In car accident, not my fault

[Brenden_E]

I'm actually thinking of the Ford Ranger, which has 5 stars. Also, as anybody knows, in an accident it doesn't hurt to have the most weight.

More than that though, I've definitely seen drivers act a little more cautiously around bigger vehicles, so if driving a bakkie will result in one of those reckless drivers deciding in a split second against taking a needless risk, then it's even better.

PS: Did you see the story about the Ranger trumping the Hilux again in April for the second time since November last year? The South African motoring tide is finally changing!

I have the Ranger and it certainly feels like you are driving a tank. If you crash into a Ranger with a small car like an i10 you dead!

 

[Foxhound5366]

The Hilux is on its run out and Ford is finally able to supply enough vehicles.

There are safer cars than a double cab. But I wont debate that with you any more. It like the ladies saying a SUV is safer.

Two comments are a "debate" to you? No, you're right, don't waste your precious pearls of wisdom here.

 

[froot]

I have the Ranger and it certainly feels like you are driving a tank. If you crash into a Ranger with a small car like an i10 you dead!

Perhaps. I have seen a double cab roll though. It ended up flat and the wheels and what not torn off. So it has two sides to it.

 

[Foxhound5366]

Perhaps. I have seen a double cab roll though. It ended up flat and the wheels and what not torn off. So it has two sides to it.

The old Fortuners always roll claim, only now we've moved onto double cabs.

It's true that anything with a higher centre of gravity is likelier to roll, but there are other factors to consider: how firm are the specific bakkie's springs, how fast was the driver going, did the bakkie have roll-mitigation built into its ESP program, where was it hit and did the driver yank the steering wheel hard in the wrong direction on a badly cambered road?

Given the right circumstances, anything will roll.

A modern bakkie gives you added ride height that may just allow you to see an incoming accident earlier and avoid it.

 

[Brenden_E]

Perhaps. I have seen a double cab roll though. It ended up flat and the wheels and what not torn off. So it has two sides to it.

Not sure if an i10 or similar is big enough to make the Ranger roll. If it's a head on collision my car's bashplate will be hitting the i10's windscreen. If anyone wants to test this, I'm a willing participant

Jokes aside, it's like me in my Bakkie getting hit by a truck. Dead. The difference in size is too much.

 

[Jet-Fighter7700]

Or like me with a picanto, removing back bumper makes people keep HUGE distance from you,

Interesting thought that.....

 

[nivek]

on another note, insurance should be a legal requirement for anyone who owns a car in SA
Or atleast third party at a bare minimum... no third party insurance - no vehicle license
...
its bull**** how many uninsured drivers there are on our roads, and they're generally the ones causing accidents, if you're too irresponsible not to have insurance chances are you're too irresponsible to drive properly too

Got screwed over this weekend by some **** who jumped a stop street with no insurance... AGAIN!

 

[Foxhound5366]

on another note, insurance should be a legal requirement for anyone who owns a car in SA
Or atleast third party at a bare minimum... no third party insurance - no vehicle license
...
its bull**** how many uninsured drivers there are on our roads, and they're generally the ones causing accidents, if you're too irresponsible not to have insurance chances are you're too irresponsible to drive properly too

Got screwed over this weekend by some **** who jumped a stop street with no insurance... AGAIN!

How were you screwed over if they didn't have insurance? If you had comprehensive insurance it wouldn't matter, because your insurance would have been the only party that was screwed (and the other person, when your insurance's debt collectors headed out after them).

Given how many drivers don't have insurance, you can't just be driving around with third-party insurance unless you really don't care about losing your car.

I fully agree that car insurance should be a minimum requirement for operating a vehicle. Don't tell me you cannot afford car insurance (like one of my co-workers claims), yet afford a number of other 'luxuries' somehow.

 

[ahoudet]

How were you screwed over if they didn't have insurance? If you had comprehensive insurance it wouldn't matter, because your insurance would have been the only party that was screwed (and the other person, when your insurance's debt collectors headed out after them).

Given how many drivers don't have insurance, you can't just be driving around with third-party insurance unless you really don't care about losing your car.

I fully agree that car insurance should be a minimum requirement for operating a vehicle. Don't tell me you cannot afford car insurance (like one of my co-workers claims), yet afford a number of other 'luxuries' somehow.

I'm assuming excess is lost... Nevermind the extreme inconvenience

 

[nivek]

How were you screwed over if they didn't have insurance? If you had comprehensive insurance it wouldn't matter, because your insurance would have been the only party that was screwed (and the other person, when your insurance's debt collectors headed out after them).

Given how many drivers don't have insurance, you can't just be driving around with third-party insurance unless you really don't care about losing your car.

I fully agree that car insurance should be a minimum requirement for operating a vehicle. Don't tell me you cannot afford car insurance (like one of my co-workers claims), yet afford a number of other 'luxuries' somehow.

Ofcourse I have insurance, but my excess and premiums get effected because some moron doesn't..
Not having insurance is stupid, but if you're willing to take the risk with your own property, thats your problem, hence I said 3rd party should be a legal requirement for any car owner

 

[adinfinitum]

Ofcourse I have insurance, but my excess and premiums get effected because some moron doesn't..
Not having insurance is stupid, but if you're willing to take the risk with your own property, thats your problem, hence I said 3rd party should be a legal requirement for any car owner

+1

3rd party insurance should be stock standard like your annual licence. No ifs ands or buts.

 

[ahoudet]

+1

3rd party insurance should be stock standard like your annual licence. No ifs ands or buts.

It was mentioned earlier that one should have 3rd party compulsory if you have a license... I'd say it makes more sense to force 3rd party per car rather and not allow for license renewal without it IMO. To me, this is extremely necessary