They put in a tridion protection cell[0] and moved the engine to the back to offer SOME crumple at the front. The Euro NCAP rated it 4/5, IIHS rated it "good" but it later failed the partial frontal collision test ("poor").

A Smart Car likely would do alright in most collisions. Although it somewhat benefits from the large crumple zones of every other vehicle has on the road. If two Smart Cars collided head on, the results might be worse than if a Smart Car collided with any other vehicle type.

That all being said, just because Smart managed it, doesn't mean every small car is equally safe. Without the tridion cell and SOME crumple zone, it would be a much less safe vehicle.

[0] http://auto.howstuffworks.com/smart-car1.htm

I drive a relatively small car for the US, and it's about the minimum I would consider safe at 70MPH. But, if you are spending 98% of your time in the city then simply renting a larger car becomes very viable. You can rent a mid size SUV at ~600$ per week and for a longer vacation you can upsize for minimal cost. Further, if your flying somewhere your car becomes meaningless anyway.

PS: Remember a tiny electric could end up saving you 250+$ / month.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance_Institute_for_Highwa...

In Rural areas the opposite is true. High speed car vs car and car vs tree accidents are most common.

Though bigger doesn't equal safer. I remember someone else pointing out that large vehicles don't increase safety overall, they decrease it. If you consider two large trucks hitting each other is typically worse than two smaller passenger vehicles doing the same. It's only large truck vs small car that is slightly safer. Less than one might think because large vehicles tend to roll over more often.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnI-LiKCtuE

In its class (which only had 3 cars), the Mini was safer than the Smart but the Hyundai Accent was much much worse.

But there were lots of bigger cars that were at the same rating or worse:

* Buick Lacrosse 2WD

* Cadillac DTS

* Cadillac Escalade 4WD

* Chevrolet Camaro

* Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Ext 4WD

* Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Crew 4WD

* Chevrolet Suburban 1500 2WD

* Ford Expedition 2WD

* Ford F-150 Super 4WD 39

* Mercury Grand Marquis

* Toyota Avalon

* Toyota Tundra Crew Max 2WD

[0] http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Driver_DeathRates_sr5001_e...

A small car can be designed to prevent intrusion into the passenger compartment, but it can't do anything about the g-forces of the collision (which can seriously ruin your day...).

Not the only thing. Recall your high school physics. Crank through the basic motion equations for inelastic equations. The more massive object experiences less change in momentum. All things being equal, passengers of the more massive vehicle are going to experience lower g-forces.

Also, a little talked about statistic is that most vehicle fatalities occur in single car accidents. Turns out, even a big ol' SUV is more forgiving than a telephone pole.

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalit...

It seems like if you are in an accident, an SUV as a class is indeed safer (but not necessarily the largest SUV interestingly enough). But the other thing that this data doesn't seem to say is if one class of vehicle has a higher accident rate than another. Without that it's difficult to say for sure if one is safer driving around one type of vehicle or another.

BTW, just a reminder that pickup trucks are body-on-frame structure which is design for more towing capacity. Unibody structure on most modern cars and SUV's are safer in general. If you check this list http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/TSP-List you'll see pickup is worse than even compact cars in crash test.

The driver sadly died while the passenger went unscathed.

The next day, my Dad sold my sister's tiny, low-riding Saturn and got her a higher-riding CRV. I don't blame him, and now riding in low-sitting cars frightens me a tiny bit on the highways.

Well done, Superman, you just broke your girlfriend into three pieces with your arms.

Superman is supposed to be able to do that; that's one of the benefits of being beyond human is (for him). A literal reality distortion field is actually the best explanation for all of the exceptions to physics that happen around him; Lois passing in to that bubble while being saved is just one more thing on the list.

Isn't the real test how likely you are to be injured/killed per mile driven? Larger vehicles like SUVs might be safer if you are in an accident but that could be offset if they are more likely to actually be in an accident.

NB I have no idea what the answer is and I've driven everything from large(ish) SUVs to the old style minis.

Only some of these effects, e.g. less deaths from air pollution, apply to EVs though.

If your family is T-boned in an intersection by a drunk driver who ran a red light, are you going to say, "Well, at least the odds of that happening were very small, since she rarely drives!"

No, you're going to be dealing with serious injuries or possibly deaths and you're going to be saying, "I wish they'd been in a larger vehicle that was more survivable."

I was driving a Toyota Camry. If I'd been driving a large truck, I probably couldn't have avoided the crash.

