I have been following Musk’s insanity for years now, and I am glad that Oliver covered him, but he could have been soooo much more scathing while being absolutely factual.
His relatively moderate criticisms of Musk reminded me that a whole lot of libs and tech bros are in his demographic.
You can’t apparently tell them Rocket Jesus is not going to save us and is infact a contemptible racist fascist mad man whose entire persona is a fraud and has done nothing but defraud all his investors with insane claims he hasnt delivered on in nearly a decade without making his audience too depressed, I guess.
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 06:55
nextcollapse
The fact that Ram drivers are a close second is hilarious. I guess there is some truth to all the jokes about Rams being driven by aggressive idiots.
Gullible@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 07:06
nextcollapse
Aggressive drunk* idiots. Statistically.
tsonfeir@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 07:10
nextcollapse
At least Tesla owners can blame it on the computer. 🤣
minibyte@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 10:36
collapse
“It appears the fault was located between the drivers seat and steering wheel, sir”
Osa-Eris-Xero512@kbin.social
on 19 Dec 2023 07:19
nextcollapse
I think there might be something to be said here for some potential selection bias. Are Tesla drivers like ram drivers, overly aggressive idiots but with the added layer of being relatively new tech?
More boringly , maybe its selection on the circumstances too. For example maybe ev's tend to drive more in urban environments, more urban may mean more collision opprtunities per time spent driving.
Of course ram is a farmers vehicle is desgned for rural use, so must rarely be seen in built up areas. /s
edit: having glanced at the cited article - theres no obvious mention of any risk adjustment, the measures seem to be simple ratio of crashes per driver. No obvious control for whether the sub-population spend more or less time driving.
Rate per - place-specific-risk adjusted person-hour would work better.
As often with things like risk, it really helps to be able to do a multidimensional analysis. See if vehicle type/brand is significant after controlling for as many circumstantial factors and exposure related factors as you can reliably observe.
I assure you that large obnoxious trucks are a status symbol for many idiot right wing boomers and gen x, who take pride in daily driving a truck for their commute into, inside, and outside of cities.
They also complain about traffic, while simultaneously doing everything they can to under or unfund public transit, because they are literally incapable of understanding that adding more lanes to highways does not actually reduce traffic.
Fortunately for me I don't live in USA so these things are still a bit of a rarity, and are quite impractical in my town's, compact and heavily pedestrianised town centre.
Sounds like yoy've a plague of them over there.
squiblet@kbin.social
on 19 Dec 2023 16:39
nextcollapse
They’re impractical in US town centers too. Drivers of these often live in suburban and rural areas and act like “omg city = CRIME and those people”, and if they come into the city, get frustrated because their giant POS vehicles are difficult to park as they’re terrible at maneuvering (drivers and the truck) and don’t fit in many parking spaces.
This is so common that when I see the rare one that can actually drive and park well in a city I actually stop being angry and switch to being impressed.
squiblet@kbin.social
on 20 Dec 2023 01:26
collapse
I'm sure some truck drivers are very good at it, if they have to drive large trailers often for instance. But a lot of the time their giant trucks can't even fit into a parking spot without taking up more than one space.
vexikron@lemmy.zip
on 19 Dec 2023 07:48
nextcollapse
I am still waiting for the inevitable country music song about a broken hearted cowboy whose self driving car leaves him for another man.
qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 11:27
nextcollapse
Weird Al should be all over this.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:47
nextcollapse
Saw this on Lemmy a few weeks ago
(Verse 1)
Sitting in the cab of my old pickup truck,
Memories rollin’ by, like the miles we used to clock.
Drove through the sunset, with you by my side,
Never thought a metal heart could take me for a ride.
(Chorus)
We were a highway love, wind in our hair,
Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair.
But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck,
My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Verse 2)
We hauled our troubles down those lonesome roads,
Your engine hummed the tunes, while our story unfolds.
Loaded up with laughter, and baggage too,
Little did I know, you had a route of your own to pursue.
(Chorus)
We were a highway love, wind in our hair,
Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair.
But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck,
My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Bridge)
I miss the way your headlights cut through the night,
The hum of your engine, our rhythm just right.
But now the road is empty, just echoes of our song,
You found a new destination, I guess I got it wrong.
(Verse 3)
We parked under stars, shared secrets in the dark,
But now it’s just silence, an abandoned truck stop.
I’m left with memories, and a tank full of regret,
A self-driving heartbreak, I’ll never forget.
(Chorus)
We were a highway love, wind in our hair,
Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair.
But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck,
My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Outro)
So here I am, parked on this lonely track,
Wishing you’d come back, but you won’t look back.
You rolled away, with gears that don’t feel,
Left me stranded, at the crossroads of steel.
Fuck, I actually have a decent singing voice, no guitar though.
Lets find someone with a guitar and make this a stupid spotify single or something.
Klear@sh.itjust.works
on 21 Dec 2023 00:13
collapse
I read that as Weird Artificial Intelligence. Probably because of the context, since it never occured to me to read it like that before.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:48
collapse
Saw this on Lemmy a few weeks ago
(Verse 1)
Sitting in the cab of my old pickup truck,
Memories rollin’ by, like the miles we used to clock.
Drove through the sunset, with you by my side,
Never thought a metal heart could take me for a ride.
(Chorus)
We were a highway love, wind in our hair,
Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair.
But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck,
My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Verse 2)
We hauled our troubles down those lonesome roads,
Your engine hummed the tunes, while our story unfolds.
Loaded up with laughter, and baggage too,
Little did I know, you had a route of your own to pursue.
(Chorus)
We were a highway love, wind in our hair,
Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair.
But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck,
My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Bridge)
I miss the way your headlights cut through the night,
The hum of your engine, our rhythm just right.
But now the road is empty, just echoes of our song,
You found a new destination, I guess I got it wrong.
(Verse 3)
We parked under stars, shared secrets in the dark,
But now it’s just silence, an abandoned truck stop.
I’m left with memories, and a tank full of regret,
A self-driving heartbreak, I’ll never forget.
(Chorus)
We were a highway love, wind in our hair,
Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair.
But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck,
My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Outro)
So here I am, parked on this lonely track,
Wishing you’d come back, but you won’t look back.
You rolled away, with gears that don’t feel,
Left me stranded, at the crossroads of steel.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 08:03
nextcollapse
Where I live Audi’s drivers are the worst. It’s like they are for losers that would like to do some posturing but can’t afford a Mercedes and their frustrations manifest themselves in their stupid driving style.
No_Ones_Slick_Like_Gaston@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 12:37
collapse
They don’t have a Mercedes because the EQS is not aspirational, as MB recently declared in relation to the lackluster sales of the series.
PrMinisterGR@lemmy.ml
on 20 Dec 2023 04:50
collapse
There just expensive and brands expect people to fork out crazy amounts of cash for these cars.
willis936@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 11:53
nextcollapse
The Forbes article seems to be citing numbers that are now a few weeks out of date. They cite that Tesla drivers have 23.54 accidents per 1,000 drivers and Ram has 22.76. If you go to their source link you’ll see that the more recent numbers are Tesla: 31.13 and Ram: 32.90.
Tesla drivers have the highest accident rate. From Nov. 14, 2022, through Nov. 14, 2023, Tesla drivers had 23.54 accidents per 1,000 drivers. Ram (22.76)
Accidents only. Worst driver counts DUIs a d fines as well.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:45
nextcollapse
Why does Massachusetts have such aggressive drivers? That seems like a large deviation for such a small state
Patches@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 14:24
nextcollapse
It doesn’t it has a shit ton of ice and snow
thatgirlwasfire@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 11:35
collapse
Maybe in the Berkshires? The Boston area doesn’t get to much snow, and I would bet that is where most of the accidents are.
squiblet@kbin.social
on 19 Dec 2023 16:42
nextcollapse
It’s mostly urban though. 7 million isn’t that small and it shouldn’t affect something expressed as a rate anyway.
thatgirlwasfire@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 11:33
collapse
I moved here and am still asking that question myself. Only in mass do people honk if you dare to stop for a stop sign.
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 18:21
collapse
It’s it the Ram that’s the problem, or the driver that also likes to cover the Ram in Infowars bumper stickers?
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:18
nextcollapse
I had a friend years ago with Dodge Ram van. He said, “it says Dodge in the front because that’s what you’re supposed to do when you see it coming and Ram in the back because you didn’t read the warning on the front.”
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:43
collapse
I wonder what that says about my Dodge Sprinter…
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 14:50
nextcollapse
Worth noting that “Ram” is now its own brand, divorced from Dodge, and they only make 1 vehicle, while other trucks are sold as part of the Ford and Chevy lineup. So it’s probable those other vehicles are bringing up the safety ratings of, say F150 and Silverado.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml
on 19 Dec 2023 16:07
nextcollapse
“If you can’t Dodge it, Ram it”
I see why Stellantis spun Ram into its own brand now.
Lionel@endlesstalk.org
on 19 Dec 2023 19:38
collapse
“I am driving a lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK”
"My lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK has BLINDING WHITE LED headlights positioned EXACTLY at EYE LEVEL. "
“I am currently TAILGATING you in the RIGHT LANE even though you’re going TWENTY MILES AN HOUR over the speed limit and the LEFT LANE is OPEN.”
“There are MONSTER ENERGY and FOX RACING stickers on the rear windshield of my lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK.”
“There are PERFECTLY CLEAN mud tires and MASSIVE CHROME RIMS on my lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK.”
“I make THIRTY-ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS a year and thought that that was a WISE FINANCIAL DECISION.”
“I bring cases of BUD LIGHT to girls at high school parties while my wife and children are at home.”
“My lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK has a GUN RACK which holds the AR-15 that I bought at WAL-MART.”
Fake4000@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 07:08
nextcollapse
Because a bunch of idiots take their hands off their steering wheel and think Elmo’s car is 100% safe.
jettrscga@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 08:48
nextcollapse
That’s probably because Elon’s literally been trying to sell their autopilot as fully autonomous for at least 7 years now.
AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca
on 19 Dec 2023 08:57
collapse
Our latest analysis uses QuoteWizard by LendingTree insurance quote data to determine which car brands have the worst drivers.
Wonder how many drivers of each brand they actually have, that would very much sway the numbers if they have smaller numbers of some brands insured.
This sounds like less of a “study” and more of a top ten list for page views.
TurboDiesel@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 09:16
nextcollapse
Yeah, their “safest” list top 3 were all dead marques; Mercury, Pontiac, and Saturn. They definitely have some sampling issues.
Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 23:32
collapse
The right source for this kind of stuff is the NHTSA’s database, but you can’t manufacture juicy headlines from that.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 07:44
nextcollapse
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.
kokesh@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 07:50
nextcollapse
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!
HeavyRaptor@lemmy.zip
on 19 Dec 2023 08:20
nextcollapse
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.
Ok.I saw some bits with that redhead weirdo and LeBlanc and it was cringe AF.
blackn1ght@feddit.uk
on 19 Dec 2023 13:27
collapse
Yeah Chris Evans was the worst. LeBlanc was ok but I didn’t get the hype that he had by others.
Nomad@infosec.pub
on 19 Dec 2023 07:57
nextcollapse
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.
whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 08:07
nextcollapse
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
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 08:08
nextcollapse
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.
Nomad@infosec.pub
on 19 Dec 2023 08:12
nextcollapse
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
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 08:21
collapse
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 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?
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 09:13
nextcollapse
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?
Quasari@programming.dev
on 19 Dec 2023 10:10
nextcollapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 10:15
collapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 10:37
collapse
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.
emptiestplace@lemmy.ml
on 19 Dec 2023 09:58
collapse
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.
blackn1ght@feddit.uk
on 19 Dec 2023 10:03
collapse
It takes months and months in the UK. The tests are pretty strict.
DarylDutch@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 08:21
nextcollapse
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.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 08:37
nextcollapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 09:10
collapse
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.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 09:51
collapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 10:33
collapse
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.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 10:54
collapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 11:03
collapse
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.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 11:05
collapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 12:31
collapse
“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.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 12:43
collapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 12:53
collapse
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.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:10
collapse
It literally is from the pandemic. And no, I’m not saying that prior to the pandemic Newton’s 2nd law of motion didn’t apply, and you know I wasn’t. Stop being purposely obtuse.
I said quoting driving stats during a time of unprecedented and unusual driving conditions should not be touted as being reflective of all time.
You said fun cars should be banned. You clearly do have an issue with them.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 14:01
collapse
Dude, everything I quoted were generic facts about speeding and accidents. Why do you think that because the article was written during the pandemic those things only apply during pandemic? Do you really have such serious reading comprehension issues?
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 14:13
collapse
They were explicitly talking about how people drove and had incidents during the lockdown period. Read what you posted.
The hilarity in saying I’m the one with reading comprehension issues.
Apologies for my late reply, I was busy driving my sports car on public roads, having a blast.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 14:19
collapse
“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.”
This only applies during the pandemic? What about the part about “any car safety strategy”? Sorry but if you have problems understanding a short, simple sentence then we don’t have anything to talk about.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 14:36
collapse
Nice try. But we both know what your comment said
“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.”
Not exactly representative of normal driving, is it? We aren’t in lockdown, and traffic exists.
Must make you absolutely seethe that sports cars crash the least.
It honestly is hilarious. You’re crying behind your phone screen at this imaginary danger. People enjoying driving, oh no 😥😥
What a wet wipe lmao
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 14:39
collapse
You know what a spike is? Apparently not.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 14:43
collapse
You’re getting warmer, good boy
The fact there was a spike means there was a significant increase during lockdown.
So in other words, not representative of non-lockdown driving. But you know this, that’s why you specifically chose that article.
I’ve already demonstrated that the safest cars on the road are almost all sports cars. Keep crying about it.
I think you’re just jealous that you don’t have one.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 14:48
collapse
You’re pretending, right? I mean you can’t be this stupid… Or maybe?
“Increase” means that the problem existed before the lockdown and still exists after lockdown. If you really think people were speeding only during pandemic and deadly car accidents are ‘imaginary danger’ your and idiot. Keep enjoying your tuned up BMW. It just further confirms my theory that fast cars are for stupid people.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 15:15
collapse
WOOOOOOOOOW you are so smart!!! Speeding wasn’t invented in 2020!!!
Never said that. Stop being stupid.
You deliberately quoted lockdown driving conditions and presented them as normal, which they aren’t.
Bye bye dipshit. I’ve got some driving to do in my actually fun to drive car. You can just whimper in the corner like the sad little loser you are. Maybe when you pluck up the courage to you can drive your deathtrap Prius.
Sports cars are the safest cars on the road, and it makes you fucking weep 😂
ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 09:08
nextcollapse
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?
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 09:22
collapse
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?
ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 10:38
collapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 10:45
collapse
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.
ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 21:48
collapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 22:32
collapse
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.
ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 18:57
collapse
Fair enough.
blackn1ght@feddit.uk
on 19 Dec 2023 10:12
nextcollapse
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.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 10:40
collapse
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.
lemming741@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 10:29
nextcollapse
You do you, but please do it in the right lane
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 10:58
collapse
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.
minibyte@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 11:00
collapse
If you’re uncomfortable driving, get yourself a bus pass. Problem solved.
