandonBogle on Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:11 am

tacster wrote:
tadamsmar wrote:
Are you prepared to brake all 4 tires independently when other drivers do something stupid or reckless so that you can make a more extreme avoidance maneuver without skidding out of control than you otherwise could without braking all 4 tires independently?

Do you even know how to get prepared to do this?
I am prepared to drive defensively. That is more important than any gee-whiz safety technology built into the car.
That would make sense if you had to do only one thing. Assuming you are correct about the more important thing, merely doing the more important thing and nothing else will give inferior results.
Last edited by tadamsmar on Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:45 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:21 am

Atilla wrote:The price I put on vehicle safety? I drive a two and a half ton brick full frame SUV that gets 17 MPG combined city/highway. I want the knucklehead who hits me to be the crumple zone. Not me.
Pre-ESC, a sedan of the same curb weight was on average safer than an SUV because of the rollover issue. But a recent IIHS study indicates that newer SUVs may be safer pound for pound.
Last edited by tadamsmar on Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Dave76
Posts: 564
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 9:05 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Dave76 » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:26 am

Gleevec wrote:Your all metal Buick/Ford from the 80s is NOT safer than a modern sedan with. Just because your car is made of metal and gets 10mpg, that doesnt mean it protects you-- all it means is that all the force of the collision is conducted directly to you through the engine block.

Cars are designed to crumple for the passengers safety, because by absorbing the impact in the materials that leads to deformation of the chassis, that force is NOT passed on to the passengers.

1. Modern cars help you avoid accidents better: ABS, traction control, lane/collision warning signals
2. Modern cars take the force of the impact away from the passenger and instead deform materials: crumple zones, multi-point restraints, airbags

I would much rather be in a 2013 Honda Accord than a 1988 Cutlass Supreme. The Honda may look like plastic taking on steel, but the Honda will protect you way better.

BTW this month's Consumer Reports has care safety ratings on the newer cars
ABS is only beneficial on icy/snowy pavement. Speaking from my own personal experiences of hard braking on dry tarmac, stopping distances have been noticeably shorter for cars not equipped with ABS.

Crumple zones and other parts of the car designed to give way in a collision have been around for decades. Those features were available on the Oldsmobile Cutlass in 1973. And again, the 200 series Volvos had crumple zones.

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:43 am

Gleevec wrote: 1. Modern cars help you avoid accidents better: ABS, traction control, lane/collision warning signals
2. Modern cars take the force of the impact away from the passenger and instead deform materials: crumple zones, multi-point restraints, airbags
The NHTSA studied ABS for decades and never mandated it because it never panned out as preventing fatalities. It was finally mandated in 2012 on all cars because it was pre-requirement for ESC. The NHTSA continued to study it after the schedule for mandating it was set (which was unusual for them since they had no decision to make) and issued a final report that said it did have some positive effects but they did not do the usual risk-benefit study since it was already on schedule to be mandated.

There were various possible reasons that ABS did not pan out (1) in the 1980s Mercedes-Benz did a study and found that 85% if drivers did not know how to use ABS in an emergency. They pumped their brakes, or let off due to the ABS vibrations or the high G forces. (2) ABS gave the drivers the ability to steer while full out braking, but they may have made worse decisions about where to go (3) Risk compensation, at least one study showed that cab drivers drove more recklessly with ABS.

I don't think traction control helps avoid accidents. It just helps you take off without your tires slipping on ice or burning rubber on pavement.

hicabob
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 5:35 pm
Location: cruz

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by hicabob » Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:31 am

Good video of a big old volvo (940 wagon) vs a small renault ("super-minicar") in a crashtest...
- a good illustration of modern crash engineering


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emtLLvXrrFs

User avatar
midareff
Posts: 5860
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:43 am
Location: Biscayne Bay, South Florida

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by midareff » Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:43 am

Best option I ever took (besides air-conditioning) is the blind spot warning system in my MB.

bungalow10
Posts: 2219
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 6:28 am
Location: Chicago North Shore

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by bungalow10 » Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:46 am

WHL wrote:I don't worry about it. I would never buy a Kia or Honda Fit or anything else tiny / super cheap. I'm certain the difference in safety features is negligible.
You might be surprised to find out the Fit is safer than several SUV models and many sedans.
An elephant for a dime is only a good deal if you need an elephant and have a dime.

Grt2bOutdoors
Posts: 19531
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: New York

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Grt2bOutdoors » Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:51 am

Dave76 wrote:
Gleevec wrote:Your all metal Buick/Ford from the 80s is NOT safer than a modern sedan with. Just because your car is made of metal and gets 10mpg, that doesnt mean it protects you-- all it means is that all the force of the collision is conducted directly to you through the engine block.

Cars are designed to crumple for the passengers safety, because by absorbing the impact in the materials that leads to deformation of the chassis, that force is NOT passed on to the passengers.

1. Modern cars help you avoid accidents better: ABS, traction control, lane/collision warning signals
2. Modern cars take the force of the impact away from the passenger and instead deform materials: crumple zones, multi-point restraints, airbags

I would much rather be in a 2013 Honda Accord than a 1988 Cutlass Supreme. The Honda may look like plastic taking on steel, but the Honda will protect you way better.

