Road Wisdom: Dos And Don’ts Of Driving Pickups

[jbowman1993]

Here is some information from the US NHTSA regarding rollover.

Causes

Rollovers are complex crash incidents and are particularly violent in nature. Rollovers, more so than other types of crashes, reflect the interaction of the driver, road, vehicle, and environmental factors. So while vehicle type does play a significant role, other factors such as driver behavior and road and environmental conditions can also cause a vehicle to roll over.

Vehicle Type

All types of vehicles can rollover. However, taller, narrower vehicles such as SUVs, pickups, and vans have higher centers of gravity, and thus are more susceptible to rollover if involved in a single-vehicle crash.

Speed

Fatal rollover crashes are speed-related more often than fatal non-rollover crashes. Some 40% of fatal rollover crashes involved excessive speeding . Additionally, nearly ¾ of fatal rollovers took place where the posted speed limit was 55 miles per hour or higher.

Alcohol

Nearly half of all fatal rollover crashes involve alcohol . Impairment can result from any blood alcohol concentration (BAC) above .00 . Even a small amount of alcohol will negatively affect your judgment, muscular coordination, and vision, making you more likely to lose control of your vehicle.

Location

Rural roads tend to be undivided and without barriers. They are thus more likely to be the scene of a fatal rollover. Almost ¾ of fatal rollovers occur in rural areas where the posted speed limit is typically 55 miles per hour or higher.

Routine Driving

NHTSA data also suggest that over 90% of the vehicles in fatal, single-vehicle rollover crashes were involved in routine driving maneuvers (going straight or negotiating a curve) at the time of the crash. This further suggests that driver behavior (distraction, inattentiveness, speeding, and impaired driving) plays a significant role in rollover crashes.

Single-vehicle Crashes

NHTSA data show that nearly 85% of all rollover-related fatalities are the result of single-vehicle crashes. This means that the majority of rollover crashes and fatalities do not involve any other vehicle besides the one that rolled over, further suggesting that driver behavior plays a significant role in rollover crashes.

[wilko]

> a comparison - pickup vs Mini.....

> which would you rather be in?????

That's not a fair comparison, comparing a European designed car with an old style American clunker of a pick-up.. At least Thai pick-ups are Japanese designed, all of them. (Even the Chevy & Ford).

Cheers,

Chanchao

I'm wasting my time here......just look at the design and construction of pickups - the Jap designs and US designs are not significantly different. (Can you tell me of one significant difference that affects safety?) - and Jap cars and Euro cars are built to the same design concepts too. The F150 or whatever has been upgraded since then but the point I’m making is a basic theory, not model based. These to vehicles were crashed head on at the same speed into a block and that is the result...the greater mass of a pick up (which BTW does not necessarily apply to a Jap one, does not give one any impunity to damage, injury or death.

You can split hairs all you want and cry "not fair" but it does not alter the stark (SKARK??) realities that firstly pickups are a less favourable vehicle to be in during an accident and many people are under the illusion that they are actually safer in one!

[jbowman1993]

You can split hairs all you want and cry "not fair" but it does alter the stark realities that firstly pickups are a less favourable vehicle to be in during an accident and many people are under the illusion that they are actually safer in one!

It "Does" alter the skark reality?

are a less favourable vehicle to be in during an accident

According to who? You? Cite your source. I gave you cold hard numbers from a government crash test safety agency. If you are going to dispute them, you need to use more than your "Basic theory"

[wilko]

Here is some information from the US NHTSA regarding rollover.

I’m quite familiar with the rollover stats; it's a major problem in Australia too. However I don't see the point you are trying to make...is it that not only are pickups worse in normal "car-on-car" incident but on top of this they are also at greater risk on their own? This is true….

