Rollovers are much more common for SUVs and pickups than for cars, and more common for SUVs than for pickups. In 2009, 56 percent of SUV occupants killed in crashes were in vehicles that rolled over. In comparison, 47 percent of deaths in pickups and 25 percent of deaths in cars were in rollovers.
Pickups and SUVs tend to be involved in rollovers more frequently than cars largely due to the physical differences of these vehicles. Light trucks are taller than cars and have greater ground clearance, causing their mass to be distributed higher off the road relative to the width of the vehicle. Additional passengers and cargo can increase the center of gravity even more. Other things being equal, a vehicle with a higher center of gravity is more prone to roll over than a lower riding vehicle.
Driver behavior may contribute to the increased rollover involvement rate of SUVs and pickups. Pickups and SUVs are more likely than cars to be driven on rural roads, where rollovers occur more frequently. Lower belt use among pickup occupants means they are more likely to be seriously or fatally injured when rollovers occur.
With the new alliance between Chrysler and Fiat settled this week, The Washington Post has been reporting on the effect this will have in Detroit, and the rest of the country.Conspicuously absent from their commentary is the consumers who have or will be injured by Chrysler vehicles sold before the company filed for bankruptcy. The situation is very grim.
Even the union leaders who are upset that factories in the USA will be closed while Mexican ones won’t are somewhat tempered in their complaints. They know that this situation is the lesser evil. 789 dealerships are slated to close and in the shuffle many Americans may have their rights slip between the cracks.
The AAJ and other consumer advocacy groups have tried to alter the deal so that the little guy doesn’t get left behind, but the chances are slim that anything will come of it. General Motors is about to go through a similar process later this summer. Hopefully a more inclusive deal will be reached, or else Americans may lose whatever brand loyalty they once held towards the US auto industry.
The Obama administration announced new rood crush rules. Auto makers will have to double the crush-resistance of passenger-vehicle roofs , but critics said the new standard was too weak to prevent many rollover deaths.
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood unveiled the new rules, which dictate that roofs must be able to withstand a force equal to three times the weight of the vehicle for cars and light trucks weighing 6,000 pounds or less. Vehicles weighing more than 6,000 pounds must have a roof-crush resistance equal to 1.5 times their weight, the first time many trucks and heavy sport-utility vehicles will be subject to such a requirement. The rules will be phased in over five years, starting in 2012.
“Rollovers are the deadliest crashes on our highways and today’s rule will help occupants survive these horrific events,” Mr. LaHood said in a statement.
In a report on motorcycle helmet effectiveness, NHTSA acknowledged that technological changes over the years have led to improvements in helmet design and materials that have saved thousands of lives in motorcycle accidents.
Yet, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) proposed rule on motorcycle helmets gives corporations a “get out of jail free” pass, according to comments submitted to the agency today by the American Association for Justice (AAJ).
While NHTSA’s proposed rule significantly increases the safety requirements of motorcycle helmets, it also includes language that could keep consumers from holding manufacturers accountable for helmets that meet NHTSA’s minimum safety standard.
“Clearly technology made a difference in thousands of motorcycle riders’ lives, however, if NHTSA’s proposed rule continues with the preemption language, manufacturers of helmets have little incentive to continue to make helmets safer for consumers,” says AAJ President Les Weisbrod. “The civil justice system provides an added incentive that NHTSA’s helmet proposal erodes.”
The motorcycle helmet rule is just one of 21 proposed rules from the Bush administration that AAJ is monitoring that include preemption language. For a list of the rules AAJ is watching to be made final in the last weeks of the Bush administration, see http://www.justice.org/Regulatory_rules_not_finalized.pdf .
View a copy of the comments AAJ submitted on motorcycle helmets here.
The NHTSA (The National Highway and Traffic SAfety Administration) is the nation’s agency for monitoring motor vehicle and highway safety. Just how the FDA is soley responsible for keeping consumers safe from the dangerous pharmaceuticals that are in circulation, the NHTSA is responsible for setting the safety standards that auto manufacturers must follow and for recalling defective products in the automobile industry.
According to the watchdog group Public Citizen, every year more than 10.000 people die in rollowver crashes. We have seen a decline in the quality of service with agencies like the FDA and NHTSA. Despite numberous requests from different safety organizations and congress over the last 20 years, they still have not established a roof crush standard.
In the case of the NHTSA, Congress required them to propose a new roof crush standard by July 1, 2008. Since then, they have recieved two extensions on time and are asking for a third. The current roof crush resistance standard has been in effect since 1973, long before the time of SUV’s.
The NHTSA has had three years to develop a new roof-crush resistance standard, but has yet to follow through, choosing instead to defend weak proposals already met by the majority of auto makers.
Consumers deserve a better standard, and Auto manufacturers need to be held responsible when their products aren’t safe.