BTW this month's Consumer Reports has care safety ratings on the newer cars
ABS is only beneficial on icy/snowy pavement. Speaking from my own personal experiences of hard braking on dry tarmac, stopping distances have been noticeably shorter for cars not equipped with ABS.

Crumple zones and other parts of the car designed to give way in a collision have been around for decades. Those features were available on the Oldsmobile Cutlass in 1973. And again, the 200 series Volvos had crumple zones.
Our first family car was a '73 Olds Cutlass Supreme - that thing was a boat, with "real" power steering and "real" 4 wheel disk brakes, 8 cylinder gas guzzler with a smooth ride. One slightly misty evening, some guy in front of my father stopped abruptly on the road, we stopped in time, the guy behind us in a "newly painted" Monte Carlo stopped in time, the guy behind him plowed right into the Monte Carlo which then lurched forward and hit the Olds steel (read: hard) bumper. The Monte's entire front end was crushed like an accordian, our bumper didn't even have a scratch. The Olds entire body was made of steel, I recall how heavy those doors were to open. Don't discount a big car - they were built like tanks back then. That car was in the family for 22 years, before the corrosive salt of NYC ate away the undercarriage.
"One should invest based on their need, ability and willingness to take risk - Larry Swedroe" Asking Portfolio Questions

Grt2bOutdoors
Posts: 19531
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: New York

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Grt2bOutdoors » Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:57 am

tadamsmar wrote:
Gleevec wrote: 1. Modern cars help you avoid accidents better: ABS, traction control, lane/collision warning signals
2. Modern cars take the force of the impact away from the passenger and instead deform materials: crumple zones, multi-point restraints, airbags
The NHTSA studied ABS for decades and never mandated it because it never panned out as preventing fatalities. It was finally mandated in 2012 on all cars because it was pre-requirement for ESC. The NHTSA continued to study it after the schedule for mandating it was set (which was unusual for them since they had no decision to make) and issued a final report that said it did have some positive effects but they did not do the usual risk-benefit study since it was already on schedule to be mandated.

There were various possible reasons that ABS did not pan out (1) in the 1980s Mercedes-Benz did a study and found that 85% if drivers did not know how to use ABS in an emergency. They pumped their brakes, or let off due to the ABS vibrations or the high G forces. (2) ABS gave the drivers the ability to steer while full out braking, but they may have made worse decisions about where to go (3) Risk compensation, at least one study showed that cab drivers drove more recklessly with ABS.

I don't think traction control helps avoid accidents. It just helps you take off without your tires slipping on ice or burning rubber on pavement.
A defensive driving course would go a long way in reducing the number of accidents on the road. The 3 major things I see in my neighborhood that will cause accidents: 1) speeding recklessly (you don't drive 50 or 60 in a 30 zone on a residential street), 2) talking or texting on a phone in one hand with the other on the wheel :oops: and 3) tail-gaiting - yes! that still occurs with high frequency both on local roads and even worse on the highway where keeping a safe distance amounts to 1-2 seconds away from winding up in someone's back seat in front of you. I can tell you where you'll find all the "crosses" of those who did one or all of the above and paid the ultimate price for their stupidity.
"One should invest based on their need, ability and willingness to take risk - Larry Swedroe" Asking Portfolio Questions

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:31 am

Grt2bOutdoors wrote:
tadamsmar wrote:There were various possible reasons that ABS did not pan out (1) in the 1980s Mercedes-Benz did a study and found that 85% if drivers did not know how to use ABS in an emergency. They pumped their brakes, or let off due to the ABS vibrations or the high G forces. (2) ABS gave the drivers the ability to steer while full out braking, but they may have made worse decisions about where to go (3) Risk compensation, at least one study showed that cab drivers drove more recklessly with ABS.
A defensive driving course would go a long way in reducing the number of accidents on the road. The 3 major things I see in my neighborhood that will cause accidents: 1) speeding recklessly (you don't drive 50 or 60 in a 30 zone on a residential street), 2) talking or texting on a phone in one hand with the other on the wheel :oops: and 3) tail-gaiting - yes! that still occurs with high frequency both on local roads and even worse on the highway where keeping a safe distance amounts to 1-2 seconds away from winding up in someone's back seat in front of you. I can tell you where you'll find all the "crosses" of those who did one or all of the above and paid the ultimate price for their stupidity.
Could be that people can't learn to perform an optimal ABS emergency stop without practice. Even if you know to do what your user manual says (Mine says "slam and steer") there is still the issue that we are not use to trying to control a car at relatively high forward G forces while our body is a bit out of position to keep the brakes slammed.

After determining that 85% of drivers did not know how to use their ABS, Mercedes Benz invented "brake assist". It determines that an emergency stop is in progress by computer monitoring of the driver's behavior and performs optimal braking. But, so far, it has not sufficiently panned out in NHTSA testing as a safety feature that is cost effective to mandate.

