Vehicle Aggressivity

More documents

Recommendations

Info

<strong>Aggressivity</strong> and Incompatibility LitigationAuthor Keith Bradsher reported in his book High and Mighty that a retired Big Three engineerhad told him that "automakers knew that SUV's might be a problem for other roadusers, but underestimated the scope of the problem and then simply chose not todo research that might produce uncomfortable conclusions." According to theengineer "voices were heard, they just weren't listened to."If vehicle manufacturers did in fact know of potential risks, hazards and dangers of LTVaggressivity and incompatibility, and did nothing to design away, guard against or warn aboutthese known risks, hazards and dangers, manufacturers could be held accountable if theychose profits over safety.Profits should never be more important than human safety. However, LTV's have been a cashcow for the vehicle industry. Ford was making $12,000 profit per Expedition and $15,000profit per Navigator. Ford was making so much money on its SUV (Expedition and Navigatorwithout considering sales of the Explorer) program, that is was paying as much as $8,000 inprofit-sharing to each of its 100,000 UAW workers. In 1996 alone, Ford realized a $2.4billion after tax profit from sales of just the Expedition and Navigator.If marketing and management overlooked LTV design and safety concerns that were pointedout by their own engineers, then vehicle manufacturers will potentially face years oflitigation. For the time-being however, manufacturers seem content with rolling out as manyLTV's as possible to cash in on otherwise dwindling profits. As summed up by former ViceChairman of GMC on why SUV's keep getting larger and larger, Harry Pierce responded "ifpigs are big and popular, I guess we'll make pigs.”HoodClassic Bumper UnderrideThis vehicle struck the sideof a Chevy SuburbanRadiatorBumper LineRadiatorHoodDigitized vehicle (right side)Right QPLeft QPDigitized vehicle (left side)Analyzed crash test videoAnalyzed crash test videoPage 14thefirm
ConclusionBrian O’Neill, the president of IIHS, has succinctly stated what areviewed by many to be the prevailing thought on LTV aggressivity andcompatibility:Automakers should design their cars so occupantsare as safe as possible, without worrying aboutincompatibility among cars in crashes. Theprinciple focus on incompatibility improvementsneeds to be on pickups and utility vehicles.In 2001, 7,252,800 LTV's were sold in the US. Due to the sheer numbersof LTV's on US roads today, there is a safety epidemic due to LTVaggressivity and incompatibility. From Detroit to Munich to Tokyo,vehicle manufacturers should take steps immediately to decrease theaggressivity of LTV's by making them less aggressive and morecompatible with smaller vehicles. If not, thousands of people each yearwill continue to be killed and maimed by this vicious lion that is hiddenunderneath all LTV’s.If you have any questions, comments or suggestions please contact me at thenumber listed below or send an e-mail to:etoddtracy@tracycarboy.comPage 15thefirm
Page 1 and 2: Aggressivity& IncompatibilityDanger
Page 3 and 4: LTV’s Market DominanceIn 1975, LT
Page 5 and 6: What is Vehicle Incompatibility?The
Page 7 and 8: Vehicle WeightIn 2001, IIHS (Insuar
Page 9 and 10: Vehicle Geometry (con’td)The char
Page 11 and 12: Design AlternativesIncompatibility
Page 13: Design Alternatives (con’td)Appar

Vehicle Aggressivity

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?