Tesla has the highest fatal accident rate of all auto brands, study finds

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a62919131/tesla-has-highest-fatal-accident-rate-of-all-auto-brands-study/

by MBCook • 2 years ago

308 375 2 years ago

So, why are Teslas — and many other ostensibly safe cars on the list — involved in so many fatal crashes? “The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior and driving conditions, leading to increased crashes and fatalities,” iSeeCars executive analyst Karl Brauer said in the report.

legitster5• 2 years ago

In a big picture, this makes sense. You can load the cars with safety features, but it doesn't change the fact that these cars are very heavy, very fast, and loaded with features that reward distracted driving. In the US at least, the top killer of drivers are trees on the side of the road.

ToucanLoucan5• 2 years ago

In a bigger picture, cars are a bad solution to the problem of transportation at scale, and really always have been. As safety features go up, complacency goes up, and to be blunt that's combining with the fact that drivers are getting consistently worse overall at the skill anyway.

Between EV's that are much, much heavier than ICE cars and SUVs/Trucks that are much larger than they need to be, vehicles themselves, despite having more safety features than ever, are also better at killing that they've been at a long time too.

We really need to get serious about improving our transportation infrastructure.

randomdata4• 2 years ago

We really need to get serious about improving our transportation infrastructure.

Better yet, we really need to consider urbanization. That way everything you need is right there by your own two feet. No need for any extra special transportation at all.

It seems people have a burning desire to live the rural lifestyle, though, even in so-called cities. I'm not sure we can actually overcome that pressure.

heywire• 2 years ago

I would wager that most people don’t want to use public transit regularly. I know I certainly don’t.

toast0• 2 years ago

In a bigger picture, cars are a bad solution to the problem of transportation at scale

They're not a great solution to transportation at scale, but they're pretty good at small volume point to point traffic.

There's not enough people going my way on most of my trips to make transportation at scale worthwhile. Ferries work well for part of many of my trips, but I can take a car on the ferry to deal with the lack of scale on either side.

I could sometimes take a bus to the ferry, walk to light rail and take light rail to the airport. But the bus only runs during commute times, so that impacts viable flight times, and the walk to the light rail got pretty sketchy in the past several years and light rail itself can be sketchy too.

Most of my cars run fine any time of day, although peak traffic is annoying, and I'm dealing with lighting issues on one so I can't take it out unless I know I'll be home before dusk.

thebruce87m3• 2 years ago

much, much heavier

https://thedriven.io/2024/05/03/are-evs-really-much-heavier-...

full electric versions are only around 10% to 15% heavier than their direct ICE equivalent

I don’t think “much, much” should be used when we are talking 10-15%. This will mislead people. There are outliers of course.

littlestymaar• 2 years ago

You can load the cars with safety features, but it doesn't change the fact that these cars are very heavy

Being heavy is actually a safety feature of sort (but just for the people inside the car, it increases overall fatality).

Gigachad• 2 years ago

Trees are anchored to the ground. Being heavier just reduces your ability to stop.

postalrat• 2 years ago

It ain't working then because these heavy cars tend to have more fatalities.

legitster5• 2 years ago

In insurance they call it the "law of lugnuts" - bigger cars have better survivability in direct collisions.

However, most traffic fatalities do not come from direct collisions. They come from driver hitting immobile objects.

Smaller, lighter cars take less kinetic energy with them around corners, are easier to steer and avoid obstacles, and are more likely to stay upright when leaving the road.

dpats• 2 years ago

In the US at least, the top killer of drivers are trees on the side of the road.

Do you have a source on that?

legitster5• 2 years ago

From 2016 to 2018 an average of 19,158 fatalities resulted from roadway departures, which is 51 percent of all traffic fatalities in the United States.

https://highways.dot.gov/safety/RwD

kevinqi4• 2 years ago

Aside from the distracted driving part, which is real, there are two physical aspects of the model 3 that I find to be safety issues as well-- the two front windshield beams are thick and add a sort of blind spot, and the side mirrors don't give you great field of view.

nomel3• 2 years ago

Same with my older Toyota. They stuffed airbags in them, which is nice, but I've had several times where an adult on a bike is completely obscured, with my passenger having to scream "stop!". After the second time, I now bob my head like a maniac to look around them.

Can't wait for displays on pillars, to make them appear transparent.

GuB-42• 2 years ago

It is a problem with most modern cars, and it is actually for safety reasons. These beams have to support the entire weight of the car in case it flips over in order to protect the occupants.

legitster5• 2 years ago

Also, the instrument cluster is located in the center, outside of the driver's direct view. And most of the important controls for the driver do not have tactile buttons.

BLKNSLVR4• 2 years ago

Same with both of my Mitsubishis. There's a roundabout near where I live that, when approaching it from one angle, the "beam" on the right hand side of the windshield totally obscures the whole road leading to the roundabout from another angle.

I have to shift in my seat to crane around to see if there is oncoming traffic I have to give way to.

They're both 10+ year old cars.

tzs6• 2 years ago

I've never been in a Tesla so don't know if this would work, but you might try getting a small convex mirror (often called a "blind spot mirror") like these [1] at Amazon. I linked Amazon for convenience. They should also be easy to find locally at anyplace that has an auto section like Walmart, or auto parts stores like NAPA, O'Reilly, and AutoZone.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/s?k=blind+spot+mirror

akira25014• 2 years ago

and loaded with features

"Ludicrous mode."

the top killer of drivers are trees on the side of the road.

It's actually alcohol and drugs. Which is the reason those drivers find themselves in the trees.

legitster5• 2 years ago

If you have driven around rural roads in the US, you realize it does not take alcohol to leave the road. A moment of distraction is all it takes to get into a ditch.

https://highways.dot.gov/safety/RwD

SoftTalker2• 2 years ago

What makes sense to me is the top 3 cars:

Tesla - autopilot that really isn't, gets fooled in many situations, driver lulled into not paying attention, can't react quickly enough when the computer bails, and ends up driving into a bridge abutment at 75mph.

Kia - cheap cars built to minimum safety standards driven by young people who aren't very experienced drivers.

Buick - cars driven by geriatrics whose declines in vision and reaction speed probably should have resulted in their licenses being revoked five years ago but who still insist on driving themselves.

vikingerik• 2 years ago

I'd also venture that the profile of Tesla drivers is also a factor along with those other two brands. I'd be pretty sure that Tesla owners collectively drive more aggressively than the average car on the road. Teslas aren't being driven by soccer moms and careful grandmas.

bsder• 2 years ago

Buick - cars driven by geriatrics whose declines in vision and reaction speed probably should have resulted in their licenses being revoked five years ago but who still insist on driving themselves.