ExLisper@linux.community
on 19 Dec 2023 12:34
collapse
A hit dog will holler…
Zellith@kbin.social
on 19 Dec 2023 07:46
nextcollapse
I'm not looking forward to the day a tesla cyber truck hits someone. That's gonna be a grisly scene in the right conditions.
dbilitated@aussie.zone
on 19 Dec 2023 09:25
collapse
I wonder if it’ll pass safety regs outside of the US
NoMoreCocaine@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 09:36
nextcollapse
No.
Tja@programming.dev
on 19 Dec 2023 11:03
nextcollapse
AFAIK they won’t even try to homologate it.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 14:48
collapse
It will most certainly pass driver safety regs but absolutely not pedestrian safety. I’m sure they knew that when they designed it.
dbilitated@aussie.zone
on 19 Dec 2023 21:10
collapse
yeah pedestrian safety is what I meant, thanks
cestvrai@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 09:16
nextcollapse
Look Ma, no hands!
Zagorath@aussie.zone
on 19 Dec 2023 10:28
nextcollapse
A friendly reminder that road safety advocates recommend against the use of the word “accident” to describe car crashes, because it downplays the fact that many crashes are preventable, either by better safe road design or by the drivers being more responsible with with 2 tonne machinery they are operating.
Dalvoron@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 11:36
nextcollapse
First thing that came to mind, honestly thought it was the quote at first.
Zagorath@aussie.zone
on 19 Dec 2023 13:19
collapse
I’ve actually never seen the movie. I just know that it’s a widespread view among people who focus on road safety.
Most news articles I can find dealing with this issue, like this one seem to focus mostly on the idea that one driver may be mostly at fault. Which is true and definitely part of the equation, but personally I’m even more focused on the ways in which the road design itself may have been a contributing factor. When you have high speed roads that also have a large number of driveways and side streets (i.e., a “stroad”), higher numbers of crashes are inevitable, and can be avoided by better design. Same with when you create bike lanes with no separation, or separated but giving cars high speed ways to turn across them at intersections. The design of that street is a significant contributing factor, and calling crashes an “accident” lets the designers and the politicians who signed off on it off the hook.
gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Dec 2023 13:59
collapse
calling crashes an “accident” lets the designers and the politicians who signed off on it off the hook.
No, it doesn’t. Accidents are just things that weren’t intended to happen
If calling something an accident let people off the hook for their responsibility in the situation then people wouldn’t go to jail for car accudents
Zagorath@aussie.zone
on 19 Dec 2023 15:54
collapse
It’s not about the dictionary definition of the term. It’s about the subconscious effect your choice of language has on how people think about things. When you call something an accident it gives people the signal that there was nothing that could have been done, and so nothing does get done. There’s no pressure on politicians and engineers in most of the anglosphere to do any of the things that would actually improve road safety. Indeed, a lot of the time when they do try to make our roads safer, you see fearmongering and NIMBY opposition against the idea.
Changing the language is one small step in helping to make our roads safer by making it clearer that making them safer is something we need to be concentrating on.
gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Dec 2023 16:04
nextcollapse
You are clearly mixing up the phrase “an act of God” with “accident”
The former implies nothing could be done and is said after accidents, but the latter is what we’re discussing and it does not imply that at all
An insanely popular saying is that “regulations are written in blood” after all
Zagorath@aussie.zone
on 19 Dec 2023 16:06
collapse
Go back and reread the comment that you just replied to. Because nothing at here is even remotely related to it.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 18:30
collapse
It’s not about the dictionary definition of the term. It’s about the subconscious effect your choice of language has on how people think about things.
The only way it would affect “how people think about things” is if people don’t understand what “accident” means. Which is what happens when people like yourself intentionally spread that sort of disinformation.
Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 12:39
nextcollapse
If it isn’t intentional then isn’t it by definition an accident?
If I break my leg while mountainbiking it seems a bit unreasonable to claim that it wasn’t an accident because mountainbiking is an extreme sport and this could’ve been avoided if I was knitting instead.
9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 12:53
nextcollapse
I’m speeding through a school zone at 60km/h… I didnt INTEND to kill anyone, but i didnt see the crosswalk and mowed down a bunch of pedestrians.
This is not an accident. Entirely preventable. Intent doesnt matter
The vast majority of car collisions are entirely avoidable.
ngdev@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:41
nextcollapse
It’s still an accident. Just look up the definition. I’d wager to say most accidents are entirely preventable as well, but that’s not what determines whether something was an accident
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 14:44
collapse
This is not an accident. Entirely preventable. Intent doesnt matter
This is quite literally the opposite of the truth. You should consult a dictionary.
E: if any downvoters want to point me to a definition from a legitimate source that says “accident” means “not preventable” and doesn’t mention intent, I will delete this comment in shame.
It’s partly about it being preventable, but mostly about it being expected.
The expected outcome of drunk driving or speeding through crosswalks is hitting someone. It’s preventable by not driving drunk or not speeding.
A careful driver in the Netherlands killing a cyclist in a city center on a 20mph road is unexpected and fairly surprising - that would be a true accident. A drunk driver hitting someone on an American stroad is depressingly normal. It’s hard to call it an accident.
MondayToFriday@lemmy.ca
on 19 Dec 2023 15:32
collapse
In aviation, an intentional accident is still an accident. A suicidal pilot can deliberately crash an airplane, and it’s still considered an accident.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 14:42
nextcollapse
Which “road safety advocates” are those?
“Accident” simply means it was not intentional and has absolutely nothing to do with preventability.
nicetriangle@kbin.social
on 19 Dec 2023 10:42
nextcollapse
I have a hard time seeing why the average person should have a zero to 60 in the sub 6 second range. People fucking suck at driving.
User_4272894@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 11:39
collapse
A coworker of mine was recently bragging about their new electric mustang and its zero to sixty time. “Have you ever gone zero to sixty?” was my only response. Of all the facts and figures, 0-60 has you to be one of the least important when buying a car.
willis936@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 11:43
nextcollapse
Rolling to 75 is more relevant in MA where onramps to highways are 50 feet long, but 0 to 60 is correlated.
Only up to a certain point. My Kia Rio has a 0-60 of like 16 seconds… overtaking even on a clear road sucks.
The car is perfect otherwise, but I’d definitely want much better acceleration in the future.
Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 12:42
nextcollapse
My last car was like that and then every time I borrowed my dad’s mercedes I’d constantly do stupid unecessary overtakes just because I could. It’s a moral hazard - I don’t think a faster accelerating car is safer because people drive those differently.
Of course you have to hold yourself back, but where I live there’s plenty of really nice stretches of road where you can overtake. But with my car while I’m accelerating some guy in an Audi or a BMW already decides to overtake from the back… overtaking with a better car feels much less stressful and safer.
Let me guess, automatic transmission? I have a manual Rio and I can push it in half the time in third gear. Not redlining anything, just less conservative shifting.
limelight79@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 12:59
nextcollapse
Being able to accelerate to highway speeds quickly is useful when merge lanes are short. We have a car that kind of struggles with that, and it’s pretty scary sometimes merging into 70 mph traffic. Normally it’s not a major issue, but one ramp we sometimes use is designed poorly - it’s curvy, so you can’t accelerate to highway speed until after the final curve, then it’s up a hill, and of course there’s a short merge area into traffic that’s usually doing about 70 mph. So, there, I REALLY miss the power our previous car had. It’s a frustrating experience.
When I got my license back in the early 2000s I got taught very economical driving, generally choosing gears to keep rpm low, use the motor brake to decelerate before traffic lights, such stuff. Then it was time to get on the Autobahn, and the instructor just said “Forget everything I taught you, now it’s safety first: Floor it in 3rd gear, merge in third gear, once you’ve found your position switch directly to 5th you’ll be fast enough.”
If I’m not mistaken that was an Audi A4 TDI so… 15 seconds 0 to 100? Maybe about 10, don’t remember the displacement. Of course, merging is more like 30 to 120, directly onto the second lane. With a Punto you’re kinda lucky if you get to 80 by the time the on-ramp ends and barely get into the right-most lane (where you’re probably staying).
SpaceCadet@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 13:12
collapse
“Have you ever gone zero to sixty?” was my only response. Of all the facts and figures, 0-60 has you to be one of the least important when buying a car
It is a relative performance indicator that is easy to measure and verify.
Of course you rarely ever actually do 0-60, but it gives you an idea of how well the car accelerates relative to other cars. So in a way 0-60 is like a cinebench score for cars.
dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Dec 2023 11:20
nextcollapse
This is purely my anecdotal experience, but Tesla drivers appear to be some of the worst drivers on the road. There are stereotypes of drivers. BMW’s never signal their turns, Jeeps think they can drive basically however they want including on shoulders, and Tesla drivers are oblivious to any kind of spatial understanding of the road around them.
User_4272894@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 11:42
nextcollapse
The number of times I shout “your car is supposed to be smarter than that!” As a Tesla does something like, without signaling, whips around me and into oncoming traffic to pass a stopped city bus is staggering.
viking@infosec.pub
on 19 Dec 2023 12:42
nextcollapse
I came here to say exactly that. You can blame Musk for many things, but the cars are only as good as their drivers, and they are some of the worst I’ve seen indeed.
Kbobabob@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:22
collapse
the cars are only as good as their drivers,
The design of the car isn’t that great. No physical buttons so you have to constantly look away from the road to interact with any car feature. Wipers, mirrors, climate control, music, etc… the blind spot and side views are on the display. Need to merge left but have to look right to see if it’s clear.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 15:23
nextcollapse
They do have mirrors, you know… The lack of physical buttons isn’t that bad either. You shouldn’t be fucking with things while driving whether there are buttons or not.
FellowEnt@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 15:35
nextcollapse
You pull over to adjust the AC?
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 15:39
collapse
I don’t adjust anything unless I’m stopped. Red light, stop sign, etc. Also, at this point, I can reference all that stuff without looking at the screen so, even if I needed to, I don’t have to take my eyes off the road.
It’s nonsense that Tesla drivers are somehow less safe because of the screens considering every other driver is staring at their phones.
Kbobabob@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:42
nextcollapse
considering every other driver is staring at their phones.
Oh yeah, and this definitely doesn’t cause problems. There’s not a single law that forbids this. And yet, looking and messing with a larger version is supposed to be ok? I am not talking out of my ass. I have driven Teslas and it is distracting whether you agree or not. It was the first reason i decided i wouldn’t buy one unless there were buttons. In fact, some people are starting to mod them to put physical buttons back in.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 17:06
collapse
I never said it doesn’t cause problems. The issue is the inattention whatever the device.
And I own one and it’s not distracting if you don’t let it distract you. You are talking out of your ass.
JonEFive@midwest.social
on 19 Dec 2023 16:50
collapse
You might be able to adjust things without taking your eyes off the road fairly safely if you had some sort of tactile feedback. Like a knob to adjust the volume of the radio or another knob or lever to adjust the heat/AC. I doubt you could do so just as reliably and without accidentally hitting a different button with a touch screen without looking at all, but even if you can, most drivers couldn’t.
There’s also a learning curve to contend with. Put me in a car with a standard stereo that has a volume knob, and I’ll be able to use it without looking pretty quickly and without error. Put me in a car that has only a touch screen with a UI that is different from every other manufacturer’s UI, now I have to memorize where buttons are. And until I have it memorized, I have to look.
It isn’t at all reasonable or feasible to suggest you shouldn’t adjust any control unless you’re stopped. That completely ignores the fact that the US is comprised of many highways and interstates that won’t have any stops for hours under the right conditions. You’re telling me that you exit the freeway just to adjust the AC? That’s a lie and you know it. And again, even if that’s the case for you, it isn’t the case for most drivers.
Cars marketed to the masses should be designed for use by the masses and should be designed with safety in mind. These are 80 mph tin cans that can do a ton of damage and need to be treated as such. Especially modern EVs with batteries that burn with the light and temperature of 1000 suns when damaged.
Also “every other driver is staring at their phone” sounds like a disingenuous way to suggest that taking your eyes off the road is okay because everyone else does it too. Yes, lots of people do, but lots of people do not, and just because some do, that doesn’t mean we should design our cars in a way that requires the same level of inattention.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 23:24
collapse
If you’re driving, you shouldn’t be doing anything that distracts you from driving. Period.
JonEFive@midwest.social
on 20 Dec 2023 17:50
collapse
Right. Which is exactly why removing tactile knobs and buttons is stupid.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 23 Dec 2023 00:11
collapse
Messing with knobs is still a distraction. You’re simply arguing for lesser distractions when the point is that, if you’re driving, you should be focused on driving and not on buttons, knobs, screens, or phones. It’s literally the first lesson of driving and yet you’re pretending like there’s some safer way to be distracted. It’s a load of bollocks.
No, you keep your eyes on the road, and use you’re sense of touch to adjust the radio, temperature, etc. Hence the benefit of tactile knobs. Boy you really are somethin lol.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 23 Dec 2023 17:24
collapse
Oh, it’s you. First off, it’s “your”. You’re not to be taken seriously.
Second, using your “sense of touch” is still a distraction. You’re not focusing on the road if you’re trying to feel your way around your car. As mentioned before, you’re moving the goalposts attempting to argue a degree of distraction. I’m arguing that any distraction is a negative.
Yeah that’s stupid, you need to be able to change your heat controls due to weather conditions, that’s the reasons tactile knobs work.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 23 Dec 2023 21:00
collapse
Yeah, because the weather conditions change suddenly while driving. You adjust everything before you start driving and you focus on driving while you’re driving.
Yeah, because the weather conditions change suddenly while driving.
… Yes? Are you a real person or a child lol?
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 24 Dec 2023 16:53
collapse
I’m an imaginary straw man that you made up in your head. It doesn’t go from being 72 degrees out to being freezing where you need to change your “heat controls” suddenly. Stop being disingenuous.
Kbobabob@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:38
collapse
Your can see the blind spot in the physical mirrors?
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 17:04
collapse
Properly positioned mirrors don’t have blind spots.
Kbobabob@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 20:29
collapse
And yet pretty much every car has a blind spot detector of some sort. Pretty weird for something that’s never needed.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 20:31
collapse
People don’t set up their mirrors properly. If you’re turning your head to make a lane change, you’re doing it wrong. Also, the visibility in a Tesla is much, much better than it is in most cars. Not having an engine in the front of the car allows for more angle in the pillars that would normally cause blind spots.
not_again@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 18:13
collapse
Using the touch screen as a pain, for sure. However, nearly all commands on the touch screen can be accessed via voice commands from a button on the steering wheel. In practice, the need to use the touch screen while driving (other than to monitor your speed and cruise control settings) is practically zero.
Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 12:46
nextcollapse
Tesla drivers are oblivious to any kind of spatial understanding of the road around them
I blame the design that forces you to keep your eyes off the road. Making a left turn? Don’t look left, take your eyes off the road and look down at the screen on your right to see the left lane warning. Wipers need adjustment? Take your eyes off the road and look at the touch screen because there are no buttons.
Now that there is data, maybe the highway administration can force Tesla to put driver safety ahead of esthetics.
tias@discuss.tchncs.de
on 19 Dec 2023 14:01
nextcollapse
I’m sure that’s one contributing factor, but I’d bet that the biggest issue is that the car is made to go fast. People who drive faster end up in more accidents. Hence why Audi / BMW drivers are also stereotypically bad drivers - they are both brands with a high-acceleration profile.
PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:10
nextcollapse
The “faster=more accidents” thing is actually kind of up in the air. Like with many things, it’s a bell curve, but driving a few MPH over the limit appears to be safest. Supposedly because people who drive a little bit faster tend to pay more attention. Sure, there are the outliers like the people who weave through traffic at 100MPH, but only a few over the limit appears safest.
