have you seen or heard this it was on the news today !
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/August2007/14/c6740.html
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/August2007/14/c6740.html
Rhd %40 more likely to be involved in a crash ?
- Thread starter toynut
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
I just read the 16 page report, they use very convenient models to come to their conclusions.
The conclusion and headline they use is so unbelievable that they have lost all credibility - if someone believes that RHD are 40 percent more likely to crash they will also believe that there are still WMD in Iraq.
The conclusion and headline they use is so unbelievable that they have lost all credibility - if someone believes that RHD are 40 percent more likely to crash they will also believe that there are still WMD in Iraq.
I would like to see the raw data behind the stats: Age of drivers, type of vehicle, area of impact, situation causing the accident, and of course then dig deeper. RHD is a pretty broad statement. I thought insurance rates were to be based on narrower data, such as new drivers (age 16-20) are more likely to get into an accident then say someone who has been driving for 20 years with no history. And of course based on the type of vehicle.
gb
gb
And of course the dollar amount of the claim, severity of the injuries if any, and all the other raw data used to float their agenda.
Of course...what are the comparative dollar amounts for injury claim, and vehicle repair for motorcycles?
For an active discussion...go here: http://www.ivoac.ca/pn/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=8388#8388
gb
Of course...what are the comparative dollar amounts for injury claim, and vehicle repair for motorcycles?
For an active discussion...go here: http://www.ivoac.ca/pn/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=8388#8388
gb
Where is the study?
Where do we get a copy?
Who and what prompted the study? Was this study done in response to some group outside of ICBC, which has financial issues at risk from these RHD imports or by genuine ICBC internal concerns about safety? Why was it not done by an independent engineering firm?
I would like to read the study and review its data and sampling approach. Was the sampling stratified by vehicle type, mileage, e.g -sorted out by 4X4, high performance vehicle (Skylines) and compared to similar LHD of same vintage/type or compared to the general 15 year old vehicle stock, most of are in such poor shape they don't get driven much. Comparing the probability of accidents between RHD and LHD vehicles should take into annual average mileage differences, not just vehicle vintage. Most 15-yr. LHD vehicles are not driven much, because of higher fuel use, lower dependability, etc, thus are exposed to much lower crash risks.
A study like this needs a very careful design to be truly objective and useful in any policy review, such as the Transport Canada a review of the 15-yr exemption.
Where do we get a copy?
Who and what prompted the study? Was this study done in response to some group outside of ICBC, which has financial issues at risk from these RHD imports or by genuine ICBC internal concerns about safety? Why was it not done by an independent engineering firm?
I would like to read the study and review its data and sampling approach. Was the sampling stratified by vehicle type, mileage, e.g -sorted out by 4X4, high performance vehicle (Skylines) and compared to similar LHD of same vintage/type or compared to the general 15 year old vehicle stock, most of are in such poor shape they don't get driven much. Comparing the probability of accidents between RHD and LHD vehicles should take into annual average mileage differences, not just vehicle vintage. Most 15-yr. LHD vehicles are not driven much, because of higher fuel use, lower dependability, etc, thus are exposed to much lower crash risks.
A study like this needs a very careful design to be truly objective and useful in any policy review, such as the Transport Canada a review of the 15-yr exemption.
JDM covers a lot of vehicles. I've seen some really fast RHD vehicles cruising around town. I doubt that ICBC is picking on LC's specifically, but JDM's in general. This comes along just when I've been entertaining the idea of getting an 81 for my wife.
GG
GG
Althought this study seems to be slightly better done than that Transport Canada, it still has some major flaws. THey dance around all kinds of mdels and controls, but when you look at the way they gather the data , their are fundamental flaws.. For example, the comparision they use between LHDs and RHD data is based on Model Year, Make and Body Style.. So in theory a 1991 RHD 2 door accord is grouped with a 1991 LHD celica/supra. ANd there are probably more cases than not where there would be no equivalent vehicles in NA to compare.. for example Delica and KEI cars.. where did those numbers get put?
The other funny thing about this study is how it glazes over the points that work in favour of RHDs. If you read the study, RHD vehicles are 21% less likely to involve injury in collisions and they also cost less of in damagaes/claims than their LHD counterparts.. yet all we hear about is this 40% figure..
Anyway, we're getting alot more media attention with the release of this report.. Mike is doing an interview on CKNW tomorrow at 1930 and I did one today with Scott Walker from CBC Victoria.. it should get posted here in the next few days:http://www.cbc.ca/allpointswest/
Those of you in the lower mainland should try and cath the interview at CKNW if you can and provide comments/feedback if they make that option available..
thanks,
Daryl
The other funny thing about this study is how it glazes over the points that work in favour of RHDs. If you read the study, RHD vehicles are 21% less likely to involve injury in collisions and they also cost less of in damagaes/claims than their LHD counterparts.. yet all we hear about is this 40% figure..
Anyway, we're getting alot more media attention with the release of this report.. Mike is doing an interview on CKNW tomorrow at 1930 and I did one today with Scott Walker from CBC Victoria.. it should get posted here in the next few days:http://www.cbc.ca/allpointswest/
Those of you in the lower mainland should try and cath the interview at CKNW if you can and provide comments/feedback if they make that option available..
thanks,
Daryl
CNW Group? That's the same firm that made up that stupid BS report saying how a Hummer H2 was more environmentally friendly than a Prius. While I'm not a treehugging prius lover, that report was completely bogus and was debunked by Toyota from start to finish.
So basically, they're as credible as a dead mule.
So basically, they're as credible as a dead mule.