We received this information today from the WA4WD Association.
The Pedestrian Council's Harold Scruby will be featured in what the pre announcement tonght described as the Great 4WD Debate. Jon Jenkins MLC sent around a rebuttal of what HS has been using a week ago and is again in contact with Channel Nine right now. We believe the ALP has done a deal with the Greens, to use whatever means to get 4WDs out of the cities as usual, in exchange for preferences. The segment may have already been recorded, Channel Nine has not interviewed Jon, so we may once more end up being ignored on this one.
I have attached Jon's notes for your information if you haven't already seen them.
Jon is our ORP member in the NSW Upper House.
------------- Attachment -------------------------
Dr Jon Jenkins MLC www.trac.org.au Preserving the Environment
Protecting Your Right to Enjoy It
The Use of US Statistics!
The US statistics may support the anti 4WD case in some cases. However there are
four serious flaws with the US statistics:
1: Only 11 of the US states have
seat belt laws which can be enforced by financial or points penalty. This completely skews any comparison of crash statistics but is
especially relevant to rollovers for obvious reasons.
2: The types of vehicles in the US are completely different from those found in
Australia. Some of the US’s most popular vehicles (Chevy and Fords) are simply not found in Australia. Conversely some of the most popular vehicles in Australia (eg Nissan Patrol and Toyota Land Cruiser 75/78) are not available in the US. To
compare vehicle characteristics in these very different environments is simply wrong!
3: The US crash statistics are completely skewed due to the Ford Explorer and
Firestone tyre fiasco. This is where Firestone tyres fitted to Ford
Explorers exploded without warning causing many hundreds of deaths and thousands of crashes. It resulted in the largest automotive recall in history.
4: The ATSB statistics tell us that unlike the US the accident rate for 4WDs and
sedans is almost identical in Australia.
Light Vs Heavy 4WDs
To lump all 4WDs together is ludicrous! It is no different than combining 4WDs with
heavy vehicles such as trucks. Further even within the Heavy 4WDs to compare the
handling characteristics of a Toyota Troop Carrier with a BMW X5 is ludicrous in the extreme.
Similarly it is equally ridiculous to compare a Honda CRV with a Nissan patrol.
Heavy 4WDs (those with a chassis and live axels) handle differently from a normal
sedans and other 4WDs. But so does any vehicle of the same weight and design,
whether it is a people mover full of people or a delivery van.
There may be some justification for special licenses as recommended by the Federal Road Safety Committee. The case for high powered motorcycles was a convincing one and has been reflected in the statistics for
young riders.
However the justification for 4WDs would also apply to any vehicle outside of the
“normal”
sedan variety: small delivery vans can also exceed 2.5 tonnes when loaded as can people movers.
Centre of Gravity and Rollovers
There seems to be this perception that 4WDs have some inherent centre of gravity
problem. It goes without saying that any larger vehicle has a higher centre of
gravity. But it should be noted that the height of the BODY of a vehicle is almost
irrelevant to its centre of gravity: the majority of the mass of a heavy 4WD vehicle is in the engine, gearbox, chassis, fuel tanks and drive train.
The centre of mass of these components is actually only a little higher than a
sedan
vehicle: it is only that height which is the difference of the larger tyres and rims that are fitted plus a little. Any engineer will tell you why: it’s to do with how drive trains and how universal joints have to work (this does not take into account highly “lifted” competition vehicles).
In order of rollover ease (highest to lowest) you could classify vehicles: B-Double,
Semi Trailer, Heavy Truck, Bus, Light Truck/Delivery Van, Heavy 4WD, People
Mover, Light 4WD,
Sedan, Sports Car, Go Kart.
As to dynamic handling there are many vehicles which have scored less than a
sports car in the moose/swerve/hook/slalom test. The classic was the Mercedes
A160 which rolled when a journalist tested the vehicle! Further a fully loaded vehicle will have very different characteristics than an unloaded one: a delivery van for example.
Why is the 4WD is singled out for special mention as to its handling?
It is an obvious result of physics that the heavier the vehicle the more damage it will do when it collides with another vehicle. A heavy 4WD will do exactly the same
amount of damage as a large
sedan, van, mini bus or people mover of the same
weight. Its just simple physics about how much energy has to be dissipated in the
crash.
Overall Size and Blocking of Vision
Length Width Overall Height
Chrysler Voyager 5094 1997 + mirrors 1749
Falcon Wagon 5053 1863 + mirrors 1483
Commodore Wagon 5046 1850 + mirrors 1527
Toyota Hi Ace 4900 1609 + mirrors 1930
Ford Transit 4900 1760 + mirrors 2363
Patrol 4930 1930 inc mirrors! 1875
The very vehicle often suggested to replace 4WDs is longer, wider and higher than most 4WDs? Even a seven
seat Commodore is longer and wider than a Nissan Patrol. Put on a loaded roof rack and voila: you have a longer, wider and higher vehicle (which is also probably dangerously overloaded!).
Pedestrian Safety
Percent of Child Fatalities Type of Vehicle
22% Heavy Trucks
22% Large Utilities
22% 4WD wagons
14% Sedans
11% Delivery Vans
6% Station Wagons
3% Ambulances
(Source ATSB)
4WDs are under-represented in child deaths in terms of numbers of vehicles on the
road (as are sedans!) whereas heavy vehicles and large utilities are over
represented.
Vehicle Type Percent of Pedestrian Deaths
Cars 64
Van/Utility/4WD 15*
Rigid Truck 12
Semitrailer 5
Bus 2
Others 3
(*Source ATSB, note that this is a combined figure for ALL Vans/Utilities and 4WDs)
4WDs seem to be almost exclusively blamed for pedestrian injuries and fatalities.