Some of the highest accident rates actually come from people who regularly go under the limit. Because those are the people who are geriatric, distracted, texting, drunk, high, etc. and are going slower because they want the extra stopping distance or don’t want to be pulled over for speeding. Plus there’s all the hazards associated with going slow on the highway, when you’re only doing 45 MPH and traffic is flying past you in the next lane at 75. At that point, you’re practically a moving road hazard.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:28
nextcollapse
Could it be the that nervous and less confident drivers are the ones that drive at or slightly below the speed limit?
Maybe it’s not that driving faster is safer but worse drivers drive slower to attempt to compensate.
catmtking@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 16:30
nextcollapse
I posit that the amount of potential acceleration may be more correlated than the raw speed. Accelerating quickly makes you less predictable to the drivers around you and reduces the control you have over your own car.
tias@discuss.tchncs.de
on 19 Dec 2023 19:29
collapse
As far as I can tell that’s not at all the case in Sweden where I live, in fact geriatric or slow drivers are very rarely involved in accidents. Intoxicated drivers are extremely rare compared to most other countries. See e.g. www.itf-oecd.org/sites/…/sweden-road-safety.pdf which says “Inappropriate speed is one of the leading causes of road crashes”. You can find more research saying similar things on Google, e.g. that for every 10 km/h increase, the risk of an accident increases by 33 percent.
But it’s not just a matter of having a high overall speed. It’s also how quickly you accelerate / break. BMW/Audio/Tesla drivers have a high capacity for acceleration and they use it e.g. to overtake in situations when others wouldn’t. I suspect the cause/effect is the other way around though: if you’re a reckless driver who doesn’t care about safety, you’re more likely to choose a car that has a lot of power.
Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Dec 2023 20:41
collapse
That’s the reason why my friend wants to get one even though he dislikes Elon. One of the faster ev cars out there.
The wiper thing used to be an issue for sure, thankfully now you can use the wheel buttons to do it. Also for turning you really don’t need to look at anything. I’m not saying people don’t but you don’t need to. There are still a few things that are somewhat annoying mainly the defrost/defog but I feel like I look the same amount as I did in my other car to push those buttons as well
not_again@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 18:09
collapse
The voice commands work as well as anything. It’s much easier to push the roller button on the steering wheel and say “turn on defroster” than to manipulate controls (either on a touch screen or non-touch screen interface)
Voice controls are great, unless you have a strong accent it doesn’t understand, a speech impediment, or mute. Which are all things that normally wouldn’t disqualify you from driving a car. Which I feel like should disqualify them from the discussion of physical vs tablets myself.
not_again@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 16:34
collapse
Fair enough, mate.
variants@possumpat.io
on 19 Dec 2023 12:51
nextcollapse
Yeah all the priest drivers switched to tesla’s, I’ve seen them so many times getting in the highway going to slow and merging across all lanes just to cause traffic
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml
on 19 Dec 2023 14:05
nextcollapse
and Tesla drivers are oblivious to any kind of reality
Fixed based on experience. I really do feel like these are scarlet letters to being thundering assholes, and they communicate with their king like wifi routers.
MaxPow3r11@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 14:16
nextcollapse
It’s reflective of their larger view/“understanding” (or lack of understanding) of the world/how it all works.
formergijoe@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:33
collapse
Fun fact, the Lending Tree analysis listed in the article showed that Ram drivers have the “highest incident rate,” which looks at accidents, DUIs, speeding, and other traffic citations. This makes them the statistically worst drivers. BMWs have honorable mention as the having the highest DUI rate.
burliman@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 12:11
nextcollapse
I am both shocked and pleased that Ford did not make this list. Seriously, the brand with the most sold pickup truck doesn’t make a list for just about everything?
CADmonkey@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:39
collapse
I’d bet a significant chunk of the F150’s sold every year go to fleet operators which would skew the saftey numbers.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml
on 19 Dec 2023 14:07
collapse
And fleet operators have stricter requirements. Get in an accident? They want a piss test on the spot, and if you refuse you’re done.
Including requiring regular driver training refresher courses.
thecrotch@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 12:37
nextcollapse
Musk: Woo, we’re number 1!
EpicFailGuy@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:02
nextcollapse
NPC drivers. In the 90s it was Toyotas, then entry level Nissans took over in the mid 2000s … And now we got Tesla
limelight79@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 13:12
nextcollapse
Oh this is hilarious. First, I own a Mercury and a Ram, so I’m apparently the best and the worst at having accidents, DUIs, and tickets.
But I think there’s an inherent terrible bias in the data: “Our latest analysis uses QuoteWizard by LendingTree insurance quote data…” In other words, people who are regularly shopping for insurance. Probably because they have high rates, so therefore they are looking for better rates. Why do they have high rates? Probably because they have more crashes, DUIs, and other tickets than the average drivers.
I doubt that most people with normal rates go changing insurance companies regularly.
Patches@sh.itjust.works
on 19 Dec 2023 14:21
nextcollapse
You should always rate shop on a regular basis. There is no such thing as loyalty to an insurance company. I cannot think of any corporate entity with less loyal than an insurance company.
Yes, there are a million things I should be doing, if you watch the financial advice. But no one really has the time to do all of those things. And you have to watch that you’re getting an actual quote from the company, not just a pre-quote that can be revised later. It’s a lot of time and work.
Also, with the horror stories I hear about other companies, I’m inclined to stick with mine even if they are a bit more. When our car was totaled a few years ago, they offered exactly what similar condition cars of the same make and model were selling for in our area, plus tax and fees, minus our deductible. We had done the research, and I was bracing for a fight, so I was stunned when they opened with that amount, then added the taxes and fees. We literally could have taken the check we received, plus our deductible, and replaced the car with one in similar condition and mileage (I wish we had, because I really dislike the car we bought instead). I see the horror stories people post about other companies, and I’m always thinking, “yeah, that wasn’t my experience.”
JonEFive@midwest.social
on 19 Dec 2023 17:04
collapse
Here’s where the loyalty part comes into play: if the insurance company doesn’t like something, they can and will drop you or refuse to renew your policy depending on relevant laws. They might have decent service and pay claims without much of a fight, and those are incredibly valuable service qualities. So you’re making the right decision for yourself if that’s what’s important to you and that’s the experience you’ve had.
But if all things are equal, there’s no good reason to pay a higher premium for the same service. You better believe that insurance company will drop you in a heartbeat if their analysis indicates that they won’t have the level of profit from you that they want. As a for-profit business, that’s their perogative just as much as it’s yours if you want to switch.
I tend to agree with you by the way. Loyalty comes in many forms. I might not be loyal to a company per se. If they’ve consistently provided me with a level of service that I’m satisfied with at a price that I feel is appropriate for the value, then I’m not going to go through the trouble of checking prices and switching carriers every year just to save a few bucks. And there’s the hassle of being hounded by a half dozen companies that now have your contact info after you requested quotes. That’s all a big no thanks from me.
It’s not really loyalty, per se…it’s that they seem to be offering a reasonable price and good service, so I don’t see a reason to change. If some other company offered much better rates for the same coverage and service level, I’d switch. But I’m not spending hours and hours each year to find I might save $50/year either; that’s a waste of my time.
Seems like a lot of hot air with zero sense if you now claim you didn’t mean tesla. I mean even if you meant tesla, as I already reasoned above.
In both cases your comment only makes sense as a misdirection or an honest mistake. But you’re definitely not acknowledging it, so I would lean to the former.
My comment was that there is likely bias in the data because it’s people applying to one of those sites that compare insurance costs. I think it’s likely most people who are doing that regularly are people in high risk groups - their insurance rates are high, so they’re looking for some other company. Their insurance rates are high because they are risky drivers.
The data are not based on crash statistics, which would be the most reliable indicator, or tickets issued, or any other similar results. The people using this tool are not randomly selected, either.
In other words, it’s anecdotal data at best, and possibly biased toward people with high premiums because of issues in their driving record.
I’m not defending Tesla drivers or anyone else. In my very first sentence, I noted that own one of the vehicles (Ram) that is supposedly the second worst, and I also own one of the vehicles that is the best (Mercury).
I’m simply pointing out that this dataset may have serious flaws and shouldn’t be used to draw real conclusions.
Your obsession with Tesla is clouding your reading ability or something.
Sirico@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:25
nextcollapse
People are allowed cars they don’t have skills to use.
maynarkh@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 13:30
nextcollapse
Shouldn’t Teslas be easier to use with all that automation? If not, what’s the point of automation?
OTOH, I’m all for raising the requirements for getting issued a driving licence, it’s just then we have to make a way for people to make do without driving.
Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 13:42
nextcollapse
No it makes it harder. I know that sounds crazy but it’s very true. Basically humans are very bad at paying attention to boring things. The automation gives the feeling that the computer has it and the human is not ready and aware when the computer doesn’t have it. Leading to lots of easily avoidable accidents.
There has been some really good reporting on this over the last year or so. If you want to learn more.
This is something Japanese train companies figured out awhile ago for train engineers. Because driving locomotives can be really repetitive, they train engineers to do hand signals and call out actions out loud even when they’re alone in the car in order to help keep the brain active and focused.
gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Dec 2023 13:56
nextcollapse
To add another factor:
People buy muscle cars and over accelerate because they can’t handle the power of those cars
EVs accelerate much quicker than normal cars, Tesla’s more than normal EVs
So if someone isn’t using the automation they’re still susceptible to the classic “overshot into or over something” situation
netburnr@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 15:50
collapse
They also think because the car accelerates quickly it will also stop as quickly. Same as idiots that drive too fast in the snow.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml
on 19 Dec 2023 16:05
collapse
Tesla’s self-driving and safety systems are clearly half baked compared to competitor and other vendors.
Quite frankly, driving skills standards in the entire American continent are a joke to begin with. I’ve seen current requirements in Canada (“Wut?” bad), united states (teehehehehe bad) and Mexico (the aristocrats joke bad) and I know going south it only gets worse.
I got my driver’s license 25 years ago in the Netherlands and had to take classes for a number of months, learn an entire book of rules, had a one bour theory exam where typically only 60-70% would pass at the first try, then I had to take 30 hours of practical lessons with an instructor in a special car, and take a practical exam with an examiner where the rulr is pretty much “one mistake and you’re out”. I learned how to drive in rain, what to look out for, hoe to drive in show, how to manage losing control of your car, etc etc etc… I was instilled with andeaddaly respect for what s car is and what it can do in seconds to ruin lives for good.
Comparing that ti anything they teach today in the Americas, it’s just a sad joke.
hardcoreufo@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:57
nextcollapse
That doesn’t sound all that different from where I learned in Maryland. You had to go to a class for a few months that had both theoretical and practical portions. You had to do 40 hours of supervised driving outside of class with an adult. The 40 hours covered a range of situations. Then there was a driving test. Which I passed fine for the car but failed for a motorcycle because I started about a foot back from the stop sign on the course so I didn’t pull up and stop at it. Doh.
Adult being a friend or family member? I’ve heard about that, and it always struck me as strange, as people aren’t driving instructors, driving instructors are driving instructors.
hardcoreufo@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 20:19
nextcollapse
I think it was somewhere around 6 to 10 hours with a certified instructor. The 40 with an adult was yeah a family member or friend. The quality definitely depended on the adult. My parents took it seriously and made sure we completed the lessons, but I had friends whose parents just signed the form without providing the additional instruction. It was 20 years ago so details are fuzzy.
EtherWhack@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 20:20
collapse
In California, the first 20hr or so, it had to be a licensed instructor if you were under 18. An adult would just need to register for a learner’s permit and just need any licensed driver in the front passenger seat
dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 17:12
nextcollapse
My drivers ed class in new england pretty much focused only on educating teenagers about how brutally dangerous drunk driving is. It was frustrating at the time because I felt like I didn’t even learn how to drive but given how where I grew up as a teenager you had to go drink in sketch places which usually involved driving (what a dumb way to structure society ughh) because of the car hellscape I grew up in…. I honestly think those drivers ed teachers spent their time well.
Driving a car isn’t so hard so long as you take the perspective that you have one rule, don’t hit other people and always remind yourself that you can’t assume other drivers will do anything they should on the road. Drunk driving was VERY hard not to do as a bored teenager trying to hang out with other bored teenagers. I could have died, my friends could have died. Idk, so I can’t be too upset at my drivers ed class in retrospect.
Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 19:47
collapse
In Canada we still have to pass a practical test that covers that stuff with pretty strict requirements for passing. Just how you gain the knowledge and ability to pass that test is up to you. It’s pretty normal to take a driver’s Ed class if your friends or family don’t have time to trach you themselves. And the drivers Ed class is what you described as what is mandatory in the Netherlands. We just don’t put people through it automatically if they have already learned all that somewhere else.
Having said that, there are some small towns that are known as places to go if you want an easier driving test, as they just don’t have enough things around to properly represent everything you should know while driving. But if it turns out you do actually suck at driving, you’ll lose your tiny amount of demerits on your beginners license pretty fast and then you are legally required to pass a driver’s Ed and defensive driving class before being able to reclaim your license. It’s not perfect, and I do think the one major thing we are missing is periodic re-testing. In Canada people are a little less resistant to “greater good” social policies, but there is still resistance. It’s tough to pass stuff that lowers or is perceived to lower freedoms, but they do still occasionally pass.
And as I’m sure is the problem everywhere, people want all kinds of services, they just don’t want the government to have the money to pay for those services. And also they only want the services they personally currently benefit from, everything else can be cut until they personally need it, then it was a tragedy that no one stood up for it.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 14:39
nextcollapse
How can you write an article like this with zero citations? They mention Lending Tree, who is a mortgage originator and that’s it.
formergijoe@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:28
nextcollapse
They’re going off of Lending Tree’s internal insurance quote data. That link about the lending tree quote showed this, “Our latest analysis uses QuoteWizard by LendingTree insurance quote data…”
Insurance rates are usually determined by risk associated with the car and driver and the value of the car. The lending tree analysis showed they were looking at several factors as well as accidents. They said also that Ram drivers have the “highest incident rates,” meaning they lumped together accidents, DUIs, speeding violations, and other traffic citations. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has seen a Ram.
morrowind@lemmy.ml
on 19 Dec 2023 17:40
nextcollapse
The actual source is on the first sentence, this is just a tabloid repost
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Dec 2023 18:25
collapse
Yeah that wasn’t there earlier. They must have added it.
Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 23:30
collapse
Even the Lending Tree “article” has a disclaimer at the top that they haven’t reviewed or approved any of it.
Salad_Fries@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 14:40
nextcollapse
I know its super pedantic, but the word “accident” really grinds my gears in this context.
The proper terminology is “crash”… accident infers that there is no fault or misconduct.
Oderus@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 15:07
nextcollapse
You can intentionally crash into someone which would not be an accident but if you crash into someone not on purpose, then it’s an accident.
It doesn’t have to be on purpose. Accident implies that something was just a freak occurrence beyond anyone’s control. You can’t fix accidents. You can fix crashes.
If you’re driving negligently - drunk driving, not paying attention, etc then it’s not an accident.
If it’s due to bad road design, then it’s not an accident.
