"My tiny, gas-saving car saved my life"

I think ppl in the US haven't seen small cars since the 70s-80s, and they still think they're the same. SUVs are safer now than they were in the 90s, but small cars are also much safer than they used to be, and you're right about active safety.

The best accident is the one you avoid.

Car safety is such a complex issue.

You need to take into account :

1) Other vehicles on the road, first and foremost, your security depends on others.
If the road is full of very old, big, heavy, unsafe vehicles like in the USA, is very different situation rather than considering EU states where car inspection is compulsory every 2 years (and every 1 year/6months for vehicles older than 10 years), and if your car is not safe they won't let you drive it again. Of course if you drive a smart car in an highway crowded with old pickups, you are assuming much ricks than driving in a highway full of other smart cars.

2) Active security = all the accidents you can avoid thanks to good trim, good brakes, low centre of gravity, properly inflated and in good state tyres, electronic aids like ABS / ESP / whatever. These above are almost not dependent on the vehicle size, altough they are obviously more difficult to achieve on designed-for-hi-load vehicles (pick-ups, lorryes), bad engineered vehicles like some usa produces suvs, and cheap/old vehicles...

3) Passive security. This no longer translates necessarily in "the more size between me and the obstacle, the better". Taking into account only the size is very wrong, indeed.
Look at a formula one / indy single-seater cars, you have not even a roof on your head, you can almost touch your opponents on the race track, but they are so stiff they will be most likely able to surive a 150mph impact on a concrete wall without the need of an airbag and such.

Look at rally (wrc) 4x4 cars, they have a roll bar and security bars, so that if you are properly fastened to your seatbelt and wearing a helmet you will survive better than in most accident.

Well, newest small cars do the same, you have a very stiff structure, you have several airbags all around you (this avoid the need of a helmet, which would indeed be unconfortable ;-) and all the non-vital part of the car are designed to absorb the impact rather than repel it. So they are designed to adsorb A LOT of impact energy.

Ten years ago my brother and his girlfriend experienced a head-on crash against another car who was being driven by a drunk person the wrong way. They were cruising at 43 mph in a 1996 VW Jetta and the drunk was doing 50 mph in a 1983 Opel Kadett; so the relative speed was very high (43 + 50 = 93 mph). Both cars were totaled.

My brother and his girlfriend needed to wear neck restraints for about a month and they had a seatbelt-shaped haematoma during days, but that was it.

In 2005 my dad went off the road driving his 2001 Dodge Neon. An earlier car accident left a very dangerous oil spill, so my dad was just one of the three other vehicles that spinned out of control. The Neon tipped over the roof and was stopped by a big tree. All passengers (dad, mom and grandma) were uninjured.

It's important to note that in both instances all were using their seatbelts, who kept them securely placed in their seats. Had they not, and they would have been expelled through the windows facing death by crashing against the asphalt or other vehicles. Always buckle up.

Have had one big crash in my Dads rebuilt tank I borrowed for the day, a head on crash into me I couldn't avoid. My only real crash.

Avoided many crashes with my own small cars over the years. Stop faster, turn quicker, maneuver easier, don't rollover easy.

Buy small-live long-live well.

I have an 07 Fit (the 09 is a new model, which I haven't driven, thus the distinction) and I've never felt so safe. Every poster above is correct - the agility of the car and the awareness of the driver are key. And the knowledge that the inside of my car is lined with airbags doesn't hurt, either...

On another note - I notice that larger SUVs (I live in Hummerland, it seems) either don't note that I'm next to them or can't see me, or just assume that they're big enough I'll get out of their way, because I've never used my horn as much as I do in this car to alert people who are drifting into my lane that I am there. I shudder to think of similar situations where the small-car driver isn't as aware or the large-car driver is overly distracted.

So glad for everyone above who survived their accidents. It's a good day when you can say that.

We also need to remember that in general, small cars handle better than big ones, so even IF big vehicles fared better in most crashes, small cars can suffer fewer accidents, thus making them safer. Unfortunately the accidents you avoid, like the power you don't use, are generally not recorded as easily by statistics, and they don't show up on the evening news like a Yaris crushed by an 18 wheeler would. So, most people look no further than that for their information.

But even the assumption that given two equally well designed and well built cars with equally good handling, the bigger one is safer, is simply wrong. Yes, in any given collision of two vehicles, the bigger of the two vehicles is likely to come away with less damage. But if two cars of the same size collide, the smaller they each are, the better; if two cars of unequal size collide and you shrink them both, both will fare better; and if a car collides with a stationary, essentially immovable obstacle, then the smaller it is, the better; it is all because smaller cars with less mass have less momentum and less kinetic energy. Middle school level physics, here.

A few years ago my Honda Civic was rear ended by a Ford F350 doing about 40mph. The car was totaled, but I walked away without a scratch.

OOH care safety.
These engineers are doing extraordinary things, the one I've always been impressed with is crumple zones and looking at the photo of the car shows it well, The engine compartment has literally been crushed into something almost unrecognizable, YET the passenger compartment is still almost completely intact.

Many Many bigger cars simple don't get that sort of thought put into them, but smaller cars (sedans and smaller) get a ton of new technology being built in.

If no one minds
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/crumple-zone.htm

That link is brilliant for explaining crumple zones and theres tons more on there about car safety technology to read about

The Yaris has a fairly high (4 or 5 I think) rating in the EU statutory EuroNCAP crash testing, a 5 rating being best.

Of course it will survive and accident like that!

There is NO safety argument for big cars, period.

My father walked away from a head on in spain driving a renault scenic at highway speed. Nothing more than a stiff neck and some bruising from the seatbelt.

Crumple zones, airbags and seatbelts......

Also, driving small more nimble cars that can stop in a shorter distance means less accidents to pedestrians. I think most people have had to slam on the breaks for somebody stupidly stepping out onto the road at some stage in there driving.

