But will they be enough to protect passengers in rollover crashes?

Rollovers account for more than one-third of U.S. traffic fatalities. In 2004, 10,553 people died in rollover crashes, up from 10,442 in 2003. About 60 percent of the people killed were not wearing seat belts, but what killed them was a combination of dynamic factors including the propensity of roofs to crush in rollover crashes.

“In rollovers, the windshield frequently shatters. Once the glass is gone, a key support system for the roof also is gone. In addition, doors may come open during a rollover, giving the roof even less support,” said Mike Davis, who is our firm’s auto product liability expert.

For years, auto manufacturers have resisted the demands of safety advocates to make roofs stronger so they will not crush inward on occupants during a rollover crash. In spite of proven statistics on the dangers of roof crush, the auto industry still questions whether strengthening roofs would provide additional protection, pointing to the high number of people killed in rollovers who were not wearing seat belts.

“Everyone should wear their seat belts, but whether an occupant is wearing one or not, a stronger roof can help protect all occupants in the event of a rollover accident,” Davis said.

NEW REGULATIONS

In August, federal officials upgraded a longstanding auto regulation and proposed new rules that would require automakers to build stronger roofs on vehicles in an effort to protect passengers in rollover crashes.

The proposal would apply for the first time to large sport utility vehicles (SUVs) and pickup trucks weighing up to 10,000 pounds, covering popular vehicles such as the Ford Expedition, the Chevrolet Suburban and the Dodge Ram. The current standard exempts vehicles over 6,000 pounds.

“This proposal was a long time coming, but still comes up short in terms of the amount of direct pressure that roofs must bear. Safety advocates have pushed for much stronger standards than those in the government’s proposal,” Davis said.

The federal proposal, which upgrades a federal regulation that has been largely unchanged since 1971, would require roofs to withstand direct pressure of 2.5 times the vehicle’s weight, increasing the current rule of 1.5 times the weight.

“For years, European automakers have done a much better job of making stronger auto roofs. I’m afraid that U.S. manufacturers’ emphasis on making money instead of saving lives could influence the European manufacturers that have been acquired by U.S. companies. An example would be Volvo, which was recently bought by Ford,” said Davis.

The new rule is expected to cost the industry from $88 million to $95 million annually, which is why U.S. automakers have resisted the changes so far.

“When a roof crushes on impact, it makes seat belts less likely to work and the occupant is more likely to be ejected from the vehicle. Once again, U.S. auto manufacturers have convinced NHTSA to water-down safety regulations, with the safety of American citizens at stake,” said Davis.