Okay, Okay... stop sending me all those PMs begging for the answer folks ! Geez, show a little patience !

Alright now. For those of you who answered "8 and 4" pat yourselves on the back. And for those of you who answered "9 and 3" give yourselves a little touch on the back.

As I learned in Auto Claim Representative school run by the worlds largest auto insurance company... and as reported by the country's most reputable and highly respected research foundation for crash studies, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (is that good enough for you, IndyDave??), the safest place to put your hands on the steering wheel in the event your airbag deploys is the 8 and 4 position.

As some folks very thoughtfully said in the thread, the old "10 and 2" position many of us were taught is no longer the preferred method. Holding the wheel in this position will more frequently result in injuries not only to the fingers, hands, and arms, but can also cause your arms and hands to strike your face, causing severe facial injuries. And for those who like to drive with one hand at the 11 or 12 o'clock position... you are especially at risk for facial injuries.

"9 and 3" is preferred by some other groups who have conducted studies but based on crash tests that I've personally witness, I wouldn't recommend it. The crash dummies' left hand and/or arm often struck the ds door with enough force to cause fractures.

 

So is one now supposed to drive with hands at 8 and 4 or shuffle there with great haste upon impending doom?

 

I just cant see there being enough control there for 8 and 4 to be practical. I know that when i took my drivers test i would have failed had i tried to drive in that position. Likewise i would rather break a few bones in my hand then have to worry about losing control of my car in the first place.

 

A bit of an exaggeration . I passed my driving test using the 8-4. It does feel a little lazy but my arms feel more relaxed. When turning (especially those curvy roads), my hands go back to 10-2 automatically. When on straight roads (aka most roads in Seattle), i am 8-4.

 

Take it for what it's worth, folks... advice on the best way to handle your steering wheel to avoid injury in the SMALL chance that you are involved in an accident that would cause your airbag to deploy.

If you personally feel the risk is greater in placing your hands at 8 & 4 because you don't feel you have control of your vehicle when you do that, compared to the risk of injury, then by all means, continue to use the old 10 & 2 method !

And Some Guy... just how many years ago was that driver's test you took.

 

A very loud and resounding NO! The IIHS is one of the groups I was referring to in my earlier post about misleading data. They do perform a lot of crash testing and in this particular question, I might accept your data. But I have seen enough trash out of IIHS that I take everything they say with a grain of salt. First and foremost, they are an organization funded by insurance companies. They may market themselves as a humble humanity serving group just trying to save lives. . . I'm not buying it.

Among IIHS's positions are a draconian approach to speed limits and enforcement- they strongly opposed eliminating the 55mph NMSL (National Maximum Speed Limit), favor making radar detectors illegal, etc. Let me say again, they are funded by insurance companies. Anything they can do to get all of us more tickets is money in their pocket!

I've ranted enough, but I'll be glad to post an example of two of IIHS's misleading statements. I used to be actively involved in the National Motorists Association (the US's foremost drivers' rights organization) and for fun got on IIHS's mailing list. Some of the things they said were just unbelieveable. To them, going 56mph is akin to being an axe murderer.

Ok, I'm done now. Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

 

Well, that post tells me all I need to know about why you were asking an insurance professional for evidence, Dave.

Sounds like you might have an axe to grind with auto insurance companies. Hey... you're not the only one, I'm sure. So whatever caused this ire, whether you were once canceled by one or you simply think auto insurance is a necessary evil... whatever... the answer is still true. Not only crash tests data tells us so, but also real life accident victims with real life injuries tell us so.

And the IIHS, yes, funded by insurance companies to perform crash tests to make auto manufacturers produce safer cars. Their tests have saved countless lives and that is indisputable.

So, if you don't like their stance on speed limits and radar detectors, you have that right. But I think your position comes of sounding selfish.

 

I will keep my hands at the 10 & 2. I tried the 4 & 8 last night as I drove home and I felt like I was just along for the ride. You have a greater range of motion at 10 & 2 than at 4 & 8 and I don't like to have to shuffle the wheel when I am driving.

