More than 30,000 Americans die each year due to auto-related collisions. I started this blog to reduce this number, and am happy to have helped thousands of parents make safer car seat and vehicular choices for their children and families. This has become my life’s work.

Drilling down into the numbers, it becomes apparent, however, that some drivers are more dangerous than others.

How safe are seniors (65+) compared to teenagers?

Earlier I wrote about how the most dangerous drivers on the road, in terms of involvement in fatal collisions per mile traveled, weren’t seniors, as is commonly thought in the US, but actually 16 to 29-year-old male drivers in general, and 16 to 19-year-old male drivers in particular. This information is summarized again here through this IIHS chart:
The chart is a good start, as at first glance, it clearly disproves the notion that senior drivers are our most dangerous on the road. In the United States, citizens are typically classified as seniors once turning 65, as this is when they become eligible for Medicare (and when they used to become fully eligible for Social Security, although this has age of eligibility has unfortunately been scaled up over the years).

The chart suggests the safest drivers, both male, and female, are those between 30 and 69, or more specifically, between 30 and 59 and between 60 and 69. The 60-69 group clearly involves a number of seniors, yet they still contribute to the group of the safest drivers.

The 70 and over crowd becomes somewhat less safe, but both male and female drivers 70 or older are still less likely to be involved in fatal collisions per mile traveled than men between 16 and 29 and women between 16 and 19. Overall, drivers as a whole 70 and older are safer than drivers as a whole between 16 and 29, primarily due to just how unsafe male drivers are between 16 and 29.

To put it simply, 16-19-year-old teenagers are more likely to be involved in fatal collisions per mile traveled than drivers over 65, regardless of gender. 

OK, so seniors 65 and over are safer overall than teenagers. But how safe are seniors 80 and over compared to teenagers?

With this question, the picture becomes a bit more complicated, as information involving large numbers of people tends to be. Let’s split the age cohorts a bit more, adding a category of drivers between 20 and 24, a category of drivers between 25 and 29, a category of drivers between 70 and 79, and a category of drivers 80 and older. Are seniors still going to be universally safer than the average male driver under 30 or the average female driver under 20?

Not quite. Let’s look at another chart of IIHS data that answers this question:

The chart offers more resolution than the other one. Seventy to 79-year-old drivers overall are still safer than 16 to 29-year-olds overall, but as a group, 80 and older drivers become the group most likely to be involved in fatal collisions per mile traveled.

Specifically, male drivers 80 and over are still less likely to be involved in fatal collisions per mile traveled than male 16 to 19-year-olds, who remain the most dangerous age and gender cohort, and almost identical to 20 to 24-year old male drivers. However, because of how safe female drivers are overall–even the 16 to 19-year-old female cohort–the 80 and older female cohort become the most dangerous female cohort, and the overall cohort of 80 and older drivers becomes the most dangerous group on the road.

To put it simply, 16 to 19-year-old teenagers are more likely to be involved in fatal collisions per mile traveled than drivers between 65 and 79, regardless of gender. However, drivers 80 and over are more likely to be involved in fatal collisions than teenagers between 16 and 19, even though drivers 80 and over are still safer than male drivers between 16 and 19 and almost identical to male drivers between 20 and 24.

The problem with this data, though, is that it’s still incomplete. Even though it provides a more detailed look at driver safety than the previous chart, there are still many unanswered questions. For example, where between 70 and 79 does the rate of fatal driver collision involvement show its steepest inflection, or change?

I can’t answer that question right now. But what’s clear from this analysis is that seniors don’t become more dangerous drivers than teenagers until they’re past 80, and even then, they’re still safer than teen males between 16 and 19, and just about as safe as male adults between 20 and 24. Teen males between 16 and 19 remain the most dangerous drivers on the road.

—

If you find the information on car safety, recommended car seats, and car seat reviews on this car seat blog helpful, you can shop through this Amazon link for any purchases, car seat-related or not. Canadians can shop through this link for Canadian purchases.

Last year, the IIHS published their first list of used car recommendations for teenagers, and I explained here why the list was less helpful to most parents than it could have been. While well-meant, the article was tone-deaf to the economic realities of the country at best and destructive by enabling misconceptions and vehicular arms races at worst.

