Copyright 2002 The Christian Science Publishing Society Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA)
December 5, 2002, Thursday
SECTION: FEATURES; IDEAS; Pg. 15
LENGTH: 799 words
HEADLINE:
Buyers looking for safety are driving in the wrong lane
BYLINE: By Eric C. Evarts
HIGHLIGHT: Can SUVs survive this high-impact
critique?
BODY: Sport utility
vehicles are a menace. As these off-road behemoths that never go off road
replace cars, the result on American highways will be "mayhem," according to an
expose titled "High and Mighty," by Keith Bradsher.
As
Detroit bureau chief for The New York Times, Bradsher set off the anti-SUV
movement and here fuels it with alarming details. For starters, since the
government regulates SUVs as trucks rather than cars, they're allowed to:
* get much poorer fuel economy.
* pollute more.
* have less effective
brakes.
* avoid standard car-crash tests.
* omit front and rear-end structures that crush to protect
their own occupants and those of cars they hit.
* ride
higher off the ground and so mesh badly with cars' crash systems.
SUVs are built on stiff frames like cars and trucks 40
years ago, which make them strong enough to hold up on rocky trails and to tow
trailers. But because they're so tall, SUVs roll over more easily than most
cars, and their rollovers are more dangerous than other types of accidents,
because they put occupants' heads closer to points of impact.
The evidence is compelling. So why are they so appealing to drive? They
fit Americans' lives like nothing since the Country Squire wagons. You don't
have to duck to get in and out. They're heavy enough to perform the occasional
duties that self-sufficient Americans equate with freedom - such as towing an
expensive boat to the lake or reaching a friend's remote cabin. Or just getting
to a high-pressure job in the snow.
In the late 1970s,
Congress required cars to get greater fuel mileage than the big sedans in
Americans' driveways could muster. In response, buyers turned to commercial
vehicles for personal use, and in so doing gave rise to the SUV.
Now technology has developed to help Texas-size cars meet fuel economy standards, and SUVs look like a nightmare that could
be getting worse. More and more families who don't need the utility of an SUV
are buying them just to see over traffic and not be disadvantaged in an
accident. Rollover statistics never enter these buyers' calculus. Also, as a
growing pool of older SUVs depreciate, more are driven by younger, less
experienced, and higher-risk drivers.
"Americans tend
to have less confidence in their driving skills, and assume that crashes are
inevitable," Bradsher warns, "so they have gravitated instead to tanklike
vehicles that [they think] will protect occupants even if they plow into another
vehicle."
Bradsher devotes a particularly strange
chapter to the cynical efforts of automakers to market SUVs to adults who want
to "hide the children" in the back, or to feel the ability to conquer other
drivers or "survive" a collapsing society in a Mad Max world. This is why so
many who never go off road buy four-wheel-drive vehicles, the argument goes. But
most buyers are not so cynical. And while marketers excel in amplifying trends,
they don't create them.
Today, there is a faint light
in the tunnel - a modern variation on SUVs called "crossover" vehicles. Unlike
early SUVs with stiff truck frames that crush other cars in collisions,
crossovers are based on cars and offer most modern cars' safety features.
Instead of archaic four-wheel-drive systems designed for rugged off-road trails,
they offer modern all-wheel-drive that excels on snow and ice. They're lighter
and burn less gas.
Bradsher dismisses these crossovers,
because they're not as thrifty or stable as the cars they're replacing. But
other experts disagree, arguing that many traditional SUV buyers are switching
to crossovers, realizing that trucky drive systems and a hard ride don't suit
their needs.
Solving America's dependence on SUVs will
not be easy, but Bradsher lays out a concise and fair path forward:
1. Classify SUVs and minivans as passenger cars to make
them comply with car safety, pollution, and fuel economy
standards.
2. Dramatically narrow the "light truck"
loophole to only pickup trucks with a single row of seats in front.
3. Institute minimum rollover-resistance standards for all
passenger cars which the best SUVs could pass.
4. Raise
insurance rates on SUVs to reflect their actual claims cost.
5. Eliminate tax breaks for SUVs.
To that I
would add, train young drivers better.
Bradsher notes
that unlike Americans, "Europeans and Asians tend to associate safety with a
nimble vehicle with excellent brakes that can swerve or stop quickly so as to
avoid an accident," which SUVs do poorly. Attention to this engaging book could
help us avoid all kinds of troubles ahead.
* Eric C.
Evarts is the Monitor's automotive writer.
High and
Mighty: SUVs The World's Most Dangerous Vehicles