If you try to roll an ordinary family sedan (e.g. a Camry) you will find this almost impossible - it has to be done on purpose or by sliding at speed onto a low obstacle. With SUVs/Pickups especially 4WDs the higher COG means this is much easier. This coupled with drivers travelling at speed through the bush, often falling asleep, the vehicle goes to the side of the road where the asphalt falls away...here one of 2 things happen: -

1. - the vehicle rolls off the road and flips

Or

2. – the vehicle swerves back across the road and flips over often into oncoming traffic…

Either way it’s something you don’t want to happen

[jbowman1993]

Another article, written by experts, as food for thought.

Which Are Safer: Cars Or Trucks?

BY PAUL A. EISENSTEIN

Published on: October 7, 2001

Popular Mechanics Magazine

Carly Scissors wanted a new Jeep Wrangler because she thought it "looked cool." Her parents decided to buy it for her because they believed an SUV would give the 19-year-old student the best line of defense in a serious accident. "If you're going to have your daughter driving around, you want her in something safe," explains stepfather Elliott Milstein, president of a small Michigan pharmaceuticals company. "And we'd read all the reports in the papers saying you're more likely to survive an accident being in a truck."

The Milstein family is by no means unique. Millions of American motorists are trading in their sedans, coupes and station wagons for minivans, pickups and sport utility vehicles. While style, utility and versatility are among the advantages that light trucks offer, for many buyers, safety is the major selling point. Fueled by surging demand for sport utility vehicles, light trucks now account for about half of the overall U.S. motor vehicle market.

But are sport utility vehicles really as safe as they seem? That's become the centerpiece of a debate that's growing even faster than the SUV market itself. To critics, they're "killer trucks." Yet others cite the same data to make their case that sport utes are among the safest things on wheels. As is common when an issue becomes so polarized, the real answer is somewhere in between.

Down And Dirty Data

According to statistics collected by the Highway Loss Data Institute, large sport utility vehicles, like the Ford Expedition and Chevrolet Suburban, have the lowest death rates on the road—about 90 occupants killed for every million registered vehicles. At the other end of the spectrum are minicars, such as the Chevy Metro and Ford Aspire. As a group, they average almost 300 deaths per million registered vehicles. Midsize SUVs, including the popular Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ford Explorer, average 136 deaths, while midsize cars run as high as 201 deaths per million vehicles. Average things out and you are, on the whole, safer in an SUV than you are in a passenger car. The death rate ratio is 151 per million compared to 168. (Remember that statistics fluctuate over time, and these could change.)

That's not to say SUVs are even close to perfect protection. Light trucks have stopping distances that aren't nearly as good as passenger cars. They're not as easy to maneuver, especially in an emergency situation. And, "sport utes are more prone to fatal rollovers" than passenger cars, notes Adrian Lund, senior vice president of research for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). That's especially true with small SUVs, such as the Chevy Tracker. Not surprising, when you consider the potentially troublesome combination of a short wheelbase and a high center of gravity. Now add the fact that these vehicles tend to be owned by young, less-experienced drivers who often act as if they're behind the wheel of an off-road sports car. On the other hand, larger SUVs, like the Explorer or Chevy Blazer, tend to be owned by older, more mature drivers, a fact that undoubtedly enhances their safety record as much as the vehicles’ mass and four-wheel drive. But the bottom line is that you're statistically better off in a sport ute.

End of story? Not quite. The current controversy takes an unusual twist. What critics are concerned with is not whether you will survive an accident in your Jeep or Explorer, but what will happen to the folks inside the car

Call Me Incompatible

It takes only an elementary understanding of the laws of physics to recognize that "when big runs into little, big tends to win," as Ford Motor Co. safety specialist Ernie Grush says. It's a concept automotive experts have dubbed "compatibility."

Smash an 18-wheeler into a subcompact and there's no contest. Obviously, the odds also are stacked in favor of a Chevrolet Suburban slamming into the side of a Chevy Cavalier. On the whole, when a light truck and a passenger car collide, the car occupants are four times more likely to die than those in the truck, according to a federal study of recent crash data. And, according to that same data, when a compact car is hit in the side by a large SUV, the death rate jumps to 27:1.

