News   Feb 18, 2026
UrbanToronto Webinar: State of Construction in the GTA
 184     0 
News   Feb 18, 2026
Construction Begins on Ontario Line 3 Elevated Guideway and Cosburn Station
 1.5K     1 
News   Feb 18, 2026
Dual High-Rises Envisioned at McCowan and Nugget in Scarborough
 802     0 

Roads: Gardiner Expressway catch-all, incl. Hybrid Design (2015-onwards)

zang said:
Except that there's a kinetic energy calculation that applies to all vehicle crash related injury, based on speed and mass.

The sum of kinetic energy is important in determining an injury severity and that is equal to one half of the vehicle mass multiplied by the square of the vehicle speed

Kinetic energy management in road traffic injury prevention: a call for action - PMC

By virtue of their variability, mass and speed have important roles in transferring energies during a crash incidence (kinetic energy). The sum of kinetic energy is important in determining an injury severity and that is equal to one half of the ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Even when separating out SUV/Pickup class vehicles, weight does matter.

"For the average U.S. metro area, a 100 kilogram increase in vehicle size corresponded to a statistically significant 2.4 percent increase in pedestrian fatalities. The impact of light trucks (again: SUVs, pick-ups, and minivans) was even more significant. In an average metro area, for every 10 percent of vehicles that rose in size to light trucks, there was a 3.6 percent increase in the pedestrian fatality rate."

medium.com

The troubling tie between bigger cars and pedestrian deaths

A new study estimates that replacing large vehicles with standard ones would have saved more than 8,100 lives since 2000. What can be done?
medium.com medium.com
Click to expand...
The difference in mass is not sufficient to explain the increase in pedestrian mortality.

Did the analysis above control for vehicle geometry, or is it confounded with weight?
 
afransen said:
If you're renting a ride, 2 seaters work. If you need more space, you pay a bit of a premium and get more space.
Click to expand...
No, I'm pointing out Zang is being incredibly silly thinking he knows better what car people should buy vs the owners. I have a 2 seat car and it isn't as rugged as a truck. I've paid $5000 for vehicle repairs due to crap roads (suspension, windshields, bent wheels etc) the city and province have given back $0. Ironically my friends in trucks have paid $0 for those types of repairs. The fact I can't carry a pet, a couch, or even a TV is probably enough for most people to buy more a bigger car.
 
The height of the front is the key issue. I'm not sure why they don't simply mandate some impact standards on the front, that are based on pedestrian survivability. Lower points that throw you up instead of down. Crushability.
 
zang said:
I dunno about that.

[In the US] "One of the studies, from 2021, estimates 8,131 pedestrians between 2000 and 2019 could have survived if they were struck by sedans instead of SUVs or trucks.

Another study, published in the Journal of Safety Research in June, found that while SUVs and trucks made up just 26.1 per cent of pedestrian and cyclist collisions, they accounted for 44.1 per cent of fatalities. That study also suggested that because of their larger size, SUVs and trucks are more likely to hit vulnerable road users in the chest or head than a sedan."

Even extrapolating that first study, that's more 400 extra deaths per year due to SUVs/Pickups.


Here in Toronto, we had 26 pedestrian deaths in 2021.

"In 2021, approximately 35 per cent of those deaths in Toronto involved SUVs while another 10 per cent involved pickup trucks, he said."


I don't think anyone can call 35% (45% if you include pickups) "marginal". Small data set perhaps, but it tracks with everything else that gets put out about pedestrian deaths.


We also had two years of pandemic in there, where there were less overall cars on the road and less interactions in general.

"The number of vehicle occupant deaths has dramatically decreased in the past 20 years, while walking and cycling deaths have stayed the same or increased, he added.""
Click to expand...
The trend has definitely slowed - but it's still declining. We broke below 300 pedestrian deaths for the first time in 2020, and that was repeated in 2022 with only 294 pedestrian deaths.

