Tesla Has The Highest Accident Rate Of Any Auto Brand
Tesla drivers had 23.54 accidents per 1,000 drivers, a study found. Tesla recently recalled 2 million vehicles over problems with its autonomous driving functionality.
You're viewing a single thread.
Unpopular opinion: all "fun" cars should be banned from public roads. You think driving is "fun"? Go to a racing track and have fun there. When I'm commuting I want to get to work safely, that's my only objective. I don't want to share the road with an idiot who thinks he's the next Schumacher and can drive safely at 150km/h. All cars should have speed limiters installed. Why can they drive faster then the national speed limit at all? It makes no sense. You want to race? Put your racing car on a flat bet and carry it to the racetrack, I don't care. The idea that driving is "fun" is cancer that killed more people than.. well, real cancer. Shows like Top Gear that promote this idea are responsible for more deaths than Nazis.
Edit: Ok, I was wrong, cancer kills more people. Bad example. 1.3M people die in car accidents every year. Speeding is the second most common cause. Just think about another example like guns or something.
The idea that driving is "fun" is cancer that killed more people than.. well, real cancer. Shows like Top Gear that promote this idea are responsible for more deaths than Nazis.
I was with you right up until here. There's no way to upvote and downvote different parts of a comment, is there?
Ok, I was wrong, cancer kills more people than speeding. But 1.3 million die every year in traffic accidents and the second most common cause of accidents is speeding. Or do you think that shows like Top Gear and magazines promoting the idea that "fast cars are awesome" do not promote speeding?
So, here's the thing...
Speeding is definitely the culprit. But accidents due to speeding have been an issue long before shows like Top Gear ever happened.
The issue is terrible drivers. Fast cars or Horse Carriages, doesn't matter.
I agree with your remark about keeping cars that can do more than the speed limit off the public roads, but sadly that won't solve accidents due to speeding. Because that's just one of the reasons.
Top Gear is just an example. Everyone loves them but I think shows like this, and they specifically, cause of a lot of harm to many people.
I understand what you mean, but that's not really true.
This is the Television equivalent of "Video Games cause kids to be violent". If the kid was mentally unstable and needed help without the game, the game is the least of the parents' worries.
Same here. If the person was incapable of following rules and abiding by basic decency standards, then they will be reckless with or without such shows. Classic example: lots of small city residents of India have never seen Top Gear or any such show. Yet the quality of driving is terrible. I say this as a native resident of India.
Reason: driving tests are not enforced well enough.
Reckless driving is not the same as bad quality driving. For example I knew a guy once who said that he never knew who has to yield at a intersection so would always stop and let the other guy go. Was he a good driver? No. Was his behavior going to kill someone? Also no. A driver that knows he has the right of way and drives through a roundabout at 100km/h maybe a better driver but has higher chance of killing someone.
As to TV shows and automotive press I think they invested or at least are actively promoting the idea that driving fast is 'sexy'. It's really hard to watch Top Gear and not to get the idea that what they are selling is the idea that driving a Ferrari at 200km/h is exciting. It would one thing it they showed it strictly in the context of a racetrack and professional competition but they are constantly mixing it with every day driving. The are saying that all driving can be exiting. Why we don't do this with other sports? Downhill cycling is existing but you don't see a lot of people jumping down the stairs on their way to work. Why with other sports we clearly separate the sport activity and everyday version of it but with driving the idea is that public roads are extensions of race tracks and a good driver can have fun on both? I blame the shows romanticizing fast cars as something desirable by everyone and driving as a skill every real man should master. The effects we see on the roads every day.
Fair enough.
And what is a "fun" car? How do we determine that? Get a government tester to drive the car for an hour and if he looks miserable getting out then the car is good to go?
Many cars that people call fun are normal hatchbacks. Nobody calls SUVs or pickups fun, and yet they're far more dangerous. Should people drive more of those? Because that's what we'd get.
And comparing Top Gear and its production crew to literal Nazis is insane. Get some perspective.
A "fun" car is car that encourages dangerous driving by pretending to be a "sports" or "competitive" car or simply pretending it's for "precision" driving or "racing". Tuned cards, high horsepower cars, supercars. Do you understand it now? Cards should encourage safe, responsible driving. Yes, distracted driving kills the most people by speeding is close second and there's entire industry of automotive press and TV shows that encourage it by promoting the idea that driving fast is fun. They kill thousands of people every year.
