FLCC> crushing of local cyclist
Mike Simkin
mes13 at cornell.edu
Mon Oct 22 23:58:01 EDT 2007
I am in no way particularly in favor of SUVs or
other large vehicles if they are not needed for
large work reasons. My personal vehicles are
smaller and I use a small trailer for hauling
loads when I need to. But you seem to be making
the erroneous assumption that these large
passenger vehicles runs down the road at their
GVWR, even though you have the definition there
correctly. Most any passenger vehicle runs down
the road at a few hundred pounds (the combined
weight of the passengers and cargo) more than
their curb weight, in the case of your Grand
Cherokee ~ 5000 lbs (4488 + a mother & child and
whatever personal effects were there) or about a
half a ton less that it's gross weight. Passenger
vehicles, even SUVs, seldom run down the road at their GVWR.
Again, I understand your beef, mostly agree with
it. But you are stretching the reality a bit, and
will be more creditable and perhaps get further
if you use more realistic data.
Cheers, Mike
At 06:45 PM 10/22/2007, John Dennis wrote:
>Hi Mike and the FLCC listserv,
>
>Yes, I was in error in my earlier post to have
>implied that the driver of the Jeep was at
>fault, as there was little or nothing first IJ
>article to warrant such an implication. From the
>IJ today we learn that witnesses saw the FedeX
>truck driven into the path of a Jeep Grand Cherokee which had right-of-way.
>
>My point about momentum is that many SUVs are
>unnecessarily heavy and thus are more prone to
>cause harm to others when involved in accidents.
>
>According to Wikipedia, “vehicles over 6,000
>pounds are restricted from many
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City>city roadways
>in the United States although there is some
>dispute about whether this restriction is for
>actual curb weight or for GVWR (gross vehicle
>weight rating). GVWR is the maximum allowable
>total
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weight>weight of a
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road>road
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle>vehicle or
>trailer that is loaded, including the weight of
>the vehicle itself plus
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel>fuel,
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger>passengers,
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo>cargo, and
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trailer>trailer
>tongue weight.” In the
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States>United
>States, two important GVWR limitations are 6,000
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_%28mass%29>pounds
>(2,721 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram>kg) and 8,500 pounds (3,856 kg).
>
>Andy Bowers suggests in a
><http://slate.com/id/2104755/>2004 article that
>California has banned big SUVs from many of its
>roads without realizing it. He claims that many
>big SUVs are banned from most roads in LA, San
>Francisco and Santa Monica by pre-SUV laws that
>banned trucks weighing more than 6000 pounds.
>Below I have made a table showing the GRWR and
>curb weights for various 2007 model SUVs and a
>few 2007 sedans. Note that the Jeep Grand
>Cherokeethe sedan involved in Friday’s
>accident--is just under the 6000 pound GRWR threshold.
>
>
><http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menugetf.cgi?COMMONQUERY=LAWS>NYS’s
>limits on vehicle weights appear to be very
>liberal. The weight on a single wheel “shall be not more
> than eleven thousand two hundred pounds.”
> That’s the equivalent of an entire H1 Hummer resting on a single wheel!
>
>
>
>Vehicle weights in pounds for 2007 vehicles unless indicated
>
>
>
>factor
>
>
>
>
>GRWR is
>
>
>GRWR
>curb weight
> >6000 lbs
>
>Hummer H1 (2006)
>10,300
>7847
>1.72
>
>Hummer H2
>8600
>6400
>1.43
>
>Lincoln Navigator
>7800
>6008
>1.30
>
>Chevy Tahoe 2008
>7300
>5524
>1.22
>
>Chevy Suburban
>7200
>5505
>1.20
>
>GMC Yukon
>7100
>5635
>1.18
>
>Toyota Land Cruiser
>6925
>5425
>1.15
>
>Toyota Sequoia
>6600
>5140
>1.10
>
>VW Touareg
>6493
>5254
>1.08
>
>Jeep Grand Cherokee
>5900
>4488
>0.98
>
>Hummer H3
>5850
>4700
>0.98
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Toyota Rav4
>4535
>3444
>0.76
>
>Toyota Camry
>
>3680
>
>
>Toyota Corolla
>
>2550
>
>
>Toyota Prius
>
>2890
>
>
>VW Passat
>
>3344
>
>
>VW Beetle
>
>
>Does the Town or City of Ithaca have any weight
>limits? Engineer Tom West of the City of Ithaca
>told me today he didn’t know of any, but he will
>check. I have found a limitation of truck
>weights to 5 tons in parts of
><http://fhia.org/events/truckcount.htm>Forest Home.
>
>Would it be out-of-line for cyclists as a group
>to ask that the Town of Ithaca and the City of
>Ithaca to impose limits on the size of SUVs
>allowed on Ithaca streets? I think not. For
>one thing, it would be a show of solidarity with
>the cyclist, Edward Coil, who was crushed by the
>Fedex truck as a result of Friday’s accident.
>Second, are streets would be safer for everyone,
>no just cyclists. Third, our pavements would
>last longer and there would be less pressure to
>raise taxes. And fourth, our City and Town would
>be on record as taking a stand to say, Enough is
>enough from a sustainable livelihoods
>perspective. In this age of global warming that
>may yet have catastrophic impacts on many
>millions of people, there is no need to drive to
>work or to the store or anywhere in a vehicle
>that weighs over 6000 pounds. Could a ban be
>imposed on a given street, when a (12,000 lb?)
