Let's focus on people getting hit with cars at 60 kph rather than prevent any such contact in the first place.

@@chbr5623you’re both right. Which means less heavy, slow to stop, poor visibility SUV’s. And better pedestrian infrastructure, and more traffic calming… all pretty much antithetical to the average suv driver.

SUV drivers aren't capable of seeing beyond their hoods. The idea of the freedom to do what you want is not a good reason when so many are dying as a result of lax regulations

​@@chbr5623that would mean increased testing for people that already have licenses. It would also mean more strict traffic laws, more traffic cops and possible more video capture machines to catch speeders and dangerous driving. Then people will complain that we've become a babysitting police state.

@@elliotjordan2326 Those are your ideas.

100%, it's excellent, and very informative as to the history of these vehicles and why they were made popular.

Not Just Bikes did a wonderful job covering the topic. Vehicles ballooning in size over the past 2 decades is crazy.

Are you implying that when NJB releases a video, a similar video appears on this channel soon after?

NJB sucks. He's a bitter, angry, hateful, cynical doomer with an equally obnoxious fanbase.

What do you think this is?? He has been on KZfaq for a while and is now partnering with CBC

@@jellybeansi ok

Need to respect the existance of ghosts and spiritual realm. Read akashic records to solve problems one by one. Clean up one by one.

Literally 😂

This time he hit himself in the head repeatedly with his nonsense.

SUV = Sports Uytae Lee T Vehicle

Fix the roads.

Ban SUVs in the city.

@@ryuuguu01 Ban eco-hippies.

They don’t make sense anywhere

@@robgrey6183Loser

What safety regulation(s) is less strict for SUV's? I'm not finding any.

@@vids595 the regulations are mentioned in this video: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oLRnoLaJstjZdaM.html The light truck segment was exempt from fuel economy standards in the US (CAFE). They were exempt but have since been added. The damage was done though and automakers can make more profits selling SUVs. From Wikipedia "CAFE has separate standards for "passenger cars" and "light trucks" even if the majority of "light trucks" are being used as passenger vehicles. The market share of "light trucks" grew steadily from 9.7% in 1979 to 47% in 2001, remained in 50% numbers up to 2011.[7] More than 500,000 vehicles in the 1999 model year exceeded the 8,500 lb (3,900 kg) GVWR cutoff and were thus omitted from CAFE calculations.[10] More recently, coverage of medium duty trucks has been added to the CAFE regulations starting in 2012, and heavy duty commercial trucks starting in 2014." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_average_fuel_economy

@@vids595 Look up "light truck" regulations. When these laws were written "light trucks" were basically work vehicles. So not a whole lot of them were around. But then the SUV came along, was classified as "light truck" and that was that. Personally I would like to see them just remove the light truck category completely. A vehicle shouldn't be unsafer for people outside of it just because the car maker cheesed it into a different category. The risk to people outside the vehicle should be the same, regardless if it is a VW Golf or an F350 Crew Cab.

what are you talking about? you literally made this up lol.

@@christ2664 Um, no? "The United States government uses light truck as a vehicle class in regulating fuel economy through the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard. The class includes vans, minivans, sport utility vehicles, and pickups. Light trucks have lower fuel economy standards than cars, under the premise that these vehicles are used for utilitarian purposes rather than personal transportation."

Hatchbacks are loud, impractical and unsafe. Within the same model, a sedan is favored against a hatchback every time. Automakers have learn their lesson.

@@littledovecitydust Only in North America. Hatchbacks are very popular in Europe. There is nothing inherently unsafe about a hatchback - concerns arise only if it collides with a substantially heavier vehicle. Which is the whole point of this story.

@@pervertt with everybody and their mother moving into taller heavier SUVs, hatchbacks are passively made unsafe. It's the inconvenient truth. The more direct is, abysmal sales figures for hatchback versions of cars.

@@littledovecitydust Which leads to a never ending arms race on the road - the next car you buy will have to be bigger and heavier than the last. Just so that you aren't killed by another driver with a bigger and heavier vehicle. It's a crazy rationale to anyone who lives outside North America.

@@pervertt people's wallet is the limiting factor. At one point, poor people are just more vulnerable on the road.

Wagons please... More of those xD

Exactly@@driftinsti

The lizard means begs to differ on that

Can we have them in higher ground clearance please, I wanted to go camping with them

@@victoryh67so like the Volvo v90 cross country?

Need to respect the existance of ghosts and spiritual realm. Read akashic records to solve problems one by one. Clean up one by one.

@@AliensKillDevils. Take your meds bro

😅 it's like an arms race, I went CUV because I can't see 🙄🤨 of course in Alberta you still can't see around 4x4s. Little cars need a periscope in addition to blindspot detection 😅

Can you see around a bus or a cement truck, semi, delivery vans? Those tend to be on the road a lot too...