Despite the much-hyped belief that 4WDs contribute significantly to pedestrian
fatalities, available statistics indicate that this is not the case and that sedans are the major contributors, followed by heavy vehicles.
The conclusion is that even when lumped with other “utility” vehicles 4WDs are still
underrepresented! Is this because 4WDs are slower?
Load Carrying
Consider for the moment which is safer for the trip north:
A) A
sedan loaded with two adults, two children, bikes, gear, luggage,
camping
supplies,
water, food, surfboards and other associated holiday requirements
and a boat attached to the rear.
B) A Toyota Landcruiser similarly outfitted
It’s a no contest to which is the safer and more comfortable option!
The “only 10% go off road” or “Toorak Tractor” Myth!
32% of 4WDs are registered (via postcodes) in designated non-urban areas? (note:
we have been unable to obtain the figures for NSW but we suspect it is the same as Victoria!)
The Fuel/Greenhouse Argument Furphy
4WDs are often accused of excessive fuel consumption and therefore being wasteful of natural resources. It is true that some heavy petrol 4WDs do consume more fuel on average than petrol sedans, because of the weight factor in the main. However a 2 tonne 4WD uses no more fuel than a 2 tonne Statesman or People Mover!
The diesel Nissan Patrol or Toyota Landcruiser, for example, can easily achieve 10.5 lt/100 km in highway driving conditions and not greatly less in urban driving. This is almost identical if not less than the average large station wagon.
With regard to pollution older and/or poorly maintained cars and erratically driven
vehicles are by far the biggest contributors towards airborne pollution (Source -
EPA). The mere fact that a vehicle is a 4WD does not mean that the contribution to
pollution is any greater than that of a conventional family
sedan.
Diesels come in for special mention in some articles. However as engineers are
well aware the modern common rail diesels with low sulphur fuels are actually less
polluting than either petrol or LPG engines. Further, modern small diesel emissions
are already clean and do not require catalytic converters (many of which can
become infective shortly after new anyway!) that petrol vehicles do.
The latest small diesels pass the stringent European Euro 4 (2005) requirements
WITHOUT a catalytic cracker! Some of them also have PARTICULATE filters (Citroen and Peugeot since 2000 for example). These can be easily retro-fitted to make all modern diesels meet the Euro 4 (2005) standards (Mercedes and Peugeot are already offering these as a retro-fit to existing models).
When you add to this the extraordinary fuel economy of modern diesels it is overtly
apparent they are not the “polluting” “fuel guzzlers” implied!
Economics of a 4WD for the Yearly Trip
Many people who own a 4WD get themselves out of bed every morning, go off to a
job they probably don’t like just so they can go on that yearly holiday to Yamba or
fishing trip to the Gulf! It’s their raison detre. They understand every time they go
for a service or to buy a tyre how much a 4WD costs to maintain and they still do it!
For more information please do not hesitate to contact the Toyota Land Cruiser Club or the NSW 4WD & ACT Association or Dr Jon Jenkins at the respective websites:
Toyta Landcruiser Club: www.tlcc.com.au
4WD NSW & ACT: www.4wdnsw.org
Dr Jon Jenkins: www.trac.org.au
Summary of the Anti 4WD Falsehoods
US Crash Statistics!
• The US statistics are skewed by the different types of vehicles and
the Firestone tyre fiasco.
• Only 11 of the 50 US states use seatbelt enforcement. This is
particularly relevant to rollover deaths.
• Accident rates for sedans are almost the same as 4WDs in Australia.
Many 4WDs are used in country areas on the worst roads at high
speeds: this is a very positive statistic.
Stability and Light Vs Heavy 4WDs
• There are different types of 4WDs. The “light” 4WDs such as the Subaru Forrester are no different from sedans.
• Heavy 4WDs will rollover more easily than a
sedan but sedans will rollover more easily than a sports car: where do we draw this imaginary line?
• Many vehicles do not do
well on the “swerve” test (including the infamous Mercedes A160 which actually rolled when tested in Germany) and yet there are no anti-vehicle name campaigns.
Size and Blocking of Vision
• Even the largest 4WDs are smaller than the replacement people movers.
• Even the largest 4WD is smaller than the average family
sedan such as a Commodore or Falcon station wagon.
Crash Statistics
•
Monash University research has shown that the heavier the vehicle the more damage it inflicts to smaller vehicles. A 2 tonne 4WD will inflict the same damage as a 2 tonne
sedan or a 2 tonne delivery van or minibus or a 2 tonne people mover. 4WDs should not be singled out for attention.
Pedestrian Safety
• ATSB statistics indicate that 4WDs contribute less to pedestrian fatalities than either
sedan cars or heavy vehicles.
• Child deaths are also under represented in 4WDs.
Load Carrying
• Heavy 4WDs are designed to carry and tow heavy loads. In this respect they are safer than lighter vehicles even lighter 4WDs!
• They are required by caravans, horse floats, boats and tradespeople.
Fuel Economy and Pollution
• Light petrol 4WDs use the same amount of fuel as light petrol sedans.
• Heavy petrol 4WDs use the same amount of fuel as heavy petrol sedans (e.g. Statesman, Fairlane etc and People Movers).
• Modern Euro 4 and Euro 5 diesels are more efficient and less polluting than either petroleum or LPG vehicles.
Bull Bars
• Don’t call these bull bars anymore, call them roo bars
• Don’t need a roo bar in city BUT do need a roo bar in the country.
• City people drive in the country and country people drive in the city!
Dr Jon Jenkins MLC www.trac.org.au Preserving the Environment
Protecting Your Right to Enjoy It
-------- End of Attachment --------------------