this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
588 points (97.3% liked)
Technology
59581 readers
3996 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I wonder if they have the data broken down by propulsion technology rather than manufacturer. One thing about Teslas and other luxury electric cars is that they have insane amounts of horsepower and instant torque. If you buy a Model S to schlep the kids around and are expecting it to behave like a minivan you'll be really surprised what happens if you floor it.
I'm curious to know if this trend is the same for other high-powered electric cars like the Hummer or Rivian. Cars that go that fast used to be limited to supercars, not large and widespread SUVs and pickups.
(Note this is not saying electric is bad or we shouldn't use it. But maybe manufacturers could ease up on the mo powah baby.)
But I also agree with the article that it could be related to their claims of "full self driving" because people might trust it too much and just not pay attention, or have it fail to detect something.
But... but... more power better.
But the article seems to be about deadly accidents, and not just accidents.
You can hit an awful lot of things at a shocking rate of speed and walk away with modern car crash design, so I'd be inclined to think it's more than just the torque curve responsible for all the dead people.
I'm all for mo powah baby, but only for people who can handle it. Grandma driving to the store shouldn't be able to get their car to act like a Mustang leaving a car meet.
Plus electric cars are a ton heavier which means way more kinetic energy which can cause worse accidents, negating some of the crash safety improvements, especially in smaller cars.
Yes please performance class tiered licensing.
Yeah the Rolling Stone article is written really weirdly. I don't think it's technically wrong anywhere but it reads really misleadingly when you compare it to the actual report.
Like it leads with "the group identified the Tesla Model S and Tesla Model Y as two of the most dangerous cars" - meaning they are in the list - at sixth and twenty first places respectively. The mix is really weird though. As you mention the top of the list is cars like the Chevy Corvette and Porsche 911, but also things like the Mitsubishi Mirage and a load of Kia models. So it seems like there's a lot to interpret there.
Certainly it's somewhat damning that despite the driver assistant technology, these models are not particularly safer. But I think other manufactures have a wide range of vehicles at different price points that also vary in safety, which brings their averages below Tesla's in the final rankings.
Thank you for linking to the actual report. It makes a lot more sense. Since they're basing it on occupant fatalities it makes sense that smaller cars are deadlier, since they'll suffer more damage in an accident. It's also interesting that the small SUVs are more deadly, which I attribute to the low mass and high CoG leading to more frequent rollovers.
Aha, occupant fatalities. I was hoping to find out if they were measuring people inside the cars mentioned or people in other cars or pedestrians or all of the above
As a note, it looks like the data they used is publicly available from the NHTSA. They mention that "models not in production as of the 2024 model year, and low-volume models were removed from further analysis." I wonder where the Hummer and Rivian show up there since they are not mentioned in the report whatsoever.
It's 100% FSD....
A human driver will almost always realize they're actively having an accident, and will be slamming breaks and attempting to swearve.
FSD not noticing something and driving straight into it won't react itll just act like what it's about to hit isn't there right up until the collusion.
A second of brakes before an interstate accident and human drivers instinct to protect their side of the car goes a long way to saving lives.
I believe you, but do you have any data to support your claim?
What specifically do you want a source for?
Because I said a couple things, and you were vague so I have to guess.
And it could legitimately be any of the sentences I typed.
A good way to be sure you're asking a question that can be answered is quoting what you're referencing:
But I mean, that's just physics...
Applying brakes before a crash would (well I guess should) obviously lead to a crash with less force.
Anyways, if you can tell me what exactly you want a source for and what claim you're even talking about. I can probably find something for you. But it's not like I had to go look at data in the instant to reference before making that comment. So I have to go find whatever your asking me for.
This would have all happened a lot faster if you just googled what you doubted. I mean, by now you may have already done that.
So I'm glad you didn't just type "source?" But what you did type was just as helpful in telling me what you wanted.
Honestly, I've almost never seen anyone in a Tesla floor it. Yeah, maybe once or twice when they first get it, but most dual motor Teslas I see drive pretty conservatively, probably because they want better mileage per charge or something.
No, no. The car is not driving you. You are driving the car. It must do what you want.
If you let the car drive you, then no wonder you are dead quite soon. So, maybe these numbers are indeed telling something about Tesla drivers...?
If there's too much power the car will start driving you. Just like how Mustang drivers leaving car meets frequently get themselves in trouble by not being able to control the power they've got.
I have learned this from my mother.
When she was young and already married, it was the time when women could not drive cars very good. At least not as good as all the men. At least that was what the tradition and every man said, and they had many such stories to tell.
So my dad got a BMW 5 series then.
People in the village started to warn my mother, for serious! Be careful. Maybe better don't drive it at all. This thing could easily run away with you.
My mother stayed super cool and told them nothing is going to happen, it needs me first to press down the pedal. And although she really did not drive it as often as my dad did, she was a good and safe driver.
you have to understand how to tell the car what you want, and that's the issue at hand
People who've been driving has cars for 10+ years are going to have a harder time adjusting to the way an EV drives. Subconsciously it's easy to forget the differences in throttle response and how coasting works, every time I have to drive a gas car it feels like I'm driving in molasses
Even skilled drivers have trouble adapting at first because of how different it is. Luckily my car has a mode where it drives more like a gas car so the wife and I used that for a while to adjust to driving it, now I almost never use that mode, but if I leave it off and someone ELSE drives my car theyre likely to burn out my tires a bit even if I warm them, there's that much more torque