It takes until 85+ years old to match the accident frequency of the 16-25 years old cohort. Should we ban young adults from driving?

The reality is that the drivers tests should be MUCH more stringent for all cohorts. The reality is also that not having a car in the US is a horrible handicap.

So, we are stuck in a very suboptimal spot until self-driving cars come online.

jvandonsel• 2 years ago

Simple solution. Cut down all the trees on the side of the road.

You’re welcome.

Mountain_Skies2• 2 years ago

In the US at least, the top killer of drivers are trees on the side of the road.

A decade or so ago the Georgia Department of Transportation tried to do away with the trees between streets and sidewalks because of so many fatalities coming from collisions with trees. Clearing out an "automative recovery zone" as they called it likely would have saved lives of some people in vehicles but of course it would increase the danger to pedestrians, who might or might not be present at that moment. Lots of trade offs in these types of analysis and not all of them are always immediately obvious.

gamblor9563• 2 years ago

In the US at least, the top killer of drivers are trees on the side of the road.

This is false. Your cited link (https://highways.dot.gov/safety/RwD) clearly demonstrates that head-on collisions cause more fatalities than tree+utility pole collisions combined.

grecy• 2 years ago

How can any reasonable person know if any story about Tesla (good or bad) is actually factual and useful, or is just a story told from a particular angle to manipulate the stock price for gain?

While many says it's the ultimate meme stock, I also can't help thinking it's the ultimate manipulation stock - it seems some people desperately want it to go down while others desperately want it to go up.

robterrell• 2 years ago

analyzed data from the U.S. Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS)

Maybe not for the "reasonable person" but government data is available and if you are here you likely know some statistics, so go nuts:

https://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

and

https://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data/fatality-analysis-report...

Lendal2• 2 years ago

Now Elon will possibly in charge of making that government database disappear.

thejazzman2• 2 years ago

I've had one since 2015 and so many issues. When I share them on Reddit I'm downvoted into oblivion for going against the cult

It's gotten better in the last few years, now that millions of people share the issues, it's harder to drown them out

Doesn't seem to matter whatsoever for their stock, so that doesn't seems to be too relevant

KerrAvon• 2 years ago

Tesla is a memestock. There's no reason it should be as high as it is; the fundamentals aren't that great and Musk is a danger to the company whether he's in or out of government.

foobazgt• 2 years ago

Some context for others - 2015 is fairly early in Tesla's history. The model 3 didn't even exist until 2017. The overwhelming majority of Teslas on the road today are Y's and 3's.

FWIW, I've personally owned three Teslas with zero problems, but none older than 2019. YMMV.

kybernetikos2• 2 years ago

Follow the link to the underlying study https://www.iseecars.com/most-dangerous-cars-study#v=2024

While the linked article is playing up the tesla angle (and so may be thought to be manipulative) the underlying study does not seem to be unusually focused on tesla, it's simply listing the results of a fairly straightforward analysis. I also have no reason to doubt it as I more or less expected tesla to have bad fatality rates compared to class (although I guess I wouldn't have expected them to be quite this bad - I thought they'd be bad compared to other luxury vehicles of similar weight size and price, not absolutely bad compared to most cars).

But you can find the underlying numbers and critique them if you have reason to think they might be wrong. E.g. if you believed the claims that autopilot was safer than human drivers and was saving lives, you might have expected to see a sign of that in this data (I didn't).

jjulius• 2 years ago

How can any reasonable person know if any story about Tesla (good or bad) is actually factual and useful, or is just a story told from a particular angle to manipulate the stock price for gain?

This is a data-based story. Follow the link(s) to review the data if one is unsure whether or not the reporting piece can be trusted.

mattlondon• 2 years ago

Karl Brauer said in the report. “A focused, alert driver, traveling at a legal or prudent speed, without being under the influence of drugs or alcohol, is the most likely to arrive safely regardless of the vehicle they’re driving.”

... implication being that Tesla drivers are more likely to be driving like pricks and/or under the influence?

I wonder what the rates are like for specific models from other brands that are associated with morons. G-wagons, M3s etc etc

lawn• 2 years ago

Or that its very difficult to be alert when using Teslas FSD?

tifik• 2 years ago

Or it's the drivers are not "focused, alert", because of the auto-pilot.

Lendal2• 2 years ago

I paid $10K for FSD when I was drinking the Kool Aid but haven't used it in over a year due to it being a steaming pile of garbage. But hey, it's a great party gag and the stock price is still soaring so keep the pedal to the metal and take us all to RICH town Elon! What could possibly go wron...

stoplight• 2 years ago

I wonder how much of this is because (IME anyway) Tesla drivers are not very good. With all that tech it's easy to get distracted (there's literally a giant tablet looking thing for a console). It's also easy to think all the bells and whistles will do things for you so drivers are paying less attention because the car will beep and holler at them if things are going awry (except by that point it's too late).

geysersam• 2 years ago

Tesla drivers are young men with big wallets, stereotypically. That demographic is not known for their carefulness in traffic, or in any other matter. I'm sure that simple confounding factor is enough to explain the excessive fatality rate of Tesla cars.

Der_Einzige• 2 years ago

Tesla drivers demographic was that maybe in 2015. Today, it's the California camry.

jiveturkey3• 2 years ago

There's a saying: BMWs are for folks that like to drive, Teslas are for folks that hate to drive.

My own add-on is: Toyotas are for folks that have to drive.

almatabata2• 2 years ago

You can add more parameters.

Whats the temperament of the driver. Certain brands attract hot heads who will drive recklessly. I was kind of expecting more sports cars in the top 5. 2/5 is still a good score.

Given the amount of SUVs as well, no matter how safe you make a small car, if an SUV rams you, it is just not going to end well for the smaller.

Koala_ice2• 2 years ago

I thoroughyl expect the Deparment of Government Efficiency to recommend U.S. Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) be shut down to save previous taxpayer dollars.