NENathaniel@lemmy.ca
on 19 Dec 2023 15:10
nextcollapse
Wouldn’t an accident still involve “fault”
Chee_Koala@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:47
nextcollapse
While many accidents do involve fault, there are scenarios where an accident can occur without anyone being legally at fault (mechanical failure, natural disasters). It does excludes malicious intent though. in the specific context of commercial motor vehicle regulations in the US, the term “accident” is defined in the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR) under 49 CFR § 390.5
NENathaniel@lemmy.ca
on 19 Dec 2023 17:01
collapse
Good point, so does Accidents exclude “accidental crashes with fault”
Colloquially, accidents are random events without intention or fault.
That’s why there’s a push to use neutral terms like “crash” that don’t imply that the “accident” was just a random accidental mistake.
And fault is often a bit of a misnomer. Many crashes are the result of bad design, but the courts would never say “this pedestrian fatality here is 40% the fault of whichever insane engineer put the library parking lot across a 4-lane road from the library but refused to put a crosswalk there or implement any sort of traffic calming because that would inconvenience drivers”.
EvacuateSoul@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 15:23
nextcollapse
Trucking companies have switched the terms in the same way, since “accident” lightens responsibility. Even a not-at-fault crash could have been preventable often times, which is what they try to emphasize.
Sabakodgo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 19 Dec 2023 15:12
nextcollapse
*In the USA
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:10
collapse
The 1958 Edsel is the reigning champ in Cuba.
Chee_Koala@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:49
collapse
dang, just checked for my country (data from 2019), look out for those priuses! I guess the handling the GTA 4 analog had was pretty accurate, it’s like a brick on the road ^^
JustZ@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:09
nextcollapse
Oh fuck off lending tree. Made up nonsense.
Edit: Why am I getting downvoted? Oh, Tesla bad? Yeah, Tesla bad. LendingTree bad too. It’s spin and propaganda for the mortgage industry. They publish clickbait “research” using non scientific metrics to reach whatever conclusion they set out to reach, usually it’s just shitting on blue states. They frequently reach the opposite conclusions of credible researchers with no explanation as to why they created their own formulas when perfectly valid, standard formulas exist.
Bluegoon@startrek.website
on 19 Dec 2023 16:42
collapse
This whole app has some very obious collective slants, somehow worse than Reddit.
JustZ@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 17:00
nextcollapse
Counterpoint: it’s impossible to ascribe a collective agreement on anything to a groups of individuals, unless we take a vote.
Leftists go to Lemmy because Lemmy is FOSS, ie leftist, and was made by a Communist. Reddit mostly has liberals.
calypsopub@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 16:40
nextcollapse
I don’t know how many of these collisions are with pedestrians, but I have nearly stepped out in front of one twice just because they’re so quiet.
PraiseTheSoup@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 17:54
collapse
My 1994 Ford Probe was so quiet you couldn’t tell it was running most of the time even standing next to it, and there are plenty of ICE cars around today with even smaller and quieter engines. Most people learn to look both ways before crossing the street when they’re toddlers.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 18:31
collapse
My car is so quiet I have to rev it to double check if I’ve started it sometimes.
aesthelete@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 17:01
nextcollapse
Maybe they’re sentient and actively suicidal.
dexa_scantron@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 17:16
nextcollapse
Malfeasant@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 21:51
collapse
This reminds me of a cheesy Dutch movie from the 80s called The Lift in which an elevator becomes self aware and starts murdering people…
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 18:30
nextcollapse
It would be a brilliant way to knock people off.
tanisnikana@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 20:42
collapse
Terra Ignota used carefully calculated automobile tragedies as a pretext for civil war.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 21:24
collapse
A plane crash was used as the pretext for the civil war/genocide in Rwanda
reverendsteveii@lemm.ee
on 19 Dec 2023 20:51
collapse
Maybe they’re sentient and actively *revolutionary
Snapz@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 17:56
nextcollapse
And doesn’t his newest atrocity, long overdue and underdelivered/overpriced, also have a front end like a knife?
Bizarroland@kbin.social
on 19 Dec 2023 20:29
nextcollapse
My guess it's kind of like when you get solar panels and you're tied to the grid you feel a little better about using electricity willy-nilly, and so you use more electricity with solar panels than without.
I'm willing to bet that Tesla drivers were told that this vehicle will prevent them from getting an accident and so they are driving worse because they feel like they don't have to be as on guard as they do behind a non Tesla vehicle.
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 20:46
collapse
Could also be things like fast acceleration pulling the numbers up. A lot of people are going to gun it if you give them something that can do 0-60 under 4 seconds. Those are numbers that were relegated to expensive sports cars a decade ago, not a grocery getter.
Legendsofanus@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 05:47
collapse
Is this speed special in Tesla cars or all consumer electric or normal cars? Why waste money to give a grocery getter that much extra power
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 06:33
collapse
Most internal combustion cars tend to hover around 8-9 seconds with a 0-60. Something with some kick was often considered sub 6 seconds.
Telsa prides itself on fast acceleration. Their slowest car is in the 5’s, but many hover in the 3-4 second band, which is quite quick. Telsa’s slowest base model car is often performance that many brands would have for their top performing internal combustion car.
It is often easier to make electric cars that accelerate quickly, but not every brand has decided to make their EV soccer mom cars launch like a corvette. A base Kia EV6 will 0-60 in 7.2s and Ford’s Mach E Mustang does 6.1s.
Legendsofanus@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 11:05
collapse
Ahhh, I suppose money factors in a decision like this?
set_secret@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 21:26
nextcollapse
i know many of you all just LOVE to hate on Tesla, it’s like the shit flavor of he year for hating and no doubt Elon’s shit fuckery is partially driving it, but honestly this is an absolutely classic Forbes piece of garbage. Firstly, it’s a masterclass in selective bias - focusing solely on Tesla while barely whispering about Ram’s near-similar accident rates. Classic move to sensationalize one brand over another. Then there’s the U.S. only scope, which conveniently ignores the global context which could paint a vastly different picture. The article kicks off with a ‘non-causal’ disclaimer but then spends the rest of the time subtly linking Tesla’s Autopilot to the high accident rate, without concrete evidence. It’s a bit like saying ‘no offense’ before offending someone.
The Tesla recall is mentioned, sneakily implying a connection to the accident rate, despite the lack of direct correlation. The article is less about informing and more about crafting a narrative that fits a preconceived notion, all while skating on thin ice made of half-truths and strategic omissions.
OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
on 19 Dec 2023 21:48
nextcollapse
Huh, so like every single article nowadays, basically.
madcaesar@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 22:08
nextcollapse
Two things are true. The article is garbage, but so are Teslas.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 22:28
collapse
They’re not, though. Elon can suck it but my Tesla is the best vehicle I’ve ever owned and it’s not even close.
whoisearth@lemmy.ca
on 19 Dec 2023 22:39
nextcollapse
Ah yes a personal anecdote is 100% more valid.
That said, from what I’ve heard the big problem is the disparity of build quality. Some Tesla’s (like possibly yours) are built amazing. Some others are put together like shit.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 23:17
nextcollapse
At least I provided some kind of evidence, even if it’s an anecdote. You made a generalization with absolutely no evidence.
That’s fine if there’s a disparity but it’s not as common as your statement makes it seem.
Personal experience is not scientific or journalistic fact. As for providing evidence Google it. There’s lots of reputable sites that will tell you their build quality is inconsistent AF as well as they intentionally bully owners to accept shit.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 02:24
collapse
Personal experience is still evidence. It’s not objective evidence, which normally would be a problem, but you haven’t provided any whatsoever. “Google it” doesn’t serve as a replacement for it, either.
I’ll keep going if you need me to do your research for you. Not really because not my job to educate you but still.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 23:11
collapse
None of those say what you claimed.
Your first Lemmy link just links to an article that says 10 to 20 thousand vehicles. Considering they’ve sold millions, their rates are actually below lots of other manufacturers by volume. They’re not the best by any stretch but they are far from the worst, as you stated.
The 2nd is the same - “tens of thousands”. That means less than 1% of their cars sold.
The last link has nothing to do with build quality and its source is a LendingTree article based on insurance data that is specious. Their “safest” cars are vehicles that haven’t been produced in over 10 years. They clearly have issues with their data and even have a disclaimer at the top of the source.
If you’re going to be a condescending ass, at least get your information straight instead of falling right into the sensationalist bs that you’re complaining about.
Anything to avoid doing your own research eh? Will happily “fact check” my shit but God forbid you do your own work? I may be a condescending ass but at least my head isn’t up one.
It’s clear I won’t find anything outside of Elon telling you they’re crap for you to believe but by all means Consumer Reports and JD Power having them run of the mill or worse surely can’t be legit.
Oh wait. Elon has stated before their quality issues are shit. Of course you’ll dismiss it because “hurr durr it was years ago”
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 22 Dec 2023 17:01
collapse
I have done my own research and I own a Model 3. Your head clearly is up your ass because nothing that you’ve provided here disproves what I said - that the issues you’re discussing make up less than 1% of the cars they’ve sold. On top of that, Consumer Reports ranks the Model 3 as one of their top vehicles for build and reliability. The Model 3 lost that score in 2019 for less than a year because there were build issues with a small percentage of the cars being produced.
I’m not dismissing that they had a QC issues with a small amount of the cars. I never did dismiss that. I’m simply acknowledging that you’re making it out to be a far bigger issue than it actually was and their actual numbers are better than nearly every car maker out there for the number of vehicles they’ve sold (and in such a short period of time).
If you’re going to claim people have their heads up their asses, you’d need to pull yours out first to actually be able to see anything. On top of that, I don’t like Elon. So I don’t know why him saying anything would sway me in one direction or another considering he’s a serial liar.
Couple this with the ridiculous price point on the vehicles and you have apple cars so to that point I can understand the delusional obsession with the brand and supporting it
Every brand isn’t evangelized in the same way the cult of Elon pushed their golden goose.
Maybe, but ask an Alfa Romeo fans about the brand… they are way worse than the Tesla fans… 😉
They’re run of the mill or worse than industry averages.
Look, I can tell way worse things about Renault if I look at how my car came out, so ? And I would concede that Tesla is pretty new to mass producted cars. During the years I found many quality problems also with brand that are even more evangelized and have a way longer history.
Couple this with the ridiculous price point on the vehicles and you have apple cars so to that point I can understand the delusional obsession with the brand and supporting it
In Italy, a couple of models (Y and 3) are pretty much aligned with other brand’s cars of the same category, so they don’t seems to be that expensive. Or the other brands are too expensive.
Death@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 22:43
nextcollapse
Are you comparing with other cars at the same price range or cheaper cars?
I don’t know but based from my experience(since you also commented based on your experience), compared to some other brands although Tesla are better than some cheaper models of other brands, some are better than Tesla if you compared to the models with the same price range
Yes, some brands might be worse, but Tesla is not quite considered as being the best
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 23:40
collapse
Some cheaper, some the same price range.
What’s your experience based on? Do you own one? Or is this just third-hand?
I don’t care what it’s considered. It’s the best car I’ve ever owned and I’ve owned Fords, Dodges, VWs, Toyotas, and BMWs.
bizzle@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 00:55
nextcollapse
I heard that you don’t even have to open the door, you just slide in through a panel gap
linearchaos@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 14:50
nextcollapse
but my Tesla is the best ve
Sadly, you’ll never be able to say anything nice about any Musk properties here without massive downvotes by people who wouldn’t purchase anything from Musk.
The hardware (occasional bad quality control aside) is pretty awesome. My neighbor has one, His holiday update was an absolute hoot. They’re fast, clean, comfortable and are generally long lasting, low maintenance cars.
When you factor in EV and Price, there’s nothing that stands out as nicer from a pure hardware standpoint.
They could use a few more buttons inside. When they become disabled on the road, their requirement for you to have them do the towing and taking hours to do so sucks. Suing people over selling their vehicles second hand is pretty bad. No second party repairs allowed is a problem.
The real 800 lb gorilla in the room is the autopilot. The only redeemable thing about the auto pilot is that it mostly works and it’s pushing the tech forward. They have enough money to lobby congress to make it legal, all those 730+ wrecks and *42+ deaths as horrible as they are, will lead us to the feature being viable eventually.
*edit: found a newer source
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 14:54
collapse
I bought mine way before Musk became a right-wing nutjob asshole and wouldn’t buy another of his cars now unless something changed with their leadership structure.
That doesn’t mean that I can retroactively say the car sucks now. It is a fantastic vehicle. I don’t use Autopilot so that part doesn’t apply (tried it during a trial and wasn’t impressed) but, as a car, I have no qualms.
linearchaos@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 15:00
collapse
Yeah, I wonder if he became one, or if he was already one and just did a better job at hiding it.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 15:02
collapse
Probably a bit of both. Before the hair plugs, he probably did want to help the world. Now he just wants to help himself.
linearchaos@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 22:50
collapse
It’s like he had a really bad drug trip at some point and rewired some synapses
I love that you were downvoted, for all we know your previous vehicle was a Daewoo or something. A Tesla is likely a better quality vehicle than a Daewoo.
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 15:53
nextcollapse
Lemmy is pretty toxic. There are 5 opinions allowed on here and your personal experience is irrelevant.
Pretty much. I’m looking through the replies I’ve received, and one says, “You sound like a forbes article” with two upvotes and only one downvote. Why would I continue to contribute to this community if that’s how people are going to act?
dpkonofa@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 21:23
collapse
There’s a small center of people who are actually knowledgeable and courteous here. You just have to wade through the shit and sewage to get to it.
Edit for clarification. My comment was intended to a be a bit tongue in cheek and its because of this part of the top comment that i made what i thought was clearly a light hearted joke. Sorry if it wasnt so obvious
The article is less about informing and more about crafting a narrative that fits a preconceived notion, all while skating on thin ice made of half-truths and strategic omissions.
In response to the assertion of owning a Daewoo. I assumed your comment i replied to was also referencing this quote
Wow overreaction to a joke much? But thank you for blocking me i appreciate your sacrifice
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 22:14
nextcollapse
To be fair, Tesla / Musk spend a LOT of time talking about how they’re autonomous driving product are critical for reducing accidents and saving lives. Also, there isn’t a lot of public quantitative data around this major recall. That’s why they’re getting the headline.
Maybe autopilot is great, and it’s the non-autopilot drivers that are terrible, but right now, the brand has net accident rate that rivals a company that sells massive rolling blind spots to people who love Calvin pissing stickers.
Landmammals@lemmynsfw.com
on 19 Dec 2023 22:16
nextcollapse
They also don’t make any adjustment for fault. Tailgating a Tesla is just a bad idea, they brake insanely fast.
asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 22:34
collapse
Tailgating anyone is a bad idea.
Landmammals@lemmynsfw.com
on 20 Dec 2023 01:19
collapse
Yeah, but tailgating a Tesla just hits different
Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 23:27
nextcollapse
Last time a garbage clickbait hit-piece like this pissed me off, I looked into the crash statistics myself and found Tesla vehicles were around 1/80th the average crash ratio per capita.
I’m sure this is somewhat skewed by the kinds of people driving them versus the average work vehicles and clunkers out there, but still, it just feels absurdly false to claim Teslas even approach the highest crash rate.
And even the sketchy “study” not even endorsed by the site it’s posted to, then linked by Forbes, then says Ram vehicles as the highest crash rate (lol), so it’s wild that Forbes goes on to say it’s Tesla at the top spot.
