Except that the studies don't suggest that. In other parts of the thread, the risk to life and injury works out to be roughly the same for the average collision.

Unless your commentary is: "Less seating means less people involved." In which case: Good job, hard to counter.

Nah, it was a simple question about the overall efficacy of surviving a crash.

And if you had participated in other parts of the conversation, you'd see that there is actually movement on that front. TL;DR, since you seem in a hurry, both trucks are equally safe at a speed that most collisions happen ( under 40mph ).

But if you want to make that about "AMERICANS ARE EVIL", I can't really stop you. 3

At first, I was going to criticize the collision speed of the example study, but found ( ok, I say found, I mean I googled for 15 seconds ) that the average American collision is occurring at less than 40mph, so good to go there.

Second, I was going to comment on the relative safety of being in the Kei truck and being struck by the 2500HD... but that just goes back to the 'participating in the arms race', so feels... stupid.

So, overall: Thanks for providing this. It directly answers the primary concern of 'what if I hit something tho'. There are some other angles I could nitpick on maybe, but they all feel like a kind of 'consolation prize' to the argument.

How does each hold up in a collision tho? Crumple zones take up space, not something terribly present in the kei truck.

Not that this makes the 2500's faults or anything. It just seems worth noticing.