Strong words, I know. Let’s look at that a bit more closely, and then I’ll have my recommendations for safe, affordable used cars, SUVs, minivans, and pickup trucks for teen drivers, based on vehicle availability in 2016.

Why was the previous IIHS analysis of safe teen vehicles a poor one?

The main reason for its relative unhelpfulnesss was because a.) it ignored the realities of how much money parents were actually spending on vehicles for their teenage drivers, b.) it misled readers into believing that all teenage drivers were the most dangerous (they’re not), and entirely avoided the greater issue that teenage male drivers are the most dangerous on the road, and c.) it encouraged a vehicular arms race by telling parents to buy large and heavy vehicles for the least experienced drivers on the road.

So if there were so many issues with the 2014 article, why am I looking at their 2015 report? Well, the IIHS does provide a lot of good information on crashworthiness, and I was hopeful they would provide far more useful, accurate, and relevant information to parents this year on safe and budget-friendly car choices for adolescent drivers. Let’s see how they did.

1. How much are parents spending on cars for their teenagers, and do IIHS recommendations address these amounts?

Last year in 2014, the IIHS reported the median amount spent by parents on vehicles for teens was $5,300. Adjusting for inflation, this yields a sum of $5,327 in 2015. The IIHS states, once again, that parents should spend more money for more safety. Of course, the median household income in 2014, per the US Census Bureau, was $51,339, which tends to be the same from year to year. Furthermore, median household debt in 2010 was $3,300, which is unlikely to have changed significantly in the last few years. Oh, and college, which most parents aspire their children attending, still costs around $23,410 if you’re aiming for average costs as an in-state student at a public 4-year school.

As a result, urging parents to spend more is unlikely to occur for a variety of reasons. So let’s look at the IIHS’ 2015 vehicle list and see how relevant it is for median parents:

They tag 81 vehicles as “best” choices and 68 as “good” choices, for a total of 149 vehicles. Of these, ideally, at least 74 should be below $5,327, with the other half above that amount, if this list is truly designed to help parents where they are, rather than where the IIHS would like them to be financially.

How many vehicles fall below the median?

Nineteen.

In other words, just under 13% of vehicles, or 19 out of 149, show up at or below the median price. An ideal list would feature 50% of vehicles in that range. Unfortunately, the list this year, much like the list last year, remains out of reach for the vast majority of American families.

2. Does the IIHS paint an accurate report of how dangerous teenage drivers are, who the most dangerous teens are, and how to reduce their danger?

Last year in 2014, the IIHS urged parents to consider “the risks teens take” and pay more to keep them safe. However, as I noted, the groups most likely to be involved in fatal crashes are teenage males between 16 and 19, followed by young men between 20 and 29. Teenage girls are safer than *all* male drivers until male drivers turn 30. The IIHS ignored their own data when omitting this information last year. Did things change this year?

Unfortunately not. The IIHS did recommend parents choose vehicles without high horsepower, with a lot of weight, and with ESC, but said nothing about reducing the amount of unsupervised driving teenage males were allowed or delaying their acquisition of licenses. Is it a good idea to put teens in vehicles with ESC? Yes, the same way it’s a good idea to put everyone in vehicles with ESC. Is it a good idea to avoid high horsepower vehicles for teens? Yes, for the same reason it’s a good idea for adults (speed kills). Is it a good idea to suggest teens drive giant vehicles to keep them safe? I’ll tackle that in a moment.

But finally, is it helpful for the IIHS to continue to paint all teens with a broad brush when the most dangerous drivers are, quite plainly, teenage males?

No; there is much left unsaid here, and an opportunity was missed.

3. Does the IIHS continue to encourage destructive policies for all road users by encouraging parents to buy large and heavy vehicles for the least experienced drivers on the road?

Last year in 2014, the IIHS directed parents to choose bigger and heavier vehicles for their teenage drivers, and explicitly stated they wouldn’t recommend minicars or small cars to parents of teenagers. I countered that this advice only made the roads more dangerous for all drivers by encouraging a vehicular arms race through telling parents to buy large and heavy vehicles for the least experienced drivers on the road. Did this change this year?

