this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Aotearoa / New Zealand
1653 readers
1 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general
- For politics , please use [email protected]
- Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, and non-NZ topics belong in [email protected]
- If you need help using Lemmy.nz, go to [email protected]
- NZ regional and special interest communities
Rules:
FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom
Banner image by Bernard Spragg
Got an idea for next month's banner?
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I know a few ute owners, I've never heard any of them mention safety as a reason for buying one. In the days of ANCAP safety ratings, it's very easy to know exactly how safe a vehicle is.
The reasons people typically buy utes and SUVs is as a lifestyle vehicle, something that can carry sporting equipment, camping gear etc, go anywhere they want to go, and tow.
It's also worth noting that some of the heaviest vehicles on the road are EVs, the difference in weight between a Leaf and a Ranger isn't actually much.
I honestly think you're barking up the wrong tree here.
https://youtu.be/cLl95jjlw0s
You're replying to a month old comment, the argument is well and truly over.
You seriously need to get a life.
It's a good video, you should watch it. 😂
https://youtu.be/9R7JV8gglgc
https://youtu.be/YpuX-5E7xoU
Look I don't want to be a dick, but single cab utes aren't the big sellers that double-cab utes are (which tend to be heavier), and also when a ute is sold as chassis, I think it means it doesn't have a deck (flat or well-side). So yeah, that particular model is lighter sure, but its not really representative.
Dude, you said no Ranger weighed less than 2.2 tonnes. Even a double cab with a tray is less than two tonnes, and fleet buyers absolutely love those things.
Pretty much everything you've said so far has been absolutely wrong.
https://www.ford.co.nz/content/dam/Ford/website-assets/ap/nz/nameplate/ranger-2019/Overview/Pdf/Ford-Ranger-2019-Spec-Sheet.pdf
OK fair enough I did say that, but I was clear it was based on a quick google only and to be fair it was about 2023 Rangers, and you've pasted spec sheets about 2019 Rangers. So I don't think either of us are getting everything perfectly right.
Meanwhile, this side discussion about whether a Ranger is heavier than a Leaf kinda ignores the finding of the study that prompted this whole discussion.
Namely, every driver saved by switching to an SUV or Pickup was balanced by 4.3 other people dying. And the main reason quoted for that 'While bigger cars typically are safer for their occupants, they pose a greater hazard to anyone or anything smaller they may collide with, a phenomenon known as “crash incompatibility.”'
If you take pedestrians and cyclists out of the statistics, we are still left with: "28%: Percent by which a collision with an SUV is more likely to kill a car’s occupants than one with another passenger car."
First, stop quoting an article written in the USA, they have a very different road fleet to what we have, and their vehicles are massive.
Second, I proved you wrong in about three minutes while on the can, so you can't have looked very hard.
Let's try to bring this back onto productive territory - clearly our vehicle fleet is escalating in size as we emulate the Americans.
Sure, we've got a way to go but there's still way to many dodge ram atrocities or great wall shockers rolling around.
Is it though? Do you have any studies that were actually done on our fleet?
Hell, yes. SUVs have gotten hugely bigger in recent years, surely that's painfully evident to anyone with eyes?
I've got no studies for you, but I've seen what our builders keep upgrading to for their company vehicles
Some of the smart ones use vans but most of the others go for the biggest, most obnoxious thing they can find
Considering some of the absolute boats that came out in the nineties, including the 80 and 100 series land cruisers, I wouldn't be surprised if the average size of our road fleet has actually shrunk.
The length of a typical Hilux, for example, has increased by 100mm, and width by 150mm. Hardly a colossal increase in size.
https://www.carsguide.com.au/toyota/hilux/car-dimensions/1990
https://www.carsguide.com.au/toyota/hilux/car-dimensions
The 90s hiluxes I remember were tiny, but after searching it seems like this model was 1990 exactly, maybe it started growing from then (which feels like a looong time ago!)
Also, I ink the crucial metric which doesn't seem to be covered is how the grille height has moved from roughly an adults hips towards their upper arm, which seems to me to be far more lethal
That's a two wheel drive model, the four wheel drives were pretty much always that height.
The main change has actually been in the styling, they look more aggressive now.
A leaf has much better pedestrian crash safety than any ute or SUV...
