Big and bad

Seems like this would be more appropriate a few years ago. Sales of the Trailblazer are down 73% (last year this month to current year) and sales of other SUV lines have dropped similarly.<p>Source: <a href="http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008%5C05%5C03%5Cstory_3-5-2008_pg5_41" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008%5C05%5C03...</a><p>The lesson for startups out of this are (1) don't chase fads, and (2) consumers really do care about total cost of ownership.

<i>Jettas are safe because they make their drivers feel unsafe. S.U.V.s are unsafe because they make their drivers feel safe. That feeling of safety isn't the solution; it's the problem.</i><p>So much wisdom in so few words.

I'm reminded of the fact that the Ferrari Enzo is one of the fastest but also safest cars in existence:<p><i>"The Enzo is one of the safest cars to be in a crash because it’s designed to come apart at high speeds, similar to a Formula 1 car."</i> <a href="http://www.motorauthority.com/cars/ferrari/another-enzo-bites-the-dust/" rel="nofollow">http://www.motorauthority.com/cars/ferrari/another-enzo-bite...</a>

Clotaire Rapaille's (he is mentioned in the article) book "The Culture Code" is a pretty insightful read. It is hard to come up with a gist of what is in there, but if I were to attempt summarizing it, I would say that the thesis is that cultural has a surprisingly sizable impact on most decisions, and consumers are never accurate when supposedly describing their feelings.

Interesting how people want to feel safe, instead of actually being safe. If people act irrationally, doesn't economics theory break down?<p>Also I think the article ignores the possibility that drivers of quick and nimble cars could be (on average) more skilled than drivers of large SUVs. This could have caused the difference in safety statistics.

In the GE transportation systems twin diesel-electric locomotive vs. Boxster crash tests, the locomotive came out ahead a remarkable 100 percent of the time. Of course, it's MPG is somewhat less than the boxster, but the soccer moms involved said that nothing was too good for their respective munchkins.

<a href="http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/03/15/sr4003.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/03/15/sr4003.pdf</a><p>Looks like SUVs are actually a little safer than typical 4 dr or 2 dr sedans.

He leaves out that 3 of the top 5 cars (all of which are absent from his chart) in terms of fewest deaths per million are SUVs. The one I drive (Lexus RX) has only about half of the fatalities that the Avalon does.<p>Also in terms of handling, it's grossly unfair to compare a Traiblazer (built for shlepping kids and groceries around) to a Boxster. I'd be interested in knowing how a Cayenne ran the course. Or how much better than a Traiblazer a similarly priced GM sedan would.