Are Small Cars Less Safe Than Large Ones???

Hello,
I was wondering if anyone knew if the size of the car made a difference on safety for the passengers. I was also wondering if the back seat is safer than the front for the passengers in it. I know they are if crashes come from the front of the car, but what about the back or side. Thanks a bunch,
Sincerely,
Anonymous

Hoenstly, every car has it benefits and weaknesses, some with more than other in certain areas. Heres a great site for comparing vehicle safety

http://www.informedforlife.org/

Hope that helps, and Im sure some of the other regulars here will expand more on the issue.

The Car Safety section of the forum has more info on this....

i thought this *is* the car safety section of the forum.

all other things being equal, yes, a larger car has more mass to absorb an impact and prevent that mechanical energy from reaching the occupants. but that does not mean that small cars are not safe. smaller cars can still get the highest possible crash test scores, especially if equipped with all the latest safety technologies like side air bags and side curtains air bags. informedforlife.org is a good place to start, they integrate data from IIHS and NHTSA. but be sure to read how they calculate their scores, it can be misleading.

Higher vehicle weight is an advantage in a crash, as is a higher seating position compared to the other car. On the other hand, SUVs take a big safety hit because of their usually poorer handling and much greater tendency to roll, though electronic stability control certainly helps compensate for the latter.

A large sedan with good safety features and excellent crash test scores is likely to be one of the safest cars around.

The Informed for Life scoring system does take vehicle weight into account. On average, a heavier car will get a higher score, though many comparatively light cars (like my Legacy) are at the top of the list. Of course, higher vehicle weight also brings down fuel economy......

This is an interesting report.

Driver Deaths by Make and Model.

http://www.iihs.org/sr/pdfs/sr4204.pdf

tjham said:

This is an interesting report.

Driver Deaths by Make and Model.

http://www.iihs.org/sr/pdfs/sr4204.pdf

Click to expand...

That *is* an interesting report, but I don't think it includes controls for driver characteristics, like age, sex, etc. (I didn't read it very carefully, so I could be wrong.) In the absence of that, it's hard to tell much about the comparative safety of the different cars. The Honda Odyssey's excellent score undoubtedly reflects something about the vehicle, but it also indicates something about the people who drive minivans.

Edit: I take that back--they do take into account driver characteristics, but not all of them, as the caption on the Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable picture indicates. And even so, there's no way of accounting for individual differences in driving style. I'm a 36 year old mother, which on paper makes me look like a sedate driver. But I'm not, and my choice of car reflects that.

IMHO, I feel much safer riding in my 2005 Jeep Wrangler than I do in my wife's 2004 Suzuki Verona. The Jeep is made of steel with a saftey cage welded to the frame, and has steel bumpers. Both vehicles have front airbags, but hers has ABS. The Jeep has more ground clearance, but being that low to the ground in her car worries me. I'm sure there are a lot of people that would disagree with me, but I am very confident in the Jeep's passenger protection.

As for the handeling characteristics... Most people will drive a car faster than a truck. People who own trucks know that they don't handel as well and usually drive at a safer rate of speed than someone in a low to the ground sedan. (My wife and I are perfect examples of this.) Where the problem comes in is when the driver does not acknowledge the limitations of the vehicle they are driving. Many of the problems come in when someone goes from a sedan to an SUV and don't adjust their driving style. For example... my wife can take a local on ramp at 60, but I need to take it at 35 in the Jeep. Different vehicles require different driving styles. If everyone drove within their skill level and within their vechicle limitations, many accidents could be avoided.

I guess I should probably answer your question now. Yes, a larger vehicle will be safer than a smaller vehicle. It just boils down to physics.

informedforlife.org ranks the wrangler pretty low for safety (124.6 risk assessment). a significant part of the overall low score was contributed by a very high rollover risk. the verona rates better, at 105.2 (lower numbers correlate with safer).

as i said earlier, all other things being equal, larger does equal safer. but there are many other parameters that are not equal.

oh, and both the verona and wrangler are within 63 lbs of each other, so they're virtually identical, mass-wise. passenger cars are all designed with safety cages nowadays as well, and the higher the center of gravity, the more risk there is for rollovers (this is reflected in the IFL ratings).

I'm more of a reader than a poster generally but I wanted to add my :twocents: to this thread.
I drive a '06 Toyota Corolla and feel safe in it even though it's a small car. It's true that my risk of death would be lower if I drove a bigger car but I don't believe that smaller risk is worth the enviromental damage. Sure a larger car would be safer now but increased gas consumption will effect my children and grandchildren. I also think there's a trend towards buying smaller cars, which means my risk as a small car driver is decressing because there are fewer giant cars on the road. Especially here in Portland where people already driver smaller cars than many other cities. So yes, certain larger cars are safer than smaller cars but to me to slight advantage gained by size is not worth it.