* For the driver.

Large cars/SUVs are vastly more dangerous for everyone else. Visibility in modern cars is also much worse, regardless of size.

▲

testing22321 20 hours ago | parent | next [-]

ABS, traction control, lane assist, crumple zones and many more things benefit everyone on the road.

Of course the emissions from that old diesel are a major health hazard. I’d rather not have that drive past my yard where my toddler is playing.

▲

speedgoose 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sorry to go against the C15 French circle jerk, but a good modern SUV is safer for everyone despite being heavier, and a SUV.

First, a good SUV is an electric SUV. Whoever had the experience to be behind a C15 without HEPA filters, something you can find in a good SUV, knows that the C15 will kill you with its air pollution.

It’s worse if you are doing sport on a bike or running. And trail running may not save you from those C15, as they are pretty capable off road vehicles and are used by hunters and farmers.

Also, the C15 has no ABS and ESP. Pierre is a lot less likely to crash into you with a modern SUV than a C15.

Finally, the C15 has no active security. It will drive full speed into toddlers playing on the road while a good modern SUV will stop automatically. Same for cyclists and other vehicles.

Visibility is indeed worse because the industry decided that a solid A pilar was more important.

▲

nosianu 21 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm not sure how useful it is to argue based on comparisons of that ancient car and new ones. Yes yes I know that's how it started, but I think it is obvious that a useful discussion is about looking at the principles behind that old car, and then to apply "what if" to modern ones.

I'm making this assumption based on how utterly useless it is to try to have a serious discussion that's really about that old car vs. a new one. I mean, would anyone even think about producing those same old cars with their old technology? Obviously not.

I think, in my discussions, not just this one, it would help us all A LOT if we didn't try to win an argument and limit ourselves to interpret the other people's comments in the most restricting way. Let's assume we are here to learn something other than finding ways to be "technically correct".

▲

speedgoose 21 hours ago | parent [-]

Sorry, the statement that a shitty C15 is safer than a modern SUV is too hard to ignore. Overall, my statement isn't to take very seriously though.

▲

kelnos 20 hours ago | parent [-]

Not quite. The statement was that the C15 is safer for people outside of the car than the modern SUV.

If I had to get hit by a car, I'd much rather it be the C15 than the modern SUV. I'm much less likely to survive the SUV hitting me.

Now you can make the argument that other modern safety features make it less likely that the modern SUV would even hit you in the first place (given automatic emergency braking, etc.), and I suspect you might even be right, but I think that requires some data to back it up.

	▲	speedgoose 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		When I wrote everyone, I meant people inside and outside. The statement wasn’t specific to collisions but you are free to prefer being hit by a C15. As for myself as a pedestrian, I am not sure. The modern SUV is bigger but modern cars have improve safety for pedestrians. Mostly much softer and taller bumpers. It’s not perfect but from the ncap YouTube videos, I may prefer the modern SUV. If we go with empirical data, I suggest test crashing all those C15.

▲

loeg 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Driver and passengers. Some of the modern sensor stuff benefits everyone else, too.