TrainedMonkey2• 2 years ago

And all USG vehicles to be replaced with Teslas to save money on gas /s

ryandvm• 2 years ago

Not even remotely farce. I hope the rest of the world is taking notes...

oblio7• 2 years ago

Doesn't each major government do independent safety testing/has independent safety requirements, anyway?

dylan6043• 2 years ago

um, that can be read both ways. they very well could be taking notes on how to move in the same direction, not the opposite

consteval• 2 years ago

This is why we need the Department of Department of Government Efficiency Efficiency so we can ensure the governmental efficiency of the Department of Government Efficiency.

roughly3• 2 years ago

Nobody needs to take notes, we’ve known what this is for a hundred years. We spent most of the last century trying to get rid of autocracy in various places, there’s entire libraries worth of books detailing this playbook at this point.

jfengel• 2 years ago

Unfortunately, they are. They have discovered that this kind of behavior gets people into office.

Expect to see more of it.

akira25014• 2 years ago

The authority and requirement to operate FARS extends from US Title Code.

Aside from that misuse and intentional misunderstanding of the FARS statistics is readily used by Tesla as a justification for their FSD system.

HaZeust• 2 years ago

These next 4 years will be a hoot and holler...

atoav2• 2 years ago

He had been "joking" about a third term already: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/13/us/politics/congress-reso...

So let's see if a Trump with total immunity will really leave gracefully this time.

notyourwork4• 2 years ago

Am I the only one that is not excited about the next four years being constant banter of this nature? I loathe it. Nothing personal against your comment but the new administration hasn't even gone into office and I cannot get away from this.

seanmcdirmid3• 2 years ago

They have already announced what they are going to do, with the pro-Trump side saying he's not serious or will mellow out the plan before he takes office, and the anti-Trump side saying he will do exactly what he says he's going to do.

Basically a repeat of 2016.

Koala_ice2• 2 years ago

I'm actually not bantering.

agumonkey• 2 years ago

I'm also jaded by the constant snark I/we have to resort to to cope and disconnect from the insanity that is today's world

caekislove• 2 years ago

They are like this literally any time a Republican is in the White House. They were like this when Dubya was President too, even though today they act like he's some sort of elder statesman just because he hates Trump.

throwaway425933• 2 years ago

> but the new administration hasn't even gone into office and I cannot get away from this.

Well, it cuts both ways. New administration should not be talking till they are in office.

zer8k• 2 years ago

These people have been inundated with the drivel of a billion dollar propaganda machine run by the most expensive campaign in history.

It's gonna take a while before they're back to normal again. I've heard so many "office of government efficiency" jokes in the last week I am tired of it too. But, in their defense if all you hear is how this administration is going to be the fourth reich (lol), destroy the country (lol), introduce fascism (lol), kill people (lol), etc you're going to react in a sarcastic way to anything you can grasp onto.

Though tbf, again, "office of government efficiency" seems like an oxymoron.

MBCook8• 2 years ago

We’ve had them in office before, plus plenty of public statements over the last 10 years.

It’s not exactly baseless speculation. People have things to base their guesses on.

hagbard_c• 2 years ago

You are not alone in this sentiment. It is beyond the pale that the denizens of a 'hacker forum' are often so narrow-minded when it comes to engaging those who think outside of the personal zone of ideological preference. The same people who have been yammering about the importance of 'diversity' are dead set against diversity of opinion. Grow up, folks, get outside your comfort zone and engage some of those deplorables, irredeemables, garbage, rednecks, hillbillies and bible thumpers instead of howling along with the masses. Go ahead and try, you may find they are more like you than you've been told by the chattering classes. Sure you'll have disagreements over certain things but that does not make them the evil monsters your moral mentors have been claiming they are. Just... grow up.

noncoml2• 2 years ago

Can you mention one thing that Trump or Musk ever did out of altruism?

namaria3• 2 years ago

It sucks for everyone. What you want us to do? Pretend it ain't so?

Wytwwww• 2 years ago

I loathe it

They are planning to appoint a nutjob who has publicly that he admitted cutting off the heads of whale carcasses with a chainsaw and dumping dead bears in the Central Park for "fun". Presumably he is also consuming those rotting animals carcasses that he keeps finding somehow (how else do you get brain worms?) to be the new US health secretary.

Seriously... what else do you need to know?

ChildOfChaos• 2 years ago

As a non-american watching the election, this was one of the reasons I didn't want the result to be the way it went. Just for having to hear about it constantly from everywhere.

asdasdsddd• 2 years ago

No, we need more SNL trump impressions, Trump pundits, and corny jokes

fumeux_fume• 2 years ago

Can't be much more worse than an off topic comment.

phtrivier2• 2 years ago

Yes, it will be annoying to have people make jokes about the people in overwhelming position of power.

Who knows ? Maybe it won't even be possible for the whole four years ?

ETH_start• 2 years ago

A certain faction always think the rule on keeping politics out of forums doesn't apply to them, because their politics are too correct and important. I experience this problem in groupchats where the very people who furiously demanded people not bring politics into the group and to make the group politics-free routinely push their own politics. They say their politics are too important to not bring up.

These same people LEFT other groups dedicated to politics so presumably if others respond in kind by discussing their own politics, they will leave the last groupchats too. This is why a certain faction is such an echo chamber. Incidentally, I was just banned from r/Archaeology for arguing that a post arguing that archeologists should prepare to fight the fascist takeover was too political.

more_corn• 2 years ago

Agreed. This seems like just the sort of government waste that department has been created to eliminate.

bonestamp22• 2 years ago

If that happens, that would be the most efficient form of regulatory capture yet!

llamaimperative2• 2 years ago

That’s not what regulatory capture is

peppertree• 2 years ago

I suspect the biggest factor is speed. After getting used to EV for over a year, every ICE vehicle feels painfully sluggish and slow. If that's the case I'm curious to see how the numbers compare to other EVs.

nytesky2• 2 years ago

Torque and touchscreens.

LUmBULtERA3• 2 years ago

I find the touchscreen actually less distracting and easier to use than the cell phone I had to use in a Honda civic. Also no critical functions need to be done on the touchscreen, they can all be done via physical buttons on the wheel or stocks.

akira25014• 2 years ago

every ICE vehicle feels painfully sluggish and slow.

You don't do much towing, do you?

Kiro• 2 years ago

99.9% of drivers will never tow anything in their life.

BLKNSLVR4• 2 years ago

Are you my in-laws?

We had to stop talking to them about the possibility of buying an EV because they kept bringing up irrational arguments like this one.

No matter how many times we reminded them that, in the two-plus decades we've been driving, we may have towed something maybe twice. Maybe.

One of our existing cars doesn't even have a towbar. The horror!