PS: Don't slam and steer on an non-ABS vehicle. I have an Accord with ABS and a CRV without ABS. If I slammed and held the brakes on the CRV while traveling at a high speed then it would probably go into a sideways skid and rollover.

PS: Tailgating a luxury car probably often turns our badly since they are the ones with emergency brake assist.

User avatar
fandango
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 6:44 pm
Location: Greater Atlanta area

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by fandango » Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:41 am

I buy new cars and keep them about 10 to 12 years.

So, usually, I make a major jump in safety features when I buy a new vehicle.

Latest purchase was a Honda CRV. Safety was part of my decision to buy this vehicle. Highly ranked.

Our other vehicle is a Toyota Camry (2005) which seems to have most of the current safety features.

I used to be a volunteer first responder. So, I have seen a lot of accident gore. You need to do eveything you can to protect yourself from having an accident, including a refresher defensive driving course. Most accidents are caused by driver error. You vehicle protection systems can only do so much.

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Mon Mar 11, 2013 9:12 am

fandango wrote: Our other vehicle is a Toyota Camry (2005) which seems to have most of the current safety features.
It may have most of the current safety features and still lack >80% of the safety improvement that current safety features afford. ESC was optional on the 2005 Camry so you may or may not have it. Field data indicates that ESC prevents about 1/3 of all fatalities which makes it the most important non-retrofittable safety feature at least since the collapsible steering wheel. It's 10 times more important than side air bags in preventing fatalities. ESC is standard on all car as of the 2012 model year.

User avatar
bottlecap
Posts: 5898
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 11:21 pm
Location: Tennessee

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by bottlecap » Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:10 am

I would consider safety features and crash tests in purchasing a new vehicle, but it's not going to make me jump from a Camry to a Volvo. I'd stay within the same class of vehicles and pick and choose amongst them.

JT

Colorado13
Posts: 778
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:58 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Colorado13 » Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:35 am

I have heard that today one of the (if not *the*) most dangerous day of the year to be on the road in terms of car accidents as a result of daylight savings time. Or is that an urban legend? Either way, be careful out there...

User avatar
tadamsmar
Posts: 7894
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by tadamsmar » Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:49 am

Daylight savings leads to more accidents, heart attacks, studies show

Read more: http://www.wjla.com/articles/2012/03/da ... z2NFbXgjZi

nyblitz
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 7:33 am

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by nyblitz » Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:49 am

Another point of view - as an alternative to purchasing an expensive super safe vehicle, consider cutting the amount of driving you have to do. This is not always possible, but may be incredibly cost effective as well as less dangerous. You also have more time, which is priceless.

http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/ ... commuting/

User avatar
jeffyscott
Posts: 7372
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by jeffyscott » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:23 pm

bungalow10 wrote:You might be surprised to find out the Fit is safer than several SUV models and many sedans.
What are you basing this opinion on?
press on, regardless - John C. Bogle

Valuethinker
Posts: 36718
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Valuethinker » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:36 pm

Colorado13 wrote:I have heard that today one of the (if not *the*) most dangerous day of the year to be on the road in terms of car accidents as a result of daylight savings time. Or is that an urban legend? Either way, be careful out there...

In the UK it is argued the other way.

In the morning when it is dark we are *more* alert. So longer darkness when driving to work is less lethal.

Human alertness drops between 4-6pm, ie just when we commute home. The UK is pretty much all above 50 degrees latitude so it gets dark at 3.30-4.00 in winter at the solstice.

If we were to adopt British Summer Time (GMT +1) all year around, we would save lives. Perhaps the lives of as many as 100 children-- the most likely to be killed by cars in that crucial 4-6pm time.

However
1. the farmers hate going to work in the dark-- that would hurt the politicians

2. it's what Europe has (although we had it in WW2 to save electricity, all year around). We'd be shock horror on the same time zone as France.

On those 2 factors it will never happen-- the farmers and the Europhobes would scream too loud.

But it would save up to 100 childrens' lives a year.

Oh and some adults, too.

fourwaystreet
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by fourwaystreet » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:46 pm

My first car was a 1975 Ford Pinto, so anything is a upgrade from that.

Rodc
Posts: 13601
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:46 am

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Rodc » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:55 pm

PS: Tailgating a luxury car probably often turns our badly since they are the ones with emergency brake assist.
And lawyers...
We live a world with knowledge of the future markets has less than one significant figure. And people will still and always demand answers to three significant digits.

Rodc
Posts: 13601
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:46 am

Re: How much of a price do you put on vehicle safety?

Post by Rodc » Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:59 pm

There maybe almost no end to paying more for (marginal) increases in safety. At some point you say this car is safe enough, the marginal safety increase is not worth the extra money.

How much you drive, where, how and how much money you have will determine where you say good enough.

I personally don't think the added cost to buy and maintain a Volvo is worth the extra cost relative to a Honda of similar size, though it is close enough that I did think about it.

YMMV
Last edited by Rodc on Mon Mar 11, 2013 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We live a world with knowledge of the future markets has less than one significant figure. And people will still and always demand answers to three significant digits.

Locked