One day i nearly hit a child who walked out onto the road without looking. I pulled up about a foot short only because i was driving my mothers celica at the time. Had i have been driving my old ford it would have been game over and i was only doing 30.....

"Passive security. This no longer translates necessarily in 'the more size between me and the obstacle, the better'. Taking into account only the size is very wrong, indeed."

That is incorrect. While weight of a vehicle is not necessarily an indicator of safety, "'the more size between me and the obstacle, the better" HAS been demonstrated as directly linked to safety.

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/02/sorry_detroit_h.php

As such, if two vehicles of similar design collide, the occupants of the larger ARE more likely to fare better than those in the smaller vehicle. Check any list of safest vehicles. You will not see many if any small cars.

"Avoided many crashes with my own small cars over the years. Stop faster, turn quicker, maneuver easier, don't rollover easy."

Both from data and my experiences driving vehicles both large and small and on the street and track, the size of a vehicle is less critical to it agility than weight distribution, ratio of center of mass height to track width, suspension design, and quality of tires. Were size the most critical determinant, the best handling cars in the world would be Smart Cars and the like, but they aren't. Many large cars stop faster and handle better as well or better than many small cars.

Small cars, especially front wheel drive cars, often have especially poor weight distribution with approximately 2/3 of their weight on their front tires; due to their narrow width and equal height have disproportionately high centers of mass; tend to employ more "compact" suspension designs, which compromise function for the sake of packaging; and tend to have narrower tires which reduces contact with the road surface. (Low rolling resistance tires, which are used widely by high efficiency vehicles, also reduce the vehicles agility, as they tend to exhibit less grip on the road surface.)

Further, though many small cars achieve high ratings from crash tests, those tests and ratings largely involve crashing the vehicle into a fixed object which isolates mass from the equation. As such where a vehicle collides with another vehicle, those ratings are considered by many to be relavent only to a collision with another vehicle of similar mass.

"Many Many bigger cars simple don't get that sort of thought put into them, but smaller cars (sedans and smaller) get a ton of new technology being built in."

Source? As a matter of fact, safety tends to "trickle down" from larger, more expensive vehicles to the smaller less expensive ones. As a matter of economics, the cost of the technology is more easily absorbed by the higher cost and margins of the larger vehicles.

If all vehicles were smaller, we would be better off, but as long as there is disparity, those in the larger vehicles have an advantage.

(By the way, I drive a compact hatchback, so I am not biase by my vehicle ownership. I consciously accept my risk.)

I think there should be an old-SUV buyback effort. Either a private NGO effort or a government program.

It's the perfect time. Old SUVs are dangerous, yet cheap, so they are driven by young (also dangerous) drivers.

The purchased SUVs should be dismantled. Some parts can be sold as is, but the engine block should be disabled and sold for scrap metal.

On cars.com I just checked and found 681 Ford Expeditions for less than $3,000, starting at $900. If I had the cash I'd buy them all, and junk them. Safer roads, less pollution. What more could you want?

My boyfriend and I were in a crash 3 years ago in a 2000 Civic. It looked much like Nick's car did after we were run off the highway at 75mph (by a presumably drunk driver, they never caught him) and rolled 3 times. The car was massively wrecked, my boyfriend had a mild concussion, I was basically uninjured. I don't know how a larger vehicle would have taken the impact but the civic held up remarkably well - there was almost no damage to the passenger compartment of the car, even after a high speed roll. A friend told me someone was looking out for us that day - I believe it was the engineers at Honda.

On related note - I won't drive over about 70mph on US highways. The road quality is poor, the driver quality is poor, semi-trucks drive like lunatics, and I figure the closer I'm going to the speed limit the better my chances of survival are. However, I recently had occasion to drive in France & Germany. The roads are SUPERB, all the cars are small, modern and safe, the drivers are extremely competent, the semis remain in the right lane AT ALL TIMES while going 50mph (they are equipped with governers). It is easy to drive 85mph and feel entirely safe. It was a wonderful experience to drive 2000km and not feel like potential disaster was lurking around every curve.

I was in an accident January or 2008. I was hit on the passenger's side of my two door toyota yaris. My tiny wonder flipped over and landed belly up. I crawled out of the drivers window with only a small scratch on my pinkie finger. My airbags didn't deploy, but I was left unharmed.

This definitely does address one issue people have with smaller cars and proves that a lot of their issues are in fact myths. I believe that this is one factor that companies should market more aggressively..

thats great... not about the crash, about the fact that people are walking away with just scratches from small cars that have been in massive accidents... I am looking for a car now so I thought of the I-go...tho the Yaris is also quite good. the problem I face with small cars is that they are a little cramped on the inside... I am 6'4" and have trouble finding a car that can comfortably fit me behind the wheel...

I drive a 2007 Yaris liftback. I purchased it after a minivan kindly destroyed the front end of my 1991 Camry in a 40 mph impact (mostly frontal).
This car has 8 airbags and ABS--far more "protection" than most cars. I think about Demolition Man every time I think about my airbags--I'd be surrounded by HOW many? Where would I fit? But that aside, I can attest that it's sheer tiny size has saved it from multiple impacts already: I can, without leaving my own lane, swerve to avoid another car. And braking distance is incredible--there is no mass to stop. I trust it to crumple if I do get hit, thus saving me from taking the force. And after my last experience, I have a whole new appreciation for that.

I had a 2008 yaris for 5 weeks. On its 5 weekaversary, I flipped it into an embankment at 65mph. It did one complete rollover. I landed on the wheels, facing in the direction I had been heading from. The car was deemed totaled due to damage to the frame. I had not a scratch. It was nowhere near as intense a roll as this person's, but I've never felt better about a car.