Prius as a functioning family vehicle

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Jan 24 2007, 10:57 PM) [snapback]380442[/snapback]</div>

Well put, and to pile on I get so disgusted when I hear safety ratings based solely on crash test performance with no weight put on agility, braking, visibility; things that help you avoid accidents in the first place. In these cases you are almost always better off with a car.


I will also add that I agree with the poster who suggested smaller strollers. Those monster Graco "system" strollers are how many people justify SUVs in the first place. Our Maclaren fits nicely in the hatch. This goes for everything I might add. IMO most people don't need more space, they just need less or smaller stuff.

 

"This goes for everything I might add. IMO most people don't need more space, they just need less or smaller stuff."

I agree up to a point. I can do most of my family running around with my Prius - we can pack 2 weeks worth of shopping (warehouse style) into the back along with 2 kids in car seats and 2 adults in the front.

However, we can NOT also fit my mom (who lives with us) in the car. I have a gasaholic minivan that sits in the garage for the times when we have 5 passengers. Yes, the Prius will fit 5 but not when 2 are in car seats.

I'm waiting for the day when we have a minivan (not an SUV, I love the sliding doors for getting kids in and out) that even approaches the fuel effeciency of my Prius.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Display Name @ Jan 24 2007, 10:12 PM) [snapback]380430[/snapback]</div>

You plan on having head-ons with SUV's? Sorry, but most of us around here are fed up with the argument that, "Oh, I need a Ford Excursion to run junior to school. Little cars are so dangerous..."

Honestly, check out the safety ratings for the Honda Civic. It's one of the safest cars on the road.

My first day learning how to drive, my uncle told me flat out: avoid head-on collisions whatever you do! They are invariably fatal. You'd be far better off running off the road. His advice makes more sense than buying a Ford Excursion for "safety."

By the way, I've survived just fine riding a *gasp* motorcycle the last 12 years, and over 90,000 miles...

It's not what you drive, it's how you drive it that is most important to your safety.

Harry

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Earthling @ Jan 25 2007, 10:45 AM) [snapback]380607[/snapback]</div>

Driving off the road to avoid a collision is fine if you avoid the fixed objects (trees, light poles).

A good portion of fatal accidents (at least half, I think) are single-car collisions, like running into light poles or rolling over. And of course, SUVs have a very poor safety record when it comes to roll-overs. I think they're improving but as a percent of highway miles, SUVs had higher fatality rates than sedans due largely to crushed heads in a roll-over. Often due to avoiding debris on the road or something - going 65 mph they can't handle a swerve, and the driver loses control and ends up upside down somewhere.

As a side note, I've seen small SUVs getting stuck or fishtailing in snowy conditions more than any other vehicle. It seems many of them are rear-wheel drive, but because it's an SUV people think they can handle anything on the roads. A person driving effectively the same thing like a small pickup or sports car are much more aware of the capabilities (limitations) of their vehicle in slippery conditions.

Bottom line, buying an SUV for safety makes as much sense as having a baby to "save the marriage". Modern myths, nothing more, but with long-term consequences.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(nerfer @ Jan 25 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]380634[/snapback]</div>

While I agree with the substance and sentiment of this, if you look at the actual insurance payouts for injuries in car wrecks, on average, larger vehicles have lower payouts. That's not an ideal statistic, for a lot of reasons, but that's also the same story that the vehicular death data show.

http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi_facts/pe...ry_coverage.pdf

That is what it is, but then people misuse that. Your point is well taken, that people take that average, don't bother to do the homework, and ignore the huge model-to-model variation within that average, and incorrectly assume that any SUV is safer than any car. Which is obviously wrong. As you can see by looking at model-level payouts here:

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/default.aspx

Unfortunately, those model-level data only let you compare within vehicle classes, not across classes. And the Prius is in the "specialty vehicle" class, for reasons only known to the IIHS.

So the point is that you don't drive the average, you drive what you drive. The Prius appears to have both good safety ratings (a theoretical measure of crash performance, assuming you have a crash), and low rates of death and insurance payout (a real-world measure that also factors in the likelihood of getting into a crash in the first place, and what you're likely to crash into).

None of these statistics are ideal but they suggest the Prius is a reasonable choice from a safety standpoint. I would not suggest it is the best possible from a safety standpoint, but ... if you want that, you should go find that, not the Prius.