OK, so what about vans? Most cab forward van designs are just a wall, and even vehicles like the Transit would be worse than most SUVs. Why aren't we griping about those?
SUV's get heavier and their pedestrian visibility gets worse every year. Vans don't suffer from either of those.
https://www.theautopian.com/full-size-suvs-are-twice-as-likely-to-kill-pedestrians-as-cars-study/
That's a US article, and they have a very different road fleet to what we do. I don't think that article is particularly applicable to NZ.
Vans are infinitely more useful than SUVs. They're also the better lifestyle cars.
Most trade vans are two seaters, they have stiff suspension, low ground clearance, and are very rarely AWD.
No, they don't make good lifestyle cars at all, especially if you tow or have children.
The massive front blind spots of these large cars are a major factor in increased pedestrian deaths.
I drive an SUV, a mazda CX-5. Because you sit so high in the vehicle, the forward visibility is very good, better even than some cars I've driven.
The blind spot argument is pretty weak, in my view.
Pretty weak? There are many studies showing bigger cars are killing more pedestrians, particularly because of the front blind spot.
Half those vehicles don't even exist on NZ roads, the only one I've seen in person is the 150, and they're rare as hen's teeth.
Out utes are much smaller.
I drive a Ute and without the front camera, the blindspot would be terrible.
True, but how many Escalades have you seen on the road in NZ?
I buy that with Utes; back in the 2000s and 2010s. But early on when SUVs were becoming vogue it was definitely a perception of safety, particularly for the urban buyers using it for around town, school and sports runs etc.
Nowadays a twin cab ute has fairly well taken over that spot, particularly for urban drivers but whether perceived safety is as much of a selling point for them I'm willing to concede.
Sure, a Leaf might weight something similar to a Ranger; but the big difference in danger from a Ranger is its height and particularly driving around town poor visibility for pedestrians.
And in any case, I'm not barking up much of a tree, read the study - it's pretty clear that Utes & SUVs in that study were a lot more dangerous. Also note I tied safety fears to SUVs, not Utes.
And to add one more thing, your weight comparison on Leaf vs Ranger doesn't ring true to a quick google. Kerb weight on the leaf shows up approximately 1570kg, looking at drive.com.au stats, there's no 2023 Ranger less than 2200kg. And then perhaps more importantly, Gross Vehicle Mass is just under 2000kg vs 3200kg+
https://www.drive.com.au/showrooms/ford/ranger/12db7674afb33e6a/
Oh look, the website you quoted proves you wrong.
As I note above - that's for a single cab ute with no deck. This is far more representative of what is actually being sold in NZ and is 2232kg, with a 3250kg GVM:
https://www.drive.com.au/showrooms/ford/ranger/12db6d74afb32f1f/
There are four door, dual cabs with a tray that weight less than two tonnes. You're still full of it.
And those 2wd XL rangers are everywhere, fleet buyers love them. Especially for tradies and service techs.
https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-advice/ford-ranger-specifications-all-the-details-88686
They start at less than 1.8 tonnes. A model S, by comparison, is 2.2 tonnes.
A model S has better brakes and a lower center of gravity, AND better visibility for pedestrians. SUV's are getting dangerously overgrown in their fronts and it's taking lives.
https://www.theautopian.com/full-size-suvs-are-twice-as-likely-to-kill-pedestrians-as-cars-study/
We're not talking about SUVs here, we're talking about utes. And that doesn't change the fact that a collision between an S and a small hatchback would annihilate the smaller car.
stop acting like the vast majority of utes are low-body holdens - today there's a lot more rangers and hiluxes that are basically SUV's with beds.
annihilate? what do you think's in the batteries, antimatter?
I think your rhetoric is more charged than the tesla and your 'cautionary' bias is ridiculously misplaced.
My point is, they're nearly twice the weight of some small hatchbacks, and if one runs into you, you're in a far worse position than an equivalent ICE vehicle.
I think you're making a much larger issue of the weight differential than actually merits, while entirely disregarding the visibility issue that's killing people left and right.
Keep posting infographics and videos about vehicles we don't even have in the country, that'll convince people.
It convinced me. But then I'm capable of extrapolating trends between counties.
It's clear though: large vehicles save the occupants but kill others at a higher rate.