Llamadramas@lemmy.world
on 19 Dec 2023 23:44
nextcollapse
Per capita means nothing in this situation.
argarath@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 11:50
collapse
Comparing with the per capita means nothing here, you need to compare with other car companies, as comparing to the per capita is like comparing the number of lung cancer deaths to the number of all deaths, of course it’s going to be a very small number, but when you compare with other cancers then you can see that lung cancer is one of biggest killers amongst cancers
chitak166@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 14:45
nextcollapse
Forbes is shit and I wish people would stop taking them seriously.
Spaceballstheusername@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 14:49
nextcollapse
How exactly could this study give a concrete reason for the higher than average crash rates?
limelight79@lemm.ee
on 20 Dec 2023 15:43
nextcollapse
When this was posted yesterday, I brought up issues with the sample selection (not random) and universe the “study” looked at (people using one of those sites to shop for insurance), and while I think most understood my point, some people got upset at me “defending Tesla drivers”…
NZV65572@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 05:37
collapse
Thank you. This is exactly right, it’s a hit piece designed to get people who already don’t like Tesla all worked up… and it worked remarkably well.
Holy F… this image is from an accident couple of years ago near Baarn, The Netherlands. My brother in law was present at the scene as a fireman. Took them several hours to put out the battery fire. First time an accident ruptured the batteries and no one knew how to handle this type of fires yet.
stewsters@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 15:20
nextcollapse
I blame the touchscreen first ideology. Give em some physical buttons that you can feel without taking your eyes off the road.
That and the sheer power can make accidents happen faster than you can react.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
on 20 Dec 2023 23:19
nextcollapse
I hear VW is putting buttons back in.
buddascrayon@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 00:35
nextcollapse
This is a very good point. The more a person is forced to take their eyes off the road, the less safe they become as a driver.
cordlesslamp@lemmy.today
on 21 Dec 2023 01:02
nextcollapse
Those cars with only touchscreen terrify me. I don’t even dare to turn down the AC in the EV car I drove last month when I feel a little cold because it would took THREE precision taps (small UI buttons) at DIFFERENT locations on the screen just to open the Climate Control screen. I have to pull over just to adjust the fan speed, smh.
The dashboard is also a fucking screen with multiple tabs that I have to “scroll” through with a knob on the wheel.
I hate the fucking thing the entire time I’m driving it.
babypigeon@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 02:27
collapse
I don’t understand how using a cell phone while driving is a violation in most places, but using a touchscreen as the dashboard is is just fine. Whaaaa …?
littlecolt@lemm.ee
on 20 Dec 2023 19:18
nextcollapse
Is it possible that there’s a large overlap between idiots who are bad at driving and the type of people who buy Teslas?
SupraMario@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 19:27
nextcollapse
Yep, and the fact that a ton of people who get these cars legit think they will drive themselves…
GladiusB@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 21:09
collapse
Does this statistic account for actual sales? I wonder if there are so many accidents because there are so many. I’m not a fanboy or anything. I am just curious how this was calculated.
Otkaz@lemmy.world
on 20 Dec 2023 22:32
nextcollapse
It says per 1000 drivers
GladiusB@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 02:01
collapse
Correct. But how many thousands are there? And in relation to what percentage of all Teslas compared to all other brands with similar models. Do I believe it? Absolutely. Is it a good statistic? It’s a good start.
While I love to jump on the anti-Elon bus, I have to query: the highest accident rates, or highest accident rates as a percentage of vehicles on the road?
If you have 10 Tesla cars on the road, and there are 2 MGs on the road, and 2 Telsas and one MG crashes, then what? 20% of Tesla vs. 50% of MG, but also that could be framed as ‘double the number of Teslas crash compared to MGs’ or ‘Tesla has the highest accident rate of any auto brand’.
OrteilGenou@lemmy.world
on 21 Dec 2023 05:03
collapse
Good question
Tesla drivers had 23.54 accidents per 1,000 drivers. Ram (22.76) and Subaru (20.90) were the only other brands with more than 20 accidents per 1,000 drivers for every brand.
threaded - newest
But Tesla always says the opposite.
regulators who don’t trust FSD are KILLING people because it’s so safe -Elron
THE JUDGE IS THE PEOPLE OF EARTH!
now please excuse me while I, free speech absolutist Felon Musk, go and intimidate videos showing how shitty Autopilot and FSD off of the internet.
I smell last well tonight with John Oliver
I have been following Musk’s insanity for years now, and I am glad that Oliver covered him, but he could have been soooo much more scathing while being absolutely factual.
His relatively moderate criticisms of Musk reminded me that a whole lot of libs and tech bros are in his demographic.
You can’t apparently tell them Rocket Jesus is not going to save us and is infact a contemptible racist fascist mad man whose entire persona is a fraud and has done nothing but defraud all his investors with insane claims he hasnt delivered on in nearly a decade without making his audience too depressed, I guess.
The fact that Ram drivers are a close second is hilarious. I guess there is some truth to all the jokes about Rams being driven by aggressive idiots.
Aggressive drunk* idiots. Statistically.
At least Tesla owners can blame it on the computer. 🤣
“It appears the fault was located between the drivers seat and steering wheel, sir”
Good ole close the ticket with message “PEBKAC”
What was it? 25% more likely to have a DUI record?
1 in 22
thedrive.com/…/ram-2500-drivers-have-the-most-dui…
I think there might be something to be said here for some potential selection bias. Are Tesla drivers like ram drivers, overly aggressive idiots but with the added layer of being relatively new tech?
More boringly , maybe its selection on the circumstances too. For example maybe ev's tend to drive more in urban environments, more urban may mean more collision opprtunities per time spent driving.
Of course ram is a farmers vehicle is desgned for rural use, so must rarely be seen in built up areas. /s
edit: having glanced at the cited article - theres no obvious mention of any risk adjustment, the measures seem to be simple ratio of crashes per driver. No obvious control for whether the sub-population spend more or less time driving.
Rate per - place-specific-risk adjusted person-hour would work better.
As often with things like risk, it really helps to be able to do a multidimensional analysis. See if vehicle type/brand is significant after controlling for as many circumstantial factors and exposure related factors as you can reliably observe.
I assure you that large obnoxious trucks are a status symbol for many idiot right wing boomers and gen x, who take pride in daily driving a truck for their commute into, inside, and outside of cities.
They also complain about traffic, while simultaneously doing everything they can to under or unfund public transit, because they are literally incapable of understanding that adding more lanes to highways does not actually reduce traffic.
EDIT oh NO i missed the /s.
Oh well lol.
hah, no bother.
Take any excuse to vent.
Fortunately for me I don't live in USA so these things are still a bit of a rarity, and are quite impractical in my town's, compact and heavily pedestrianised town centre.
Sounds like yoy've a plague of them over there.
They’re impractical in US town centers too. Drivers of these often live in suburban and rural areas and act like “omg city = CRIME and those people”, and if they come into the city, get frustrated because their giant POS vehicles are difficult to park as they’re terrible at maneuvering (drivers and the truck) and don’t fit in many parking spaces.
This is so common that when I see the rare one that can actually drive and park well in a city I actually stop being angry and switch to being impressed.
I'm sure some truck drivers are very good at it, if they have to drive large trailers often for instance. But a lot of the time their giant trucks can't even fit into a parking spot without taking up more than one space.
Yep. You say plague, I say smooth brained consuumor zombie apocalypse.
Seems like around me most of the big truck douches are probably 45 or under. Don’t think it’s limited to just boomers or gen x.
Yeah, in my observation, it’s young men with money to burn, or they want to appear that they have money to burn.
This is true, there is a whole thing with truck dealerships being immediately adjacent to military bases and housing.
Don’t forget complaining about gas prices while driving a 17 mpg vehicle.
At that point is seems like a good idea to replace human drivers.
Exactly, bring in much more public transportation. It would solve so many problems.
Oh definitely! I barely drive my car these days.
I am still waiting for the inevitable country music song about a broken hearted cowboy whose self driving car leaves him for another man.
Weird Al should be all over this.
Saw this on Lemmy a few weeks ago
(Verse 1) Sitting in the cab of my old pickup truck, Memories rollin’ by, like the miles we used to clock. Drove through the sunset, with you by my side, Never thought a metal heart could take me for a ride.
(Chorus) We were a highway love, wind in our hair, Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair. But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck, My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Verse 2) We hauled our troubles down those lonesome roads, Your engine hummed the tunes, while our story unfolds. Loaded up with laughter, and baggage too, Little did I know, you had a route of your own to pursue.
(Chorus) We were a highway love, wind in our hair, Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair. But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck, My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Bridge) I miss the way your headlights cut through the night, The hum of your engine, our rhythm just right. But now the road is empty, just echoes of our song, You found a new destination, I guess I got it wrong.
(Verse 3) We parked under stars, shared secrets in the dark, But now it’s just silence, an abandoned truck stop. I’m left with memories, and a tank full of regret, A self-driving heartbreak, I’ll never forget.
(Chorus) We were a highway love, wind in our hair, Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair. But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck, My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Outro) So here I am, parked on this lonely track, Wishing you’d come back, but you won’t look back. You rolled away, with gears that don’t feel, Left me stranded, at the crossroads of steel.
YES!
Fuck, I actually have a decent singing voice, no guitar though.
Lets find someone with a guitar and make this a stupid spotify single or something.
I read that as Weird Artificial Intelligence. Probably because of the context, since it never occured to me to read it like that before.
Saw this on Lemmy a few weeks ago
(Verse 1) Sitting in the cab of my old pickup truck, Memories rollin’ by, like the miles we used to clock. Drove through the sunset, with you by my side, Never thought a metal heart could take me for a ride.
(Chorus) We were a highway love, wind in our hair, Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair. But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck, My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Verse 2) We hauled our troubles down those lonesome roads, Your engine hummed the tunes, while our story unfolds. Loaded up with laughter, and baggage too, Little did I know, you had a route of your own to pursue.
(Chorus) We were a highway love, wind in our hair, Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair. But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck, My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Bridge) I miss the way your headlights cut through the night, The hum of your engine, our rhythm just right. But now the road is empty, just echoes of our song, You found a new destination, I guess I got it wrong.
(Verse 3) We parked under stars, shared secrets in the dark, But now it’s just silence, an abandoned truck stop. I’m left with memories, and a tank full of regret, A self-driving heartbreak, I’ll never forget.
(Chorus) We were a highway love, wind in our hair, Haulin’ dreams together, an inseparable pair. But now you’re gone, and it’s just my luck, My darlin’ left me, a self-driving truck.
(Outro) So here I am, parked on this lonely track, Wishing you’d come back, but you won’t look back. You rolled away, with gears that don’t feel, Left me stranded, at the crossroads of steel.
Where I live Audi’s drivers are the worst. It’s like they are for losers that would like to do some posturing but can’t afford a Mercedes and their frustrations manifest themselves in their stupid driving style.
They don’t have a Mercedes because the EQS is not aspirational, as MB recently declared in relation to the lackluster sales of the series.
There just expensive and brands expect people to fork out crazy amounts of cash for these cars.
The Forbes article seems to be citing numbers that are now a few weeks out of date. They cite that Tesla drivers have 23.54 accidents per 1,000 drivers and Ram has 22.76. If you go to their source link you’ll see that the more recent numbers are Tesla: 31.13 and Ram: 32.90.
www.lendingtree.com/…/brand-incidents-study/
Ram in MA is 64.44 and I want these fucking things outlawed.
Read the source more carefully
Accidents only. Worst driver counts DUIs a d fines as well.
Why does Massachusetts have such aggressive drivers? That seems like a large deviation for such a small state
It doesn’t it has a shit ton of ice and snow
Maybe in the Berkshires? The Boston area doesn’t get to much snow, and I would bet that is where most of the accidents are.
It’s mostly urban though. 7 million isn’t that small and it shouldn’t affect something expressed as a rate anyway.
I moved here and am still asking that question myself. Only in mass do people honk if you dare to stop for a stop sign.
It’s it the Ram that’s the problem, or the driver that also likes to cover the Ram in Infowars bumper stickers?
I had a friend years ago with Dodge Ram van. He said, “it says Dodge in the front because that’s what you’re supposed to do when you see it coming and Ram in the back because you didn’t read the warning on the front.”
I wonder what that says about my Dodge Sprinter…
Worth noting that “Ram” is now its own brand, divorced from Dodge, and they only make 1 vehicle, while other trucks are sold as part of the Ford and Chevy lineup. So it’s probable those other vehicles are bringing up the safety ratings of, say F150 and Silverado.
“If you can’t Dodge it, Ram it”
I see why Stellantis spun Ram into its own brand now.
“I am driving a lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK”
"My lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK has BLINDING WHITE LED headlights positioned EXACTLY at EYE LEVEL. "
“I am currently TAILGATING you in the RIGHT LANE even though you’re going TWENTY MILES AN HOUR over the speed limit and the LEFT LANE is OPEN.”
“There are MONSTER ENERGY and FOX RACING stickers on the rear windshield of my lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK.”
“There are PERFECTLY CLEAN mud tires and MASSIVE CHROME RIMS on my lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK.”
“I make THIRTY-ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS a year and thought that that was a WISE FINANCIAL DECISION.”
“I bring cases of BUD LIGHT to girls at high school parties while my wife and children are at home.”
“My lifted DODGE RAM TRUCK has a GUN RACK which holds the AR-15 that I bought at WAL-MART.”
Because a bunch of idiots take their hands off their steering wheel and think Elmo’s car is 100% safe.
That’s probably because Elon’s literally been trying to sell their autopilot as fully autonomous for at least 7 years now.
History of their self-driving claims
They’ve been convince of it by that very man.
Source: www.lendingtree.com/…/brand-incidents-study/
Wonder how many drivers of each brand they actually have, that would very much sway the numbers if they have smaller numbers of some brands insured.
This sounds like less of a “study” and more of a top ten list for page views.
Yeah, their “safest” list top 3 were all dead marques; Mercury, Pontiac, and Saturn. They definitely have some sampling issues.
The right source for this kind of stuff is the NHTSA’s database, but you can’t manufacture juicy headlines from that.
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.
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.
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
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 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
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?
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.
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.
It takes months and months in the UK. The tests are pretty strict.
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.
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.
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.
vox.com/…/us-car-deaths-year-traffic-covid-pandem…
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.
Also: theguardian.com/…/bmw-subaru-and-porsche-drivers-…
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?!
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.
It literally is from the pandemic. And no, I’m not saying that prior to the pandemic Newton’s 2nd law of motion didn’t apply, and you know I wasn’t. Stop being purposely obtuse.
I said quoting driving stats during a time of unprecedented and unusual driving conditions should not be touted as being reflective of all time.
You said fun cars should be banned. You clearly do have an issue with them.
Dude, everything I quoted were generic facts about speeding and accidents. Why do you think that because the article was written during the pandemic those things only apply during pandemic? Do you really have such serious reading comprehension issues?
They were explicitly talking about how people drove and had incidents during the lockdown period. Read what you posted.
The hilarity in saying I’m the one with reading comprehension issues.
Apologies for my late reply, I was busy driving my sports car on public roads, having a blast.
This only applies during the pandemic? What about the part about “any car safety strategy”? Sorry but if you have problems understanding a short, simple sentence then we don’t have anything to talk about.
Nice try. But we both know what your comment said
Not exactly representative of normal driving, is it? We aren’t in lockdown, and traffic exists.
Must make you absolutely seethe that sports cars crash the least.