But that's not exclusively what people call a fun car, people call all kinds of cars fun.
The current generation Civic was praised for its handling, suspension, and being quite fun to drive - do you think it's so unsafe it should be outlawed, but a Hummer shouldn't be?
Pretty much the only cars that are basically never called fun are SUVs and pickups - the cars that are most dangerous!
I don't believe that you'll find any proof that, say, an MX-5/Miata is more dangerous or causes more deaths than a Ford F250. And yet you say the issue is with fun cars and sports cars.
Cars being enjoyable isn't the issue. And the people behind car TV shows aren't fucking synonymous with Nazis. What an awful take.
The Nazis wanted to exterminate races and cultures they found to be inferior. The top gear crew have a different hobby to you, one that inherently carries a small amount of risk. That's not the same.
one that inherently carries a small amount of risk
To other people. I'm fine with them driving on a racetrack. I'm not fine with them promoting sports cars on public roads. I know they never say "speeding on public roads is fun" but the entire car culture they promote comes down to reckless driving really. And your hobby should never put other people in danger. Any other hobby that would sometimes kill bystanders would be banned. Also, millions of people die in car accidents, big chunk of them because speeding. The risk is not small.
As to what "fun" car is I'm not going to get into definitions here, I'm not writing a law. I think it's clear what I mean. Most people drive under the speed limit, don't accelerate or break suddenly, don't take turns at high speeds. Driving for them is a normal activity. Other people do all those reckless things because they think it's "fun". Yes, you can drive recklessly in any car but some cars specifically promote it. I'm not talking about specific models, more about the idiotic car culture in general.
I want to see your data that sports cars or "fun" cars are the driving force of accidents.
Until we've established that, all of what you're saying is completely baseless.
From what I can see looking at data in the UK, the Toyota Prius is the most crashed car, with 1,207 crashes per 100,000 on the road. You have to go all the way down to 11th to find a sporty car - the Audi RS3.
I'm not surprised, after all, we all know the Prius is the most savagely quick and sporty car known to man. Bugatti and Koenigsegg have yet to match it!
E: funny enough, the least crashed cars contains the likes of the Jaguar XK, Porsche 911, Audi TT, John Cooper Works Mini, Porsche 718, Porsche Boxster, and BMW Z4. Funny that. Maybe the people who enjoy driving the most and cherish their car the most are the people who are most attentive to the whole driving process.
I'm not saying they kill the most people. Distracted drivers kill more people but you don't have TV shows that claiming that texting while driving is fun. Speeding is the second most common cause of accidents and it's absolutely is related to the entire "car culture" promoting fast driving and sports cars.
I've literally just given you data disproving the myth you've pedaled. Look at my comment again. See the edit.
People need to stop driving their Toyota Prius and Honda Insight and get something safer, like a Porsche. 😉
E: and I've looked up your speeding claim as well. At least in the UK, driving above the speed limit is a factor in 7.4% of crashes, making it the 7th most common reason to be in a crash, behind the likes of not checking mirrors, carelessness, loss of control due to slippery conditions, etc.
Maybe it's different where you are, but I'm getting a clear picture here: the relatively small amount of "fun" cars on the road are not the driving force of accidents, no matter how much you baselessly say they are.
https://www.vox.com/22675358/us-car-deaths-year-traffic-covid-pandemic
From here:
"According to several traffic experts I spoke with, the explanation for the 2020 fatality spike is relatively straightforward: With fewer cars on the road during quarantine, traffic congestion was all but eliminated, which emboldened people to drive at lethal speeds."
"And speed is the decisive factor in a car crash’s severity. Everything else — drunk driving, distracted driving, bad weather — makes crashes more likely to happen, but speed is the difference between life and death"
"Controlling speeds on roads is the most important goal of any car safety strategy."
Do you understand? Not all crashes are the same. Slow speed crashes are not the main issue. You need to look at different statistics (and understand them). No, I'm not moving the goal post. Saving lives is the main goal, that's why I'm talking about speeding and not using the turn signals correctly. Speeding kills. If you disagree with this basic fact we really don't have anything to continue talking about.
