posted by wap, platform: SONY Xperia TX
链接在此，[http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/vehicle-size-and-weight/qanda]
自己翻译的，有所错误请谅解

1，How do a vehicle’s size and weight affect safety?
All other things being equal, occupants in a bigger, heavier vehicle are better protected than those in a smaller, lighter vehicle. Both size and weight affect the forces people inside a vehicle experience during a crash. The magnitude of those forces is directly related to the risk of injury.

In the case of size, the longer distance from the front of the vehicle to the occupant compartment gives a bigger vehicle an advantage in frontal crashes, which account for half of passenger vehicle occupant deaths. The longer that distance, the bigger the crush zone, and the lower the forces on the occupants.

Weight comes into play in a collision involving two vehicles. The bigger vehicle will push the lighter one backward during the impact. As a result, there will be less force on the occupants of the heavier vehicle and more on the people in the lighter vehicle. Heavier vehicles also fare better in some single-vehicle crashes because they are more likely to move, bend or deform objects they hit.

IIHS demonstrated the role of size and weight in a series of crash tests in 2009 in which a microcar and two minicars were each crashed into a midsize car from the same manufacturer. The Smart Fortwo, Honda Fit and Toyota Yaris all had good ratings in the Institute’s moderate overlap frontal test, but all three performed poorly in the crashes with midsize cars.

1，一辆车的大小尺寸和重量如何影响安全性？
在其他条件相同的情况下，大的重的车中的乘客收到的保护好于小的轻的车。大小和重量同时影响着在碰撞中人体所收到的力。从而对人体受到的伤害有巨大的影响。
在尺寸比较的试验中，尺寸大的车的身前部长度给了乘客在前部碰撞中一定的优势，这个优势影响到了乘客死亡的一半。前部长度越长，碰撞区域越大，乘客受到的力越小。
重量的实验在两部车之间进行，重量大的车会把重量小的车往后推。作为结果，重的车里的人受到的力小于轻的车里的人受到的力。重的车在单车事故里表现的更好，因为他们更有可能推动，使他们所撞的物体产生形变。
IIHS在2009年做了一系列实验，让The Smart Fortwo, Honda Fit and Toyota Yaris同他们生产商所生产的中级车对撞。虽然他们都在前部碰撞实验中获得了good，但是他们在同中级车的碰撞中完全处于下风。

2 Are people less likely to be killed or injured in a bigger, heavier vehicle?
Yes. Driver death rates calculated by IIHS illustrate the real-world advantages of bigger, heavier vehicles. For example, as a group, in 2012 very large cars 1-3 years old had 20 deaths per million registered vehicles, while minicars had 77. Of the 26 vehicles with the lowest driver death rates from the 2005-08 model years during 2006-09, all but three were midsize or larger. More than half of those with the highest rates were small vehicles or minicars. 2

Improvements in crash protection have made vehicles of all sizes safer, but, as illustrated in the figure below, an advantage persists for bigger vehicles, as measured by shadow, or length times width. Size and weight are highly correlated, so the figure would look similar if weight were used instead.

2，是不是人们在大的重的车中死亡几率更小。
是的。大的重的车的驾驶员更有优势，死亡几率更小。举例，在分组中，2012年车龄在1-3年的very large car中，每百万死20个人,minicar中，这个数字上升到77.在05-08那边和06-09年的记录中，死亡率最低的26辆车只有3两不是中型或大型车。死亡率最高的车型中超过一半是小车。
随着时间的推移，车辆的安全性都在上升，但是大和的重车始终占据优势地位。

3 What’s more important, size or weight?
It’s difficult to separate the effect of weight from the effect of size in the real world. However, a recent HLDI analysis did this to some extent by comparing hybrid vehicles with their conventional, nonhybrid twins. 3 These pairs are identical except for the battery packs that give the hybrids extra mass. The analysis of insurance claims found that the odds of being injured in a crash are 25 percent lower for people in hybrids than for people in the nonhybrid versions of the same vehicles. While other factors, including how, when and by whom hybrids are driven also may contribute to their advantage, HLDI concluded that the extra weight is likely a key factor.