>snow plow was allowed to operate on that street.
>I have no idea! The latter is an emergency
>vehicle and the objective of minimizing weight
>stresses to pavement and the number of heavy
>vehicles on our streets would still be served.
>
>Friday’s accident is at least the second fatal
>SUV-related accident in Ithaca in the past year,
>is it not? In an earlier accident on Seneca
>St., a female pedestrian was fatally run over by
>an SUV as she crossed the street. The driver of
>the SUV continued on without stopping. Police
>later found him shopping at Home Depot and he
>apparently denied knowing that he had run over
>anything. According to the IJ on-line comment
>section, the driver received only a traffic citation.
>
>One wonders if members of the community spoke up
>and asked the police and District Attorney’s
>Office how much investigation went into the
>driver’s claim to have been completely unaware
>of having hit anything? Was this driver asked to
>submit to a polygraph or related test? Did the
>District Attorney’s office order simulation
>tests to be performed to test whether it would
>be physically possible for an SUV of the model
>in question to hit a manikin of the victim’s
>weight, size, and density without the impact
>shock being clearly noticeable to a driver?
>
>If California’s major cities already have 6000
>pound weight limits for most of their roads, why
>shouldn’t Ithaca pass similar laws? In our
>case, however, I would be in favor of there
>being a clear intent to enforce these laws for
>both SUVs and commercial trucks (with exceptions
>for fire trucks, snow plows, garbage trucks and similar service vehicles).
>
>Best, John
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: flcc-bounces at icycle.org
>[mailto:flcc-bounces at icycle.org] On Behalf Of Mike Simkin
>Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 9:46 AM
>To: flcc at icycle.org
>Subject: Re: FLCC> crushing of local cyclist
>
>We seem to have it out for the woman in the Jeep. We need to remember
>that she had the right of way, traveling east on Court and the Fed X
>truck, traveling south on Washington, was supposed to stop. I saw the
>damage on the front of the Jeep and to me didn't seem like enough to
>have tipped over the Fed X truck. I have observed that those new Fed
>X trucks seem to be rather high and not too wide so I wonder about
>their stability. Anyway outside of speed, if there id fault to be
>laid on someone, it is likely to fall on the driver of the Fed X
>truck as he should have stopped for the intersection. It is a shame
>that anyone should loose their life in an accident like this, but
>that seems to be the risk we all take if we ride, drive on the road.
>
>Mike
>
>At 03:09 AM 10/21/2007, david streater wrote:
> >For even an suv to cause a truck to overturn and kill a cyclist,
> >there's no way it was not traveling at an excessive, murderous, rate
> >of speed. This kind of thing should just not happen. But it will
> >keep happening until all those responsible are held responsible.
> >(not just those who can't afford 'good' lawyers!).. I know it seems
> >unfair to suddenly start holding perpetrators responsible for such
> >crimes, but it has to start somewhere, or it will continue to get
> >worse. The situation is totally out of control...
> > InHisThirdOrFourthLifeAtLeast (Dave Streater)
> >
> >-------- Original Message --------
> > > From: "John Dennis" <jvd at baka.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 1:15 PM
> > > To: flcc at icycle.org
> > > Subject: FLCC> crushing of local cyclist
> > >
> > > The photos in today's HYPERLINK
> > > "http://ithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage"Ithaca Journal of the
> > > two-vehicle crash that resulted in the crushing of a cyclist and his
> > > tricycle under a Fedex truck document the extraordinary momentum
> > that an SUV
> > > can have even when traveling in an urban neighborhood.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Over the past ten years or so, I have heard
> SUV owners on the topic of why
> > > they bought an SUV. Somewhere in the explanation was usually the sort of
> > > tongue-in-cheek statement, "Well, if I get
> into an accident, it will be the
> > > other guy who takes the hit.
> (chuckle,chuckle)." Isn't it time to rein in
> > > this Darwinian urge with at least an
> insistence that such driver's be held
> > > fully culpable for reckless use of their vehicles in part because
> > they chose
> > > a vehicle that is well known to be more
> hazardous than other cars to other
> > > users of the road?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Of course, SUV owners as a group can probably afford much better lawyers
> > > than can riders of tricycles, so I suspect that the SUV driver in
> > > yesterday's crash either will not be charged at all (the IJ makes
> > no mention
> > > of any charges) and, if charged, will successfully defend herself against
> > > any and all criminal and civil charges.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > In any case, I would be in favor of the President of the FLCC writing a
> > > letter of concern to the Tompkins County District Attorney Gwen Wilkinson
> > > and to local newspapers.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Best, John
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database:
> 269.15.3/1081 - Release Date: 10/19/2007
> > > 5:41 PM
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > FLCC mailing list
> > > FLCC at icycle.org
> > > http://icycle.org/mailman/listinfo/flcc_icycle.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >FLCC mailing list
> >FLCC at icycle.org
> >http://icycle.org/mailman/listinfo/flcc_icycle.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>FLCC mailing list
>FLCC at icycle.org
>http://icycle.org/mailman/listinfo/flcc_icycle.org
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.3/1081
>- Release Date: 10/19/2007 5:41 PM
>
>
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.5/1085
>- Release Date: 10/22/2007 10:35 AM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://icycle.org/pipermail/flcc_icycle.org/attachments/20071022/cc35410c/attachment-0001.html
More information about the FLCC
mailing list