> In today's Daily Telegraph the an article caught my eye. It appears
> that the UK Department of Transport have been conducting research into the
> relationship between car colour and likelihood of a personal injury accident.
> The rates of involvement of each colour per 10 000 licensed cars are as
> follows:
> black - 179
> white - 160
> red - 157
> blue - 149
> grey - 147
> gold - 145
> silver - 142
> beige - 137
> green - 134
> brown - 133
> yellow - 133
> other - 139
Interesting. Did the article mention if these figures were based on
10,000 licensed cars of the given color, or just 10,000 overall? If
the latter, then the figures are less useful, because for example
there are more white cars on the road than any other color, at least
in the USA. This would skew the results such that the more common
colors would have diproportionately higher rates by virtue of there
being more cars of that color on the road. The above ratings would
then not be based on color alone, but both color and number. (Hope
my description is clear.)
On a related note, fire trucks here in the USA are slowly being
converted from red to a sort of baby-sh*t yellow-green, the stated
reason being that the red trucks are harder for other drivers to see
and are consequently involved in more accidents.
Also, I'm surprised that silver/grey are not higher than they are.
Those colors are near impossible to see on an asphalt road at dusk,
and/or in the rain.
BTW, my vehicles are a red Madza pickup, a white Isuzu Trooper, and a
white Sunbeam Alpine... Been lucky though, my last accident was in
1982 or so, in a green VW 412 (I was rear-ended).
Thanks for taking the time to type in all the figures.
--
T.J. Higgins | tjhiggin@ingr.com | (205) 730-7922
Intergraph Corp. | Mapping Sciences Division | Huntsville, AL, USA
"There are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics"
-- can't remember who said this...
|