It's hard to judge from the available data, but my guess, based on the sources above, is that moving from the Prius to a randomly-chosen SUV would not improve your safety. In other words, the Prius, being exceptionally safe for its size, is roughly as safe as the average SUV. (If I could find the hard data, I'd be sure of that -- this is from eyeballing the sources above.) But if you worked at it, sure, you could find an SUV with lower realized insurance claims for personal injury than the Prius has. Same as you could find a car that fit that criterion.

Besides, the overwhelming issue for safety is the human factor, not the vehicular factor. How likely are you to crash? If you're traveling on divided interstates, doing the speed limit, sober, the likelihood of a head-on collision is negligible. And if you look at vehicular death statistics, the majority of people who die in car wrecks were doing stupid things. If you exclude the deaths of the people doing those stupid things, and the occupants of their cars, the actual risk of death in a car crash, per person per year, is very small. The bottom line is that if you want your family to be safe, it's far more important for you to be an alert, awake, un-distracted safety-conscious driver, than it is to drive a tank. For example, based on some potentially challengeable statistics, using the cell phone while driving substantially increases the likelihood of an accident. To the point where where your average SUV driver on the cell is significantly less safe than an undistracted driver in a small light car.

So if the question is, have I done what it takes to keep my family safe, then, well, when I'm in the right hand lane on 95 south doing 65, and I see a Volvo SUV going by at 85 (and up) in the left lane, I am completely sure that my family is safer than theirs at that moment.

Bottom line: if you buy a car with good crash ratings and good insurance experience, and you make your mind up to drive it safely, you've done your due diligence for your family's well-being. Buying a randomly-chosen SUV adds nothing to your safety. Only if you buy an SUV specifically chosen for good saftey and insurance ratings will you improve your safety. And then, it's a matter of preferences. I judge the marginal gain in crash safety to be so small as to be negligible, mostly because the likelihood of a crash is small if you don't do stupid things. Others could legitimately make the opposite choice.

The one choice that does not make much sense to me would be to buy an SUV for the presumed safety, then drive like a maniac. It seldom bothers me when I see somebody in a sports car driving like a fool, because, hey, that's what you buy them for, and if you don't drive like that you've wasted your money. But a Volvo flying by at 90, driver chatting on the cellphone, to me, that's a seriously mixed message from a seriously confused person.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Earthling @ Jan 25 2007, 12:45 PM) [snapback]380607[/snapback]</div>

I agree. I remember reading something about our risk-taking behaviour increasing in response to greater vehicle safety, and that the most effective safety item of all would be a spike on the steering wheel. And if you think motorcycles are dangerous and don't get no respect, try cycling. Or walking. Even a Prius now feels like an armoured tank.

 

It makes me laugh to see so many new moms hauling their first kid in an Expedition they HAD to buy because they were starting a family. What a crock.

My wife and I are expecting in April and we bought a Prius last September knowing this time would come. My sister even scoffed at the fact that we bought such a 'small' car with the prospect of kids on the horizon.

The fact is, people these days automatically assume that SUVs and Minivans are required when you have kids. They are not. If you plan ahead and think simple, you'll find that the Prius can more than accommodate you. Especially when you are just starting out with a family. Someone already mentioned to not buy the monster sized strollers. There's several on the market that are light weight, SAFE, and they basically collapse into nothing. The problem is that most people just buy what they think looks good instead of thinking things through. It all comes back to the bigger is better and I need more stuff to tote around fad that causes people to buy minivans or SUVs. In most cases, people either don't have enough things/people to cart around in these vehicles to justify them, OR they are just carrying way more junk than they need to.

However, anyone with 4 or more kids is more than justified.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Jan 25 2007, 02:12 PM) [snapback]380702[/snapback]</div>

"People who drive SUVs often say they do so because they are safer - if you have a crash, you are better protected. But they've probably not considered the effect of "risk compensation".

That's when one aspect of a situation makes you feel more secure, so you take more risks in other ways. And that's what researchers in London found after watching 38,000 passing cars, of which 3000 were 4x4s. The SUV drivers were almost four times more likely to be seen using hand-held cellphones which is illegal).