 

I'm with IndyDave as far as speed limits are concerned--I don't trust IIHS on the subject of speed, etc. But in other areas, where both motorists' and insurance companies' interest are shared, such as crashiness worth, I may give them more credibuility. For example, this steering wheel issue--I can certainly see why 8-4 is safer, because you're holding the wheel under the 'path' of the airbag's explosion, while holding 10-2 would lead to the arms being impacted by the airbag more severely.

 

Exactly. All I'm saying is, don't take everything you hear as gospel. And IIHS is not a neutral party. They have a vested interest, and the people and companies that support them have a vested financial interest. If I were in the insurance business, I probably would take similar positions.

But from many past observations, I still think IIHS makes "there are lies, damn lies, and statistics" an art form. . . .

 

Your entitled to an opinion on the subject every bit as much as I am, Dave.

But if you think the crash tests they conduct and the facts that come from them are "lies, damn lies, and statistics", then you are seriously misguided.

I've seen their crash tests. What's even more interesting than watching a brand-spanking new Mercedes crash into a barrier at 40 mph is the Mercedes reps in the audience that are on their cell phones as the crash takes place to communicate back to their HQ with the results. It's that important to them.

Why ? Because the results are accepted by the general public and manufacturer's alike. They know if they get poor results, people will realize the risks and their sales will suffer. Engineering will be making changes to their designs before the day of the crash is over.

So naysay the IIHS if you want. But if you ever have a loved-one in a serious accident and they walk away from it, you very well may owe it to the IIHS.

 

I'm not saying that their crash tests are worthless--far from it, they ARE valuable. I place more credibility on their crash tests than on their speed limit positions, BECAUSE with crash tests, at least the insurance companies and I share a common interest in seeing cars that will protect the driver and passenger.

It's just that when it come to speed limits and other such subjects, we don't place much stock in IIHS because our interests are different in this area--insurance companies are looking for any excuse to raise premiums, even when such excuse is flimsy and unsupported by objective/unbiased scientific analysis, while us drivers want speed limits set scientifically and according to the road conditions, rather than broad-brushed speed limit (55 MAX everywhere, even out in Nevada!)

Hope you understand the difference! And thank you very much for taking the time to share your knowledge of insurance with the rest of us! Looking forward to further threads!

 

Insurance companies fund the IIHS in order to LOWER premiums, not raise them.

The bulk of the insurance industry spending comes in the form of Bodily Injury claims. By reducing the injuries sustained in accidents, besides the obvious benefits, the insurance companies are reducing payouts for bodily injuries and can therefore keep your and my premiums at a lower rate. Who's not in favor of that ?

Insurance companies don't *want* to raise premiums. They only do so when their profit margins fall below the accepted standard. That happens for one or both of two reasons: High ratio of claims payouts to premiums earned, or their reserves that are invested suffer losses. Usually, its the former more so than the latter.

Speed limits ? Lowering the speed limits is so far down on my company's list of priorities, that I can't really speak knowledgebly on the IIHS's position on lowering limits. If you think they have an immoral agenda in that regard, then okay. But don't naysay their results on crash tests just because you don't agree with their position on speed limits. I don't think you're doing that, but Dave seems to be.

Maybe your beef should be with State legislatures instead of the IIHS or the insurance industry.

As a side note but yet related to the subject: I know how a lot of people view Insurance Companies. But when you see Insurance Companies making huge profits in any given year, remember that they need to build up the reserve funds for when the Hurricane Katrines, the California wildfires, and the San Francisco earthquakes of this world happen. There are years when big insurance companies payout three times more than they bring in. Am I saying insurance companies don't make a profit, overall ? No, of course not. If that were the case, there wouldn't be any insurance companies. But their profits are not out of line with other industries.

