Toyota Yaris?

My friend Dizzy, AKA Stupid, Troll, Idiot, Moron, Dumbshit, Asshole, Engineer and Pathological liar you can call yourself whatever you wish, because we all know you are a Pathological liar

mike hunt

My friend Dizzy, AKA Stupid, Troll, Idiot, Moron, Dumbshit, Asshole, Engineer and Pathological liar you can say whatever you wish, because we all know you are a Pathological liar but the accident rates I sited came from the NHTSA

mike hunt

Yet another diz moment!!

Your post has nothing to do with the fact that SUV are more prone to rollovers than other vehicals. You just keep posting non-relevent information.

And is is inpisputable that SUVs are more prone to rollovers.

• Sport utility vehicles are more prone to rollover than other vehicle types. This is due to their higher ground clearance and narrow width which tend to make the vehicle top-heavy and more likely to roll over in a crash. (NHTSA)

• Sport utility vehicles, as a class, account for almost 70 percent of all rollover crash fatalities. (NHTSA)

According to NHTSA, SUVs rollover in 37 percent of fatal crashes, compared to a 15 percent rollover rate for passenger cars. Rollover crashes accounted for 53 percent of all SUV occupant deaths in single vehicle crashes in 1996. Only 19 percent of occupant fatalities in passenger cars occurred in similar crashes.

Once again I will point out NO motor vehicle is PRONE to roll over, none. The bulk of the mass is just above the center line of the drive train and the drive train in an SUV is only an inch or so above that of a sedan. The wheel base has a greater effect on an SUVs chance of roll over than it height. The fact is they are all prone to remain on their wheels, if anything. 43,000 American died in automotive accidents in 2005, the overwhelming majority of them frontal crashes. Only around 2% of all the crashes involved a roll over. One can not defy the laws of physics and one can site any statistic they want in an effort to win an argument. The fact remains one is safer in the larger vehicle like an SUV period and opinions will not change that fact.

You are free to believe what ever you choose. If you think you will be worth riding in a piss ant midget car like a Yaris, than in a larger safer vehicle like a full size sedan, pickup or an SUV, to save a few hundred dollar a year on fuel then be my guest. I spent much of my life designing and test crashing vehicles to make then safer, I'll ride in the lager vehicle any time, I never intend to be caught dead in a piss ant car. ;)

mike hunt

Some (read SUVs) are more prone than others. As statistics show.

Both affect it.

You're playing with bad statistics. You're diluting the chances of rollovers in a SUV by including all vehicles in the stat. Can't do that.

Good for you, I could give a rats ass what you drive, but your argument about SUVs not being more prone to rollovers is still a bunch of crap.

• Sport utility vehicles are more prone to rollover than other vehicle types. This is due to their higher ground clearance and narrow width which tend to make the vehicle top-heavy and more likely to roll over in a crash. (NHTSA)

• Sport utility vehicles, as a class, account for almost 70 percent of all rollover crash fatalities. (NHTSA)

According to NHTSA, SUVs rollover in 37 percent of fatal crashes, compared to a 15 percent rollover rate for passenger cars. Rollover crashes accounted for 53 percent of all SUV occupant deaths in single vehicle crashes in 1996. Only 19 percent of occupant fatalities in passenger cars occurred in similar crashes.

Short wheel base SUVs are more susceptible to roll than those with a longer wheel base, but neither is 'prone' to roll over.

Does the fact your figures are from ten years ago, ring a bell? Do a search of Firestone tires on the Explorer that sold at a rate of 400,000 back then. The fact remains the larger the vehicle the safer it is for properly belted passengers, period. That is one of the reason seat belts are not required in school busses ;)

mike hunt.

Small engines in cars made in the past 10-20 years usually cruise at well below 3,000 RPM, and I doubt their longevities differ much from those of much larger auto engines.

My clubs fit easily sideways in the Yaris sedan trunk, there's about 57" across at the widest point. The footprint of the Yaris is almost the same as the Matrix, believe it or not.

The Yaris S with automatic transmission--the heaviest Yaris in the fleet--weighs 2,326 pounds.

I'm sure yours was a typo.

For another example, the new Honda Fit weighs in at 200 pounds MORE than my old 92 Civic Si.

Porky suckers, aren't they.

I believe you'll find that the word is spelled *kibosh.*

Speaking of swill, what sort had you been drinking when you wrote that? ("Where there's a swill, there's a sway.")

What in the name of Klortho the Magnificient does that have to do with anything I said? Most SUVs not being involved in rollovers doesn't negate the fact that taller vehicles are more top-heavy than less-tall vehicles.

Geoff

There's that devastating liberal comeback, "Yer stupid!" No goddam wonder you people can't seem to win any elections. Pathetic...

"If we can't win this one, we can't win shit!" -- James Carville, 2004

And you'd know this...how, exactly? Are you a member of Liberal Central Command?

I don't think there's a liberal conspiracy to propagandize against SUVs in the formal, organized sense. It's more a matter of lots of people of like mind pulling in a common direction.

Geoff

You certainly don't have a very analytical mind for an engineer, or a very good grasp of spelling and syntax for someone whose profession revolves around attention to detail.

I'd wager that most engineers are sufficiently familiar with their newsreaders to know how to use a text editor, also, rather than top-posting like some clueless WebTV 'tard.

Geoff

As reply quickly typed in few second, and relying on my automatic spellchecker, is all of my time your post deserved. ;)

mike hunt

That is true but so are the larger vehicles better engineered today to absorb the energy in a crash. No mater how it is spun, one can not defy the laws of physics. The larger the vehicle the safer it is for properly belted passengers, period. It is not the weight of a vehicle that makes the larger vehicles safer for properly belted passengers. It is the fact there is more area ahead of the passenger compartment into which we could design and build in the crumple zones that reduce trauma to the occupants. In my opinion anybody who buys a midget car, to save a few hundred dollars a year, is betting a few hundred dollars a year they will not be in a accident sufficient to deploy the SRS. As one who actually worked in designing crumple zones, and knows their limitations, that is not a bet I would make for myself or family members.

mike hunt

I guess that works if you are golfing alone, but if you are part of a foursome, you will need a Town car, CV or 500 to carry all four bags. ;)

mike hunt

That my be what you believe but most larger V6 and V8 engines cruse at half that many RPMs. If I ran my cars at 3K I would be doing over 100 MPH ;)

mike hunt