When I buy a car, I want to know both how likely it is that I can avoid a crash (manueverability, stopping distance, ABS, etc) and how likely it is that I can survive one if it happens. Both are relevant.

Consumer Reports' 2016 Automotive Edition had a lot of discussion about car safety. Most of it was centered on technology that helps to prevent accidents or make them less severe. Eg, if your car detects that you're about to hit something (Forward Collision Warning) and has Automatic Emergency Braking, you might not hit it, or hit it at 30mph instead of 60mph.

That could save your life. To say that the weight of your car is a safety factor but stopping distance isn't is just silly.

Size is not the same things a weight. Crumple zones are what size buys you in modern vehicle design, and you don't have to have a heavy car to have nice big cushy crumple zones.

This discussion started about size, not weight.

Maybe you have extraordinary reflexes and could have accelerated out of the way, or slammed on the brakes, but the average driver? I think not. I'd like to have some serious steel and crumple zone between me and that motorist under those circumstances, and the tiny little electric buggy is probably not going to have the same amount of protection as a large SUV.

I'd sooner be in the light car with a chassis that doesn't get crushed into the cabin than a heavy car which does.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_r5UJrxcck I know which one Id like to be in..

Or you'll be the one running over a child (possibly your own) and you'll be wishing that your car was smaller or had better visibility as you reversed.

Making up unpleasant stories is fine, but at some point actual numbers and statistics are required, and everyone getting larger and larger cars in some kind of arms race seems to have obvious downsides.

Could anyone imagine a a smart camera, with a display. The camera/computer would assist the driver in seeing better at night. Would calculate the odds of a police cruiser behind you. Would warn of potential danger, like an animal on the side of the road. Would warn you if you are being followed. Would be so well designed, you still used your rear view, but kicked in at the needed times? Would map out likely spots police hide? Could even be tied into physiological body sensors? "Today is not a good day to drive? Watch out for ice. Watch you temper?"

The camera/sensors would have to be easily installed, like a stereo?

I would buy one if programmed right, and the cost was justifiable.

Then again there's someting beautiful about a simple chrome rear view mirror. A driver knowing they need to drive with all senses fully engaged, with no assistance other than experience, and good coordination.

Also, the probability I'm interested in is not the survivability in an accident, it is the total survivability over my lifetime, discounted by some percentage for cost etcetera. In your argumentation, everybody should drive around in tanks on the off chance that somebody else might get drunk. In reality, nobody does that and tradeoffs are made. Have you ever tried driving in an old European city in an average (American) SUV? You literally would not fit in most parking spaces, let alone fit in some of the smaller streets.

It was quite a fun experience, but in the future I'll rent a smaller vehicle.

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/driver-death-rates

Compare the death rates of small, tiny, and midsize sedans (2011 data is the latest).

Then look at large SUVs. Huge difference. "All vehicles" = 28. Most of the large SUVs are single digits, most of the smaller cars are well above 28.

Curiously, Ford Expedition 2WD is above average and is an exception. I would love to understand why because it's a huge vehicle. The Ford Expedition 4WD is way at the other end, 5 deaths. Perhaps it has something to do with how people drive, or some flaw in how it handles.

Most trucks are pretty safe, but the Ford F-150 4WD has above average death rates, and is the most popular single model of pickup truck. I wonder if this is because lots of people buy this truck who don't really know how to drive a truck.

Anyway, some interesting data to explore there. Although as I pointed out, there are some outliers, in general the data lines up with the contention that larger vehicles are safer.

No, it's probably because it's a truck with a body-on-frame chassis instead of a unibody chassis like any modern vehicle, and was designed for towing and load-hauling rather than crash protection. If you want crash protection, you need to buy a vehicle with a modern chassis that was expressly designed for it. Same goes for the Expedition. And yes, handling could be a factor too: these vehicles have horrible handling and can't avoid accidents the way a good-handling vehicle can, and will frequently roll over.

And just try doing a panic turn (to avoid something) in a tall SUV and see what happens.

You can't just ignore the laws of physics. Center-of-gravity is an important thing.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/02/rollover-101/inde...

Depends on the engineering I suppose. The Smartcar which is just as tiny has a very high score in test crashes. Of course its twice the price of the car you quote and owned by Mercedes and gets all of Mercedes safety know-how. Until that Chinese car gets proper accident testing, I guess we won't know, but I think its safe to assume China's cheaper/faster/copy culture doesn't lead to safer products.

IIRC The smart car beats the Hummer in crash test ratings....