Side impacts are about the most deadly vehicle-to-vehicle collision. Accordingly, side-impact survivability has been the most recent focus of automotive safety engineers. Today's automobiles are designed with a lot of crush space that will fold up like an accordion—in a frontal or rear-end collision—helping absorb much of the crash energy. When you're hit in the side, however, there's simply not much room to "ride-down," or absorb the impact forces. So run a full-size passenger car into the side of a small one, and you're still 20 times more likely to die if you're sitting inside the car that's being hit.

Federal automotive safety watchdog NHTSA finds particularly troublesome the rate at which passenger cars are being replaced by sport utility vehicles and other light trucks. The agency feels that if that trend were reversed, the highway death toll might drop by as many as 2000 lives a year.

But a recent series of government-sponsored car-truck crash tests were not nearly as conclusive as the safety agency had expected, prompting many to question NHTSA's dire warnings. Since 1980, light trucks have gone from 20 percent to more than a third of all the vehicles on the road, yet over the same period, the nation’s vehicle fatality rate has dropped from just over three deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled to less than two. So, one could just as easily agree with GM safety expert Robert Lange, who argues, "Today's motor vehicle fleet is safer because of the penetration of light trucks, not in spite of it."

And while NHTSA might argue that big is bad, a report by the Brookings Institute would contend that small is an equally serious problem. It asserts that by downsizing the U.S. passenger car fleet over the last 20 years, we have added 2000 lives a year to the nation's highway death toll. "We have a small-vehicle problem," agrees IIHS president Brian O'Neill. "When you look at crash statistics, the biggest gains could be made by getting rid of small [passenger cars]."

A Geometry Lesson

Even if one accepts there is an imbalance when cars and trucks collide, just how serious a problem is it in the real world? SUV-passenger car crashes account for a scant percentage of the total passenger car fatalities. Far more people are killed when their passenger cars hit trees. Indeed, single-vehicle accidents account for almost half of passenger-car fatalities, about twice the total for all car-truck accidents.

Of course, all safety experts—from the government, insurance companies and the automakers--agree that we could slash highway fatalities by getting everyone to buckle up.

That said, one can't dismiss the compatibility issue entirely. The problem is, no one quite understands all the forces at work when cars and trucks collide. "Weight has a big effect," says Priya Prassad, one of Ford's top safety researchers. But factors such as vehicle stiffness and geometry catch at least some of the blame in accidents leading to the loss of 1000 lives a year.

Geometry refers to the fact that light trucks tend to ride higher than cars, and usually have longer front and rear overhangs (the amount of vehicle between axle and bumper). So when a big SUV, such as the Ford Excursion, T-bones a small car, it's not uncommon for the SUV's bumper and hood to penetrate into the car's passenger compartment—something that can result in fatal head injuries. And even in frontal accidents, high-riding trucks often "over-ride," or climb on top of, the car they're hitting.

As for stiffness, while cars combine body and chassis in a relatively yielding unibody package, most trucks mount their bodies on rigid steel frames. That's useful when you're designing a vehicle for rough off-roading or to haul a heavy trailer. But in an accident, a truck's stiff frame rails can knife into the vehicle it hits, something Adrian Hobbs, of Britain's government-funded Transportation Research Laboratories, calls the "fork effect."

Light-truck critics contend the easiest answer would be to lower the height of tomorrow's trucks and build them on frames with more built-in crush space. "You can make SUVs lighter, lower and softer," insists Clarence Ditlow, director of the Washington-based consumer group, The Center for Auto Safety.

The challenge, industry officials counter, is to make those changes without trading off the utility and versatility that SUV and other light-truck owners value. It's also essential, stresses GM's Lange, that "you don't do anything that will compromise the safety of light-truck occupants in order to improve the safety of someone in the car they might hit."