Size also confers its own advantages, independent of mass. For example, among 2005-08 models, SUVs weighing 3,001-3,500 pounds had 39 driver deaths per million registered vehicles, compared with 51 for cars in the same weight range. 2

The advantage for SUVs may be connected to their taller profile. For one thing, the taller a vehicle is, the less likely it is to underride another vehicle in a crash. In addition, crash testing suggests that sitting higher makes occupants less likely to have head and chest injuries when their vehicles are struck in the side by shorter vehicles because the point of impact is lower.

This SUV advantage is a relatively new phenomenon. In the past, these vehicles had some of the highest death rates because they were prone to rollover crashes, and that tendency outweighed any advantage from their bigger size. That’s no longer a factor because of less top-heavy designs and the increasing prevalence of electronic stability control, which prevents rollovers and is now required on all new vehicles.

3，大小和重量哪个更有优势？
把重量从大小中分开是很困难的。但是 一个最新的HLDI的分析用混动车和他们非混动版本做了实验，因为混动车的电池给了他们更大的重量，。这个分析报告指出，混动车里的人比非混动车里的人拥有更低的受伤几率(25%)，当然其他因素也对此有影响，但是HLDI认为多余的重量是关键因素。
尺寸也有它的优势，例如 05-08年代的车型中 ，3000-3500磅重的SUV 每百万死39个，而轿车死51.
suv的优势有可能来自他们更高的高度，高的车不大会钻入其他车的车底，另外，坐姿高使得乘客的头胸部受伤几率更小因为撞击点一般比较低
suv的优势是一个新的现象，因为在以前suv有更高的死亡几率因为他们更容易翻车，而且更倾向于超载，但是现在电子系统使翻车几率减小，新的设计也使车身重心降低。

4，Do bigger vehicles pose a threat to occupants of smaller vehicles?
A lighter vehicle will always be at a disadvantage in a collision with a heavier vehicle. Beyond weight differences, SUVs and pickups historically have posed a danger to people in cars because their energy-absorbing structures didn’t line up with those of lower-profile vehicles. As a consequence of such incompatible designs, cars would often underride SUVs and pickups, resulting in more severe damage and a higher risk of injury and death. An analysis of crashes in 2000-01 involving 1997-99 model vehicles showed that SUVs and pickups were much more likely than cars or minivans of the same weight to be involved in crashes that killed occupants of other cars or minivans. 4

This mismatch has faded as a problem in recent years, thanks to new designs of SUVs and pickups. The energy-absorbing structures of these vehicles are now lower so that they line up better with those of cars. The new designs came out of a voluntary agreement forged by automakers, the government and IIHS in 2003. A more recent study of 2008-09 crashes involving 2005-08 models showed that SUVs were no more likely than cars to be in crashes in which occupants of other cars died. 5 Pickups still killed people in other vehicles at a higher rate, but the difference was much smaller than it was previously.

4，是不是更大的车对小车的乘客更有威胁
轻的车在与重的车的碰撞中永远处于劣势。除开重量的不同，suv和皮卡对在轿车中的人更有威胁因为他们吸收能量部位的结构更高。结论是轿车由于结构的关系经常钻入suv和皮卡的车底，导致受伤死亡几率更大。一个00-01的俄碰撞分析指出97-99年的车型中，相同重量的情况下皮卡和suv更容易使得轿车里的人受伤。
这个结论近年来发生变化。得益于suv和皮卡的新的设计。能量吸收部位做的更低了，所以使得轿车的劣势减少。新的设计是由于政府，汽车制造商和iihs2003年的协议。0809年的碰撞研究指出，05-08年的轿车并不会和在suv的碰撞中死更多人。，皮卡仍然使得轿车死更多人，不过差距比以前小得多。

5。。累了。。。和油耗有关我就贴原文了
How can fuel economy be improved without sacrificing safety?
Technological innovations, including electric vehicles, hybrids and more efficient internal combustion engines, are the best way to improve fuel efficiency without affecting occupant protection. These improvements don’t come with the safety tradeoffs that downsizing brings, and in the case of electric and hybrid vehicles, the extra weight from their batteries can provide a safety boost.

