SAFE car for a new baby

You completely missed my point and ignored my question...................

................

Your question was as follows

Are you seriously making out that an SUV is equivalent to (say) a small car, if they both crashed side on into an average car? Are you really saying that the larger, heavier, SUV with greater ground clearance would not do more damage?

I know the Laws of Physics and I am not doubting them. It's obvious a heavier vehicle will have more momentum and will cause greater damage. However the same argument can be thrown at the driver of every car that is involved in an impact with a smaller car.

I will pick my vehicle with my own, and my passengers', interests of primary concern. Self preservation is paramount.

I know this is a tangent, but isn't that half the fun of Internet forums.

Going back to the original query, I would not consider any of the following to be a "safe" car for today's driving conditions
Skoda Octavia
Honda Civic (new)
Opel Astra.
Ford Focus.
Toyota Corrolla.

Go for something big and safe.
 
So this raises the question of lots of things but I would like to ask you for advice on a car for my preganat wife that will keep her safe during her pregnancy and then keep my child safe when he is born.
Why not just drive carefully/cautiously to reduce the risk of accident?
 
Why not just drive carefully/cautiously to reduce the risk of accident?

Sure, that's part of it -but a fairly simplistic answer to the original question.
One can only attempt to reduce the risk of an accident by they themselves driving carefully;
something I'm fairly sure the OP has every intention of driving carefully/cautiously given his concern for his pregnant wife and unborn child evident by his asking the question in the first place.
Unfortunately, one cannot fully be responsible or even hope to prevent some fool from crashing into your car due to their careless driving.
 
I'm perfectly happy with my car, which is far from big.

I chose it based on what I want, not what others wanted or on what others think.

Why do you ask?
 
Don't you agree?

It's about the size of a Picasso or Scenic, and that's not big, by any stretch of the imagination.
 
A guy in a yaris rear ended me about a month ago, his front end was smashed in, leaking fluids everywhere, not a scratch on mine. (Toyota Land Cruiser Comm) tow bar and rear mounted wheel did all the damage.

I'd say he did about 4K-5K damage to his motor.
 
Don't you agree?

It's about the size of a Picasso or Scenic, and that's not big, by any stretch of the imagination.

No I don't agree.

I must sort out a fews stats. to either prove my theory (or blow it apart).
 
From carzone.ie

Picasso (1.6 Diesel)
overall length (mm): 4,276, overall length (inches): 168.3, overall width (mm): 1,751, overall width (inches): 68.9, overall height (mm): 1,637, overall height (inches): 64.4,


Xtrail 2.2dCi
overall length (mm): 4,455, overall length (inches): 175.4, overall width (mm): 1,765, overall width (inches): 69.5, overall height (mm): 1,750, overall height (inches): 68.9,

So Xtrail is 7 inches longer, 0.6 inches wider and 4.5 inches taller. Not a lot, and nothing significant.

Let's look at Grand Scenic?
overall length (mm): 4,493, overall length (inches): 176.9, overall width (mm): 1,810, overall width (inches): 71.3, overall height (mm): 1,636, overall height (inches): 64.4,

Hey, it's longer than Xtrail (not by much), it's wider too (not by much) and, coincidentally, not, (2 French cars) it's the same height as the Picasso.
 
A guy in a yaris rear ended me about a month ago, his front end was smashed in, leaking fluids everywhere, not a scratch on mine. (Toyota Land Cruiser Comm) tow bar and rear mounted wheel did all the damage.

I'd say he did about 4K-5K damage to his motor.

A crumple zone makes a car safer for the occupants. If there was no crumple zone, the sudden decelleration would be much more severe.
 
I had a look at a XTrail today. It's not huge inside.

I can't see the point having one if you don't go off road regularly. It handles and brakes worse than a comparable car. It's also heavier so less fuel efficient.

Each to their own I suppose.
 
"I can't see the point having one if you don't go off road regularly."

Towing.
 
I had a look at a XTrail today. It's not huge inside.

......................

As I said.

....................

I can't see the point having one if you don't go off road regularly. It handles and brakes worse than a comparable car. It's also heavier so less fuel efficient.

Each to their own I suppose.

Given the state of Ireland's roads it's a hell of a lot better on the rough stuff than any saloon car. I find it great.

I have the 4WD version, the only one worth having. Four Wheel drive is a huge benefit for traction and grip and of enormous help when towing something.

Less fuel efficient? In case anybody hasn't noticed, it's litres per week that costs money, not litres/00km. A 4wd Xtrail will return 38mpg, by the way. Fuel is only one factor in the cost of a car, depreciation to biggest. BTW the annual road tax, at e722, is ridiculous, equal to the cost of 6000 miles of driving.

Other favourable attributes are the driving position, relatively high, and safe, and the general performance of the car.

w.r.t. the handling? The onus is on the driver of this vehicle, and all vehicles, to drive safely and within the limits of the car. It's amazing how many people blame the car (usually an SUV) for it's handling deficiencies, and not the driver for recognising the limits of his vehicle.

I'd have an Xtrail over a Primera (closest Nissan product, in size) any day of the week. In fact I'd never drive a Primera, I think they are absolutely dreadful.

Each to their own, I suppose!
 
Back
Top