The irrational hatred / fear is real.

kybernetikos2• 2 years ago

The worst 23 models according to the study are here: https://www.iseecars.com/most-dangerous-cars-study#v=2024

I'm not sure which of them are evs, but you could work it out fairly easily. Even if many of them are, it still looks to me like tesla is doing poorly by this metric.

Tempest19812• 2 years ago

None of the others are EVs, except maybe a small % of Kia Souls

r00fus• 2 years ago

Mostly non-EVs. In fact the only EVs are both Tesla.

HeatrayEnjoyer2• 2 years ago

I heard EVs are very heavy, how can they be faster?

MBCook8• 2 years ago

EVs have full torque at 0 RPM so they are capable of accelerating much faster than an average ICE.

The manufacturer can alter based on software, how much current the electrical system is capable of supplying, how powerful the motors are, etc.

But even “normal non-performance” EVs that aren’t designed for performance like a Chevy Bolt come off the line way quicker than an equivalent normal car, even if they’re full 0 to 60 time isn’t that much faster.

LUmBULtERA3• 2 years ago

Eh, my neighbors Honda Pilots and other friends Toyota Siennas are heavier than my Y.

thebruce87m3• 2 years ago

People love to say that EVs are very heavy, or are much, much heavier, massively heavier and so on. This paints the wrong picture in people’s heads. The same people will use the Hummer EV as an example, but most people aren’t driving that.

https://thedriven.io/2024/05/03/are-evs-really-much-heavier-...

full electric versions are only around 10% to 15% heavier than their direct ICE equivalent

To put it into perspective, from the table, you could load an ICE with passengers and some luggage and it would weigh the same as the EV equivalent with just the driver.

tim3333• 2 years ago

I wonder what percentage are autopilot driving into things?

janalsncm2• 2 years ago

I would also like to know this. How many fatal crashes happened where autopilot was engaged in the 30 seconds prior to a fatal accident?

By definition, if the autopilot has disengaged it’s a more dangerous situation, so it is fair to place the blame on it. A relief pitcher doesn’t get charged with earned runs he inherits.

avidiax• 2 years ago

Very low.

Technically the driver drove into those things, since autopilot disengaged .4 seconds before impact.

Autopilot was just there to ensure the trip to that last .4 seconds wasn't too draining.

nytesky2• 2 years ago

Have the demographics of typical Tesla driver changed in last 5-10 years? I think it was at first wealthy environmentalists, but it shifted to be a new Yuppie mobile, and most recently probably skews to a young male crowd?

TrainedMonkey2• 2 years ago

The study was conducted on model year 2018–2022 vehicles, and focused on crashes between 2017 and 2022 that resulted in occupant fatalities.

Teslas can go fast real fast, so naively this is the result I would expect given how they have filtered the data. In other words, unless they controlled for this, this would be biased by natural selection playing out.

Having said that, as someone who had a couple of close calls with the autopilot. I would love to know what percent of those crashes was with autopilot enabled.

phony-account• 2 years ago

Teslas can go fast real fast, so naively this is the result I would expect given how they have filtered the data. In other words, unless they controlled for this…

Explain to me why you would want to filter out fatalities caused by going “real fast”?

Petersipoi• 2 years ago

Because comparing the fatality rate of a Corolla going 50mph and a Tesla going 90mph is useless to a person who wants a car that is safe when driven responsibly.

IncreasePosts• 2 years ago

If a bunch of lunatics buy the car because it is fast, and kill themselves, that doesn't necessarily affect my safety in the car if I'm buying it for some other feature and don't intend to drive it dangerously.

MBCook8• 2 years ago

In other words, unless they controlled for this, this would be biased by natural selection playing out.

Why should they control for it? It’s a natural consequence of Tesla’s design choices, not a total coincidence that Tesla had no control over.

bunderbunder3• 2 years ago

I'd love to see some sort of multiple regression or ANOVA on this, instead of singling out a single variable. Is car brand really the best independent predictor? Or is it specific design decisions you tend to see in certain brands?

(Like, say, maximizing driver distraction by consolidating a bunch of essential controls and information displays into a touchscreen display that's really difficult to operate when it's sunny outside. Just to pick something at random, of course.)

Somewhat related, I was recently shopping for refrigerators, and fell down a data rabbit hole. If you just look at the overall style of fridge, French doors look like a terrible option from a reliability perspective. But then, digging in a bit more, it turns out that's kind of a spurious correlation. Actually it's the presence of bells and whistles like through-door ice dispensers that kill a refrigerator's reliability. And then perhaps on top of that the amount of extra Rube Goldberg machine you need to make a chest height ice dispenser work in a bottom-freezer French door refrigerator creates even more moving parts to break. But a those problems don't apply to a model that doesn't have that feature.

doctorpangloss• 2 years ago

It's an interesting perspective. I was recently shopping for shoes, and a fully closed shoe had more places where it could break compared to my flip flops. That's why whenever you are doing a dangerous activity, flip flops are recommended.

TheGamerUncle• 2 years ago

Nick Mullen may disagree

bunderbunder3• 2 years ago

I'm not entirely sure an anecdote about the dangers of singling out just one variable is a great counterpoint to a criticism of the practice of singling out just one variable.

stego-tech3• 2 years ago

I mean, even lacking proper scientific data, ask yourself how often your brain “autocompletes” someone based on a brand or object? There’s a reason advertisers spend so much money and effort cultivating a very specific customer image: it works.

In the case of Tesla - and I cannot overstress enough how much lf this is purely subjective conjecture on my part and not a statement of fact - the image cultivated by the company and its Chief Executive is very much one of rejecting norms and expectations, fierce independence, and a hostility towards others (mostly from the Cybertruck unveiling onward). The people who relate to that brand would, I would think, be more likely to flout laws like speed limits, failing to use indicators for turns or merges, and drive more aggressively than a brand that emphasizes safety or enjoyment of experience (like Hondas and Toyotas). My purely subjective experiences bear this out, and I’m consistently rewarded giving Teslas a wider berth on the roads.

So as far as branding as an indicator of outcome, yeah, I can totally see that being a reliable indicator. I’d still be darn curious to see more research about it, though.

sshine• 2 years ago

The people who relate to that brand would, I would think, be more likely to flout laws like speed limits, failing to use indicators for turns or merges, and drive more aggressively than a brand that emphasizes safety or enjoyment of experience

And BMW owners like German shepherds?

soerxpso• 2 years ago

This was my thought as well from looking at the actual list. Of the top 5 models with the worst fatal accident rate, 2 are luxury cars that seem like they'd attract drivers with reckless personalities (the Chevrolet Corvette and the Porsche 911). I don't think the average mile driven in a Corvette is really equivalent to the average mile driven in a Honda Civic.

