There was a study released not that long ago that compared the safety of cars and SUVs on a scale of size, and the results were suprising. I have been unable to find the exact results, but I will atempt to describe them the best I can. I have chosen to illustrate the baisic idea with this very simple (almost childish) graph:
The Y-axis represents the generalized ammount of safety produced by a given vehicle. The X-axis represents the size of a given vehicle, the green line being some of the smallest cars (Kia Rio, Chevy Aveo, etc.), the orange line representing the mid-size cars (Toyota Camry, Chevrolet Impala, etc.), and the red line representing large SUVs (Ford Expedition, Mercedes G-Wagon, etc.).
The baisic idea, atleast of what I have read, is that the general safety of a given automobile is largely determined by the size.
The extremely small cars, despite the fact that they have become safer, are still in danger from larger and heavier vehicles that are on the road today. Their lack of overall size and weight therefore lets them simply be "pushed around" in comparison to the larger cars and trucks on the road. Of course, just like many of the other classifications, there are exceptions to the rule (the Honda Fit comes to mind), but in general the cars arent nearly as safe as the larger models.
The mid-size models largely benefit from their larger size and slightly heavier weight. Beyond that, generally more safety features are built into these vehicles as they are often the main part of the sales to come from a particular company. Added to that is the growing public interest in safety, presumably from the percieved "danger" they face from the SUVs, and thus greater ammounts of safety features have been added to the average Accord or 300. Of course there are again, exeptions to the rule, as several models recieve very poor ratings (the Ford Fusion and Infiniti G35 come to mind), but in general, you are much safer in a mid-size than anything else.
SUVs in general are "safe," but that is often limited by the fact that they can roll over so easily, and their heavier weight can often cause more problems when good. Think of an SUV as a bowling ball traveling down the bowling alley at a set of pins, the pins being stopped traffic. Because of gravity and momentum, the bowling ball simply plows through the lighter and smaller pins, seemingly doing nothing to the bowling ball itself. Although no one would deny that an SUV wouldnt be damaged, if it were to colide into a pile of Kia Rios, you are probably more likely to walk out of a Thoe than a Rio in a given accident, unless of course, rollover happens.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The point that I am attempting to get at is that really, no vehicle is going to be 110% protected when coliding with another. In many situations, a smaller car can be just as safe as an SUV, and vice versa.
I personally am going to be more likely to look into a VW Jetta or Passat Wagon (possibly with 4MOTION) over a small SUV in most situations, but I can understand why people buy them, and why many people do not. I also completely understand the complaints filed against them (I have my own as well), but I would also do my best to defend those who drive SUVs.
Neither side is going to be able to see eye to eye, and I suppose the meeting ground is going to have to be the growing Crossover market, but I'm sure there are going to be people who start complaining about them pretty soon as well...
fficial_s%26sa%3DN
