I believe it was the California DMV that did the survey a few months ago
that rated the Dodge Dakota the #11 most deadly vehicle to be hit by, touting
it's rugged construction and unwillingness to "give" in an accident. The
Dodge Ram and Ram Van were tied at the #1 most lethal vehicles to be hit by.
The survey called for car manufacturers to make trucks and SUV's less rugged
so they don't kill people. I got a good laugh out of this since the entire
reason you need a truck or SUV is for RUGGEDNESS! DOH!
Never trust the government/agency findings, they are only pointers. The
real test is the death/injury rate. This is released by the government every
year. I don't know if it's on the web or not. Even the governement will tell
you that crash testing is not an exact indicator of vehicle performance in
crashes. Some vehicles excell in certain tests and fail in others.
Shaun H.
---original message---
Yes, I looked at the crash photos. Since this is the *Insurance* Institute
for Highway Safety, I really have to wonder just how independent and
unbiased these people really are. What about several months ago when
everyone was whining that our trucks should just be outlawed because they
caused too much damage to tiny little shoebox cars when the drivers of said
shoebox cars crash into us. I suppose by that logic we should outlaw buses,
cube vans, transports, and trains, because they're even worse. No, I like
my solution better. If you're worried about your micro car getting wrecked,
I say drive something made of steel instead of plastic.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:10:58 EDT