This data is interesting, but not really useful for decisionmaking if we can't isolate the extent to which the disparities are caused by features of the actual vehicle, as opposed to driver selection factors.

Is anyone making an argument that the Model Y has an actual safety problem in its design? I'd like to hear about which physical aspect of the car people think is making it 4x less safe than the average car? I don't see anything obvious. Its crash test performance is fine. I'd hesitate to blame autopilot, since we know that they crash less often with autopilot enabled than without (even if due to selection factors).

piotrkaminski2• 2 years ago

brand that emphasizes safety or enjoyment of experience (like Hondas and Toyotas)

This is plausible on its face, and yet the Honda CR-V Hybrid ended up higher on the list than the Model Y. No idea how to explain that...

interestica2• 2 years ago

You highlighted the correlation. I bet GoPro users have the highest fatality rate of all camera brands.

jameskraus• 2 years ago

I’d love to read any analysis you’ve done like this, or any reading you might recommend.

cowpig• 2 years ago

Check out the study, it's linked to in the article:

https://www.iseecars.com/most-dangerous-cars-study#v=2024

bilsbie2• 2 years ago

I was thinking for my next fridge to just buy a plain cheap one and then buy a cheap countertop ice cube maker.

Since that’s the thing that always breaks on the fridges. And it adds like $500 to the price.

_dark_matter_2• 2 years ago

Mine is French door without a front ice maker/water, and I love it. Way more room in the fridge too. Just open the bottom to get ice.

interestica2• 2 years ago

Dedicated Ice Makers can be quite good and fast at what they do too.

jdietrich• 2 years ago

The Tesla Model Y is a two ton SUV with the performance of a Porsche 911. The base RWD model is fast and the Performance model is stupidly fast. I don't think anyone would be particularly surprised to learn that Porsche drivers get into a lot of fatal accidents.

technothrasher• 2 years ago

The top most model of the Model Y is as fast in a straight line as the lowest base model 911, and the handling isn't even close to the same. Saying the Model Y has the performance of the 911 is not really an accurate statement.

Freedom2• 2 years ago

Don't the aerodynamics severely limit the cornering performance of the Model Y? How can it have the same performance? Or is there only one metric of performance that is being measured?

XenophileJKO• 2 years ago

Looking at the results.. it does make you wonder if there is something other underlying problem with the model Y vs the Model X or model 3.

floxy4• 2 years ago

I don't think anyone would be particularly surprised to learn that Porsche drivers get into a lot of fatal accidents.

From the actual study:

                               Fatal Accident Rate   Compared to
    Rank| Model               |(per 10^9 Miles)    | Overall Average
    ----+---------------------+--------------------+-----------------
     1  | Hyundai Venue       | 13.9               | 4.9x
     2  | Chevrolet Corvette  | 13.6               | 4.8x
     3  | Mitsubishi Mirage   | 13.6               | 4.8x
     4  | Porsche 911         | 13.2               | 4.6x
     5  | Honda CR-V Hybrid   | 13.2               | 4.6x
     6  | Tesla Model Y       | 10.6               | 3.7x

bonestamp22• 2 years ago

My fridge has been repaired twice, the first time within its first year. Both times, each repair guy said the same thing: Avoid LG and Samsung. Avoid counter depth. I have no idea if that's accurate, so I'm curious if your data dive backs up either of those notes?

BLKNSLVR4• 2 years ago

What is "counter depth"?

aziaziazi8• 2 years ago

essential controls

Can’t you drive a Tesla without it? I expect the screen was for radio, gps, AC…

I agree those are distracting through.

jvanderbot• 2 years ago

Rent a Tesla and try to adjust the mirrors while driving I dare you.

Less difficult but much more common:

Change the radio station / music.

Change the climate control.

Both of those require taking your eyes off the road and navigating through multiple touch screen-only modal windows. I have owned one for years and it is a distraction factory.

Veserv• 2 years ago

Gear selection is done via the screen on a Model 3 [1]. Technically, there is a touchscreen button on the rearview mirror unit, but I doubt anybody actually uses that.

Alternatively, you can use the AI gear selector from park which guesses what direction you want to go.

[1] https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/model3/en_eu/GUID-E9B387D...

valval7• 2 years ago

It’s also worth noting that sample sizes in this study are low, and without checking I know the results aren’t statistically significant.

daft_pink• 2 years ago

While I think that a single variable isn't always very useful, when something is an outlier and people are moving from other luxury brands with much lower rates to a new brand and experiencing high rates, there is definitely something wrong.

I'm guessing that while the total accident rate declines with automation, that the serious accident rate is increasing, because a human driver drives in a risk adjusted way and takes less care to avoid minor accidents and more care to avoid serious accidents, but when a robot find itself unable to drive the errors are more evenly distributed or even more likely to result in a serious accident, because its doing things idiotically with no sense of self preservation.

altairprime2• 2 years ago

The linked study is better: https://www.iseecars.com/most-dangerous-cars-study#v=2024

samatman• 2 years ago

“Most of these vehicles received excellent safety ratings, performing well in crash tests at the IIHS and NHTSA, so it’s not a vehicle design issue,” said Brauer. “The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior and driving conditions, leading to increased crashes and fatalities.”

Quoting what's easily the most important passage in that study.

The two Teslas on the list are the Model Y, right beneath the Porsche 911, and the Model S, right beneath the... Toyota Prius.

So yeah. No surprises here. It's a study where the lesson should be "a car is as dangerous as its driver" and everyone is going to read it as "Teslas are deathtraps". What else is new.

_dark_matter_2• 2 years ago

That just assumes that the crash tests are good indicators of actual safety. My understanding is that car manufacturers could go much further in the name of safety, but do just enough to scrape by on those crash tests. So there could definitely be differentials in terms of safety even among cars that have perfect safety measures from IIHS/NHTSA.

ccorcos• 2 years ago

It’s hard to to be cynical about the intentions of the authors of the original article after seeing this…

floxy4• 2 years ago

It is better. But in the year 2024, why should I believe the data from a random source, with unknown data analysis? When will they be releasing their data package for independent analysis? Why isn't this the expected norm? And how can we make it so?

altairprime2• 2 years ago

Did you email them to ask for it? What sort of meta-analysis do you intend to do with their data? Have you released other interesting work in this field that would benefit the post? Why weren’t your intentions for their model published in your comment? What can we do to denormalize rhetoric in forum discussions?