Previous studies cited by the UK's Independent newspaper have shown that drivers using mobile phones have four times the risk of an accident. On that basis, SUV drivers are at 16 times the risk of having an accident. They were also less likely to use seat belts. So not so safe after all.

from: http://www.newscientist.com/blog/shortshar...mpensation.html

And how about this:

"Armed with such research, automakers have, over the past decade, ramped up their SUV designs to appeal even more to the "reptilian" instincts of the many Americans who are attracted to SUVs not because of their perceived safety, but for their obvious aggressiveness. Automakers have intentionally designed the latest models to resemble ferocious animals. The Dodge Durango, for instance, was built to resemble a savage jungle cat, with vertical bars across the grille to represent teeth and big jaw-like fenders. Bradsher quotes a former Ford market researcher who says the SUV craze is "about not letting anything get in your way, and at the extreme, about intimidating others to get out of your way." "

and

"Ask a typical SUV driver why he drives such a formidable vehicle, and he'll invariably insist that it's for safety reasons--the kids, you know--not because he's too vain to get behind the wheel of a sissy Ford Windstar. Automakers themselves know otherwise--their own market research tells them so. But Bradsher makes painfully clear that the belief in SUV safety is a delusion. For decades, automakers seeking to avoid tougher fuel economy standards have invoked the fiction that the bigger the car, the safer the passenger. As a result, most Americans take it on faith that the only way to be safe on the highway is to be driving a tank (or the next best thing--a Hummer). Bradsher shatters this myth and highlights the strange disconnect between the perception and the reality of SUVs."

lots of interesting reading on that web page: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/...2.mencimer.html

"While failing to protect their occupants, SUVs have also made the roads more dangerous for others. The "kill rate," as Bradsher calls it, for SUVs is simply jaw-dropping. For every one life saved by driving an SUV, five others will be taken. Government researchers have found that a behemoth like the four-ton Chevy Tahoe kills 122 people for every 1 million models on the road; by comparison, the Honda Accord only kills 21. Injuries in SUV-related accidents are likewise more severe."

"Ironically, SUVs are particularly dangerous for children, whose safety is often the rationale for buying them in the first place. Because these beasts are so big and hard to see around (and often equipped with dark-tinted glass that's illegal in cars), SUV drivers have a troubling tendency to run over their own kids. Just recently, in October, a wealthy Long Island doctor made headlines after he ran over and killed his two-year-old in the driveway with his BMW X5. He told police he thought he'd hit the curb. "

Yup, SUV's are wonderful. Buy one and be safe. Just try to refrain from killing me, (or your own children).

Harry

 

One more quote, while I'm at it:

"Clearly, the best solution would be for Americans to realize the danger of SUVs and simply stop buying them. Social pressure can be a powerful determinant on car choices, as seen in Japan, the one country where SUVs have not caught on because of cultural checks that emphasize the good of the community over that of the individual. There are signs that perhaps public sentiment is beginning to shift against SUV drivers here, too, as activists have begun to leave nasty flyers on SUV windshields berating drivers for fouling the environment and other offenses. But for a true reckoning to take place, image-obsessed Americans will need to fully understand the SUV's true dangers--including to themselves--before they will willingly abandon it to the junkyard. Spreading that message against the nation's biggest advertiser--the auto industry--will be tough work. Drivers can only hope that Bradsher's book will cut through the chatter. "

Again, from: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/...2.mencimer.html

Harry

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(quagmire0 @ Jan 25 2007, 03:18 PM) [snapback]380706[/snapback]</div>

But how, in this day and age, can anyone justify having 4 or more kids? We know what causes that now, and 'because I can afford to' is a pretty poor excuse. NOT having more offspring will do the environment far more good than driving a Prius.

(OK, guilty as charged. I have 2 myself. But I know better now. )

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Jan 25 2007, 03:01 PM) [snapback]380735[/snapback]</div>

I don't think anyone needs to justify having the number of children they have, whether it's one or ten. Nor does nayone have the right to ask someone to justify why they have so many children.

It makes about as much sense as to ask somone to justify their own existance. Why should you exist. Do you serve some critical function that could not be done by someone else?

But this is all off topic...