@@chbr5623 I live in a small town, 70% of daily traffic are big 4x4s. Semi trucks are mainly seen in highway (so no T intersection turns) and I maybe see cement trucks once a year 🤔 again mainly on highway or main ring roads 😅 so I'm mostly cursing about in town traffic and only seeing the hood of the trucks in the way of seeing oncoming traffic.

are you mentally challenged, busses, construction trucks, semi trucks are all necessities. the only people who should be driving pickup trucks are the handful of construction workers who need them, not people who are overcompensating.. @@chbr5623

Can here to say this. Tax the weight but do it at the manufacturing level so consumers don't get this panties in a bunch.

An electric vehicle is always going to weigh more than its internal combustion engine counterpart largely because the batteries contribute a significant aspect of the vehicles curb weight and yet they are far more efficient than their counterparts, so I don't think this argument holds much weight (pun intended).

​@@senekerc they aren't assuered to be more efficient, you would need to calculate the fuel equivalent of the electricity used to charge to calculate that, which can be very variable based on local solar power, nuclear etc. And ofc u are hauling more weight around so that reduces miles per energy as compared to fueled vehicles

they are taxed more.....they use more gas so pay more gas tax, cost more so pay more sales tax, you also had to get more income to afford so you paid more income tax

Yeah, they do that in Japan

You have the causation completely reversed. Ford is abandoning sedans because no one is buying them. SUVs and Sedans could have the exact same profit margins, obviously SUVs will be more expensive because they require more materials to build, and are heavier and larger and therefore more expensive to transport, but the bigger influence is economy of scale. The product you produce more of will be cheaper to produce per unit. They produce more SUVs because thats what sells more. If people only bought one model of ford, it would be insanely efficient at all levels from R&D to manufacturing, and therefore have a higher profit margin.

get sports cars or sports sedans.

@@sirskelletor They’re not buying them because Ford’s sedans are terrible. Same for Chevy. Dodge has great sales actually. But most just opt for Japanese/Korean

​@とひこ They aren't horrible. It's just called market shift. Even for toyota the sales of sedans have declined over time. If I can buy a SUV that gets the same mileage as a sedan but can carry 2x as much, why would I buy the sedan.. it just makes sense for most people.

@@alextran8188 I agree fully that SUVs just make more practical sense than sedans. Sedans still make up like ~50% of the market though so people are still buying them. It's not as doom and gloom as two bad American sedan manufacturers make it out to be lol. Especially German car makers, they often have full lines of sedans and multiple different coupe models.

Where did you hear him say larger cars are killing more people? No where in this video did I hear him say larger cars are killing more people. Did you miss the part about ~40-50% fewer passenger deaths in SUVs? Do we want to cut 30,000 passenger deaths by 40% (in the US), or 6,000 pedistrian deaths by 5.6%?

SUV/truck drivers: I'm not putting my life at risk by driving a smaller car, based on the way I see other people drive.

@@jameshoiby lower passenger deaths, but in return with way more pedestrian deaths, including their own children

@@ianhomerpura8937 That's not what I understood from my research but that doesn't mean I am right. :) Regardless, I hate these large trucks as well, but I've always done so for environmental reasons. I have several neighbors who are, for example, accountants, who drive giant F350 diesels to work from our location in the city. Why is this necessary!

​​@@jameshoiby but where is the stats of the people that never get back the health they had before an accident? if two SUVs a suburban crash against an expedition, one of them at 100km/h the other was just at 30km/h which one would suffer the most damage? or rollover? by more airbags that have the G forces and accelerations inside the cabin are more important, and now is the fashion of put to the cars in general glass roof or sunroof or moonroof so worse it's the result in case of an severe accident, plus the higher ground clearance makes the SUVs easier to lose the gravity center and get an easy rollover

Only on higher trims. **Like what the video explicitly stated, pedestrian safety features are written into the law as required standards for new vehicles in the EU and Japan.** But in North America, only those who can afford them would consider getting them on the grounds of whether they need them for their own safety as the driver.

​@@teasea546 not sure if you're correct. Subaru has their safety tech across all lineups, and Honda offers it higher trims but Hondas are cheap.

@@littledovecitydust Subaru only made EyeSight standard on all trims in the recent couple of years, I know because I drive one. New cars are not cheap for the majority of North Ameircan population, and most of them are definitely not driving brand new Subarus or high-trim Hondas.

@@littledovecitydust Living in the Pacific Northwest might have also skewed your perception, Subaru is not mainstream enough be an indicator or industry trend setter in North America's mainstream.

I never met a car owner who cared less about his own safety than SUV owners...

that has nothing to do, things don't always improve over time!

More importantly freedom on choosing topics.

I think it would be more effective to require a different license classification in order to drive vehicles over a certain weight.

​@@vids595. I agree. Stricter licensing criteria.

The only menace on our roads are incompetent drivers and wreckless oblivious pedestrians.

@@huntsbychainsaw5986 Everybody thinks they're a great driver and everyone else are terrible drivers.

@@michaelvickers4437 The difference is that I've got the credentials to prove I'm right.