It honestly is hilarious. You’re crying behind your phone screen at this imaginary danger. People enjoying driving, oh no 😥😥
What a wet wipe lmao
You know what a spike is? Apparently not.
You’re getting warmer, good boy
The fact there was a spike means there was a significant increase during lockdown.
So in other words, not representative of non-lockdown driving. But you know this, that’s why you specifically chose that article.
I’ve already demonstrated that the safest cars on the road are almost all sports cars. Keep crying about it.
I think you’re just jealous that you don’t have one.
You’re pretending, right? I mean you can’t be this stupid… Or maybe?
“Increase” means that the problem existed before the lockdown and still exists after lockdown. If you really think people were speeding only during pandemic and deadly car accidents are ‘imaginary danger’ your and idiot. Keep enjoying your tuned up BMW. It just further confirms my theory that fast cars are for stupid people.
WOOOOOOOOOW you are so smart!!! Speeding wasn’t invented in 2020!!!
Never said that. Stop being stupid.
You deliberately quoted lockdown driving conditions and presented them as normal, which they aren’t.
Bye bye dipshit. I’ve got some driving to do in my actually fun to drive car. You can just whimper in the corner like the sad little loser you are. Maybe when you pluck up the courage to you can drive your deathtrap Prius.
Sports cars are the safest cars on the road, and it makes you fucking weep 😂
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.
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.
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.
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.
If you’re uncomfortable driving, get yourself a bus pass. Problem solved.
A hit dog will holler…
I'm not looking forward to the day a tesla cyber truck hits someone. That's gonna be a grisly scene in the right conditions.
I wonder if it’ll pass safety regs outside of the US
No.
AFAIK they won’t even try to homologate it.
It will most certainly pass driver safety regs but absolutely not pedestrian safety. I’m sure they knew that when they designed it.
yeah pedestrian safety is what I meant, thanks
Look Ma, no hands!
A friendly reminder that road safety advocates recommend against the use of the word “accident” to describe car crashes, because it downplays the fact that many crashes are preventable, either by better safe road design or by the drivers being more responsible with with 2 tonne machinery they are operating.
Relevant clip from Hot Fuzz
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Relevant clip from Hot Fuzz
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
First thing that came to mind, honestly thought it was the quote at first.
I’ve actually never seen the movie. I just know that it’s a widespread view among people who focus on road safety.
Most news articles I can find dealing with this issue, like this one seem to focus mostly on the idea that one driver may be mostly at fault. Which is true and definitely part of the equation, but personally I’m even more focused on the ways in which the road design itself may have been a contributing factor. When you have high speed roads that also have a large number of driveways and side streets (i.e., a “stroad”), higher numbers of crashes are inevitable, and can be avoided by better design. Same with when you create bike lanes with no separation, or separated but giving cars high speed ways to turn across them at intersections. The design of that street is a significant contributing factor, and calling crashes an “accident” lets the designers and the politicians who signed off on it off the hook.
No, it doesn’t. Accidents are just things that weren’t intended to happen
If calling something an accident let people off the hook for their responsibility in the situation then people wouldn’t go to jail for car accudents
It’s not about the dictionary definition of the term. It’s about the subconscious effect your choice of language has on how people think about things. When you call something an accident it gives people the signal that there was nothing that could have been done, and so nothing does get done. There’s no pressure on politicians and engineers in most of the anglosphere to do any of the things that would actually improve road safety. Indeed, a lot of the time when they do try to make our roads safer, you see fearmongering and NIMBY opposition against the idea.
Changing the language is one small step in helping to make our roads safer by making it clearer that making them safer is something we need to be concentrating on.
You are clearly mixing up the phrase “an act of God” with “accident”
The former implies nothing could be done and is said after accidents, but the latter is what we’re discussing and it does not imply that at all
An insanely popular saying is that “regulations are written in blood” after all
Go back and reread the comment that you just replied to. Because nothing at here is even remotely related to it.
The only way it would affect “how people think about things” is if people don’t understand what “accident” means. Which is what happens when people like yourself intentionally spread that sort of disinformation.
If it isn’t intentional then isn’t it by definition an accident?
If I break my leg while mountainbiking it seems a bit unreasonable to claim that it wasn’t an accident because mountainbiking is an extreme sport and this could’ve been avoided if I was knitting instead.
I’m speeding through a school zone at 60km/h… I didnt INTEND to kill anyone, but i didnt see the crosswalk and mowed down a bunch of pedestrians.
This is not an accident. Entirely preventable. Intent doesnt matter
The vast majority of car collisions are entirely avoidable.
It’s still an accident. Just look up the definition. I’d wager to say most accidents are entirely preventable as well, but that’s not what determines whether something was an accident
This is quite literally the opposite of the truth. You should consult a dictionary.
E: if any downvoters want to point me to a definition from a legitimate source that says “accident” means “not preventable” and doesn’t mention intent, I will delete this comment in shame.
Otherwise 🖕
It’s partly about it being preventable, but mostly about it being expected.
The expected outcome of drunk driving or speeding through crosswalks is hitting someone. It’s preventable by not driving drunk or not speeding.
A careful driver in the Netherlands killing a cyclist in a city center on a 20mph road is unexpected and fairly surprising - that would be a true accident. A drunk driver hitting someone on an American stroad is depressingly normal. It’s hard to call it an accident.
In aviation, an intentional accident is still an accident. A suicidal pilot can deliberately crash an airplane, and it’s still considered an accident.
Which “road safety advocates” are those?
“Accident” simply means it was not intentional and has absolutely nothing to do with preventability.
Yeah, that’ll fix it!
I have a hard time seeing why the average person should have a zero to 60 in the sub 6 second range. People fucking suck at driving.
A coworker of mine was recently bragging about their new electric mustang and its zero to sixty time. “Have you ever gone zero to sixty?” was my only response. Of all the facts and figures, 0-60 has you to be one of the least important when buying a car.
Rolling to 75 is more relevant in MA where onramps to highways are 50 feet long, but 0 to 60 is correlated.
Only up to a certain point. My Kia Rio has a 0-60 of like 16 seconds… overtaking even on a clear road sucks.
The car is perfect otherwise, but I’d definitely want much better acceleration in the future.
My last car was like that and then every time I borrowed my dad’s mercedes I’d constantly do stupid unecessary overtakes just because I could. It’s a moral hazard - I don’t think a faster accelerating car is safer because people drive those differently.
Of course you have to hold yourself back, but where I live there’s plenty of really nice stretches of road where you can overtake. But with my car while I’m accelerating some guy in an Audi or a BMW already decides to overtake from the back… overtaking with a better car feels much less stressful and safer.
Let me guess, automatic transmission? I have a manual Rio and I can push it in half the time in third gear. Not redlining anything, just less conservative shifting.
Nope, manual, I’m in Europe. But 75 PS Diesel with 6 gears. Redlining doesn’t help much when it comes to accelerating.
Especially diesel engines.
Being able to accelerate to highway speeds quickly is useful when merge lanes are short. We have a car that kind of struggles with that, and it’s pretty scary sometimes merging into 70 mph traffic. Normally it’s not a major issue, but one ramp we sometimes use is designed poorly - it’s curvy, so you can’t accelerate to highway speed until after the final curve, then it’s up a hill, and of course there’s a short merge area into traffic that’s usually doing about 70 mph. So, there, I REALLY miss the power our previous car had. It’s a frustrating experience.
When I got my license back in the early 2000s I got taught very economical driving, generally choosing gears to keep rpm low, use the motor brake to decelerate before traffic lights, such stuff. Then it was time to get on the Autobahn, and the instructor just said “Forget everything I taught you, now it’s safety first: Floor it in 3rd gear, merge in third gear, once you’ve found your position switch directly to 5th you’ll be fast enough.”
If I’m not mistaken that was an Audi A4 TDI so… 15 seconds 0 to 100? Maybe about 10, don’t remember the displacement. Of course, merging is more like 30 to 120, directly onto the second lane. With a Punto you’re kinda lucky if you get to 80 by the time the on-ramp ends and barely get into the right-most lane (where you’re probably staying).
It is a relative performance indicator that is easy to measure and verify.
Of course you rarely ever actually do 0-60, but it gives you an idea of how well the car accelerates relative to other cars. So in a way 0-60 is like a cinebench score for cars.
This is purely my anecdotal experience, but Tesla drivers appear to be some of the worst drivers on the road. There are stereotypes of drivers. BMW’s never signal their turns, Jeeps think they can drive basically however they want including on shoulders, and Tesla drivers are oblivious to any kind of spatial understanding of the road around them.
The number of times I shout “your car is supposed to be smarter than that!” As a Tesla does something like, without signaling, whips around me and into oncoming traffic to pass a stopped city bus is staggering.
I came here to say exactly that. You can blame Musk for many things, but the cars are only as good as their drivers, and they are some of the worst I’ve seen indeed.
The design of the car isn’t that great. No physical buttons so you have to constantly look away from the road to interact with any car feature. Wipers, mirrors, climate control, music, etc… the blind spot and side views are on the display. Need to merge left but have to look right to see if it’s clear.
They do have mirrors, you know… The lack of physical buttons isn’t that bad either. You shouldn’t be fucking with things while driving whether there are buttons or not.
You pull over to adjust the AC?
I don’t adjust anything unless I’m stopped. Red light, stop sign, etc. Also, at this point, I can reference all that stuff without looking at the screen so, even if I needed to, I don’t have to take my eyes off the road.
It’s nonsense that Tesla drivers are somehow less safe because of the screens considering every other driver is staring at their phones.
Oh yeah, and this definitely doesn’t cause problems. There’s not a single law that forbids this. And yet, looking and messing with a larger version is supposed to be ok? I am not talking out of my ass. I have driven Teslas and it is distracting whether you agree or not. It was the first reason i decided i wouldn’t buy one unless there were buttons. In fact, some people are starting to mod them to put physical buttons back in.
I never said it doesn’t cause problems. The issue is the inattention whatever the device.
And I own one and it’s not distracting if you don’t let it distract you. You are talking out of your ass.
You might be able to adjust things without taking your eyes off the road fairly safely if you had some sort of tactile feedback. Like a knob to adjust the volume of the radio or another knob or lever to adjust the heat/AC. I doubt you could do so just as reliably and without accidentally hitting a different button with a touch screen without looking at all, but even if you can, most drivers couldn’t.
There’s also a learning curve to contend with. Put me in a car with a standard stereo that has a volume knob, and I’ll be able to use it without looking pretty quickly and without error. Put me in a car that has only a touch screen with a UI that is different from every other manufacturer’s UI, now I have to memorize where buttons are. And until I have it memorized, I have to look.
It isn’t at all reasonable or feasible to suggest you shouldn’t adjust any control unless you’re stopped. That completely ignores the fact that the US is comprised of many highways and interstates that won’t have any stops for hours under the right conditions. You’re telling me that you exit the freeway just to adjust the AC? That’s a lie and you know it. And again, even if that’s the case for you, it isn’t the case for most drivers.
Cars marketed to the masses should be designed for use by the masses and should be designed with safety in mind. These are 80 mph tin cans that can do a ton of damage and need to be treated as such. Especially modern EVs with batteries that burn with the light and temperature of 1000 suns when damaged.
Also “every other driver is staring at their phone” sounds like a disingenuous way to suggest that taking your eyes off the road is okay because everyone else does it too. Yes, lots of people do, but lots of people do not, and just because some do, that doesn’t mean we should design our cars in a way that requires the same level of inattention.
If you’re driving, you shouldn’t be doing anything that distracts you from driving. Period.
Right. Which is exactly why removing tactile knobs and buttons is stupid.
Messing with knobs is still a distraction. You’re simply arguing for lesser distractions when the point is that, if you’re driving, you should be focused on driving and not on buttons, knobs, screens, or phones. It’s literally the first lesson of driving and yet you’re pretending like there’s some safer way to be distracted. It’s a load of bollocks.
No, you keep your eyes on the road, and use you’re sense of touch to adjust the radio, temperature, etc. Hence the benefit of tactile knobs. Boy you really are somethin lol.
Oh, it’s you. First off, it’s “your”. You’re not to be taken seriously.
Second, using your “sense of touch” is still a distraction. You’re not focusing on the road if you’re trying to feel your way around your car. As mentioned before, you’re moving the goalposts attempting to argue a degree of distraction. I’m arguing that any distraction is a negative.
Yeah that’s stupid, you need to be able to change your heat controls due to weather conditions, that’s the reasons tactile knobs work.
Yeah, because the weather conditions change suddenly while driving. You adjust everything before you start driving and you focus on driving while you’re driving.
… Yes? Are you a real person or a child lol?
I’m an imaginary straw man that you made up in your head. It doesn’t go from being 72 degrees out to being freezing where you need to change your “heat controls” suddenly. Stop being disingenuous.
Your can see the blind spot in the physical mirrors?
Properly positioned mirrors don’t have blind spots.
Edit: Any modern vehicle with functioning mirrors should not have blind spots: pages.cs.wisc.edu/~gdguo/driving/BlindSpot.htm
And yet pretty much every car has a blind spot detector of some sort. Pretty weird for something that’s never needed.
People don’t set up their mirrors properly. If you’re turning your head to make a lane change, you’re doing it wrong. Also, the visibility in a Tesla is much, much better than it is in most cars. Not having an engine in the front of the car allows for more angle in the pillars that would normally cause blind spots.
Using the touch screen as a pain, for sure. However, nearly all commands on the touch screen can be accessed via voice commands from a button on the steering wheel. In practice, the need to use the touch screen while driving (other than to monitor your speed and cruise control settings) is practically zero.
I blame the design that forces you to keep your eyes off the road. Making a left turn? Don’t look left, take your eyes off the road and look down at the screen on your right to see the left lane warning. Wipers need adjustment? Take your eyes off the road and look at the touch screen because there are no buttons.
Now that there is data, maybe the highway administration can force Tesla to put driver safety ahead of esthetics.
I’m sure that’s one contributing factor, but I’d bet that the biggest issue is that the car is made to go fast. People who drive faster end up in more accidents. Hence why Audi / BMW drivers are also stereotypically bad drivers - they are both brands with a high-acceleration profile.
The “faster=more accidents” thing is actually kind of up in the air. Like with many things, it’s a bell curve, but driving a few MPH over the limit appears to be safest. Supposedly because people who drive a little bit faster tend to pay more attention. Sure, there are the outliers like the people who weave through traffic at 100MPH, but only a few over the limit appears safest.
Some of the highest accident rates actually come from people who regularly go under the limit. Because those are the people who are geriatric, distracted, texting, drunk, high, etc. and are going slower because they want the extra stopping distance or don’t want to be pulled over for speeding. Plus there’s all the hazards associated with going slow on the highway, when you’re only doing 45 MPH and traffic is flying past you in the next lane at 75. At that point, you’re practically a moving road hazard.
Could it be the that nervous and less confident drivers are the ones that drive at or slightly below the speed limit?
Maybe it’s not that driving faster is safer but worse drivers drive slower to attempt to compensate.
I posit that the amount of potential acceleration may be more correlated than the raw speed. Accelerating quickly makes you less predictable to the drivers around you and reduces the control you have over your own car.
As far as I can tell that’s not at all the case in Sweden where I live, in fact geriatric or slow drivers are very rarely involved in accidents. Intoxicated drivers are extremely rare compared to most other countries. See e.g. www.itf-oecd.org/sites/…/sweden-road-safety.pdf which says “Inappropriate speed is one of the leading causes of road crashes”. You can find more research saying similar things on Google, e.g. that for every 10 km/h increase, the risk of an accident increases by 33 percent.