Canadian Motor Vehicle Traffic Collision Statistics: 2022

tc.canada.ca tc.canada.ca

going back 20 years to 2002, pedestrian deaths were at 363:

Table 3-1: Transportation Fatalities by Mode (Number of people), Canada

Table 3-1: Transportation Fatalities by Mode (Number of people), Canada
www144.statcan.gc.ca www144.statcan.gc.ca

This is a difference of about 19%. Per-capita, the decline is even greater. Canada grew from 31.2 million to 38.7 million in that time - 24%. Per-capita, that's a pedestrian death rate decline of 35%, going from 1.16 deaths per 100,000 to 0.76 deaths per 100,000! In 26 years, it's even greater, with the pedestrian death rate per capita being less than half in 2022 than in 1996 (0.76/100,000 vs. 1.6/100,000)

Also - Canada enjoys one of the lower road fatality rates in the western world on miles-travelled:

1715803787529.png


Definitely possible to improve, but we are doing better than even the illustrious Netherlands.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rbt
nfitz said:
The height of the front is the key issue. I'm not sure why they don't simply mandate some impact standards on the front, that are based on pedestrian survivability. Lower points that throw you up instead of down. Crushability.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with this. Full size pickup trucks front hoods are absolutely ridiculous these days and are absolutely a threat to pedestrian safety.

That said - Canada isn't really seeing substantial increases in pedestrian or road deaths. At all. It's actually going the other way pretty consistently. Doesn't mean we can't do better though.
 
zang said:
Sure, why not give it a try. Free Market Capitalism and Libertarianism has done squat to help save pedestrians from vehicle deaths.
Click to expand...
So then, what are your courses of action for people who live in the city but need a larger vehicle for work? What about people who have pets, what about people who have cottages, etc.

Sweeping restrictions don’t really help anybody.
 
zang said:
Sure, why not give it a try. Free Market Capitalism and Libertarianism has done squat to help save pedestrians from vehicle deaths.
Click to expand...
I mean look at my post above. Pedestrian fatality rates have been halved in 25 years.

A lot of that is attributable to efforts greater than "free market capitalism" - but the automotive markets safety features are a massive, massive reason (much of which is in response to legislation, much of which is genuine market innovation) for the massive reduction in road deaths and injuries.
 
turbanplanner said:
So then, what are your courses of action for people who live in the city but need a larger vehicle for work? What about people who have pets, what about people who have cottages, etc.
Click to expand...

Perhaps everyone should own a cube van for the times they might move house?

They could do that, or they could just rent for the times they need more. Is it that oppressive a concept?

turbanplanner said:
Sweeping restrictions don’t really help anybody.
Click to expand...
Funny how I can't legally buy a car without seatbelts, or drive whatever speed I want.
 
zang said:
Perhaps everyone should own a cube van for the times they might move house?

They could do that, or they could just rent for the times they need more. Is it that oppressive a concept?


Funny how I can't legally buy a car without seatbelts, or drive whatever speed I want.
Click to expand...
Why strawman the argument? I trust people enough to buy something that makes sense for them.

My point about sweeping rules was that everyone’s situation is unique enough that I think a general rule on what cars you can own would need to have so many exceptions it would be pointless.
 
zang said:
I dunno about that.

[In the US] "One of the studies, from 2021, estimates 8,131 pedestrians between 2000 and 2019 could have survived if they were struck by sedans instead of SUVs or trucks.

Another study, published in the Journal of Safety Research in June, found that while SUVs and trucks made up just 26.1 per cent of pedestrian and cyclist collisions, they accounted for 44.1 per cent of fatalities. That study also suggested that because of their larger size, SUVs and trucks are more likely to hit vulnerable road users in the chest or head than a sedan."

Even extrapolating that first study, that's more 400 extra deaths per year due to SUVs/Pickups.


Here in Toronto, we had 26 pedestrian deaths in 2021.

"In 2021, approximately 35 per cent of those deaths in Toronto involved SUVs while another 10 per cent involved pickup trucks, he said."


I don't think anyone can call 35% (45% if you include pickups) "marginal". Small data set perhaps, but it tracks with everything else that gets put out about pedestrian deaths.


We also had two years of pandemic in there, where there were less overall cars on the road and less interactions in general.