NJB sucks. He's a bitter, angry, hateful, cynical doomer with an equally obnoxious fanbase.

I watch NotJustBikes too, it definitely gave me some things to help form an opinion about transportation.

NJB sucks. He's a bitter, angry, hateful, cynical doomer with an equally obnoxious fanbase.

then the government instead of steal the money to the taxpayers should first make streets that don't flood at winter with the first rain, nationwide , the most funny of your comment is that Canada makes many American vehicles on sale in Canada and the United States but can't even make the model for the local market non CAFE compliant

aka the suburban soccer mom

The smallest man also drives the biggest truck

- it's primarily an ego (and narcissism) driven 'arms race', at least in the US where I am. Mine is bigger than yours so I'm 'better'... Where I work about half the parking area is filled with full-size pickups and SUV's. Most are driven there by a single person, mainly men.. If you look at a full-size US 'Big 3' truck (Ford, GM, Dodge) from 20 years ago versus now, the new ones appear they are all 'roided up' (on steriods).. A lot heavier + overly 'macho-ified' styling as well. Outside the US, a close friend has been looking into replacing his mid 1980's era Land Rover 109 (3.5 V8) that he has had a long time and is used solely as a work vehicle, mainly towing medium & large 2-axle cargo trailers. He needs 4wd and has looked at and driven several 4wd US pickups and even the smaller (in comparison) Jeep Gladiator tows no more than what he can now but is larger and heavier in comparison. The physical size makes even it ponderous where he lives (a heavily forested and mountainous area) + it uses a lot more fuel. Normal US pickups like the Ford F-series and Ram, which he looked into, are even larger and heavier, so they have been ruled out. He recently visited the US and we rented a new F-150 and did a road trip in it. He liked driving it but said it was simply 'far too large' to own/use normally where he lives. Now he is leaning towards keeping his LR and 'investing' in fixing the corrosion it has and if eventually needed, buying a Toyota to replace the LR. Where he lives, US trucks are so heavy (even the lighter duty 1/2 ton versions), that when you combine the weight of the truck & a trailer being towed, it requires the driver have a commercial drivers license. Not practical as that also restricts when and where you can use the 'truck' such as not before/after certain times of day, on Sundays or within some towns/cities.

Same here in the Philippines. There are a lot of new Ford Raptor and Rangers as well as Chevy Silverados. All of them are way too large to fit in existing roads.

@@AB-pl1ko the huge "pickups" US car manufacturers like to sell literally have LESS BED SPACE than smaller pick-ups from decades ago.

@@MsZsc - Exactly. it's bascially an 'arms race'.. I used to own (last ten years) a 1977 GMC Sierra 2500 (3/4 ton chassis) longbed 2wd, considered a 'full size' pickup. Good truck btw.. If I compare it dimensionally to current model, my old truck looks more like a compact now. Utterly pointless if you ask me as that old truck did everything I needed it for and would fit inside a normal garage, unlike many current ones...

​@@MsZsc that is not true. If anything bed space has increased as the width of these newer trucks have incresed.. you can still buy a truck with an 8 ft bed..

Cycling is great in Edmonton where the road is ice covered for more than 6 months per year and the winters can reach well below -40 C.

@@chbr5623 Oulu, Finland. Cold and ice is not a factor in whether or not winter cycling is viable in a city or not. Proper infrastructure, and proper winter maintenance of that infrastructure is. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/i86oYJVnrMyncok.htmlsi=6oryQYGqD5Iq9bqu

@@Xachremos It's a dumb idea to prioritize cycling in Edmonton in the winter where the roads have deep ice ruts and are ice covered for more than 6 months of the year.

and most of them suck at off roading too

They are great at keeping you safe from other drivers.

We love our suvs! There comfortable, spacious inside & safe. Sedans are low to the ground, get high sided in snow conditions.

@@404notfound..... safe for those inside, but not for everyone outside. And with idiot drivers in many places, lots of pedestrians die.

@@ianhomerpura8937couldn’t have agreed more with you on that, most people that drive suvs, can’t drive or don’t pay attention like for real, they are higher from the ground and have proximity sensors and yet they still hit pedestrians, kids and cyclists like how stupid and idiotic can you be with all the driving assistance at your disposal, and for people driving sedans they have better visibility on the road and seeing pedestrians and kids crossing the road, and those people are more better and smarter at driving and don’t need the help of proximity sensors and backup cameras to park or to do any of the basics for a car, in conclusion SUVs are piles of garbage. And are making people more dumber at driving and more reliant on the driving assistance rather than driving skills.

feel free to move to europe

it's been found that SUV drivers tend to be worse drivers; presumably this is either due to large blind spots (which make collisions more likely, thus making them appear as worse drivers), or because bad drivers don't trust their skills and therefore tend to buy 'safer' cars (at least for the occupant).

It's buses and heavy trucks that damage the roads not vehicles under 10,000 lbs...