Have you considered a bicycle? I only have a bike and I use it to get around everywhere in the city (not your city). Bikes actually work a lot better than you might expect if you have not tried it.
Bikes aren’t allowed on the Bay Bridge. They’re very effective around here for local travel (for point to point travel in San Francisco or getting around Berkeley/Oakland bikes go at about the same speed as non-BART public transit) but the Bay Area is sprawling and I (and lukeprog) have to transit the whole Bay Area somewhat regularly.
Smart Cars are not as deadly as motorbikes, but way deadlier than most cars. They don’t have crumple zones, relying on the crumple zone of the other car. (That’s the manufacturer’s actual justification.) So good thing trees have crumple zones, hey.
(I don’t know their stats off the top of my head; I’m going by having glanced at a crash test report. Crash test reports are great things to read. VicRoads in Victoria had them in the waiting area for licence renewal. I’m so glad I don’t need a car in London.)
In general: whoever’s in the smaller car, comes off a whole lot worse. Driving something the size of a tank is good for you. (Unless it’s an SUV, their higher centre of gravity means they roll more.)
I dunno. What are the accident stats like on your planned route?
In general: whoever’s in the smaller car, comes off a whole lot worse. Driving something the size of a tank is good for you.
And bad for everybody else. Total utility is probably negative because the process where people drive larger and larger cars in order to be safer (at the expense of others) leaves everyone roughly equally safe, but driving more expensive, more fuel-hungry, less-manoeuvrable cars.
Whether this is reason not to buy a larger car depends on one’s level of altruism, of course.
“A Nice Morning Drive”
is a (very) short story that takes place in a future where
this process has been taken to an extreme. (It was the
inspiration for Rush’s song “Red
Barchetta”.)
Maybe a Smart Car, then. But motorcycles are cheaper, have much cheaper insurance, and don’t depreciate in value. And I live on a non-profit salary.
Have you considered a bicycle? I only have a bike and I use it to get around everywhere in the city (not your city). Bikes actually work a lot better than you might expect if you have not tried it.
Bikes aren’t allowed on the Bay Bridge. They’re very effective around here for local travel (for point to point travel in San Francisco or getting around Berkeley/Oakland bikes go at about the same speed as non-BART public transit) but the Bay Area is sprawling and I (and lukeprog) have to transit the whole Bay Area somewhat regularly.
Smart Cars are not as deadly as motorbikes, but way deadlier than most cars. They don’t have crumple zones, relying on the crumple zone of the other car. (That’s the manufacturer’s actual justification.) So good thing trees have crumple zones, hey.
(I don’t know their stats off the top of my head; I’m going by having glanced at a crash test report. Crash test reports are great things to read. VicRoads in Victoria had them in the waiting area for licence renewal. I’m so glad I don’t need a car in London.)
In general: whoever’s in the smaller car, comes off a whole lot worse. Driving something the size of a tank is good for you. (Unless it’s an SUV, their higher centre of gravity means they roll more.)
I dunno. What are the accident stats like on your planned route?
And bad for everybody else. Total utility is probably negative because the process where people drive larger and larger cars in order to be safer (at the expense of others) leaves everyone roughly equally safe, but driving more expensive, more fuel-hungry, less-manoeuvrable cars.
Whether this is reason not to buy a larger car depends on one’s level of altruism, of course.
“A Nice Morning Drive” is a (very) short story that takes place in a future where this process has been taken to an extreme. (It was the inspiration for Rush’s song “Red Barchetta”.)