On Mon, 27 Apr 1998 21:56:21 -0700 Bill <Bill@FREEHOLDER.COM> wrote:

> Consumer Reports, generally, doesn't like SUVs either, not because of
> what happens to them in a wreck, but what happens to the passengers in
> the other car.

They also dislike some because they tip over too easily. And have hated
others because of the jagged interior of the passenger compartment.

> One of the most important factors in a wreck is the relative weight of
> the vehicles involved.

This is true, but there is also the matter of local crush zone and what
life is like for someone in the front seat after a head-on crash.  My
father almost lost a leg in such a collision in our '62 bus, but he went
right out and bought--and continued to buy--buses until he died (not in a
car crash!)

I have my problems with CU reporting too, but this argument about safety
will not go away easily.  I found some material on the vanagon.com web
site, but it was not very thorough or convincing.  There was some
"evidence" on both sides of the argument but not very much solid data
(sorry, but I am a scientist, I like data (-: ).  I also read a review in
which the Eurovan was touted as very safe in collision tests.

So why does CU seem to refuse to acknowledge the very pressenc of any VW
van?  Are there none being sold in the US today?  From the April CU issue,
you'd get that impression.

Cheers,

Rob.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob MacLeod, Ph.D.
Nora Eccles Harrison Cardiovascular Research and Training Institute (CVRTI)
Building 500, University of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112                      ____  __o
Internet:  macleod@cvrti.utah.edu              ____   -\<,
Phonemail: (801)581-8183                         ....0/ 0
Fax:       (801)581-3128
---------------------------------------------------------------------------