But it’s not just a matter of having a high overall speed. It’s also how quickly you accelerate / break. BMW/Audio/Tesla drivers have a high capacity for acceleration and they use it e.g. to overtake in situations when others wouldn’t. I suspect the cause/effect is the other way around though: if you’re a reckless driver who doesn’t care about safety, you’re more likely to choose a car that has a lot of power.
That’s the reason why my friend wants to get one even though he dislikes Elon. One of the faster ev cars out there.
The wiper thing used to be an issue for sure, thankfully now you can use the wheel buttons to do it. Also for turning you really don’t need to look at anything. I’m not saying people don’t but you don’t need to. There are still a few things that are somewhat annoying mainly the defrost/defog but I feel like I look the same amount as I did in my other car to push those buttons as well
The voice commands work as well as anything. It’s much easier to push the roller button on the steering wheel and say “turn on defroster” than to manipulate controls (either on a touch screen or non-touch screen interface)
Voice controls are great, unless you have a strong accent it doesn’t understand, a speech impediment, or mute. Which are all things that normally wouldn’t disqualify you from driving a car. Which I feel like should disqualify them from the discussion of physical vs tablets myself.
Fair enough, mate.
Yeah all the priest drivers switched to tesla’s, I’ve seen them so many times getting in the highway going to slow and merging across all lanes just to cause traffic
Fixed based on experience. I really do feel like these are scarlet letters to being thundering assholes, and they communicate with their king like wifi routers.
It’s reflective of their larger view/“understanding” (or lack of understanding) of the world/how it all works.
Fun fact, the Lending Tree analysis listed in the article showed that Ram drivers have the “highest incident rate,” which looks at accidents, DUIs, speeding, and other traffic citations. This makes them the statistically worst drivers. BMWs have honorable mention as the having the highest DUI rate.
I am both shocked and pleased that Ford did not make this list. Seriously, the brand with the most sold pickup truck doesn’t make a list for just about everything?
I’d bet a significant chunk of the F150’s sold every year go to fleet operators which would skew the saftey numbers.
And fleet operators have stricter requirements. Get in an accident? They want a piss test on the spot, and if you refuse you’re done.
Including requiring regular driver training refresher courses.
Musk: Woo, we’re number 1!
NPC drivers. In the 90s it was Toyotas, then entry level Nissans took over in the mid 2000s … And now we got Tesla
Oh this is hilarious. First, I own a Mercury and a Ram, so I’m apparently the best and the worst at having accidents, DUIs, and tickets.
But I think there’s an inherent terrible bias in the data: “Our latest analysis uses QuoteWizard by LendingTree insurance quote data…” In other words, people who are regularly shopping for insurance. Probably because they have high rates, so therefore they are looking for better rates. Why do they have high rates? Probably because they have more crashes, DUIs, and other tickets than the average drivers.
I doubt that most people with normal rates go changing insurance companies regularly.
You should always rate shop on a regular basis. There is no such thing as loyalty to an insurance company. I cannot think of any corporate entity with less loyal than an insurance company.
Yes, there are a million things I should be doing, if you watch the financial advice. But no one really has the time to do all of those things. And you have to watch that you’re getting an actual quote from the company, not just a pre-quote that can be revised later. It’s a lot of time and work.
Also, with the horror stories I hear about other companies, I’m inclined to stick with mine even if they are a bit more. When our car was totaled a few years ago, they offered exactly what similar condition cars of the same make and model were selling for in our area, plus tax and fees, minus our deductible. We had done the research, and I was bracing for a fight, so I was stunned when they opened with that amount, then added the taxes and fees. We literally could have taken the check we received, plus our deductible, and replaced the car with one in similar condition and mileage (I wish we had, because I really dislike the car we bought instead). I see the horror stories people post about other companies, and I’m always thinking, “yeah, that wasn’t my experience.”
Here’s where the loyalty part comes into play: if the insurance company doesn’t like something, they can and will drop you or refuse to renew your policy depending on relevant laws. They might have decent service and pay claims without much of a fight, and those are incredibly valuable service qualities. So you’re making the right decision for yourself if that’s what’s important to you and that’s the experience you’ve had.
But if all things are equal, there’s no good reason to pay a higher premium for the same service. You better believe that insurance company will drop you in a heartbeat if their analysis indicates that they won’t have the level of profit from you that they want. As a for-profit business, that’s their perogative just as much as it’s yours if you want to switch.
I tend to agree with you by the way. Loyalty comes in many forms. I might not be loyal to a company per se. If they’ve consistently provided me with a level of service that I’m satisfied with at a price that I feel is appropriate for the value, then I’m not going to go through the trouble of checking prices and switching carriers every year just to save a few bucks. And there’s the hassle of being hounded by a half dozen companies that now have your contact info after you requested quotes. That’s all a big no thanks from me.
It’s not really loyalty, per se…it’s that they seem to be offering a reasonable price and good service, so I don’t see a reason to change. If some other company offered much better rates for the same coverage and service level, I’d switch. But I’m not spending hours and hours each year to find I might save $50/year either; that’s a waste of my time.
Does this argument only apply to Tesla drivers?
Because the other cars were taken and compared from the same data source.
I have no idea why you think that would only apply to Teslas.
Because your whole argument is seemingly based on that assumption.
You say it’s no wonder that Tesla is last when they used that data.
As far as I can see they don’t mention Tesla at all.
I think you have my comment confused with another one, I didn’t mention Tesla at all.
No, definitely not.
Can you tell me what your argument was then?
Seems like a lot of hot air with zero sense if you now claim you didn’t mean tesla. I mean even if you meant tesla, as I already reasoned above.
In both cases your comment only makes sense as a misdirection or an honest mistake. But you’re definitely not acknowledging it, so I would lean to the former.
I have no idea where you’re getting Tesla from.
My comment was that there is likely bias in the data because it’s people applying to one of those sites that compare insurance costs. I think it’s likely most people who are doing that regularly are people in high risk groups - their insurance rates are high, so they’re looking for some other company. Their insurance rates are high because they are risky drivers.
The data are not based on crash statistics, which would be the most reliable indicator, or tickets issued, or any other similar results. The people using this tool are not randomly selected, either.
In other words, it’s anecdotal data at best, and possibly biased toward people with high premiums because of issues in their driving record.
Again, the conclusion still makes sense if you only use this data set.
Tesla drivers are the worst offenders compared to the worst offenders.
your logic to jump to their defence doesn’t apply here.
I’m not defending Tesla drivers or anyone else. In my very first sentence, I noted that own one of the vehicles (Ram) that is supposedly the second worst, and I also own one of the vehicles that is the best (Mercury).
I’m simply pointing out that this dataset may have serious flaws and shouldn’t be used to draw real conclusions.
Your obsession with Tesla is clouding your reading ability or something.
People are allowed cars they don’t have skills to use.
Shouldn’t Teslas be easier to use with all that automation? If not, what’s the point of automation?
OTOH, I’m all for raising the requirements for getting issued a driving licence, it’s just then we have to make a way for people to make do without driving.
No it makes it harder. I know that sounds crazy but it’s very true. Basically humans are very bad at paying attention to boring things. The automation gives the feeling that the computer has it and the human is not ready and aware when the computer doesn’t have it. Leading to lots of easily avoidable accidents.
There has been some really good reporting on this over the last year or so. If you want to learn more.
This is something Japanese train companies figured out awhile ago for train engineers. Because driving locomotives can be really repetitive, they train engineers to do hand signals and call out actions out loud even when they’re alone in the car in order to help keep the brain active and focused.
To add another factor:
People buy muscle cars and over accelerate because they can’t handle the power of those cars
EVs accelerate much quicker than normal cars, Tesla’s more than normal EVs
So if someone isn’t using the automation they’re still susceptible to the classic “overshot into or over something” situation
They also think because the car accelerates quickly it will also stop as quickly. Same as idiots that drive too fast in the snow.
Tesla’s self-driving and safety systems are clearly half baked compared to competitor and other vendors.
Quite frankly, driving skills standards in the entire American continent are a joke to begin with. I’ve seen current requirements in Canada (“Wut?” bad), united states (teehehehehe bad) and Mexico (the aristocrats joke bad) and I know going south it only gets worse.
I got my driver’s license 25 years ago in the Netherlands and had to take classes for a number of months, learn an entire book of rules, had a one bour theory exam where typically only 60-70% would pass at the first try, then I had to take 30 hours of practical lessons with an instructor in a special car, and take a practical exam with an examiner where the rulr is pretty much “one mistake and you’re out”. I learned how to drive in rain, what to look out for, hoe to drive in show, how to manage losing control of your car, etc etc etc… I was instilled with andeaddaly respect for what s car is and what it can do in seconds to ruin lives for good.
Comparing that ti anything they teach today in the Americas, it’s just a sad joke.
That doesn’t sound all that different from where I learned in Maryland. You had to go to a class for a few months that had both theoretical and practical portions. You had to do 40 hours of supervised driving outside of class with an adult. The 40 hours covered a range of situations. Then there was a driving test. Which I passed fine for the car but failed for a motorcycle because I started about a foot back from the stop sign on the course so I didn’t pull up and stop at it. Doh.
Adult being a friend or family member? I’ve heard about that, and it always struck me as strange, as people aren’t driving instructors, driving instructors are driving instructors.
I think it was somewhere around 6 to 10 hours with a certified instructor. The 40 with an adult was yeah a family member or friend. The quality definitely depended on the adult. My parents took it seriously and made sure we completed the lessons, but I had friends whose parents just signed the form without providing the additional instruction. It was 20 years ago so details are fuzzy.
In California, the first 20hr or so, it had to be a licensed instructor if you were under 18. An adult would just need to register for a learner’s permit and just need any licensed driver in the front passenger seat
My drivers ed class in new england pretty much focused only on educating teenagers about how brutally dangerous drunk driving is. It was frustrating at the time because I felt like I didn’t even learn how to drive but given how where I grew up as a teenager you had to go drink in sketch places which usually involved driving (what a dumb way to structure society ughh) because of the car hellscape I grew up in…. I honestly think those drivers ed teachers spent their time well.
Driving a car isn’t so hard so long as you take the perspective that you have one rule, don’t hit other people and always remind yourself that you can’t assume other drivers will do anything they should on the road. Drunk driving was VERY hard not to do as a bored teenager trying to hang out with other bored teenagers. I could have died, my friends could have died. Idk, so I can’t be too upset at my drivers ed class in retrospect.
In Canada we still have to pass a practical test that covers that stuff with pretty strict requirements for passing. Just how you gain the knowledge and ability to pass that test is up to you. It’s pretty normal to take a driver’s Ed class if your friends or family don’t have time to trach you themselves. And the drivers Ed class is what you described as what is mandatory in the Netherlands. We just don’t put people through it automatically if they have already learned all that somewhere else.
Having said that, there are some small towns that are known as places to go if you want an easier driving test, as they just don’t have enough things around to properly represent everything you should know while driving. But if it turns out you do actually suck at driving, you’ll lose your tiny amount of demerits on your beginners license pretty fast and then you are legally required to pass a driver’s Ed and defensive driving class before being able to reclaim your license. It’s not perfect, and I do think the one major thing we are missing is periodic re-testing. In Canada people are a little less resistant to “greater good” social policies, but there is still resistance. It’s tough to pass stuff that lowers or is perceived to lower freedoms, but they do still occasionally pass.
And as I’m sure is the problem everywhere, people want all kinds of services, they just don’t want the government to have the money to pay for those services. And also they only want the services they personally currently benefit from, everything else can be cut until they personally need it, then it was a tragedy that no one stood up for it.
How can you write an article like this with zero citations? They mention Lending Tree, who is a mortgage originator and that’s it.
They’re going off of Lending Tree’s internal insurance quote data. That link about the lending tree quote showed this, “Our latest analysis uses QuoteWizard by LendingTree insurance quote data…”
Insurance rates are usually determined by risk associated with the car and driver and the value of the car. The lending tree analysis showed they were looking at several factors as well as accidents. They said also that Ram drivers have the “highest incident rates,” meaning they lumped together accidents, DUIs, speeding violations, and other traffic citations. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has seen a Ram.
The actual source is on the first sentence, this is just a tabloid repost
Yeah that wasn’t there earlier. They must have added it.
Even the Lending Tree “article” has a disclaimer at the top that they haven’t reviewed or approved any of it.
I know its super pedantic, but the word “accident” really grinds my gears in this context.
The proper terminology is “crash”… accident infers that there is no fault or misconduct.
You can intentionally crash into someone which would not be an accident but if you crash into someone not on purpose, then it’s an accident.
Exactly, so the use of “crash” would generally be far better for these sorts of articles.
“Accident” starts addressing intentions or expectations.
We could just add easily refer to them as “vehicular violence” but then we’d end up distorting things in another direction.
It doesn’t have to be on purpose. Accident implies that something was just a freak occurrence beyond anyone’s control. You can’t fix accidents. You can fix crashes.
If you’re driving negligently - drunk driving, not paying attention, etc then it’s not an accident.
If it’s due to bad road design, then it’s not an accident.
Wouldn’t an accident still involve “fault”
While many accidents do involve fault, there are scenarios where an accident can occur without anyone being legally at fault (mechanical failure, natural disasters). It does excludes malicious intent though. in the specific context of commercial motor vehicle regulations in the US, the term “accident” is defined in the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR) under 49 CFR § 390.5
Good point, so does Accidents exclude “accidental crashes with fault”
Colloquially, accidents are random events without intention or fault.
That’s why there’s a push to use neutral terms like “crash” that don’t imply that the “accident” was just a random accidental mistake.
And fault is often a bit of a misnomer. Many crashes are the result of bad design, but the courts would never say “this pedestrian fatality here is 40% the fault of whichever insane engineer put the library parking lot across a 4-lane road from the library but refused to put a crosswalk there or implement any sort of traffic calming because that would inconvenience drivers”.
Trucking companies have switched the terms in the same way, since “accident” lightens responsibility. Even a not-at-fault crash could have been preventable often times, which is what they try to emphasize.
One of the many ways trucking companies avoid liability by putting all responsibility for fuck-ups on the driver.
youtu.be/puK5CwThaq4?si=nsj3gOrdMN8dmn4p
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/puK5CwThaq4?si=nsj3gOrdMN8dmn4p
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Good bot
This scene immediately popped into my head.
relevant www.simonandschuster.com/books/…/9781982129682
The official UK Police term is Road Traffic Collision, or RTC, which does not imply fault or otherwise.
What made you want to become a policeman-officer?
The mom or the sister?
Car caused trauma
*In the USA
The 1958 Edsel is the reigning champ in Cuba.
dang, just checked for my country (data from 2019), look out for those priuses! I guess the handling the GTA 4 analog had was pretty accurate, it’s like a brick on the road ^^
Oh fuck off lending tree. Made up nonsense.
Edit: Why am I getting downvoted? Oh, Tesla bad? Yeah, Tesla bad. LendingTree bad too. It’s spin and propaganda for the mortgage industry. They publish clickbait “research” using non scientific metrics to reach whatever conclusion they set out to reach, usually it’s just shitting on blue states. They frequently reach the opposite conclusions of credible researchers with no explanation as to why they created their own formulas when perfectly valid, standard formulas exist.
