Is there any data on whether the growing ubiquity of SUVs and large pickup trucks in city driving has had any effect on the number of minor, low-speed accidents? I’ve been driving for over 20 years, and it just seems to me that it’s harder to see in a lot of situations. You can’t see as far down the road to check for potential problems. You can’t see around the solid mass of metal next to you when you are backing out of a parking space. You can’t see what’s coming when pulling into a cross-street if there are huge vehicles parked along the road. And it would seem that SUV drivers would have more trouble seeing behind them as well, although they might have a better overall driving vantage point.
Collision claim frequency:
In 1997
In 2000 Same kind of results.
A study on SUVs
So it looks like they don’t have as many wrecks, but when they do hit something they pretty much annihilate it. As much as I hate to endorse the gas-guzzling things, they seem to be a more sensible bet from a loss frequency/survivability standpoint.
I figured the SUVs themselves might be involved in fewer of those types of accident. What I’m curious about is whether there are, for example, more pull-out and parking lot accidents in general due to the inability to see around. So the accidents in question might actually involve two regular cars who just couldn’t see each other. I live on a street that has angle parking, and it’s much harder to get out safely when there is a large vehicle, especially a pick-up, next to me.
Ah. Probably no data on SUVs as an uninvolved “obstruction” simply because vehicles not sustaining damage in an accident are typically disregarded by insurance companies and law enforcement agencies. The exception of course is if the beheamoth is behaving in a negligent fashion and the owner is officially charged (rare occurrence, that). Parked or legally operated monsters are just part of the playing field and it’s up to everyone to avoid or minimize the possibility of running into stuff. But I agree a Yukon with privacy glass may as well be a brick wall when it comes to other cars trying to see what’s on the other side.
I also want to recant/modify my previous post. While I still believe SUVs are not the major causes of financial loss overall, I omitted some good pondering points:
- While they abound, SUVs are still outnumbered by the little cars. Thus it is natural that probability dictates more accidents will involve small cars. A better metric would be per capita loss figures–the “Relative Claim Frequency” is useful, but not necessarily the “Loss Payment” information.
- The little cars are racking up some expensive losses–could this be because they’re being crushed by SUVs? (The Dodge Viper tends to roll over–I’ve never seen a Viper involved in a total loss involving another car, it always seems to be the driver over estimating his/the car’s capabilities).
Sorry, I seem to have run your OP in the wrong direction. By my bet is that there’s not an answer for you simply due to lack of laws against being big and opaque. 
I would also add that their effect on pedestrian casualty rates is relatively severe: they tend to have very pedestrian-unfriendly front structures (especially when fitted with bull bars and other similar penis-compensating ironmongery). Generally this would matter less in the U.S. compared with other countries, but I imagine that in cities this well-established property would reassert itself in the accident statistics.
Fairly recently there was a news report how motorcycle riders are making out much worse. An injury use to consist of broken legs and fun stuff like that, now it’s death due to the higher bumper and flatter higher ‘grill’.
Not exlusively; they’re just more expensive to fix. They’re more complicated, have more smaller parts, and partially as you said, they get more damage. But not as a result of SUV’s. Anything that hits a small car with hurt a small car more than an SUV. The body structures are way, way, way different. Trucks are easy.