Unfortunately not. The IIHS repeats their “every driver for him/herself” mantra by urging parents outfit their teenage drivers with vehicles capable of doing more harm to others by doing less harm to them by extension. I understand the logic behind this thought process, but it’s ultimately a futile one.

If everyone follows the advice and drives heavy vehicles, heavy vehicles offer no advantages to anyone inside them, while making the roads that much more dangerous for people who aren’t in any vehicles, such as cyclists, motorcyclists, and every single pedestrian in the country. And whether we acknowledge it or not, all of us are pedestrians at one point or another in the day, even if only when walking to and from our vehicles when leaving or arriving our homes, places of work, of food, of commerce, of worship, and so on.

Am I stating parents should only buy tiny cars for their teenage drivers? Not necessarily. But I am absolutely stating that parents should not buy large vehicles for their children, or for themselves, if not absolutely necessary.

It is the height of irresponsibility to buy vehicles that increase the already-grandiose sense of invincibility felt by far too many teenage males (which, of course, is what leads to their having a far higher rate of involvement in fatal collisions than teenage females or males of any other age before 80).

To put it frankly, the IIHS’ recommendation to avoid a number of very safe, practical, affordable, and fuel-friendly vehicles (e.g., a used Prius that yields 50 mpg while having a driver death rate better than dozens of 4000-6000 lb pickup trucks and SUVs) is an unpleasant one for a number of ethical, environmental, financial, and humanitarian reasons.

This list isn’t helpful. Let’s make one that is.

If the IIHS is unhelpful in choosing safe and budget-friendly vehicles for teenagers, which ones would you recommend in 2016, Mike, and why?

At this point, it’s clear that the IIHS’ agenda isn’t necessarily the most relevant or helpful one for parents interested in keeping their teenagers safe and financially solvent without increasing the risks they pose to others on the road (of all ages). My recommendations are based on those assumptions.

As a result, I primarily include mini (subcompact) and small (compact) cars and SUVs, add mid-sized cars, and completely leave out mid-sized and larger SUVs, minivans, and pickup trucks, which are unnecessary for most teenagers (who ideally should either be driving with parents or driving alone, and certainly shouldn’t be driving with other teens). Furthermore, all of my recommendations are around the median price parents are spending ($5,327), and all of my recommendations include vehicles with side airbags, ESC, and good frontal and good or acceptable side crash scores. All prices are based on private party costs in November 2015 in the Chicago metro area.

The safest affordable mini cars and subcompacts for teenagers in 2016

2010+ Toyota Yaris

The Yaris is a good choice for teens on a budget who prioritize fuel economy; the EPA ratings are 29/35 city/highway in the automatic and 29/36 in the manual. From 2010 onward, ESC is standard, while side airbags are standard from 2009 onward. It has both good frontal and side crash test scores.

The safest affordable small cars and compacts for teenagers in 2016

2010+ Ford Focus

The Focus sedan is another good choice for parents interested in safety, affordability, and fuel economy. It’s rated for 24/34 in the automatic and 24/35 in the manual, and comes standard with side airbags and ESC from 2010 onward, or simply with side airbags from 2008 onward. It has a good frontal score but only an acceptable side score.

The safest affordable small SUVs and crossovers for teenagers in 2016

2005+ Honda CR-V

The CR-V, along with the Yaris, is one of the two most reliable vehicles on this list, and is highly recommended for parents who would like vehicles their teens can pay to repair due to low maintenance costs. It comes with ESC and side airbags as standard features from 2005 onward. It has both good frontal and side crash test scores and is rated at 20/26 in the automatic FWD. It’s also one of only 2 vehicles on the list with an AWD option (the other is the S60).

The safest affordable mid-sized cars for teenagers in 2016

2004+ Saab 9-3

The Saab 9-3 is the most affordable vehicle on this list to buy, although probably not the cheapest to maintain. It has come with both ESC and side airbags since 2003, which is earlier than any vehicle on this list and the vast majority of vehicles ever made. It has both good frontal and side crash test scores as of 2004, and is rated at around 18/27 in the automatic.

2007+ Volvo S60

Finally, the S60 is another good choice for parents interested in safety and affordability. Like the 9-3, however, it’s likely to cost more to maintain over time. It has good frontal and acceptable side crash test scores and has come with ESC since 2007 and side airbags since 2001. It is rated at around 19/28 in the best of the automatic transmissions, and is also available in AWD.