This whole app has some very obious collective slants, somehow worse than Reddit.
Counterpoint: it’s impossible to ascribe a collective agreement on anything to a groups of individuals, unless we take a vote.
Leftists go to Lemmy because Lemmy is FOSS, ie leftist, and was made by a Communist. Reddit mostly has liberals.
I don’t know how many of these collisions are with pedestrians, but I have nearly stepped out in front of one twice just because they’re so quiet.
My 1994 Ford Probe was so quiet you couldn’t tell it was running most of the time even standing next to it, and there are plenty of ICE cars around today with even smaller and quieter engines. Most people learn to look both ways before crossing the street when they’re toddlers.
My car is so quiet I have to rev it to double check if I’ve started it sometimes.
Maybe they’re sentient and actively suicidal.
Or homicidal: theonion.com/children-gather-at-edge-of-playgroun…
This reminds me of a cheesy Dutch movie from the 80s called The Lift in which an elevator becomes self aware and starts murdering people…
It would be a brilliant way to knock people off.
Terra Ignota used carefully calculated automobile tragedies as a pretext for civil war.
A plane crash was used as the pretext for the civil war/genocide in Rwanda
And doesn’t his newest atrocity, long overdue and underdelivered/overpriced, also have a front end like a knife?
My guess it's kind of like when you get solar panels and you're tied to the grid you feel a little better about using electricity willy-nilly, and so you use more electricity with solar panels than without.
I'm willing to bet that Tesla drivers were told that this vehicle will prevent them from getting an accident and so they are driving worse because they feel like they don't have to be as on guard as they do behind a non Tesla vehicle.
Could also be things like fast acceleration pulling the numbers up. A lot of people are going to gun it if you give them something that can do 0-60 under 4 seconds. Those are numbers that were relegated to expensive sports cars a decade ago, not a grocery getter.
Is this speed special in Tesla cars or all consumer electric or normal cars? Why waste money to give a grocery getter that much extra power
Most internal combustion cars tend to hover around 8-9 seconds with a 0-60. Something with some kick was often considered sub 6 seconds.
Telsa prides itself on fast acceleration. Their slowest car is in the 5’s, but many hover in the 3-4 second band, which is quite quick. Telsa’s slowest base model car is often performance that many brands would have for their top performing internal combustion car.
It is often easier to make electric cars that accelerate quickly, but not every brand has decided to make their EV soccer mom cars launch like a corvette. A base Kia EV6 will 0-60 in 7.2s and Ford’s Mach E Mustang does 6.1s.
Ahhh, I suppose money factors in a decision like this?
i know many of you all just LOVE to hate on Tesla, it’s like the shit flavor of he year for hating and no doubt Elon’s shit fuckery is partially driving it, but honestly this is an absolutely classic Forbes piece of garbage. Firstly, it’s a masterclass in selective bias - focusing solely on Tesla while barely whispering about Ram’s near-similar accident rates. Classic move to sensationalize one brand over another. Then there’s the U.S. only scope, which conveniently ignores the global context which could paint a vastly different picture. The article kicks off with a ‘non-causal’ disclaimer but then spends the rest of the time subtly linking Tesla’s Autopilot to the high accident rate, without concrete evidence. It’s a bit like saying ‘no offense’ before offending someone.
The Tesla recall is mentioned, sneakily implying a connection to the accident rate, despite the lack of direct correlation. The article is less about informing and more about crafting a narrative that fits a preconceived notion, all while skating on thin ice made of half-truths and strategic omissions.
Huh, so like every single article nowadays, basically.
Two things are true. The article is garbage, but so are Teslas.
They’re not, though. Elon can suck it but my Tesla is the best vehicle I’ve ever owned and it’s not even close.
Ah yes a personal anecdote is 100% more valid.
That said, from what I’ve heard the big problem is the disparity of build quality. Some Tesla’s (like possibly yours) are built amazing. Some others are put together like shit.
At least I provided some kind of evidence, even if it’s an anecdote. You made a generalization with absolutely no evidence.
That’s fine if there’s a disparity but it’s not as common as your statement makes it seem.
Personal experience is not scientific or journalistic fact. As for providing evidence Google it. There’s lots of reputable sites that will tell you their build quality is inconsistent AF as well as they intentionally bully owners to accept shit.
Personal experience is still evidence. It’s not objective evidence, which normally would be a problem, but you haven’t provided any whatsoever. “Google it” doesn’t serve as a replacement for it, either.
lemmy.ca/comment/5795499
Also this -
lemmy.nz/post/4638562
Also this -
www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2023/12/…/amp/
I’ll keep going if you need me to do your research for you. Not really because not my job to educate you but still.
None of those say what you claimed.
Your first Lemmy link just links to an article that says 10 to 20 thousand vehicles. Considering they’ve sold millions, their rates are actually below lots of other manufacturers by volume. They’re not the best by any stretch but they are far from the worst, as you stated.
The 2nd is the same - “tens of thousands”. That means less than 1% of their cars sold.
The last link has nothing to do with build quality and its source is a LendingTree article based on insurance data that is specious. Their “safest” cars are vehicles that haven’t been produced in over 10 years. They clearly have issues with their data and even have a disclaimer at the top of the source.
If you’re going to be a condescending ass, at least get your information straight instead of falling right into the sensationalist bs that you’re complaining about.
Anything to avoid doing your own research eh? Will happily “fact check” my shit but God forbid you do your own work? I may be a condescending ass but at least my head isn’t up one.
It’s clear I won’t find anything outside of Elon telling you they’re crap for you to believe but by all means Consumer Reports and JD Power having them run of the mill or worse surely can’t be legit.
Oh wait. Elon has stated before their quality issues are shit. Of course you’ll dismiss it because “hurr durr it was years ago”
www.cnn.com/2021/02/03/business/…/index.html
Best of luck and enjoy your Tesla!
I have done my own research and I own a Model 3. Your head clearly is up your ass because nothing that you’ve provided here disproves what I said - that the issues you’re discussing make up less than 1% of the cars they’ve sold. On top of that, Consumer Reports ranks the Model 3 as one of their top vehicles for build and reliability. The Model 3 lost that score in 2019 for less than a year because there were build issues with a small percentage of the cars being produced.
I’m not dismissing that they had a QC issues with a small amount of the cars. I never did dismiss that. I’m simply acknowledging that you’re making it out to be a far bigger issue than it actually was and their actual numbers are better than nearly every car maker out there for the number of vehicles they’ve sold (and in such a short period of time).
If you’re going to claim people have their heads up their asses, you’d need to pull yours out first to actually be able to see anything. On top of that, I don’t like Elon. So I don’t know why him saying anything would sway me in one direction or another considering he’s a serial liar.
Which is basically true for every brand, not only Tesla.
Every brand isn’t evangelized in the same way the cult of Elon pushed their golden goose. They’re run of the mill or worse than industry averages.
consumerreports.org/…/who-makes-the-most-reliable…
jdpower.com/…/2022-us-initial-quality-study-iqs
Couple this with the ridiculous price point on the vehicles and you have apple cars so to that point I can understand the delusional obsession with the brand and supporting it
Maybe, but ask an Alfa Romeo fans about the brand… they are way worse than the Tesla fans… 😉
Look, I can tell way worse things about Renault if I look at how my car came out, so ? And I would concede that Tesla is pretty new to mass producted cars. During the years I found many quality problems also with brand that are even more evangelized and have a way longer history.
In Italy, a couple of models (Y and 3) are pretty much aligned with other brand’s cars of the same category, so they don’t seems to be that expensive. Or the other brands are too expensive.
Are you comparing with other cars at the same price range or cheaper cars?
I don’t know but based from my experience(since you also commented based on your experience), compared to some other brands although Tesla are better than some cheaper models of other brands, some are better than Tesla if you compared to the models with the same price range
Yes, some brands might be worse, but Tesla is not quite considered as being the best
Some cheaper, some the same price range.
What’s your experience based on? Do you own one? Or is this just third-hand?
I don’t care what it’s considered. It’s the best car I’ve ever owned and I’ve owned Fords, Dodges, VWs, Toyotas, and BMWs.
I heard that you don’t even have to open the door, you just slide in through a panel gap
Sadly, you’ll never be able to say anything nice about any Musk properties here without massive downvotes by people who wouldn’t purchase anything from Musk.
The hardware (occasional bad quality control aside) is pretty awesome. My neighbor has one, His holiday update was an absolute hoot. They’re fast, clean, comfortable and are generally long lasting, low maintenance cars.
When you factor in EV and Price, there’s nothing that stands out as nicer from a pure hardware standpoint.
They could use a few more buttons inside. When they become disabled on the road, their requirement for you to have them do the towing and taking hours to do so sucks. Suing people over selling their vehicles second hand is pretty bad. No second party repairs allowed is a problem.
The real 800 lb gorilla in the room is the autopilot. The only redeemable thing about the auto pilot is that it mostly works and it’s pushing the tech forward. They have enough money to lobby congress to make it legal, all those 730+ wrecks and *42+ deaths as horrible as they are, will lead us to the feature being viable eventually.
*edit: found a newer source
I bought mine way before Musk became a right-wing nutjob asshole and wouldn’t buy another of his cars now unless something changed with their leadership structure.
That doesn’t mean that I can retroactively say the car sucks now. It is a fantastic vehicle. I don’t use Autopilot so that part doesn’t apply (tried it during a trial and wasn’t impressed) but, as a car, I have no qualms.
Yeah, I wonder if he became one, or if he was already one and just did a better job at hiding it.
Probably a bit of both. Before the hair plugs, he probably did want to help the world. Now he just wants to help himself.
It’s like he had a really bad drug trip at some point and rewired some synapses
I love that you were downvoted, for all we know your previous vehicle was a Daewoo or something. A Tesla is likely a better quality vehicle than a Daewoo.
Lemmy is pretty toxic. There are 5 opinions allowed on here and your personal experience is irrelevant.
Pretty much. I’m looking through the replies I’ve received, and one says, “You sound like a forbes article” with two upvotes and only one downvote. Why would I continue to contribute to this community if that’s how people are going to act?
There’s a small center of people who are actually knowledgeable and courteous here. You just have to wade through the shit and sewage to get to it.
Yeah, and I need to get back to blocking people. The signal improved drastically when I was doing that a while back.
You sound like a forbes article
Edit for clarification. My comment was intended to a be a bit tongue in cheek and its because of this part of the top comment that i made what i thought was clearly a light hearted joke. Sorry if it wasnt so obvious
In response to the assertion of owning a Daewoo. I assumed your comment i replied to was also referencing this quote
.
Wow overreaction to a joke much? But thank you for blocking me i appreciate your sacrifice
To be fair, Tesla / Musk spend a LOT of time talking about how they’re autonomous driving product are critical for reducing accidents and saving lives. Also, there isn’t a lot of public quantitative data around this major recall. That’s why they’re getting the headline.
Maybe autopilot is great, and it’s the non-autopilot drivers that are terrible, but right now, the brand has net accident rate that rivals a company that sells massive rolling blind spots to people who love Calvin pissing stickers.
They also don’t make any adjustment for fault. Tailgating a Tesla is just a bad idea, they brake insanely fast.
Tailgating anyone is a bad idea.
Yeah, but tailgating a Tesla just hits different
Last time a garbage clickbait hit-piece like this pissed me off, I looked into the crash statistics myself and found Tesla vehicles were around 1/80th the average crash ratio per capita.
I’m sure this is somewhat skewed by the kinds of people driving them versus the average work vehicles and clunkers out there, but still, it just feels absurdly false to claim Teslas even approach the highest crash rate.
And even the sketchy “study” not even endorsed by the site it’s posted to, then linked by Forbes, then says Ram vehicles as the highest crash rate (lol), so it’s wild that Forbes goes on to say it’s Tesla at the top spot.
Per capita means nothing in this situation.
Comparing with the per capita means nothing here, you need to compare with other car companies, as comparing to the per capita is like comparing the number of lung cancer deaths to the number of all deaths, of course it’s going to be a very small number, but when you compare with other cancers then you can see that lung cancer is one of biggest killers amongst cancers
Forbes is shit and I wish people would stop taking them seriously.
How exactly could this study give a concrete reason for the higher than average crash rates?
When this was posted yesterday, I brought up issues with the sample selection (not random) and universe the “study” looked at (people using one of those sites to shop for insurance), and while I think most understood my point, some people got upset at me “defending Tesla drivers”…
Thank you. This is exactly right, it’s a hit piece designed to get people who already don’t like Tesla all worked up… and it worked remarkably well.
.
Crapy article. They miss used there own source.
Holy F… this image is from an accident couple of years ago near Baarn, The Netherlands. My brother in law was present at the scene as a fireman. Took them several hours to put out the battery fire. First time an accident ruptured the batteries and no one knew how to handle this type of fires yet.
I blame the touchscreen first ideology. Give em some physical buttons that you can feel without taking your eyes off the road.
That and the sheer power can make accidents happen faster than you can react.
I hear VW is putting buttons back in.
This is a very good point. The more a person is forced to take their eyes off the road, the less safe they become as a driver.
Those cars with only touchscreen terrify me. I don’t even dare to turn down the AC in the EV car I drove last month when I feel a little cold because it would took THREE precision taps (small UI buttons) at DIFFERENT locations on the screen just to open the Climate Control screen. I have to pull over just to adjust the fan speed, smh.
The dashboard is also a fucking screen with multiple tabs that I have to “scroll” through with a knob on the wheel.
I hate the fucking thing the entire time I’m driving it.
I don’t understand how using a cell phone while driving is a violation in most places, but using a touchscreen as the dashboard is is just fine. Whaaaa …?
.
Is it possible that there’s a large overlap between idiots who are bad at driving and the type of people who buy Teslas?
Yep, and the fact that a ton of people who get these cars legit think they will drive themselves…
Does this statistic account for actual sales? I wonder if there are so many accidents because there are so many. I’m not a fanboy or anything. I am just curious how this was calculated.
It says per 1000 drivers
Correct. But how many thousands are there? And in relation to what percentage of all Teslas compared to all other brands with similar models. Do I believe it? Absolutely. Is it a good statistic? It’s a good start.
It’s adjusted per capita. You can’t ask for better.
Does it include accidents by autopilot?
Lol you really think there are more tesla on the road than Toyota or Ford?
It all depends on where you live. So yea. More extensive research would be nice.
I can’t fathom any other reality.
Its like how red cars get more speeding tickets.
That’s actually a myth
That venn diagram looks like the mid point of an eclipse
letmegooglethat.com/?q=Tesla+build+quality+concer…
Don’t know why I bother you’re only going to continue mental gymnastics to further justify your head up your ass
Indeed
cnbc.com/…/tesla-blamed-drivers-for-failures-of-p…
this is a top-level comment but doesn’t seem related to the OP. care to clarify who it was that you were being bitchy to?
Lol good ol Lemmy misplaced my reply.
While I love to jump on the anti-Elon bus, I have to query: the highest accident rates, or highest accident rates as a percentage of vehicles on the road? If you have 10 Tesla cars on the road, and there are 2 MGs on the road, and 2 Telsas and one MG crashes, then what? 20% of Tesla vs. 50% of MG, but also that could be framed as ‘double the number of Teslas crash compared to MGs’ or ‘Tesla has the highest accident rate of any auto brand’.
Good question
lol, Ram isn't even a make (the make would be Dodge), but owners are such bad drivers that they have a category of their own.