Starting Fresh

That doesn't mean you have to accept today's limitations. "If you start with a clean sheet of paper, you can design safer vehicles, even if you don't understand exactly what compatibility is," says Dr. Falk Zeidler, a senior engineer with DaimlerChrysler. That's the approach the automaker took with its Mercedes-Benz M-Class. Its bumper, hood and frame rails are lower than the typical SUV’s, and there's carlike crush space designed into the M-Class's front end. DaimlerChrysler engineers also took steps to spread out crash loads to prevent the fork effect.

Then there's the "active bumper" system that both Ford and GM are exploring. It would automatically extend several inches when a sonar or radar system detected an impending accident. This would provide an instant crush zone to help cushion the impact. But, these measures might be helpful in only a relatively small number of accidents. Other steps are being taken that would have a far greater reach. Since last year, passenger cars have complied with federal safety standard FMVSS208. It significantly improves side-impact crash protection, and is likely to save hundreds of lives each year, no matter what types of vehicles are involved. A newer standard, FMVSS214, will add an additional measure of head protection.

It used to be said in the auto industry that "safety doesn't sell." Don't try to tell that to today's buyers. Safety has become one of the most important factors in the purchase decision, and while automakers once dragged their feet whenever a new government standard was enacted, the smarter manufacturers now move even faster than the government mandates. As you peruse the specifications and features of the vehicles cataloged in this Buyers Guide, note the larger number that offer—at least as an option—side-impact airbags.

Is It A Car Or A Truck?

Another factor that should help minimize the compatibility issue is the emergence of the car-truck hybrid, vehicles like the Subaru Legacy Outback, Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV-4 and Lexus RX 300 which, despite their SUV-looking bodies, ride on passenger-car chassis. Many of tomorrow's SUVs will have more in common with the RAV-4 than the Chevrolet Blazer. The California market research firm AutoPacific estimates that by 2005 there'll be 68 sport utes on the market, but 29 of them will be passenger car-based

Car/truck hybrids could offer several advantages besides compatibility. There's ride comfort, for one thing. And the fact that trucks are generally a good bit heavier than similar-size passenger cars translates into lower fuel economy and increased emissions. Manufacturers are making giant leaps in their effort to reduce the output of traditional pollutants, like carbon monoxide and smog-forming oxides of nitrogen. But there's a direct and immutable equation that means the more fuel you burn, the more carbon dioxide you create. And if you believe in global warming, that's a problem.

In sum, light trucks don't handle quite as well, they're more prone to roll over, and even with four-wheel drive you can still skid off the road in a snowstorm. But all else being equal, bigger vehicles provide an added measure of protection in an accident. Says Adrian Lund of the IIHS, "The laws of physics work." So, if crashworthiness is your bottom line, SUVs do help put the odds in your favor.

[wilko]

You can split hairs all you want and cry "not fair" but it does alter the stark realities that firstly pickups are a less favourable vehicle to be in during an accident and many people are under the illusion that they are actually safer in one!

It "Does" alter the skark reality?

are a less favourable vehicle to be in during an accident

According to who? You? Cite your source. I gave you cold hard numbers from a government crash test safety agency. If you are going to dispute them, you need to use more than your "Basic theory"

I certainly don't have to cite anything...I'm not disputing anything I'm agreeing with your posting but I can't see the point you are making as you haven't made one! Have you?

My source? Do you think I would come to my conclusion form only one source? What kind of research would that be?

I've done my research, and I'm not pawing over websites on your behalf...the evidence is out there if you don't believe it ,that's up to you, go and find it yourself...I've got other things to do.

If you want to get some information just put pickup into your search engine for this site and you'll probably find I've posted several sites that will back up what everyone in the motor industry already knows.

However this is a chat forum not an academic institution and I feel under no obligation whatsoever to spend my time crawling around on the web to find out what I already know just because you don't or can't be bothered to find out for yourself...I’m not your wet nurse!

If you want my research you can buy it off me!

[jbowman1993]

I’m not your wet nurse!

