From what I can tell, it doesn't look like the NHTSA safety ratings take potential dangers to non-occupants into account. Am I correct in this understanding? If so, that seems like a giant mistake. In the US it feels cars and trucks have just gotten bigger and bigger, and one reason is that for any individual, a bigger car is safer. But when everyone drives giant vehicles, safety is much worse for everyone, because you just have overall much more kinetic energy zipping around the highways.
A relatively new term has come into use, though: Vulnerable Road Users. The current state of automobile and road safety has drastically reduced the number and severity of injured and killed automobile occupants. What's continued to rise is the numbers of pedestrians, cyclists, people using wheelchairs and mobility devices, and even people who work alongside automobile infrastructure.
The lack of concern for anyone outside of a motor vehicle is part of why driverless cars have been licensed despite well-publicized incidents involving these vehicles, e.g. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-16/woman-ge...
Interesting that you phrase it that way - yes, it's safer for the occupants in the more massive vehicle, and consequently much more dangerous and destructive for those in smaller vehicles. My primary point is that this "race to larger vehicles" is classic Tragedy of the Commons: "A social problem in which each individual is incentivized to act in a way that is ultimately harmful to all individuals."
The first deliveries were in late 2023 and 2019 was when the initial pre orders were available. I find the very first sentence in the article to be wrong or misleading.
Was the rating given by Musk? Sounds like it's how it's working in the US these days.