So maybe Porsche's are not that safe after all? And yes, you can speed in any car. I don't really care if you own Porsche as long as you drive below the speed limit same as I think you're an asshole for driving your Toyota Yaris recklessly. What I have issue with are all the wannabe race drivers practising on public roads. Personally I blame the stupid car culture promoted in TV shows and car magazines but there could be other reasons for it.
Whoaaaa holy cherrypick! You're seriously using crash stats from when we were in lockdown and presenting it as normal conditions?!
I don't really care if you own Porsche
Ummm yes you do... you said they should be banned for being too fun.
Of the 20 most crashed per 100,000 cars in the UK, Porsche isn't even in the top 20, but they do have 5 cars in the bottom 20.
So your objections are no longer about safety, if it was you'd have changed your mind after finding out some of the facts. This is about something else. You just fundamentally hate people having enjoyment with their cars? Is that it?
The (not peer reviewed) study only seems to compare Porsche and BMW to Hyundai and Skoda, which is another red flag. Why single out those brands in particular? Nobody ever said Skoda or Hyundai were unsafe. What of the dozens of other car manufacturers, are they to be ignored because they don't fit your narrative?
The study itself doesn't even talk about safety or crashes, just things like the likelihood of speeding, which could be correlated with safety, but it's not the same thing - someone going 75mph on a motorway instead of 70mph, for example, isn't being horrendously unsafe, even if, strictly speaking, they are breaking the law.
No, it's not from the pandemic. Read it again. Do you think speeding kills people only during pandemics? Before the pandemic crashing at high speed was safe? WTF?
I also said I think cars should speed limiters installed. Read my comment again also. If a Porsche has a limited horse power and limited max speed it's fine. Do you think with limited it's not fun any more? Then we agree, ban fun cards.
Driving can be "fun" in any car though. You don't need a sports car to enjoy driving, for some driving is just a fun activity that can still be done safely and within the regulations of the road.
The idea that driving is “fun” is cancer that killed more people than… well, real cancer.
You've literally just made this up.
Yeah, I did. I though more people die in car accidents but I've checked the number and no.
Also, If you enjoy driving below the speed limit and without any sudden manoeuvres then I have no issue with you enjoying your ride. I think it's obvious that's not what I have issue with.
I know people in the US get their license in a few days. But in europe people take a proper course over a few weeks and drive dafely and routinely at speeds up to 200 km/h. Not that I disagree with the fun part.
200kmh is never really safe, I hope that everyone driving at that speed realize it, of course we feel safe in those new cars, it's like nothing, but a flat tire or something else and it's done for you
And I don't think every country in Europe have proper training, in France people are not that disciplined as in other part of Europe
It takes months and months in the UK. The tests are pretty strict.
Yeah, I'm sure they can drive safely at 200km/h at a race track. There's no way to drive safely above the speed limit on a public road.
There’s no way to drive safely above the speed limit on a public road.
If you're driving a well maintained regular car in good conditions you absolutely can drive safely above many speed limits. If the speed limit was set at the true limit of safety nothing but the best handling vehicles in the best of conditions could drive at said limit safely, and this is clearly not the case for the vast majority of speed limits. Instead most traffic can travel safely at the set speed limit in less than ideal vehicles and in less than ideal conditions, so logically there are going to be situations where it would be safe to drive above said limit.
Consider too speed limit changes. In my area there have been a few roads recently which have been lowered from 100km/h limits to 80km/h. Nothing changed about these roads except the speed limit signs. Why was it possible to drive safely at the 100km/h limit one day but not possible to drive safely at the same speed on the next day? Another road several years back had its speed limit changed from 80km/h to 90km/h. Again only the signs changed, so why would it be unsafe to drive 90km/h there one day when that would be the speed limit the following day?
As with everything we do, there is a subjective element to setting limits, but it's definitely not as arbitrary as you are suggesting. Maybe they reduced one limit because there were too many accidents, and maybe they increased the other because they finally got the signal pattern working as intended.
Risk assessment is incredibly complex. It might be perfectly reasonable to drive 110km/h on a given road most of the time, but frequent use by large farm equipment could necessitate a lower speed. Or, maybe adjusting traffic on road x decreases accidents on road y.
