I kind of wonder if what we Europeans call SUVs is really what a lot of thew people in these threads think about.

For example, I am going to buy a new car in the next 2 years, so looking a bit, and two cars I might be choosing behind would be the:

Peugeot 3008/5008, seen as a SUV in the Netherlands: 67% Pedestrian Euro NCAP score: https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/peugeot/3008/5008/26581

Peugeot 208, smaller car, same brand, same year: 56% https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/peugeot/208/38543

Or the original posters BMW X3: 70% https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/bmw/x3-/-x4/33285

Otoh, the BMW 3 series: 87% https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/bmw/3-series/38531

Full electric BMW i3: 57% https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/bmw/i3/8863

So what I am trying to say is: yes, "SUV" in general are likely to be worse for pedestrians, but there is so much variability, that "picking a SUV" doesn't mean much about safety.

I understand the concern but it is not based on comparable data.

A few things to take into account:

- The 67℅ in the test in 2016 for the Peugeot 3008 is based on a Pedestrian Impact performance.

- The 56% of the test in 2019 for Peugeot 208 is based on a Pedestrian Impact Performance _and_ ADAS pedestrian detection +Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) performance

An important point with Euro NCAP is that typically the tests are always getting harder year on year to account for the expected technological development. Such that the same car would progressively score less if it were to repeat the Euro NCAP test year on year.

I hope this helps your concern.

In 'standard height' cars the first impact is usually on lower limbs or torso and secondary trauma to the head will happen on the bonnet or windshield.

In SUV's, pedestrian and cyclists are much likely to suffer head trauma on first impact.

My point is, in the horrific scenario that this should happens the survival rate will always be higher for non-SUV vehicles (ideally with longer bonnets and pedestrian friendly deformable structures).

Do you have any data about pedestrians killed by SUV’s vs other car shapes?

"At speeds in excess of 40 miles per hour, 100% of the SUV incidents studied resulted in the death of a pedestrian, compared to 54% for crashes involving cars at this speed."[0]

"The GHSA reported that the number of pedestrian deaths involving SUVs increased by 50 percent from 2013 through 2017, while the number of pedestrian deaths caused by passenger cars increased by 30 percent over that same period. That reflects booming sales of SUVs and the fact that pedestrians are much less likely to survive the impact of an SUV."[1]

[0] https://brandonlegalgroup.com/iihs-study-suvs-present-a-high...

[1] https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2019/02/28/pedestri...

Study size of n=79, amazing.

I assumed you asked in good faith so I will try to ignore the unnecessary sarcasm.

I hope a Cochrane meta-analysis meets your evidence based statistical standards.[0][1]

It's physics, a higher front-end means primary blunt force trauma to the chest and head (specially for children and cyclists), were by primary we mean the first and highest force trauma, and by chest and head we mean trauma to vital organs.

I am not judging if this type of vehicle is your preference but demanding scientific rigor without accepting the physics involved just feels like a cognitive dissonance. I am not arguing that higher front-end vehicles cause accidents, I am arguing that pedestrian are less likely to survive upon impact compared to other vehicles.

The only reason these vehicles are not banned from city centres is purely because they are a marketing and economical success not because of lack of evidence on their dangers.

[0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20146143/

[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33147075/

I have not yet seen scientific evidence, just some correlation which doesn't bother to account for increased driving, increased smartphone and headphone use, etc. Further there doesn't seem to be any indication of SUV sizes, nor inclusion of other large vehicles. Even article itself says it should be taken with grain of salt.

All that said there is little doubt that lower car would be safer for peds. But all I asked is some evidence and you provided some garbage.

I don't think we ought to ban trigger-vehicle-of-the-year just because you feel like it. First I totally think we should discourage driving in cities, no matter the car. Pedestrian only streets, public transport, bike lanes is 100% my vibe. If you really want smaller cars in cities - make smaller parking spots. Make it inconvenient to use them (which is already case in European cities).

So answer me - what is your fetish with SUVs in particular and why you dance around fact that there are ton of other more dangerous vehicles on the road?

p.s. again your second links are irrelevant again - one is tiny sample size, other is about trucks.

> First I totally think we should discourage driving in cities, no matter the car. Pedestrian only streets, public transport, bike lanes is 100% my vibe.

There we have common ground.