Animats• 2 years ago

How much data does Tesla have on the details of crashes? Probably depends on whether enough electronics survived to phone home.

It's possible to dig the airbag controller out of the wreckage and read out the last 30 seconds or so. Airbag controllers have a short but nonvolatile memory and usually survive crashes. That gets you speed, acceleration in several axes, plus steering, brake, and power inputs, and detailed info about what the airbag system did.[1] Those were originally created to tune the airbag algorithm, and, over the years, false airbag deployments have dropped almost to zero.

That's the basic info needed to analyze fatal crashes. Speed at collision? Speed 10 secs before collision? Accelerator and brake inputs? Maneuvering (side accel) before crash? That, plus the crash scene, tells most of what you need to know.

Law enforcement will sometimes read out those units, when it's not clear what happened. It's not done routinely.

[1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/fmvss/EDR_QAs_11...

FireBeyond• 2 years ago

"Fun" fact... Tesla doesn't count fatalities in their accident stats!

Nor does it count accidents where there was no airbag deployment because as you point out, modern airbag systems use a wide variety of parameters, not just "if speed > x and collision = true; deploy".

So you can hit someone obliquely at 30mph, and due to factors, airbags don't deploy, and Tesla says "great, not an accident".

Or you can be in such a serious collision or similar where the airbags CAN'T deploy, and Tesla? "Not an accident".

fakedang• 2 years ago

Something something Lex Fridman something.

jiveturkey3• 2 years ago

Seems flawed. Tesla Model Y was the best selling model worldwide for 2023. (I think #3 if limited to US.) The study only covers 2017-2022, but we can infer that for the entire Brand, Teslas sold quite well over at least that latter part of that period.

Now if there are more Teslas on the road vs other vehicles (note they excluded car model years earlier than 2017, another fatal (heh) flaw in the study), it makes sense they would have more fatalities.

So this should be normalized "per capita" to vehicle counts if we want to extract any brand-related causality, in the same way as the data is already normalized to miles driven.

I enjoy hating on Tesla as much as the next person, but come on.

cachecrab• 2 years ago

It’s on a “per billion miles driven” basis so it is normalized.

FactKnower69• 2 years ago

If you had clicked through to the article before writing your comment, you would know that the stat being compared is "fatal crash rate per billion miles driven", and that the fatal crash rate for Teslas is 2.0x the national average

jiveturkey3• 2 years ago

If you had read my comment before replying, you would know that I recognized and even stipulated that the report was already normalized to miles driven.

I am suggesting that per mile driven and per vehicle brand on the road are not the same thing. Now that I think about it, miles driven per brand would be an interesting data point.

Just as an example of why per-brand might be useful, let's imagine that teslas are driven half the miles of the average for all other brands. so if that were the case and if the number of fatalities were equal, then that would result in tesla having 2x the fatality rate per mile. but at the same time, this doesn't let us appreciate the amount of time tesla spends on the road vs other brands. so miles might be half but time spent might be closer to 1 (equal time). and maybe that is because teslas are concentrated in urban-suburban interface environments in high congestion areas, whereas other brands are spread out across the country where for the same amount of time spent, twice as many miles are covered and congestion is less.

Data like that is needed to properly evaluate this result. And while I asked for per-vehicle-on-the-road, and my example didn't match that, you can still see how the simple per-mile-driven is insufficient.

They also could have noted the demographics of the drivers -- male/female and years of driving experience, things like that.

So again, I find the implications of this article to be very unfair.

Projectiboga• 2 years ago

What is the Horsepower equivalent of the Tesla power trains? Is this just because they are the new luxury sportscar and many of these drivers haven't been trough major car repairs, ever? The zero to sixty of even a basic Tesla is very quick and even with strong breaking other physical limits with turning and maneuvering can arise if some one is zooming around weaving in traffic. These stats need to be studied by age and other demographics like age, income and alcohol consumption.

MBCook8• 2 years ago

It’s not just the horsepower, a big thing is the torque. There is so much and it’s available basically from zero. So even if you can compare it to a combustion engine with the same amount of horsepower it may take off the line a lot faster.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF• 2 years ago

I remember some car collision data that showed that men were more likely to get into any collision and women were more likely to get into a fatal collision. A comment I read about the study suggested the conclusion that men take more risks while women take bigger risks.

It's interesting to think in that context about this. Could Tesla drivers be taking bigger risks because they think the car's software will save them from the negative consequences of their risky decisions? (As an extreme example, one such driver opted to drive in the back seat instead of the driver's seat. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/california-highway-patr...)

sombrero_john• 2 years ago

A comment I read about the study suggested the conclusion that men take more risks while women take bigger risks.

Or women's weaker musculoskeletal systems provide less protection against blunt force trauma?

roughly3• 2 years ago

Or, like medicine and a whole variety of other fields, “male” is assumed default and anyone who isn’t the default has worse outcomes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/27/business/car-safety-women...

mrguyorama2• 2 years ago

If you look into car safety testing and design, they haven't used "Woman sized" crash test dummies until very very recently.

Cars were less safe for women because they were not designed to be safe for women.

Andrew6rant• 2 years ago

Guess what year the NHTSA started using female crash dummies?

2003, thirty years after they started using male crash dummies. And the NHTSA's female dummies were essentially male dummies shrunk to 4'11" and lightened to 97/108lbs.

What year do you think they mandated a crash dummy that was actually based on the female body?

Just guess. I think you might be surprised that they haven't done this yet. It's in the works (see THOR-5F), but it's crazy it's taken so long.

Now guess when they first put the 2003 female crash dummy in the drivers seat for the frontal collision crash test. They still haven't!

bastloing3• 2 years ago

If you read the article it implies driver fault not car fault. Tesla receiving the highest ever crash safety ratings echos that.

MBCook8• 2 years ago

The huge difference between their cars seems to indicate that too. The Y is way above their brand average, for example.

yumraj• 2 years ago

“The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior and driving conditions, leading to increased crashes and fatalities,”

I’m assuming the driver behavior also includes relying on the half baked auto pilot/FSD features.

fallingfrog• 2 years ago

I wonder how this breaks down by region. I imagine a heavy car is probably bad in the snow.

bilsbie2• 2 years ago

I’m really confused. A major reason I bought one was because I heard they were so safe.

