Comments on: Betting Your Life on a Hybrid

By: Matt N

Matt N — Sat, 16 May 2009 22:13:10 +0000

I’d be curious to see the statistics about the build country of a car and the corresponding fatality rates. I hypothesize that the Swiss and the Germans would have lower rates than American and probably Asian vehicles, ceteris paribus, but this is mostly speculation.

I’ve owned 4 German cars (all VW), one of which was totaled. I’d like to say that I buy German for the sleek and elegant design, but after the accident, it’s for the safety. I’ll always put safety before fuel economy, as I believe it is a rational order of preference. So until the German manufacturers, or their Swiss competitors, start making hybrids more popular in the States, I’ll stick with the petrol-loving People’s Car.

By: ProfSwitzer

ProfSwitzer — Sun, 10 May 2009 15:59:36 +0000

I’m pleading the fifth. Next Christmas, give me a fifth of something good and maybe I’ll tell my stories.

By: Jack and Annie

Jack and Annie — Sat, 09 May 2009 17:55:07 +0000

So thats it, no explainatiion, no excuse, no alibi? Pete says youre hiding behind all your degrees and the real Dave is finally coming out. Honestly I would have pointed the finger at Suzi. lol

By: ProfSwitzer

ProfSwitzer — Sat, 09 May 2009 14:55:51 +0000

Damn it, Suzi! See what you’ve done!

By: Jack and Annie

Jack and Annie — Sat, 09 May 2009 12:45:58 +0000

I find this all very interesting but inquisitive on Suzis LeBaron egg throwing incident. lol

By: Benjamin Seghers

Benjamin Seghers — Fri, 08 May 2009 21:57:32 +0000

“If people don’t want the cars, why are you spending taxpayer money to bribe people into buying them?” The claim is that the subvention is there to promote actions that promote the overall good. That’s the claim. It’s the same reason why you get tax deductions or benefits for doing engaging in certain actions like donating or getting married. So the idea is that people are not naturally altruistic so there needs to be some sort of incentive to promote it.

Peanut butter vs. lightning. The former is easily preventable. (At what cost, though?)

Dealership prices might increase initially, but wouldn’t you expect them to decrease as output increases (along with future advances in technology)?

There is, however, a way to make cars both light and safe. Amory Lovins has been talking about it for years. It’s called carbon fiber.

By: Nik Drescher

Nik Drescher — Fri, 08 May 2009 03:40:33 +0000

I wonder where sports cars fit into the chart. I might drive my Civic differently then someone drives their Sports Car.
Also the higher rate on the small pickups might be linked to turn overs or something like that.

By: Zach

Zach — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:41:27 +0000

My dad works for a Toyota dealership as a buyer/seller of used cars during this past summer he said at the height of the oil prices you could buy a new Corolla or Prius for a little more than a thousand dollars more (if you could find one) than one that is a year or 2 old. The SUVs he couldn’t give away and now that is all people want because they can afford it again.

To add to Tylers point about Buicks, I will take it a step further because most cars that tend to be large and very-large tend to be luxury vehicles that have safety features in about every cubic inch of the vehicle.

To the point about large and very-large SUVS, I feel that any Volvo is a Tank ride or drive in one and you will see what I mean they can take a lickin and keep on hittin

By: ProfSwitzer

ProfSwitzer — Thu, 07 May 2009 21:01:02 +0000

Hey now, Suzi! That was a long time ago… I’m older, wiser, and slightly more mature now.

Tyler — I find one interesting thing in the numbers: the fatality rate for the very large SUV is higher than for the mid-size or large. Not sure if that’s because large SUVs may tend to have more people in them, or if it has something to do with the kind of people that drive that kind of car. Maybe they feel like they’re in a tank so they don’t have to drive as carefully. Your main point is correct — concluding that a car is “safer” because it is involved in fewer accidents, without looking at the characteristics of the person driving the car, is erroneous. (“Erroneous! Erroneous on both counts!”) It would be nice to have the data on who is involved in the accident (presuambly something the insurance companies would have) so we could control for these factors and get a better idea of how much safer some cars are than others.

One objective measure is the crash test performance of cars in the IIHS testing (featured often on Dateline). Here’s one example of how larger cars outperform small cars: http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/14/iihs-finds-sub-compacts-fair-poorly-again/

P.S. Sorry if you are getting any pageload errors. It seems hostmonster is having some server issues today. I guess that’s what you get when you only pay $6/month for web hosting…

By: Suzi

Suzi — Thu, 07 May 2009 20:24:35 +0000

What category does the LeBaron fall under? What are the statistics on teenagers who throw eggs from them?

By: Tyler Sirucek

Tyler Sirucek — Thu, 07 May 2009 20:10:15 +0000

Switzer, I cannot help but think that there is another correlation between certain vehicles and the death rates. I would deduct, based on life experience, that there is a relationship between the types of people that buy and drive certain type of vehicle and how that person drives. I do not know many young people who buy Buick’s or can afford a big SUV. Maybe this is why the death rates are lower on these vehicles, because of the type of people who drive them. The people who can afford certain vehicles in the low death rate category most likely are those who would be better drivers and who maybe have more to loose so they drive better (wealthier) Better sick the Human Relations department on all the Buick drivers because they are privileged for being better drivers! lol!, I mean, they have more money so they must be oppressing people or some dumb nonsense like that.