"The number of vehicle occupant deaths has dramatically decreased in the past 20 years, while walking and cycling deaths have stayed the same or increased, he added.""
Click to expand...
That's 427 fatalities a year, correct.

But that's only if all SUVs were replaced with cars.

SUVs and trucks aren't new though. they have increased as a percentage of the vehicle fleet substantially, but have always existed. They have gone from about 10% of the total fleet to 30% since the SUV trend started around 2010. So only a small fraction of those would be associated with the increase in the prevalence of SUVs.

If SUVs are about 1.7x as likely to cause a fatality as the study suggests, the total fatality risk of the entire US vehicle fleet has actually increased about 13% since 2010. This suggests bringing SUVs back to a percentage of the total fleet they were 15 years ago would result in a 13% reduction in pedestrian fatalities. In the US.

The Canadian market is different, very, very different, when it comes to this kind of thing both in terms of average vehicle size and death rates.
 
Last edited:
afransen said:
Did the analysis above control for vehicle geometry, or is it confounded with weight?
Click to expand...
Most of the referenced data is from 2000-2008, before the massive rise in SUVs. It's still basic physics though, that an object with more mass will transfer more energy to whatever it strikes.
 
innsertnamehere said:
I mean look at my post above. Pedestrian fatality rates have been halved in 25 years.

A lot of that is attributable to efforts greater than "free market capitalism" - but the automotive markets safety features are a massive, massive reason (much of which is in response to legislation, much of which is genuine market innovation) for the massive reduction in road deaths and injuries.
Click to expand...
I'd like to find a study that actually finds that people buy cars that are safer for the pedestrians they may hit.

Most studies about driver behaviour has the majority of drivers believing they're a better driver than most others on the road. It's unlikely a purchase is calculated on "what if I'm not better"?
 
zang said:
I'd like to find a study that actually finds that people buy cars that are safer for the pedestrians they may hit.

Most studies about driver behavior has the majority of drivers believing they're a better driver than most others on the road. It's unlikely a purchase is calculated on "what if I'm not better"?
Click to expand...
People absolutely buy safer cars. Believe it or not, people don't want to get in collisions, and safety features are huge, huge sellers of vehicles. There is a reason Automakers splatter "IIHS Top Safety Pick" over all their car ads. I mean have you ever looked at a car brochure or watched a car ad? 20-30% of automotive marketing is dedicated to safety.

There is a lot of automotive technology which will be leading to reduced collisions (including those with pedestrians) which has been developed in the last 20 years. Think things like backup cameras (huge, and very well loved by the car buying public), automatic lane departure protection, automatic emergency braking, etc. These are all things that work to reduce pedestrian collisions which have become common features on cars by market demand, not regulation (backup cameras are mandated now, but they were very popular even before the mandate. all other features are not mandatory).

Some manufaturers have also done pretty extensive research in improving pedestrian safety - Volvo specifically, who usually leads the market in automotive safety features. They led the development of now common automatic emergency braking, and are now deploying features like Pedestrian Protection Systems which automatically raise the hood angle on the vehicle when a collision with a pedestrian is detected to better deflect the forces on the pedestrian:


Automatic emergency braking especially is huge in both reducing collisions and the severity of them as even if a collision can't be avoided, it reduces the speed at which it occurs. And it's not mandated by government at all despite being present on the vast majority of new vehicles sold today - even base model Honda Civic's have it. The NHTSA is not mandating it until 2029.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
People absolutely buy safer cars. Believe it or not, people don't want to get in collisions. There is a lot of automotive technology which will be leading to reduced collisions (including those with pedestrians) which has been developed in the last 20 years. Think things like backup cameras (huge, and very well loved by the car buying public), automatic lane departure protection, automatic emergency braking, etc. These are all things that work to reduce pedestrian collisions which have become common features on cars by market demand, not regulation (backup cameras are mandated now, but they were very popular even before the mandate. all other features are not mandatory).
Click to expand...
Yes, but they’re all arguably about the safety of the driver and protection of their property, rather than the safety of those outside the vehicle; be it pedestrians or other vehicles.

It’s been posited that some of the SUV trend is an arms race; that people feel safer in a larger vehicle on roads with an increasing number of large vehicles.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top