MBCook8• 2 years ago

If you read the end of the article they basically say that Teslas are safe.

It really appears to be an issue of average Tesla driver behavior compared to overall average driver behavior.

vegadw• 2 years ago

I think they probably are when not using "autopilot" as others are commenting, this isn't cause. It's likely that the brand attracts a kind of driver that likes to speed or that wants to over rely on assisted driving tech that isn't there yet.

That said, I suspect they're regressing, like how they removed ultrasonic sensors which are a dime a dozen to only rely on computer vision. That's just plain stupid, IMHO.

For the money, I think you can do much better than a Tesla in many regards, but I'm not about to shame you for reading marketing and believing it either, especially if it was pre the current Musk hell and the general knowledge that he's essentially a fraudster given the perpetual 1 year away for autopilot and what not.

itake• 2 years ago

I wish this would break down driver and passenger deaths in the tesla vs outside the tesla.

if other people are more likely to hit a tesla or are tesla drivers usually at fault?

rahimnathwani• 2 years ago

How does iSeeCars (who did the study) know how many miles were driven by each brand's cars? It says they have a database of cars, but do we know whether it's an unbiased sample?

postmeta• 2 years ago

exactly, we should ask Karl Brauer to cite his sources and explain his methodology

pluc• 2 years ago

Let's put that guy in charge of government efficiency, what's the worst that could happen

whitej125• 2 years ago

Tesla vehicles have a fatal crash rate of 5.6 per billion miles driven, according to the study;
So, why are Teslas — and many other ostensibly safe cars on the list — involved in so many fatal crashes? “The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior and driving conditions, leading to increased crashes and fatalities,”

What is the nature of those miles driven by each brand? I've got to imagine that pure-EV companies like Tesla are predominantly driven in urban/city driving (shorter daily distances, more traffic, etc). In contrast to ICE cars which can rack up lots of miles on long trips.

1 billion Tesla miles I suspect looks different than 1 billion Ford miles.

breckenedge• 2 years ago

In 2022, the rate of crash deaths per 100 million miles traveled was much higher in rural areas than in urban areas (1.68 in rural areas compared with 1.15 in urban areas). From 1977 to 2022, the rates decreased by 61% in rural areas (from 4.35 to 1.68) and 51% in urban areas (from 2.35 to 1.15).

https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/urban...

why_at• 2 years ago

The ranking is still strange to me though. The model S is lower than the model Y even though it is smaller and faster, both of which should make it less safe, and the model 3 didn't even make the list.

stbullard• 2 years ago

Misleading/clickbait “journalism”:

* The FARS data is “normalized” by unpublished internal iSeeCars estimates of miles driven; the underlying “study” is a marketing blog post for their company.

* FARS data distinguishes between driver and occupant fatalities - the “study” looks only at occupant fatalities, which is not what most people would reasonably expect given the headline.

* One might reasonably suspect Tesla’s long history of touting 5-star safety ratings and advanced safety tech could lead to passengers being lulled into a false sense of security, and being less likely to use seatbelts.

Driver fatalities and seatbelt use are right there in the FARS data - one wonders why these weren’t considered and incorporated in the “study”.

Anyhow, a note to the HN user: don’t upvote FUD-sowing headlines based on blog posts about unscientific “studies” that are really just submarine PR; they carry none of the credibility of the underlying studies, and are a disservice to the scientists and public servants who rigorously and faithfully collect and analyze this data.

HN used to be better than this…

drcode• 2 years ago

Per page 234 of FARS, drivers are classified as occupants https://www.ire.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/USERGUIDE-201...

_wire_• 2 years ago

In any lineup by height someone is tallest and someone is shortest, so what's significant about Tesla in this spread? If not them then another.

A significant aspect is that Telsa, as a harbinger of "progress", by this measure is making cars less safe. That's a surprising development as it's contrary to the promises and prognostications for the devices.

It's expected that the distribution of harm from cars would change with increasing automation, but the promise of the automation is to make the devices safer overall. So is this a key metric by which we find that the progress is actually a hazard, or is the changing distribution part of an overall trend of improvement with some hazardous edge cases?

All we have with this article is yet another headline with no useful information.

“A focused, alert driver, traveling at a legal or prudent speed, without being under the influence of drugs or alcohol, is the most likely to arrive safely regardless of the vehicle they’re driving.”

What does "focused and alert" mean for a robot? Does arriving safely allow a wake of carnage?

The Trump administration figures as a harbinger for such questions in that he is a well-known champion of disinformation in favor of his self interest, as are all of his cabinet picks and advisors. But this is in keeping with the modern history of the GOP.

Alupis3• 2 years ago

The study's authors make clear that the results do not indicate Tesla vehicles are inherently unsafe or have design flaws. In fact, Tesla vehicles are loaded with safety technology; the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) named the 2024 Model Y as a Top Safety Pick+ award winner, for example. Many of the other cars that ranked highly on the list have also been given high ratings for safety by the likes of IIHS and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, as well.
So, why are Teslas — and many other ostensibly safe cars on the list — involved in so many fatal crashes? “The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior and driving conditions, leading to increased crashes and fatalities,” iSeeCars executive analyst Karl Brauer said in the report. “A focused, alert driver, traveling at a legal or prudent speed, without being under the influence of drugs or alcohol, is the most likely to arrive safely regardless of the vehicle they’re driving.”

Ok so Tesla's aren't less safe than any other vehicle in this lineup. It's just that Tesla drivers are more likely to be careless.

Nasrudith• 2 years ago

My first thought was if mass got factored into it, but it looks like mass has already crept up pretty high for other cars. A Toyota Prius is about 3200 lbs and a Model 3 is about 4000 lbs or 3800 lbs for their lightest variant. My mental models were outdated and still imagined sedans as about one ton and change. While bigger not as significant a factor as I initially thought.

oblio7• 2 years ago

EVs are really heavy.

The average VW Golf weighs about 1.3 tons while the average VW ID.3 weighs about 1.8 tons. That's 40% heavier.

