Posted on Sunday 11 May 2008
Presidential candidate and longtime activist Ralph Nader has once again voiced his objection to proposed vehicle roof-safety standards from the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telling reporters the standards should be much tougher.
Current regulations require vehicles sold in the United States to withstand 1.5 times the weight of the vehicle without collapsing more than five inches into occupancy space. The NHTSA proposal would increase the requirement to 2.5 times the vehicle’s weight, however Nader and other advocates want vehicles to withstand at least 4 times their weight, reports Consumer Affairs.
Roughly 11,000 people die on American roads from rollovers each year (about 24,000 suffer permanently disabling accidents), which accounts for 25% of all fatalities even though it constitutes just 5% of all accidents. According to Nader, most of those injuries and deaths occur when the roof collapses, breaking passengers’ necks.
Nader also hopes to see rollover accidents become part of official crash testing, in the same fashion as current front, side and rear impact testing.
A number of carmakers, such as Volvo, Saab and Subaru, are already building cars that exceed the federal standards. The NHTSA, which is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation, is expected to update its 36-year-old roof crush standard in July.
Here we go again!!!!
If you talk to an engineer they will tell that the reason for the U.S. having so many roll over type crashes is that U.S. spec cars have softer suspension settings than the rest of the world.
Also by making the cars stronger you now increase weight which ofcourse is going to decrease MPG. Why not fix the problem instead of putting a bandaid on the wound.
Ofcourse to fix the real problem time has passed us buy and it is now to late. That fix being for Ralph’s parents to have used some form of birth control!!!!
Hate to say it, but it sounds like Ralphie is right.
If truly that many people die from rollover injuries, and it is TRULY because of roof collapse, and not just the seatbelts being too loose (5 point belts?) or some other reason, then roofs should be strengthened tremendously.
To suggest it’s a soft suspension problem is asanine. Statistics show Corvette’s as having one of the highest rollover accident rates of all cars (at least before the current one, which has SC), due to the nature of sports cars being driven aggressively. On wreckedexotics.com you can see all sorts of hypercars which get rolled over. If anything is typically American about this problem, it’s our huge SUV population compared to other countries. Thus, merely stiffening the suspension isn’t going to cut it.
The solution is severalfold; Stability control systems, better restraint systems, and stronger roofs. But how do you make a stronger roof without more steel or with carbon fiber? One is heavy in exactly the wrong place, and the other is still too expensive…
This guy has been complaining about safety standards for 30 years now.
Gus- its not that insane at all! As for hyper cars rolling over lets use some common sense here. They are usually doing well over the legal limit and there are not that many of them on the road in reality.
On the other hand family sudans and SUV’s number in the hundreds of millions and as a market the U.S. has the most of them rolling over and yes they do have softer suspensions than their euro counterparts. Also when compared against their euro counterparts the U.S. has a higher rate of roll overs per vehicle.
As for why I would know this useless piece of information? I know and have spoken to my fair share of car engineers and getting their view on safety and what the government wants to do are total opposites.
So once again I ask the question. Why didnt Mr and Mrs Nader use birth control? This guy really needs to hang it up. He single handedly destroyed the Corvair when Mercedes and Triumph were using the same rear suspension set up and he never said a thing. Talk about having a vendetta towards a company rather than moving things forward for all….
Does this mean that Darth Nader will kill the convertible? I don’t want to sound unappreciative about the whole seatbelt thing, but if Ralph kills soft-tops, I’m moving back to Europe and paying the damned congestion charges.
anyone has any ideas how to achieve this protection without adding to much extra weight?
or are the US manufacturers leaving something out over there. I’ve rolled a couple of cars but I don’t think they were Americans or maybe I was just lucky. Can anyone tell me a simple facts or difference between US design vs Japs or EU. or is it poor standards.
Gus–You drive aggessively at high speed, you get what you ask for, greater roof protection or not. Why do the manufactures have to protect schmuck drivers against themselves? I can’t tell you how many SUVs, vans, etc. of their ilk I’ve seen driven very stupidly–abrupt lane changes, weaving in and out of traffic, too fast in corners, etc.
Bambam–You’ve rolled a”couple” of cars? SOmeone else’s fault or yours?
C’mon people, don’t blame the problem on the manufacturers.
It’s time for Nader to be committed to a home…
I still don’t buy the suspension argument, but whatever.
Rollovers occur for a variety of reasons.
Driving aggro is a good one, and is your own damn fault, but I would still want decent protection, hence the 4-point rollbar in my convertible.
But getting hit broadside or at an angle causes a large number of the rollovers, and those happen to the stiffest of cars.
So, back to the real argument (not some silly American vs the World nonsense everyone seems to LOVE to pander on about); When cars roll over (and they do, even in perfect Europe) how strong should the roof be? I guess that’s the problem with Nader’s argument, currently (without adding a lot of top heaviness or carbon fiber cost) there isn’t a great solution… And no, I don’t want my BMW 7 series to have a firmer suspension…