Minivan is safer than SUV ! - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>Automobile - 车轮上的传奇

Minivan is safer than SUV !

Minivan is safer than SUV !# Automobile - 车轮上的传奇

l*g2014-07-08 07:07

1 楼

就是周末2天懒了一些，只顾着出去玩，泵的不是很勤，结果周一的时候奶量突然大
减。虽然加紧喝汤灌水，可是3天了还是回不来。怎么办？是不是这个月份奶量已经
没救了？？
有没有妈妈可以告诉我？？如果真就这样没了，我倒是可以开始减肥了，唉我这个不
负责的后妈～～～

c*o2014-07-08 07:07

2 楼

福布斯：iPhone不再酷了青少年转向三星(图)
新闻来源: 新浪科技于January 14, 2013 03:43:13 敬请注意:新闻取自各大新闻媒体
,观点内容不代表本网立场! [转发本条新闻到微博]
www.6park.com
由于创新乏力，iPhone品牌在青少年中的号召力下滑
www.6park.com
据《福布斯》杂志网络版上周报道，多家市场研究机构的调查结果显示，由于创新
乏力，不再像以前那样“酷劲十足”，苹果iPhone品牌在美国青少年中的号召力正在下
滑。 www.6park.com
魅力逐渐消退 www.6park.com
对于美国青少年来说，他们不希望自己的手机同父母、牙医或是咖啡调配师的一样
。相反，他们渴望拥有能反映他们这一代人精神面貌的最新、最酷的手机。 www.6park
.com
三星近来推出了最新款Galaxy手机，而微软也不甘落后，大举进军硬件市场，发布
了Surface平板电脑。相比之下，iPhone虽然每年都会推陈出新，都毕竟已上市五年时
间。 www.6park.com
另外一个不利于iPhone品牌形象的因素是，在美国，许多父母在更换新机时，往往
会将老款iPhone留给孩子。与此同时，三星和其他Android手机的价格更为低廉，使得
家长更有可能给孩子们购买Android新机。 www.6park.com
市场研究机构Insites-Consulting分析师乔里·范登伯格(Van den Bergh)说：“
外界有关iPhone 5的报道确实有一些是负面的，除了屏幕尺寸和重量外，它和iPhone
4S相比没有实质性的重大创新，这也对iPhone原本具有的炫酷形象带来了影响。”结果
，在当代美国青少年眼中，iPhone的魅力正在逐渐消退。 www.6park.com
青少年市场营销机构Buzz分析师蒂娜·威尔斯(Tina Wells)表示：“孩子们告诉我
们说，苹果产品不再新潮。为了迎合‘X一代’(指出生于20世纪60年代中期至70年代末
的一代人)和2000年前出生的孩子的需求，苹果可谓下足了功夫，但我认为，他们并未
准确把握2000年及以后出生的孩子的心理，微软Surface和三星Galaxy如今在他们心目
中的地位开始上升。” www.6park.com
三星强势崛起 www.6park.com
种种迹象表明，最年轻的智能手机用户群对苹果的不满情绪在过去几个月日趋显现
。例如，Smarty Pants等市场营销机构的调查结果显示，苹果在青少年手机用户中的地
位正在下滑或持平。 www.6park.com
美国投资银行派杰报告称，在富裕人家的孩子中，虽然仍有67%表示在更换新机时
会倾向于购买iPhone，但三星也以22%的支持率位居第二。在12个月以前，如果有青少
年更青睐iPhone以外的手机，简直令人无法想象。 www.6park.com
iPhone品牌影响力下滑有多方面的原因。威尔斯说，“苹果产品的确掀起了一场完
美风暴”，但随着它们多次遭遇技术问题，而竞争对手却以更低的价格推出更酷、更具
创新力的产品，在这场较量中逐渐发力，让苹果感受到越来越大的压力。 www.6park.
com
特别是三星，这家韩国电子产品巨头在与苹果竞争中的手段更激进，并取得了积极
进展。根据市场研究机构Strategy Analytics的数据，2012年第三季度三星智能手机出
货量达到5690万部，几乎是同期苹果iPhone 2690万部的两倍。 www.6park.com
三星还在法庭上与苹果展开了激烈竞争，希望进一步搞垮后者的形象。一家与三星
有合作关系的广告公司高管透露，“法律诉讼的闸门已经打开，三星肯定希望加入这场
纷争，所以他们比以前任何时候都激进，希望通过媒体宣传将青少年群体纳入他们的版
图。”
展开广告攻势 www.6park.com
为此，三星在过去短短几个月投入数百万美元展开广告攻势，将iPhone描述成是父
母等年龄更大的用户喜欢的手机，而青少年则应该拥抱“下一个大事件”。三星另一个
重大策略则是将矛头对准苹果的公司文化，强调让用户排队购买一款智能手机的做法是
多么的荒唐。 www.6park.com
与此同时，RIM也试图重新赢得青少年的青睐，与Extreme International等一系列
以青少年为导向的品牌建立了合作，旨在面向16岁至20岁的用户群开发黑莓专用应用和
移动产品。尽管如此，分析师也指出，苹果的命运最终掌握在自己而非竞争对手手中。
www.6park.com
威尔斯说：“一切事情都在往复循环，苹果不该沉迷于过去的辉煌。你必须做出改
变以保持相关性。苹果需要专注于创新，仅凭这一点就能重新赢得青少年的关注。”
www.6park.com
青少年品牌营销机构Mr. Youth分析师马特·布里顿(Matt Britton)最后表示，“
三星和Android平台的确是一个可怕的竞争对手。但是，苹果生态系统高度完善，产品
组合十分完美，在可以预见的未来，增长前景一片光明。别忘了，美国智能手机市场的
渗透率刚刚超过50%，Android手机和iPhone这两大阵营将来只会继续增长。”