If you want my research you can buy it off me!

I certainly don't have to cite anything...I'm not disputing anything I'm agreeing with your posting but I can't see the point you are making as you haven't made one! Have you?

My point was simply this. You claim that cars are inherently safer than pickups or SUV's. I have produced documented evidence that suggests that this is not the case anymore. (NHTSA + sources in the Popular Mechanics article). If you wish to dispute those results, by all means, try. But leave out the personal innuendo's about my drinking habits (wet nurse). I prefer beer.

[Plus]

Wilco, you are certainly wasting your time here - you stated your point, we read it, why do it again and again and again? Unless you can come up with some statistics you have nothing more to add to the safety topic.

A couple of months ago I posted an interview with one of GM honchos visiting Thailand - he reiterated the same ideas - trucks and SUVs are safer in head-on collisions but more prone to rollovers.

As for your Mini-Truck picture - they hit the wall, not each other! Do you really want to be in a Jazz when a 2 ton Fortuner ploughs right through it?

Another point - for non-fatal accidents, of which there are perhaps thousands a day in Bangkok only, pickup trucks repairs are cheaper than cars - thanks to their "crumble zones" (I actually think it's because trucks are a lot stronger).

I'm somewhat perplexed by some posts here - people seem to be on an anti-pickup crusade, feeding their frenzy on their own posts and ignoring everyone else's opinions, or even hard facts. It would be sad if the thread degenerates further into personal insults.

[chanchao]

Its kind of refreshing to have a kindergarten 'is not - is too' match on a different topic.

(And I fully include myself among the kindergarten kids!)

Anyway, how about a Nissan NV? Worst of both worlds. At least you can play Songkran in one as long as you don't have too many friends..

[jbowman1993]

I don't mind having debates about things, I just like to make sure I don't have to read about other men's lactating nipples.

Peace

[marshbags]

The thing that disturbed me about the crashed Honda Jazz i saw in my comparison on safety

was the amount of damage to body above the chassis.

The front end was completely flattened and no way did the occupants survive, unless they had the

flexabilty of a rubber ball.

It had obviously run into a higher vehicle and the front of the car was flattened into the back area.

As i keep my speed reasonable at what i consider safe enough to be able to take aversive action i personally feel quite safe in my Dmax.

I realise and accept that there are, no matter how responsible you drive when you are in the lap of the gods.

The fact is if you keep within the speed limit avasive action is possible in lots of accidents.

O.K. you can quote and fire examples at me i know, but how many farang do you know among these

in Thailand.

The fact is every time i go out i have to take avasive action several times, if i was driving at a reckless speed and not pay attention i to would be a crash statistic.

Again as has only been mentioned on the odd post the legal driving speed in most cases is

90 km for a pick up and above is illegal. ( most )

Just look at the modifications that people do to allow them to carry additional volume and then include side way mods as well as height and length.

This must surely be the main cause of the accidents along with under the influence, reckless driving and sleep deprivation, not to mention the state of the vehicle.

Stay alert and keep your speed at a reasonable level and this will surely increase your chances of survival.

Debate is very good and if we take onboard the sensible points raised in the posts we can all increase our chances of surviving and most important of all our families.

Let,s enjoy the debate, as it is a good and important topic that was started and continues with interest.

marshbags

[stumonster]

The fact is every time i go out i have to take avasive action several times

agreed - maybe not every but the majority.

the slower speeds that occur when in city traffic helps , though I find myself evading unaware motocyclists the most , but on the dual lane highways where you are sitting on 100-110 klm/h you must be very aware that you will very likely have to come to a total stop without hitting the car in front of you.

[Plus]

Debates are great, it's just that they have to adhere to some accepted rational way of reasoning.

When someone says no pick up can go above 130 km/h and MY can't for sure, and someone else says: Yes, that's ok, it's just your mechanic messing with your airflow, not secretly, so you can read it in your logbook - "Airflow restricted so that your pickup will never go as fast as in magazine reviews". This is when it becomes irrational.