Melatonic2• 2 years ago

From my experience the model 3 also drove very different than other Teslas (in a good way). It was by far my favorite even being the cheapest.

aziaziazi8• 2 years ago

So, why are Teslas — and many other ostensibly safe cars on the list

Interesting, my initial mental concern was: "So, why IIHS ranked cars highly involved in crash with Top Safety+?" Didn’t they though using statistics could help prevent accidents in praxi?

scruple• 2 years ago

I spend a lot of time driving around Irvine, CA and it feels like the Tesla (especially Model Y) capital of the world. And I am not at all surprised to see these sorts of fatality statistics about these vehicles because their drivers are, far and away, the most distracted and oblivious drivers I have ever encountered on the road in 28 years of driving.

gamblor9563• 2 years ago

On my monthly drive to the office this week I passed 7 accidents on the morning commute to Irvine. Every single accident involved a Tesla. One of the accidents even involved two Teslas: one crashed into the other, and based on what one of the drivers was yelling into his phone as I slowly inched passed them, both Teslas were using FSD.

On a more somber note, in one of the accidents an AP/FSD-driven Tesla crashed into a motorcyclist. The motorcyclist survived (or at least, the news did not report a fatality on the 405 that day), but there was a lot of blood on the road and the Tesla that crashed into him.

jccc• 2 years ago

Buried at the very end of the article:

The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior and driving conditions, leading to increased crashes and fatalities,” iSeeCars executive analyst Karl Brauer said in the report.
“A focused, alert driver, traveling at a legal or prudent speed, without being under the influence of drugs or alcohol, is the most likely to arrive safely regardless of the vehicle they’re driving.

jaco6• 2 years ago

The list of deadliest cars is a mixture of compact cars and sports cars. Compact cars are less safe because they get obliterated in collisions with bigger vehicles. Sports cars are unsafe because drivers tend to drive them at high speeds and attempt dangerous cornering maneuvers, eg driving the Pacific Coastal Highway at high speeds.

Teslas are faster than many sports cars, but in the case of the Model Y and Model X lack the preferred low profile of a true sports car. In the case of the Model S, the acceleration is so great that it is frankly surprising it doesn’t rank higher. I wonder how many new Model S owners have gotten themselves killed within a few days of owning the car?

I myself purchased a Model 3 last year and drove it quite foolishly for the first few months I had it. The acceleration was so amazing to me coming from a Honda Accord that it was hard to resist the temptation to weave and corner like a mad man. Model S would have been even worse. The Model S also has a long body like a full size sedan, not ideal for sports performance either, compared to the Model 3’s short length, more comparable to a Corrola or Toyota BRZ.

So I suspect that speculations about “Tesla drivers being morons” and “distracted by the screen” (almost all new cars have shiny screens!) are nonsense.

Another frequent remark is that Teslas’ high weight is a disadvantage. This is not as straightforward as they assume, because weight actually has benefits for traction. Light cars are much more likely to lose grip and slide around. On the other hand, a heavy car with worn out tires or brakes is much more difficult to stop than a light car with worn out tires or brakes. So weight is probably a wash.

But I do agree with some commenters that the autonomous features, and particular misuse of those features, are probably a contributor to these statistics as well. If you’re new to them you assume they are safer than they really are. With more experience you realize you still need to be watching the road the whole time.

Melatonic2• 2 years ago

Not true at all - cars with more weight theoretically have a little more traction but also way more momentum.

Also your model 3 is much more comparable in weight to a normal car so it handles of course much better

phtrivier2• 2 years ago

I would be interested in:

* having the ratio of fatalities organised by sized and power of cars. My understanding is that Teslas have a bit more horsepower than other cars, so maybe an apple-to-apple comparison needs to compare them to a slighly smaller share of the overal pool

* having the ratio of fatalities involving the so called "autopilot" feature. I'm not necessarily going to blame Tesla for making fast cars that reckless people use to get into accidents when running too fast.

However, if it's your average joe getting an accident because of a software glitch in the driving assistance system, because they assumed something called "autopilot" was able, to, you know, pilot on its own...

aucisson_masque• 2 years ago

So, why are Teslas — and many other ostensibly safe cars on the list — involved in so many fatal crashes? “The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior

So people who drive Tesla are arse, got it.

Bombthecat• 2 years ago

Many people underestimate how fast an e car can accelerate... Would like to know how many accelerated to their death, cause it's their first e car...

Sverigevader• 2 years ago

I'd like to add my perspective here. I drove 50 miles to and from work every day for 5 years, around Stockholm, Sweden. 80 % highway traffic.

The only driving aid I use (rely on) on is ACC (Automatic Cruise Control), to keep my speed and distance (maximum) to the car in front of me. I almost always stay in the rightmost lane doing the speed limit.

Without a doubt Tesla drivers consistently stood out as the most "strange". Drivers of all brands can be stressed and drive too fast, but Tesla drivers were janky, couldn't stay in their lanes, and very often didn't keep a safe distance to the car in front of them.

Worst part, they didn't seem aware of their surroundings. They would merge in the most insane situations/positions or dangerously try to pass other drivers.

I don't know if they relied on their hardware to guide them, this autopilot thing, or whatever else they have, but it puckered me up good.

mppm• 2 years ago

Most commenters here focus on how fast and heavy Teslas are, while for me the overwhelmingly most likely explanation is Tesla's long-promised and still half-baked autopilot - either by directly getting drivers into sticky situations or just training them not to pay due attention to the road. Except for this one factor, Teslas ought to be better than average due to premium segment, modern construction techniques and a full array of active safety gear.

enslavedrobot• 2 years ago

From the website:"the number of cars involved in a fatal crash were normalized by the total number of vehicle miles driven"

They assume every car drives the average number of miles. Of course a CR-V is going to score high, since they likely drive more than an average number of miles.

A 911 on the other hand probably drives a small fraction of the average.

This study is fairly low quality. The IHHS list 13.3 fatalities per billion miles as the actual number.

daghamm2• 2 years ago

Isn't that the other way around?

This is fatalities per 10**X miles.

daghamm2• 2 years ago

How common are the vehicles on the top of the list?

I assume there are not too many Porsche 911 on the roads, so a couple of bad drivers could make an impact on this score

jiriro• 2 years ago

As expected – It’s not a vehicle design issue. It’s the driver behaviour and driving conditions.

–––

“Most of these vehicles received excellent safety ratings, performing well in crash tests at the IIHS and NHTSA, so it’s not a vehicle design issue” [1]

“The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior and driving conditions, leading to increased crashes and fatalities.” [1]

- Karl Brauer, iSeeCars Executive Analyst

[1] The 23 Most Dangerous Cars On The Road

https://www.iseecars.com/most-dangerous-cars-study#v=2024

Tesla has the highest fatal accident rate of all auto brands, study finds

Related Stories