H*E2014-07-08 07:07

3 楼

I am confused here... a few IDs on this board were saying SUV is safer
than Minivan. but that's not what I found. look at the article below:
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/are-suvs-more-danger
Children are less likely to be killed or injured in a crash if they are
riding in a minivan than an S.U.V., according to new safety research.
In a study first published in the journal Injury Prevention, researchers
from the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Michigan and the
Center for Injury Research and Prevention at the Children’s Hospital of
Philadelphia, looked at fatal and injury-producing crashes between 2000 and
2006, involving 1998 to 2007 model vehicles. The S.U.V.’s included classic
body-on-frame models, as well as crossovers, which use car-type construction.
When it came to crashes that caused injuries but not deaths, Dr. Dennis
Durbin of the Center for Injury Research and Prevention said children in
minivans were 35 percent less likely to be hurt than children in S.U.V.’s.
Dr. Durbin, who drives a minivan, isn’t sure what is behind that, but he
had a couple of theories. One was that the structure of the minivan may
absorb energy better than a body-on-frame S.U.V. The other was that there
seemed to be more room inside minivans, he said. “There is a lot of space
for them to move around in without hitting each other or some component of
the vehicle.”
Looking at fatal crashes, there was a 24 percent greater chance of a child
being killed in an S.U.V. than a minivan, the researchers found. Dr. Durbin
said the reason for that was clear: S.U.V.’s had more rollover crashes. The
study found that 66 percent of the S.U.V. fatalities involved a rollover,
compared with 37 percent for minivans.
When vehicles with such high centers of gravity are sliding sideways, they
are most vulnerable to being tripped by a curb or deep snow, causing them to
roll over. Electronic stability control features try to automatically
correct for a vehicle that is sliding. “If you could mitigate the rollover
you would mitigate a huge proportion of the fatality risk for the kids in
the S.U.V.,” Dr. Durbin said. “Once you account for the tendency of the
vehicle to roll over, the effect of the vehicle isn’t there anymore.”
There was one issue for which the researchers could not compensate: driver
behavior. Dr. Durbin hypothesizes that drivers of minivans are more cautious
. S.U.V. drivers, he said, may “tend to drive a little more aggressively.”
“They may adopt the risk compensation model,” he said. “They figure, ‘I
am in a tank — I can be a little more aggressive on the road,’ and the
fact is you can’t be.”
For parents, Dr. Durbin said the study’s message was that if they need an S
.U.V. instead of a minivan they should get one with electronic stability
control. It should also be one that has done well on the rollover-resistance
tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and
available here.
Dr. Durbin acknowledged that the researchers had a complex problem when they
compared the safety of the two vehicle types. The issue was, real-world
crashes are incredibly complicated and varied events.
Dr. Durbin said one thing was more important than the type of vehicle:
having the child in the proper kind of safety restraint. “That is a more
powerful protector of risk of injury or death than the type of vehicle you
drive.”