[wilko]

I don't mind having debates about things, I just like to make sure I don't have to read about other men's lactating nipples.

Peace

[There are three kinds of lies: Lies, ###### Lies, and Statistics. – Mark Twain attributed to Benjamin Disraeli]

Statistics and just one article are not enough – you need to get and interpret the info preferably from primary sources and have to learn to be critical of this sort of writing and work out where it’s coming from. You will find for instance that the motoring press outside the US is in general far more critical of these vehicles. What we have here is an article in a magazine that essentially is trying to put forward the cause of the large SUVs as a safer form of transport. The US motor has a particular axe to grind when it comes to promoting large SUVs – they can’t build or sell anything else….both Ford and GM have a desperate need to promote the sales of pickups and SUVs. The number one selling sedan in US is the Toyota Camry. Toyota is now the number one car manufacturer, deposing GM who has been there for over half a century. Mismanagement and bad design has left the old US industry floundering and open to competition from overseas manufacturers and designers.

“It takes only an elementary understanding of the laws of physics to recognize that "when big runs into little, big tends to win," as Ford Motor Co. safety specialist Ernie Grush says. It's a concept automotive experts have dubbed "compatibility."

Less elementary physics would of course dispute this…..

This from a man who works for a company that covered up the faulty Pinto gas tank on the basis that it was cheaper to pay the dead’s rellies compensation than change the design…..and more recently tried to cover up the faulty tires fitted to one off their SUV models. As the SUVs and pickups are the only thing that US manufacturers are not loosing money on they aren’t very likely to knock them are they?

The stats they quote are not simply relevant to size or safety, as I and another poster mentioned earlier, a lot of accidents are dependant on the way the vehicles are driven and who drives them and the circumstances and environment of the accident. This also has to be backed up by analysis of controlled crashes. Changes in death rates can be due to better driving or road design or safety campaigns. So as Benjamin Disraeli once said “There are lies, dam lies and statistics”.

The large Ford and GM models are certainly safer than they used to be and more so than the humble pickups in Thailand. If as the article suggests, they cause many extra fatalities to cars they side impact, surely that would be a case for banning them altogether as I also mentioned earlier, the way the pickups disintegrate on impact often poses a danger to people other than the occupants.

Remember too that the large pickups and in fact most US cars sell in very small numbers outside the States/North America. A lot of the smaller pickups in US are Jap designs even if they bear a different badge. Mazda/Ford, Isuzu/GM etc.

The article also mentions that in future the companies are going to move towards “car-based” pickups and SUVs. If the old chassis design is so good then why change? Because they know that in the end they will have to produce a safer vehicle…

[jbowman1993]

You are right Wilko. How could I ever have let myself be decieved by those idiots at the US NHTSA. Their ###### lies! Crashing all those 2006 model vehicles, in a blatant attempt to support the US auto industry. All those 5 star ratings crash test and rollover ratings they gave Toyota and Honda trucks and SUV's, and the mix of 4 and 5 star ratings given to Ford, Chevy, and Dogdge. Its a conspiracy, I tell you! Thank you for shedding light on this for all of us.

I feel so dirty. How could I let myself be tricked like that. I need a shower

Grumbling to myself: "Tricksy little stinkin fat hobbitses. Whats this? A pickup truck? My love, my precious....."

[jbowman1993]

Dont mind me too much Wilko, Im harmless.

[wilko]

Debates are great, it's just that they have to adhere to some accepted rational way of reasoning.

When someone says no pick up can go above 130 km/h and MY can't for sure, and someone else says: Yes, that's ok, it's just your mechanic messing with your airflow, not secretly, so you can read it in your logbook - "Airflow restricted so that your pickup will never go as fast as in magazine reviews". This is when it becomes irrational.

air flow??

Log books??

what have you been reading???????