 

I was referring to statistics used to try to effect legislative change (e.g. speed limits), not crash tests. I do take exception to the earlier "force auto companies to make safer" cars. But that's a whole other debate. Instead of the IIHS, why don't we give the credit to the automotive engineers who develop the technologies that are saving lives?

I have no problem with insurance companies making profits, not my beef at all (ditto for the oil companies, there's another example that has been completely twisted out of proportion), but I have seen numerous examples of the IIHS twisting facts and data to support positions such as the 55mph speed limit. My original question and point was to understand the data and facts supporting what you say. Everyone is biased, myself included, and I don't take things at face value. Ever.

I have a lot more I could share, but I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, and move on.

 

Your words:

How was I not to believe you meant their crash tests, as well ?

If you want to argue about their attempts to lower speed limits, you're on your own. My thread was never about speed limits and I really don't know their position on that matter.

If you want to talk more about crash tests and hands on steering wheels, I'll continue to talk with you.

 

Hit the nail on the head and well stated IMHO.

 

I keep telling myself I am going to take my own advice and "agree to disagree" but when I read off the wall statements like this one, a comeback just seems mandatory.

Are you telling me that you think the executives of your company are spending money (thru IIHS funding) just so they can reduce revenue (premiums)? You can't be serious. Every company seeks to maximize profits by both increasing revenue (such as increased premiums due to more speeding tickets from unrealistically low speed limits) AND reduce costs (such as reducing accidents and claims). Or am I misquoting you and you really meant to say that insurance companies fund IIHS so that they can reduce costs (not premiums)? I hope so. . .

Question for you, is pricing (premiums) in the insurance industry cost-based. e.g. premiums are based on claims (predicted obviously) plus a certain profit? In which case it could be argued that reducing claims would translate to lower premiums. Or is it market based pricing, in which premiums are competitive, and are set based on what others are charging (like most manufacturing industries are)?

I think your questions were enlightening for a lot of us and I'd like to see some more. I didn't intend for this to turn into a debate on IIHS. But again, back to my original question, about the source of your data. With questions such as hand position on the steering wheel, I wanted to understand the source of your data. Just because I read somewhere that 8 and 4 is the safest position doesn't make it so. I read so much garbage in general in newspapers, on the internet, etc. that facts and data clearly refute, that I wanted to know where your data was coming from.

Yes, I am biased against IIHS, not necessarily insurance companies (for the record, I've been a State Farm customer for 20+ years and aside from a couple of relatively minor fiascos on getting claims paid, I have no complaints at all). My personal observations of IIHS, mostly relating to the revenue side of the insurance business (e.g. increasing premiums by increasing the number of speeding tickets written) is that they often distort and twist data to suit their needs. Example- "people automatically drive 10mph over the speed limit, raising speed limits automatically increases accidents"- the data simply proves this is just not true, despite the popular myths. I've seen Brian O'Neill (is he still president of IIHS?) on national TV so many times quoting this line it makes me sick. I'm sorry if you think IIHS is a wonderful humanitarian organization, my observations are quite a bit different. So while crash test data might be more scientific and less opinionated, yes, it's hard for me to separate the distortions I've seen on one topic from IIHS and assume that they will be completely truthful on another.

But you've given me an idea with your questions, I still have a ton of data from my years of activity in the National Motorists Association, that maybe I'll post a few questions about traffic laws and safety. I'll dig into my files and see if I can find a few good ones. . .

 

Okay, Dave.... whatever.

You are so slanted against Insurance Companies and the IIHS over this whole speed limit thing that nobody will ever convince you that they're not evil.

Yeah, we're out to get you and everybody else.

 

Debating over, back on topic (sort of).

Discovered a side benefit of 8 and 4 on the morning commute today. Top down at 40F, hands stay much warmer (no gloves) at 8 and 4 vs. 10 and 2!

Question, is there any data on safest steering wheel position? I tend to keep mine as low as possible (considering what I think is the one major ergonomic flaw of the MINI- a too large tach that is blocked by the steering wheel), but any crash test data on the steering wheel high vs. low? Just curious. . .