l*g2014-07-08 07:07

4 楼

底盘高的碰撞占优势
以前suv因为顶棚不够结实，翻车几率又大，所以被妖魔化了
自从iihs加测顶棚，各厂家用了最新的稳定系统以后，suv翻车几率大大减小，死亡率
降低更多
iihs 有研究结果，minivan只比compact suv好，连midsize suv都不如
minivan一死一车人的车祸例子不少
Note: Passenger versions of vans often referred to as minivans are
classified as cars.
Passenger vehicle occupant deaths by vehicle type, 1975-2010

and
classic

【在 H**E 的大作中提到】

: I am confused here... a few IDs on this board were saying SUV is safer
: than Minivan. but that's not what I found. look at the article below:
: http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/are-suvs-more-danger
: Children are less likely to be killed or injured in a crash if they are
: riding in a minivan than an S.U.V., according to new safety research.
: In a study first published in the journal Injury Prevention, researchers
: from the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Michigan and the
: Center for Injury Research and Prevention at the Children’s Hospital of
: Philadelphia, looked at fatal and injury-producing crashes between 2000 and
: 2006, involving 1998 to 2007 model vehicles. The S.U.V.’s included classic

h*r2014-07-08 07:07

5 楼

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/10/19/11447681-sun.html
It's a kind-of outdated study (just look at the publication date and the
model years in the investigation), when SUVs are highly subject to rolling
over.
Most of the folks here refer to ground clearance safety, where SUVs are
advantageous than minivans. Thus, SUVs are safer than minivans for small
accidents.
For bigger collisions, I think minivan should be equally safe given that
there's more room.
I don't think minivan has any structural advantage over SUVs' body-on-frame
design in terms of safety. A few years back, I saw the following article,
where a minivan was cut in half - this kind of structure is really not very
good. I personally never heard of a SUV got split into halves - please let
me know if there's any.
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/10/19/11447681-sun.html

and
classic

【在 H**E 的大作中提到】

N*n2014-07-08 07:07

6 楼

09年的suv也就Xc90还在用当时的技术吧？

i*x2014-07-08 07:07

7 楼

帮你贴点婊子数据
http://iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4605.pdf

【在 l*******g 的大作中提到】

: 底盘高的碰撞占优势
: 以前suv因为顶棚不够结实，翻车几率又大，所以被妖魔化了
: 自从iihs加测顶棚，各厂家用了最新的稳定系统以后，suv翻车几率大大减小，死亡率
: 降低更多
: iihs 有研究结果，minivan只比compact suv好，连midsize suv都不如
: minivan一死一车人的车祸例子不少
: Note: Passenger versions of vans often referred to as minivans are
: classified as cars.
: Passenger vehicle occupant deaths by vehicle type, 1975-2010
:

B*Z2014-07-08 07:07

8 楼

你不是说死亡率统计没有用么？死亡率只和开车的人脾气有关。所以Sienna死亡率比Gr
and Charokee 低，所以Grand Cherokee死亡率比Grand Caravan低。这个逻辑我到现在
还没有搞明白。

【在 l*******g 的大作中提到】

l*g2014-07-08 07:07

9 楼

死亡率当然有用，但是只统计1年或者2、3年，司机的死亡率那绝对是屁用没有
我给的死亡率是长时间大范围数据，不光是司机

Gr

【在 B*Z 的大作中提到】

: 你不是说死亡率统计没有用么？死亡率只和开车的人脾气有关。所以Sienna死亡率比Gr
: and Charokee 低，所以Grand Cherokee死亡率比Grand Caravan低。这个逻辑我到现在
: 还没有搞明白。