[wilko]

You are right Wilko. How could I ever have let myself be decieved by those idiots at the US NHTSA. Their ###### lies! Crashing all those 2006 model vehicles, in a blatant attempt to support the US auto industry. All those 5 star ratings crash test and rollover ratings they gave Toyota and Honda trucks and SUV's, and the mix of 4 and 5 star ratings given to Ford, Chevy, and Dogdge. Its a conspiracy, I tell you! Thank you for shedding light on this for all of us.

I feel so dirty. How could I let myself be tricked like that. I need a shower

Grumbling to myself: "Tricksy little stinkin fat hobbitses. Whats this? A pickup truck? My love, my precious....."

Unfortunately you are not quoting the US NHTSA figures; you are quoting an article that is using some of their findings to support their pro SUV (and pickup?) stance. You are also quoting a head of Ford with a vested interest in the SUVs survival. (V. Fords plan to close several more plants TBA).

To get a clear picture you would have to look at world-wide reports by similar institutions. (you'll probably find a national bias in all of them).

For instance - how many 2006 US SUVs do you see around Thailand. Essentially we are talking about the pickups used here and that form of design, be it US, Euro or Jap.

the motor industry exists outside the States, in fact most of it exists outside the States and they are (because they have to) improving vehicular design. The US manufacturers have lost the plot but are still very powerful...what they will do to promote their products is anyone’s business. The fact remains that very few vehicles built in the US are suitable for sale outside the continent, so an institution like the NHTSA must surely be taken into account with other figures from other parts of the rest of the world.

[jbowman1993]

No problem Wilko, apparently, you missed my other post, where I talked about my own research, using primary sources. So here it is.

Peace

"and it’s been demonstrated time after time that cars are safer than pickups."

I wanted to find some ratings to see what the general level of safety was on pickup trucks, so I went the the US government website, www.nhtsa.dot.gov On that website, they do rate trucks and provide crash test marks, and rollover marks. I looked at the 2006 models, and the results of the 2006 models would seem to indicate that trucks are equally as safe as cars.

Admittedly, they were testing US models, but this is the only comprehensive source I could locate, so that is what I am going by.

All Dodge pickup models scored 5 and 4 stars in all catagories, including rollover.

The Ford F-150s were all 5 and 4 stars, and the Ranger scored well in crash ratings, but only 2 stars in rollover.

Chevy trucks scored between 3 and 4 stars in crash ratings and 4 star in rollever

The new pickup by Honda, the Ridgeline, 5 star ratings across the board.

Nissan Frontier - 4 and 5 star ratings across the board.

Toyota Tundra, Tacoma, and Prerunner - 4 and 5 star ratings across the board.

I actually went added up all the ratings awarded (im a nerd,what can i say), and it came out to a 4 star average, for pickups in general.

Next i turned to ratings for 2006 passenger cars. This was more difficult as there were many more models.

Ford and Volvo turned in the highest marks overall, with several of their models having 5 star ratings across the board., but these were balanced by 3 and 2 star ratings turned in by our old friend GM, and Nissan, Kia, etc. The average rating for the passenger cars listed, also 4 stars.

So, what conclusions can we draw from this? Well, it would seem that pickup truck safety and car safety vary by model, but the general level of safety in both types is equal.

I would be curious to look up results from previous years, to see if pickups were lower, and have been catching up, but I am tired, and I don't want to, lol

Peace

We'll, Im quoting myself. Guess this thread is pretty much shot to hel_l. later

[Maigo6]

So many theories and different opinions!

Wilko, what car/ truck do you drive?

If you think your Honda Jazz is safer in an impact against a much heavier veichle, smash into a 10 wheel truck and guage the results.

I have a Fortuner, and I would rather be in that if I was involved in a crash with a Honda Jazz, the same as I would rather be in The 10 wheeler if it was involved in a crash with my Fortuner, and I would rather be in a Tank if it was in a collision with a 10 wheeler.

Extreme examples, but size really CAN matter, just ask the wife!