Safe Speed Forums

Drivers of 4X4s warned about big blind spots

LONDON (Reuters) - Drivers of 4x4s were warned on Tuesday some of their off-roaders have blind spots twice as large as those of a normal-sized family saloon, representing a major safety hazard to other road users and pedestrians.

Tests undertaken by MIRA -- formerly the Motor Industry Research Association -- found popular SUVs (Sports Utility Vehicles) like the Land Rover Discovery and Freelander, Grand Jeep Cherokee and Hyundai Santa Fe, had the largest blind spots of 24 cars tested.

"Because of their size, 4X4 vehicles require thicker A-Pillars (the columns which separate the windscreen from the front windows) than smaller vehicles in order to maintain their structural strength," said Nigel Doggett of Autoglass -- the company which commissioned the research.

"It is of particular concern considering the high volume of 4X4 vehicles used to pick children up from school, and parent-drivers must take extra care to ensure they've seen all of the hazards around them before setting off," the managing director of the glass company said.

More than 25,000 road accidents happened last year where a failure by a driver to see objects after looking contributed to the collision, according to government statistics.

The MIRA tests included a calculation of the A-Pillar blind spot, the 'A' Spot which refers to the width of objects hidden from a driver's vision from 23 metres -- the recommended stopping distance at 30 mph.

The worst performing 4X4 tested was the Grand Jeep Cherokee with an A-spot of 4.5 metres compared with the Audi A4 which had an A-spot of just 0.3 metres.

"The latest research from Autoglass shows that A-Pillar blind spots need to be acknowledged, especially on 4X4 vehicles," said Adrian Walsh, director of RoadSafe, a group which campaigns to reduce traffic deaths and injuries.

Many SUV drivers cite safety concerns as a reason for buying the big, expensive vehicles, believing bigger is safer.

But, the European New Car Assessment Programme, which carries out crash tests, found many 4x4's offer no more protection to occupants than the saloons.

And most 4x4s score badly in terms of pedestrian safety. Research from Trinity College Dublin in 2005 found pedestrians hit by 4X4s were twice as likely to die as those hit by a hatchback or saloon car.

"It is of particular concern considering the high volume of 4X4 vehicles used to pick children up from school, and parent-drivers must take extra care to ensure they've seen all of the hazards around them before setting off," the managing director of the glass company said.

Safe Speed issued the following PR at 11:56:

PR375: Sorry Mate, I Didn't See You

. . . . .
. . . . .

Following our work on the issue with Bike magazine, published in September
2004, Department for Transport commissioned urgent research. We believe that
the research was completed in March 2004, but it remains unpublished. We'd like
to know why.

Is that a typo with the dates??? Should that be March 2005?

Yes, what is going on is the insurance companies are doing surveys to find excuses for raising premiums far beyond inflation.

The government has already orchestrated a cash grab against 4x4 onwers, the insurance companies want a piece of the action.

Actually, they haven't. Motorists are getting shafted wholesale on the back of unreasonable anti-4x4 bigotry and many who thought they were in the clear because they didn't drive one of those "dastardly monsters" had a nasty wake-up call at VED renewal time.

The difference is the angle of the A pillars. On the Pajero, they are more upright and so tend to obscure a narrow, vertical band (i.e. obscure a relatively small horizontal section), whereas on the other cars they are more inclinded and so tend to obscure both horizontally and vertically.

I've found it to be the opposite to be honest. A vertical pillar of the same cross-sectional thickness as a raked pillar obscures the view from both eyes over a wider field of view. With a raked pillar, the area that is obscured to one or other eye might be bigger but the area obscured to both eyes at the same time is smaller because it slopes.