B*Z2014-07-08 07:07

10 楼

你这里面根本就没有Minivan数据，哪里来的结论。你意思minivan和yaris一样安全么？

【在 l*******g 的大作中提到】

P*C2014-07-08 07:07

11 楼

选suv不选minivan的有几个是因为安全因素的外观是主因吧

h*r2014-07-08 07:07

12 楼

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/10/19/11447681-sun.html

【在 P*C 的大作中提到】

: 选suv不选minivan的有几个是因为安全因素的外观是主因吧

P*C2014-07-08 07:07

13 楼

太狠了，不过你要小心开minivan的弟兄开骂阿

【在 h**********r 的大作中提到】

: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/10/19/11447681-sun.html

l*g2014-07-08 07:07

14 楼

minivan算在very large sedan里面

么？

【在 B*Z 的大作中提到】

: 你这里面根本就没有Minivan数据，哪里来的结论。你意思minivan和yaris一样安全么？

f*r2014-07-08 07:07

15 楼

你說這種高速的車身中間的衝擊，如果換成SUV會好些嗎？
純討論
我覺得也夠嗆這個衝擊太變態了

【在 P*C 的大作中提到】

:
: 太狠了，不过你要小心开minivan的弟兄开骂阿

h*r2014-07-08 07:07

16 楼

What's wrong with you? It's an isolated event that actually happened and
documented.
There's nothing involving with anybody's feelings or personal opinions. It's
just a factual matter. What the hell is wrong with you?
I just hate this kind of activity by people with some kind of 3rd-party tone
to promote conflict in this board. If there's similar things happened to a
SUV, I'd like to hear that too - just collecting different sides of the
story.

【在 P*C 的大作中提到】

:
: 太狠了，不过你要小心开minivan的弟兄开骂阿

P*C2014-07-08 07:07

17 楼

不懂不敢乱说

【在 f*********r 的大作中提到】

: 你說這種高速的車身中間的衝擊，如果換成SUV會好些嗎？
: 純討論
: 我覺得也夠嗆這個衝擊太變態了

P*C2014-07-08 07:07

18 楼

's
tone
a
你脑子不好吗，首先你从哪看到我要挑起矛盾了，让你小心就是挑起矛盾?
另外你自己发个minivan被撞两节的帖子哪个是挑起矛盾

【在 h**********r 的大作中提到】

: What's wrong with you? It's an isolated event that actually happened and
: documented.
: There's nothing involving with anybody's feelings or personal opinions. It's
: just a factual matter. What the hell is wrong with you?
: I just hate this kind of activity by people with some kind of 3rd-party tone
: to promote conflict in this board. If there's similar things happened to a
: SUV, I'd like to hear that too - just collecting different sides of the
: story.

h*r2014-07-08 07:07

19 楼

You don't know what you're talking about.

【在 P*C 的大作中提到】

:
: 's
: tone
: a
: 你脑子不好吗，首先你从哪看到我要挑起矛盾了，让你小心就是挑起矛盾?
: 另外你自己发个minivan被撞两节的帖子哪个是挑起矛盾

m*s2014-07-08 07:07

20 楼

一辆以55迈速度行驶的卡罗拉，撞击停止的车的驾驶员正门，哪些车可以使坐在被撞击
车里的驾驶员不受很大的伤害？
家美丽？
怕塞特？
西耶纳？
T&C？
mini?
F150？
途锐？
MDX？
GL550？
阿可低压？
18轮？
消防车？

【在 f*********r 的大作中提到】

: 你說這種高速的車身中間的衝擊，如果換成SUV會好些嗎？
: 純討論
: 我覺得也夠嗆這個衝擊太變態了

P*C2014-07-08 07:07

21 楼

你懂行了吧我服了你了大哥

【在 h**********r 的大作中提到】

: You don't know what you're talking about.

m*s2014-07-08 07:07

22 楼

怎么没人回答这个这么有意义的问题？

【在 m********s 的大作中提到】

: 一辆以55迈速度行驶的卡罗拉，撞击停止的车的驾驶员正门，哪些车可以使坐在被撞击
: 车里的驾驶员不受很大的伤害？
: 家美丽？
: 怕塞特？
: 西耶纳？
: T&C？
: mini?
: F150？
: 途锐？
: MDX？

c*l2014-07-08 07:07

23 楼

这是轮椅传奇版，不让你坐上轮椅就白混了.

and
classic

【在 H**E 的大作中提到】

h*r2014-07-08 07:07

24 楼

/sign.
What I meant was that it's easy to stir a hectic discussion in this board.
So I've developed high sensitivity to some comment (even not intended) that
may result in personal attacks...
well, on the other hand, it's also kind of fun. It's not kind of fun to
debate based on subjective matters, but no fun at all discussing over facts.
:-)

【在 P*C 的大作中提到】

:
: 你懂行了吧我服了你了大哥

e*g2014-07-08 07:07

25 楼

哥，你这么多语法错误为神马不用中文呢？

that
facts.

