Vehicle Weight and Fatality Risk for Sport Utility Vehicle???versus???Passenger Car Crashes

2002 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 751-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Mayrose ◽  
Dietrich V. K. Jehle
Author(s):  
Paul J. Carlson ◽  
Gene Hawkins

A study was conducted to determine the legibility impacts of freeway guide signs when encapsulated retroreflective sheeting is replaced with microprismatic retroreflective sheeting. The study included freeway guide signs mounted in an overhead position and exclusively illuminated with vehicle headlamps. A total of 60 subjects divided into three age groups participated in this nighttime study. All 60 subjects drove two vehicles, a modern sport utility vehicle (SUV) and a late-model passenger car. The findings show that microprismatic sheeting does provide statistically longer legibility distances than encapsulated sheeting. Overall, the improvement was 53 ft, or 9.5%. However, for the modern SUV, the improvement was much greater (78 ft) compared with the late-model passenger car (28 ft). The main differences are related to the evolution of vehicle design and specifications. Today’s United States citizens prefer large vehicles such as an SUV, pickup, and minivan. These vehicles also meet recently revised headlamp specifications. These two issues inherently reduce the amount of headlamp light retroreflected from the sign back to the driver. Unfortunately, these counterproductive trends show signs of continuing. Considering the increasing proportion of older drivers in the United States, it becomes even more critical that transportation agencies do all they can to increase overhead-sign luminance. The findings show that increasing overhead-sign luminance by switching from encapsulated retroreflective sheeting to microprismatic retro-reflective sheeting results in significantly longer legibility distances. The magnitude of the difference will continue to increase as long as the SUV-like proportion of the U.S. fleet continues to grow and headlamp specifications continue to direct less light toward overhead signs.


Author(s):  
King K. Mak ◽  
Roger P. Bligh

The appropriateness of test vehicles specified in NCHRP Report 350 was assessed, including ( a) whether the 2000-kg, three-quarter-ton pickup truck should continue to be used as a test vehicle, and if not, what replacement vehicle would be appropriate; ( b) whether the 820-kg passenger car should continue to be used as a test vehicle, and if not, what replacement vehicle would be appropriate; and ( c) whether another test vehicle should be added to the matrix—for example, an intermediate-sized passenger car. From the analysis, the following conclusions and recommendations were drawn: ( a) The three-quarter-ton pickup truck appears to be a good surrogate for the light truck subclasses. The recommendation is to keep the 2000-kg, three-quarter-ton pickup truck as one of the design test vehicles in the update of the guidelines for NCHRP Report 350. ( b) A potential problem is the availability of three-quarter-ton pickup trucks with standard cabs. An alternative design test vehicle may be an intermediate-sized sport utility vehicle, ( c) The availability of the 820-kg passenger car design test vehicle will be a problem within the next few years. The recommendation is to keep the current test vehicle as long as it is still readily available, or until the NCHRP Report 350 guidelines are updated, and to increase the curb weight to a level consistent with the curb weights of the two smallest passenger cars with reasonably high sales volume. ( d) The addition of a third design vehicle—for example, a 1500-kg intermediate-sized passenger car—to ensure that a roadside feature performs satisfactorily across the entire vehicle spectrum is highly desirable but cost-prohibitive. The addition of an intermediate-sized design test vehicle is therefore not recommended except in situations in which there is a perceived concern that the device may not function properly when impacted by an intermediate-sized vehicle.


Author(s):  
Kara Maria Kockelman

Light-duty truck classification allows manufacturers and owners to avoid a host of passenger-car regulations, including gas-guzzler taxes, safety standards, and more stringent emissions and fuel-economy standards. The distinct policies that govern light-duty trucks and passenger cars are described; the emissions, safety, and fuel economy differences that have resulted are evaluated; and the household use differences across such vehicles are investigated. The result is that when the average new pickup truck or sport-utility vehicle is compared with a passenger car, there appears to be an implicit subsidy of roughly $4,400 favoring the light-duty truck. When minivans are compared with passenger cars, this subsidy is estimated to be around $2,800. With more equitable vehicle regulations, it is likely that prices would more accurately reflect the true cost differences resulting from the use of these vehicles, causing light-duty trucks to lose some of their popularity or clean up their act.


Measurement ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 179 ◽  
pp. 109381
Author(s):  
Mohamed A.A. Abdelkareem ◽  
Lin Xu ◽  
Xingjian Jing ◽  
Abdelrahman B.M. Eldaly ◽  
Junyi Zou ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael W. Danyo ◽  
Christopher S. Young ◽  
Henry J. Cornille ◽  
Joseph Porcari

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document