I hope you’ve found this article helpful and informative as a parent interested in finding safe and affordable transportation for you teenage child. We can’t protect them from everything, but we can certainly keep them safer without going into debt or making the roads less safe for others in our communities.

—

If you find the information on car safety, recommended car seats, and car seat reviews on this car seat blog helpful, you can shop through this Amazon link for any purchases, car seat-related or not. Canadians can shop through this link for Canadian purchases.

Road safety is a passion of mine, and is the driving force behind why I created this blog. I’ve written extensively about car seat selection and safe vehicle choices and technologies, but I’ve also extensively advocated for the need to improve our cultural attitudes toward safe and sustainable transportation in order to make our streets and communities safe for everyone (especially those who can’t or won’t drive, such as children, cyclists, the elderly and disabled, and so on).

This entry, as a result, is part of a series about driving in the United States, and the people on our roads who make such driving (and road use) more or less safe. Today’s focus is on the most dangerous drivers in the United States: young men between the ages of 16 and 29. This is a large and influential demographic in our country, and it’s worth looking into how and why they’re dangerous, and what we can do to make them safer, in order to make the roads safer for everyone.

Which drivers are most likely to be involved in fatal vehicle crashes?

According to an IIHS analysis of USDOT Fatality Analysis Reporting System data, male drivers are universally more likely to be involved in fatal collisions per mile driven than female drivers, as reflected by the 2.1 per 100 million miles traveled rate for male drivers compared to the 1.4 per 100 million miles traveled rate for female drivers. In other words, for every mile driven, a male driver is 50% more likely to be involved in a fatal crash than a female driver. That’s bad enough. But things get even worse when we look at younger drivers.

How dangerous are teenage drivers (male and female)?

Look at the chart closely, and you’ll notice that the two highest rates of fatal crash involvements, and they’re the two highest by a long shot, belong to male drivers. A 16 to 19 year-old male driver is nearly 2x more likely to be involved in a fatal collision than a 16 to 19-year-old female driver. However, a 20 to 29-year-old male is still more than 1.5x more likely to be involved in a fatal collision than a 16 to 19-year-old female driver. The average male driver doesn’t experience a lower rate of fatal crash involvement than the average 16 to 19-year-old female driver until he’s at least 30 years old.

To put it another way, the average male driver is a greater risk on the road, per mile driven, than any other driver, from the moment he gets his license until the day he turns 30. That’s 14 years of being more dangerous than a senior driver of either gender, and that’s 14 years of being more dangerous than a teenage female driver.

This is sobering, but it’s so important to keep in mind. Every day, it’s common to hear talk among people and throughout the news about how dangerous “seniors” are behind the wheel, or how bad “teenagers” are when it comes to taking driving seriously. This paints an incomplete picture of the facts.

While it’s true that there are certainly some poor elderly drivers and that teenage boys and girls are the demographics most likely to be involved in fatal collisions within their genders, a look at the numbers reveals a more accurate picture. And that picture indicates that male teens and young adults are far more likely to be reckless drivers than drivers of any other gender or age group. I’ve written about this before.

How do we make male drivers under 30 safer, more responsible, or at least less dangerous?

That’s a great question, and it’s one with a range of possible answers. For me, one of the most pressing answers involves awareness and education. As I noted above, most people aren’t aware of how often men under 30 are involved in fatal collisions, and many more paint all seniors or teens with too broad of a brush, mistakenly believing they’re the reasons our roads are unsafe.

The truth is, however, that all men are a greater risk at every age than the equivalent female demographic, and that men under 30 are particularly risky drivers. Spreading the word of this truth, from my perspective, is the first step toward creating a culture of safer drivers.

As a male driver, I’ve lived through the two most risky demographics for my gender, and I can easily affirm that my peers didn’t take driving nearly as seriously as it merited, and neither did I more times than I’m proud to admit. But we need to make a change. Too much is at stake on our roads to keep driving the way we do.

Once we start having this discussion, the topic of how to drive safely can then be raised. It’s one the men of this country need to hear.