【在 h**********r 的大作中提到】

: /sign.
: What I meant was that it's easy to stir a hectic discussion in this board.
: So I've developed high sensitivity to some comment (even not intended) that
: may result in personal attacks...
: well, on the other hand, it's also kind of fun. It's not kind of fun to
: debate based on subjective matters, but no fun at all discussing over facts.
: :-)

P*C2014-07-08 07:07

26 楼

that
facts.
你敏不敏感不管我事没事别朝别人喷显素质

【在 h**********r 的大作中提到】

h*r2014-07-08 07:07

27 楼

Since your response is inappropriate and I just point it out to you.
It is different to decry you.

【在 P*C 的大作中提到】

:
: that
: facts.
: 你敏不敏感不管我事没事别朝别人喷显素质

H*u2014-07-08 07:07

28 楼

拿某个车祸来得出的结论都不值一提，正式研究要做严格细致的统计，即便如此作者也
经常对自己的结论有所保留。不过这个车祸如果换成同年份的SUV，被宝马侧撞可能会
有更好的结果。虽然IIHS侧撞实验撞击能量相同，可以跨类比较，也就是某个侧撞Good
的Car比某个侧撞Poor的SUV更能承受侧撞，前提是实际车祸的受力面与IIHS小车侧撞时
受力面一致，包括撞击高度和前后位置，尤其是撞击高度。但同时有另外一个关键问题
，IIHS侧撞小车是刚性的，被撞车吸收绝大部分能量；而被宝马5系侧撞时，宝马5系会
吸收部分能量，具体有多少能量分配到被撞车上，会影响到实际受损，而被撞车底盘高
度和侧面吸能区位置会影响到能量分配。
实际车祸中SUV/Pickup和Car/Minivan相撞时，因为前者energy absorption zone更高
，导致撞击能量/损失主要有后者承担，而SUV/Pickup就成了占便宜的一方。BOF SUV吸
能区更高，有些人所说的Body On Frame SUV更结实，根据就在这里，这些人认为BOF底
盘更高，Frame更结实；但实际统计结果恰恰相反，BOF明显不如同年份的Unibody SUV
安全，前面我贴过统计数字和解释。Unibody是SUV的发展方向，如果N年前car经历过的
一样。
大概2003年左右，汽车商专门搞过协议，自愿降低SUV/Pickup的energy absorption
zone高度，我记得要求他们的吸能区至少50%要与Car/Minivan的吸能区重合。实际上
SUV做了很多改进（尤其是Unibody SUV），Pickup改进很少，统计证明这个自愿协议只
有一定的帮助。除非政府机构搞强制标准，否则SUV/Pickup占便宜的现象还会继续存在。
所以要拿出最重要的结论的话，被动安全方面，最近几年生产的SUV/Pickup比Car/
Minivan更安全，这个不是主观说法，是客观事实证明的结论。
PCC说的很好，“不懂不敢乱说”。乱说也没啥，娱乐版没多少认真的；但真要想搞清
楚的话，就多google看看，大部分人都是业余爱好，没人总是对的，我个人的看法也在
改变。
虽然SUV被动安全性更好，但实际的死亡率数字与Minivan相当，说明安全意识和驾驶习
惯对实际死亡率有非常大的影响。同样一个人坐在full size SUV/pickup座椅上可能会
感觉自己是刀枪不入的超人，坐在Minivan上可能总担心别的车撞了自家老小。对穷人
来说，考虑到SUV巨大的利润和较小的空间，还是Minivan更实惠，SUV平均利润大概在
5000到10000刀之间。

【在 f*********r 的大作中提到】

: 你說這種高速的車身中間的衝擊，如果換成SUV會好些嗎？
: 純討論
: 我覺得也夠嗆這個衝擊太變態了

h*r2014-07-08 07:07

29 楼

Study your English first. And I'll try to do better.
More importantly, focus on the subject pls.

【在 e******g 的大作中提到】

: 哥，你这么多语法错误为神马不用中文呢？
:
: that
: facts.