ecchamberlin
09-29-2007, 05:49 PM
I found this an interesting read.
http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4025061&icid=autos_236>1=10367
and found this, within that article, to be quite a distinction between a Chevy Blazer and a 3rd Gen 4Runner:
But even if CAFE standards pushed cars to lose weight, Schewel says it could still be a good thing. To her, the "simple physics" argument doesn't hold up. "Cars are not simple objects colliding like billiard balls on a table. They are highly complex products engineered to protect you." Design and safety features make a huge difference when two cars collide. Schewel points out how a driver of a 1999-2002 Chevrolet Blazer is 26 times more likely to die in that vehicle than the driver of a similar model year Toyota 4Runner, even though both are midsize SUVs (the 4Runner is actually 200 lbs. less).
Any thoughts?
http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4025061&icid=autos_236>1=10367
and found this, within that article, to be quite a distinction between a Chevy Blazer and a 3rd Gen 4Runner:
But even if CAFE standards pushed cars to lose weight, Schewel says it could still be a good thing. To her, the "simple physics" argument doesn't hold up. "Cars are not simple objects colliding like billiard balls on a table. They are highly complex products engineered to protect you." Design and safety features make a huge difference when two cars collide. Schewel points out how a driver of a 1999-2002 Chevrolet Blazer is 26 times more likely to die in that vehicle than the driver of a similar model year Toyota 4Runner, even though both are midsize SUVs (the 4Runner is actually 200 lbs. less).
Any thoughts?