—

If you find my information on best practices in car and car seat safety helpful, you can buy my books here or do your shopping through this Amazon link. Canadians can shop here for Canadian purchases.  It costs nothing extra to do so, but when you shop through my links, a small portion of your purchase, regardless of what you buy, will go toward the maintenance of The Car Crash Detective.

If you read this blog, you’ll know that I’m a fan of much of what the IIHS does, particularly with respect to their side impact tests, which I feel are more relevant to real life than the NHTSA’s side impact tests. However, there are a number of policies and practices they espouse that I either directly disagree with or find less than helpful. The institute recently came out with this list of, per their perspective, the best used vehicles for teen drivers. Here are my thoughts on it from a financial angle.

This is perhaps the section of the article that bothers me the most. The two lists provided by the IIHS are for vehicles under 20k and vehicles under 10k, yet at least 1/2 of vehicles chosen by parents are under 5.3k. The fact that the average price, 9.8k, is nearly twice that of the median, further indicates that very few parents actually spend 9.8k, but that a few parents are spending large amounts of money (e.g., those buying expensive new cars), which skews the average upward.

Averages can be deceiving when understanding human behavior

It’s sort of like the joke of how if 3 people in a restaurant have 10k each in net worth (e.g., Person A with a net worth of 5k, Person B with a net worth of 10k, and Person C with a net worth of 15k….this would result in both a median and mean, or average, of 10k) and a billionaire walks in, the “average” net worth in the restaurant jumps to 250 million dollars. However, that doesn’t make any of the other 3 people any richer, and the median remains at a far more reflective value of 12.5k (10k + 15k = 25k / 2 = 12.5k), rather than 250 million. A newspaper, television, or other dishonest source of information, however, would tell you that the folks at the restaurant were very well off. But it wouldn’t be true at all.

In other words, averages often have nothing to do with reality. Look for medians to find out what things actually look like on the ground and in the trenches.

With that said, it’s not very helpful to provide a list of expensive vehicles (from the perspective of the parents who actually buy the vehicles) with the knowledge that most parents aren’t going to spend anywhere near the values on the list. To the IIHS’ credit, they do acknowledge that only 3 vehicles on their list cost less than the median value. However, with a list of 95 vehicles, at least 47 should have been priced less than the median value for the list to be relevant to parents. Instead, 3 vehicles fall on the weaker side of the median (the ’06 Sedona, ’05 9-3, and ’06 Passat). That’s just not helpful.

Who are the most dangerous drivers? Not all teenagers are the same

At this point, you might state that the IIHS does encourage parents to spend more on vehicles for their teens. That is absolutely true. However, the problem isn’t that parents aren’t spending enough as much as that new vehicles cost far too much to begin with, which leads to used vehicles costing far more than they should. And statistically, while teenagers may be the most inexperienced drivers on the road (due to having the least amount of time behind the wheel), all teenagers don’t carry equal risks. When rates of involvement in fatal collisions are considered, which, to me, is as good a way as any of analyzing who the dangerous drivers are, the most dangerous drivers on the road in terms of age and gender groups are males between 16 and 29. “The risks teens take” would better be described as the risks males take, and implying that all teens need big vehicles to protect them from themselves is both patronizing and inaccurate. If anything, young male drivers should drive as little as possible until they turn 30, regardless of which vehicles they’re driving.

The IIHS knows this, as this information is available on their website here. I’ll have another post on that issue later (update: here!). But for now, I’ll end this post with noting that we don’t do parents (or teens) any favors by taking the time to research how much parents actually spend on vehicles for teenagers, and then providing a list of vehicles bearing no relation to the realities of parental budgets, and urging parents to spend more. Not in an economic climate where the cost of a full year of public school education (~25k) for one child is equivalent to half of the median household salary (~50k), and where healthcare eats up ever-larger portions of family finances. It doesn’t make sense.

I’ll also argue against the wisdom of encouraging the vehicular weight arms race by telling parents to buy their teenagers large SUVs and minivans at another time. But for now, my take home message is that promoting $20,000 and $10,000 vehicles for teens when most parents are spending well, well under these amounts does little to actually promote vehicular safety for teenagers.

—

If you find the information on car safety, recommended car seats, and car seat reviews on this car seat blog helpful, you can shop through this Amazon link for any purchases, car seat-related or not. Canadians can shop through this link for Canadian purchases.