We are still learning how to produce vehicles that reliably compensate for variables like friction, or human reaction time. The implications of even these two simple things seem to be completely lost on most drivers: with a tiny bit of rubber touching the asphalt, we happily drive around in inconceivably heavy vehicles at rates where it's very easy for an event to begin and end before we even suspect something is imminent.
While I'm here: turn your lights on when you start your car, turn into your own fucking lane, always move over if someone is behind you in the fast lane even if you think you're going "fast enough" (someone could be bleeding out, seriously), don't pass people on the wrong side, and finally: stop trusting the meat in your head so much, our brains fuck up all the time, so in addition to driving defensively wrt external factors, consider how you can set yourself up to succeed if something unexpected happens internally.
I hate people like you on the roads. You're not the one who decides what's the safe maximum speed on the road is. If you think you can arbitrary decide that some speed limit is too low and you can drive faster you're wrong and shouldn't be on the road at all. If we had less people like you on the roads everyone would be safer.
If speed limits are indeed set at the true safe maximum for all vehicles and all conditions then how can you travel safely at said speed limits in your car, which I would wager cannot corner as well or stop as quickly as a top end sports car?
If it's a maximum limit to what's safe, you can say anything at or below it is safe. They don't set the maximum at a value that is unsafe for some vehicles.
Indeed, at least for most modern speed limits. That was intended as more of a rhetorical question to lead the person I was replying to towards noticing speed limits are typically set with a wide safety margin, and not actually at the limit of what can be safe in good conditions.
I'm not saying all speed limits are set perfectly. I'm saying it's not up to you to decide which ones are 'safe' to break. The driver that think they know better than everyone else are the most dangerous ones. Even if you think the limit is set tol low just follow it, ok? Is it so hard?
Say that to start off with then rather than "there's no way to drive safely above the speed limit on a public road", because there clearly are roads where it can be safe to drive above the speed limit.
Great, as long as we agree you should never drive above the speed limit I can agree that there definitely are some roads where the speed limit is set below the maximum safe speed.
There are a lot of streets without a speed limit in europe. People are told to drive around at least 130 to not hinder traffic. Most people go about 140 or 150 if the roads are free. Speed lane is usually about 160
No, not a lot, only highways in Germany AFAIK. Where I live the limit is 120 so 150 is always over the limit. Road fatalities in Germany are the same as in my country because in Germany you also have idiots driving 200km/h. What you have to do is adjust your speed to the conditions. Depending on how the roads are build the limit will be different but if you're driving 50km/h faster than everyone else you're creating dangerous situation. Same if you're driving too slow obviously.
There's also the Isle of Man, but it's an unusual case in its own right
I love driving my 34 year old car. It only goes 140km/h max and that is fine for it. I consider it a fun car as well even though it has the reputation of being a shopping trolley for old people. I can't see where you would would draw the line of fun car and what that would do for road safety. Most crashes tend to happen at intersections because of inattentive drivers or confusing situations. This behavior is promoted by a sense of perceived safety which people get from a "self driving" car. If I could snap my fingers and apply a ban on a car type it would be suv's without a doubt. Big cars in general also give that sense of safety which is somewhat true for the people in it but they kill more people involved in crashes with them. Now for your last point about Top Gear. Quite a strong opinion which I do not agree with. They tend to close roads to do their scenes. If you ever go to one of those beautiful roads you will find out that they are very popular and the speed limit cannot even be met. In conclusion, make cars small again.
You do you, but please do it in the right lane
Ok, and when I have to take over someone please drive 1m behind me and flash your lights at me. It the least you can do.
Anyone here actually watched the "Top Gear"? After real Top Gear was cancelled, it was unwatchable. The Grand Tour was good, but the first series was quite stupid. Speeeeeeeed!
I don't know why you're getting down voted. Post-Clarkson Top Gear is horrendous. The Grand Tour has its own issues but also some very fun moments.
I'm guessing at least a few are for getting so far off topic.
The latest trio were pretty decent, probably the best since the Clarkson, Hammond & May era.
Ok.I saw some bits with that redhead weirdo and LeBlanc and it was cringe AF.
Yeah Chris Evans was the worst. LeBlanc was ok but I didn't get the hype that he had by others.