Yes, the Prius can serve very well as a family car. Like Dr. Fusco, we bought our Prius when we were a family of four. Soon after delivery, we found out there would be another delivery. I too had some concern about the space. It is incredibly difficult to fit three car seats in the back, but it has been done. I finally gave up and put my 4 year old in a booster in the front seat. The airbag seat sensor works and shuts off the airbag. I only let him sit here on the drive to and from school, which is less than 2 miles and 35 mph or less. He does not sit up front for any other driving. It's not ideal, but it works for now. As my daughter moves into a booster, that will likely change, with the youngest moved to the middle of the back seat and the boosters on each side.

There is enough room for a lot of stuff in the trunk, but as someone else mentioned, check to make sure your stroller(s) will fit, as some may not.

For longer drives we always take our SUV. It is superior in every way (that counts) for long trips. Gas mileage is nothing compared to my children's comfort and happiness. It has more room for everyone as well as gear. It is also safer than the Prius. Of course it uses more gas, but there are always some sacrifices. And no matter what all the SUV haters say, we will always own a large SUV for family trips and longer drives. For me comfort is paramount over mileage.

Is it the perfect family car? No, but it's close enough for me to be happy with it for limited distances. If you have two or less children, and you pack lightly for long trips, then it may very well be the perfect family vehicle.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Earthling @ Jan 25 2007, 08:45 AM) [snapback]380607[/snapback]</div>

While I despise huge, overweight (5000+ lb.) SUVs, have you looked at the "fine print" for the crash test data? The results from crash tests here conducted by the IIHS and NHTSA are conducted so that you can draw conclusions only about how well it does in a crash when crashing into other vehicles of the same class and similar size and weight.

Here are some curb weight comparisons:
06 Prius: 2890 lbs.
07 Civic: 2628 - 2807 lbs
Toyota Camry 4 cylinder: 3263 - 3373 lbs
Chevy Tahoe: 5265 - 5529 lbs
Chevy Suburban: 5607 - 6327 lbs.
Ford Expedition 5578 - 5803 lbs
Hummer H2: 6400 lbs.

Physics dictates that kinetic energy = 1/2 * mass * velocity^2.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cwerdna @ Jan 26 2007, 01:56 AM) [snapback]381006[/snapback]</div>

The above equation is a truism that cannot be changed. But damn it... so many of us end up at the wrong conclusion - get a bigger / heavier vehicle.

I am sorry folks; there is only 1 long term viable answer for this: REDUCE the weight of vehicles! In other words, re-engineer any vehicle heavier than about 3,000 lbs... And, in fact, over the long term reduce all vehicle weights down even further.

Any person who thinks they have a G-d given right to use 5,000+ lbs of steel to haul their sorry little A-- around this fragile earth is crazy.

I am not trying to offend anyone, but it is irrational to argue that a heavier vehicle is a better choice, because it is safer. With this rational, we would all be racing towards driving big 10,000 lbs vehicles. To make things even worse, the US Congress has even argued this point, saying that it was better for "Soccer Moms"; thus the exemption for trucks and the resistance to changing the CAFE mileage numbers.

If you drive an SUV, you may also consider your decision in the following way: The next time your SUV nails a car, a motorcycle or a pedestrian - YOU are much more likely to kill them or maim them then if you were in a small vehicle. You will be "SAFE", but will you be able to live with yourself for the rest of your life? I bet you didn't think of that!!

In summary, if you want to be a selfish P-G, then sure, get the biggest, heaviest, worst mileage vehicle available. You will have yours and who gives a S--T about everyone else.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cwerdna @ Jan 26 2007, 04:56 AM) [snapback]381006[/snapback]</div>

You left out my motorcycle:

2003 BMW R1150RT : around 600 lbs.

Gee, I'm still alive, how can that be?

I'm almost 57 years old and have never had a head-on collision.

Gee, how can that be?

As a country, the US spends about $0.50 on driver training for the average car driver. In Germany, you have to go through the equivalent of pilot training, and spend upwards of $2,000 to be trained (thoroughly) to drive.

I trained myself in defensive driving and vehicle handling, with excellent results. I don't need no stinkin' SUV to be safe on the road.

Harry

PS: I didn't train myself entirely by myself. I've taken 4 driver improvement courses over the years, a motorcycle rider course, and have read numerous books on driving safety.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(John in LB @ Jan 26 2007, 03:44 AM) [snapback]381017[/snapback]</div>

I wholeheartedly agree with you that weights should be reduced but unfortunately, people in America are being the selfish pigs you describe AND weights of vehicles haven't gone down. Go lookup curb weights of say a current Honda Civic or Nissan Sentra and compare it to one from the early 90s.