Still, automakers rely on a variety of strategies to meet fuel economy standards and that includes making vehicles lighter. In the past, manufacturers met fleetwide fuel targets by selling more small cars to balance out the bigger gas guzzlers. The current standards, in effect for 2012-16 models, have addressed this problem by tying fuel economy requirements to a vehicle’s footprint, roughly defined as the square footage outlined by a vehicle’s wheels. In the new system, simply replacing a big vehicle with a small one wouldn’t help meet targets because the smaller vehicle has to meet a more stringent target. This framework will continue under standards that have been finalized for 2017-21.

A government analysis of potential weight reductions in vehicle fleets found that the risk of fatalities doesn’t go up as long as the reductions are concentrated in the heaviest vehicles. 6 In contrast, an across-the-board cut of 100 pounds from every vehicle would cause fatalities involving cars weighing less than 3,106 pounds to rise 1.6 percent. The calculations included not only fatalities of people inside a given vehicle, but also occupants of other vehicles and pedestrians.

大概意思是混动车由于多出来的重量更安全，但是厂商仍然在做轻量化，再恶性事故中，轻于3106磅的车每轻100磅死亡几率高1.6%


总结，大的重的车比小的轻车车更安全。相同的车重的比轻的更安全。suv比轿车安全。再恶性事故中，轻于3106磅的车每轻100磅死亡几率高1.6%。

本帖最后由 stkoichi 于 2015-6-30 11:27 通过手机版编辑

posted by wap, platform: SONY Z1
身大力不亏！

posted by wap, platform: nubia Z7 Mini
本来越重的车就是以更高的油耗，更差的加速和操控性，更大的对第三者（路人飞机）的安全威胁，来换取和比自己更轻的车辆碰撞时候的相对幸存优势。我觉得这算是一种典型的恶性循环，狠的通吃全赢。

posted by wap, platform: Galaxy Note III
坐等某些人来喷IIHS是个山寨机构

posted by wap, platform: ZTE
这玩儿可以类比的，最极端的例子就是坦克，最极端的例子就是自行车。

结论是神车党赢了？

引用:

原帖由 slr 于 2015-6-30 12:09 发表
结论是神车党赢了？

结论是比亚迪的唐可能是史上最安全的汽车

SUV 车身高，带电池（重）:D

posted by wap, platform: Android
和坛子里的结论大相径庭啊，真是胡说八道

引用:

原帖由 realclone 于 2015-6-30 12:21 发表
posted by wap, platform: Android
和坛子里的结论大相径庭啊，真是胡说八道

又轻又安全的车不是没有，比如各种超跑各种高性能车，但是都属于特例了，在这种调查里肯定体现不出来的，这种调查就是针对广大买菜车的。

引用:

原帖由 stkoichi 于 2015-6-30 12:18 发表



结论是比亚迪的唐可能是史上最安全的汽车

SUV 车身高，带电池（重）:D

东风加长分分钟教它做人

posted by wap, platform: Chrome
如果就个例来说，两车相撞，总归是重的比较合算

而如果从事故来分析，两个轻的车碰撞的总伤害是要比两个重的车碰撞总伤害要少的。

从这个角度来说，别人都轻，你开重的车是合算的，但是大家一起轻的话就更合算，这时候需要各种政策、法规来引导和限制了，让市场上的车重降下来，减少事故的危害。否则就是劣币淘汰良币，大家都开坦克

这段时间日精们有些着急

posted by wap, platform: iPhone
本来就是这样，基本的物理定律而已。而且有个前提，其他条件相同。小车车头撞大车车门，结果可不一定小车吃亏。车架设计，刚性等都有积极作用。

只不过汽车厂商不是坦克厂商，必须找个平衡。轻量化是个趋势。

posted by wap, platform: Galaxy Note III

引用:

原帖由 @firesun  于 2015-6-30 12:35 发表
如果就个例来说，两车相撞，总归是重的比较合算

而如果从事故来分析，两个轻的车碰撞的总伤害是要比两个重的车碰撞总伤害要少的。

从这个角度来说，别人都轻，你开重的车是合算的，但是大家一起轻的话就更合算，这时候需要各种政策、法规来引导和限制了，让市场上的车重降下来，减少事故的危害。否则就是劣币淘汰良币，大家都开坦克

囚徒困境就是这样，你想牺牲自己？

看看美国总统的车队就清楚了