Light trucks (includes SUVs, pickups and minivans) have gone up sharply as a percentage of the vehicle fleet and now make up a larger percentage than passenger cars. Average curb weights of both fleets have gone up too.

See http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/CAFE/NewPa...gerCarFleet.htm
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/CAFE/LightTruckFleet.htm

I see an insane # of people driving 5000+ lb. SUVs on the way to work such as Tahoes, Navigators, Expeditions, Yukons and Surburbans. (in many cases solo and sometimes holding a cell phone to their ear)

edit: I FINALLY found the article I was looking for in another thread http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/mpg/fetrends/420s06003.htm.

 

If the issue is whether a Prius is as safe as "an SUV", car insurance claims data suggest that, yes, it is, if you take "an SUV" to be the average or randomly chosen SUV. Those insurance claims data are not perfect, but they do reflect the incidence of all types of crashes, not just the head-on collision for which the simple physics of momentum is most relevant, and the severity of the resulting injuries.

If you go out of your way to choose a particularly safe SUV, then yes, you can be safer than in a Prius.

Or, if you plan only to have a head-on collision, and never any other type of accident, then I suppose you can reasonably argue that "an SUV' is likely to be safer than a Prius, based on an appeal to the laws of physics, and ignoring whether differences in the safety features of the vehicles might or might not offset the inherent disadvantage of the smaller mass of the Prius.

But head-on (frontal) collisions are a minor contributor to automobile fatalities. Roughly 60% of fatal crashes do not involve any collision between vehicles, they are single-vehicle crashes. Then, angle collisions account for 20% of fatal crashes, and head-on collisions account for about 12%. In urban areas, head-on collisions account for under 10% of fatal crashes.

What I'm saying is, don't just look at who wins in 10% of cases. Yes, head-on collisions have an appeal in that macho my-Hummer-can-beat-up-your-Prius view of the world. But they are a minor contributor to the overall accident picture. Instead, look at the statistics that encompass all types of crashes. And if you do, the Prius appears about as safe as the average SUV. If you want to claim that a particular SUV is safer, great, but look up the data on it. Clearly, roughly speaking, about half of them are, about half of them aren't. You've got about a 50/50 chance of being correct. The URLs for the insurance claims data were give in a prior post in this thread.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Earthling @ Jan 25 2007, 02:51 PM) [snapback]380728[/snapback]</div>

Ugh; I know it...you know it...most of us here know it.

But it's like saying "cigarettes will kill you" to a smoker; they don't believe it'll happen to them.

A while back, I worked on an anti-smoking ad campaign; one of the images was the Marlboro man, with that ubiquitous cigaret hanging out of his mouth. Only thing was, the cigaret was limp.

The headline: cigarette smoke causes impotence.

Regarding automobiles, I think we've proven that it takes a lot for us to make sacrifices for the common good...so, logical appeals probably won't work.

But if we could prove that "a majority of hot-looking hetero women under 30 who want to get laid think that a man who drives an SUV is **gay**," then we might have a chance!
[laughing]

 

I see the thread's gone off in a different direction, so my apologies for bring it back to the OP's subject...

I've had my Prius since July 06. We sold our '97 Dodge Grand Caravan because we felt it was just too much vehicle for our needs and we were seriously trying to offset in our own little way the damage to the planet, the dependence of foreign oil, etc.. We have two kids, 10 and 13. My son, the 13 year-old, just passed me in height (I also may be shrinking). We use the Prius as our family vehicle, and it's been perfectly fine. We've taken it once to Parma, OH (~8 hour drive one-way) to visit my in-laws, and there were no complaints, and plenty of room for our stuff for our 4-day stay in the hatch (removed the tonneau cover and floor for a little more space. We use it around town and for all our trips. The only time I really miss the mini-van is when we're at Home Depot and could use the room (sheetrock, lumber, etc.) - then again it's a good excuse not to do anymore sheetrocking...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jan 26 2007, 01:00 PM) [snapback]381319[/snapback]</div>

Do you want to start the campaign?

Anyway, unfortunately a large number of so-called "Socker Moms" still think that the SUV is safer.

Dave M.