Speed Kills - or does it?

McSack said:
Ummm... Because that's one of the benefits of riding a motorcycle? And it's legal
Click to expand...

It may be a benefit, and I have no problem with it as long as they understand that they are not as visible as a car would be, and take responsibility for their own safety in doing so... but legal.... ummm nope definitely not
 
what everyone else has said about the inconsiderate nature of SA drivers
 
alanf85 said:
Will you be willing to prove that by crashing into a wall at 20 km and then at 120km? :o

As for for speeding in a car my test is far more relevant then yours :p
Click to expand...
I smacked into a taxi that turned in front of me. Mercedes Benz E series, speed: 108km/h, airbags deployed (all of them), my injuries: zero, taxi driver - paralysed (luckily he had no passengers). Taxi was going < 20 when he jumped into my lane (didn't check blind spot).

I have a lot of faith in the safety features of Mercedes Benz.
 
Pitbull said:
You're wrong

The higher the speed the less resistance the wall will have.

easy test. Hit a plank with your fist at half strengh.... You'll prob bust your hand. Hit it at full speed: Your fist will go thru the plank and your hand will have no pain at all :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Depends on how well the wall is built ;)
 
nic777 said:
I'm glad that you brought this up.

I first heard this during Chritmas last year on the radio and many people were mentioning that it is not the people driving fast are causing accidents, but in fact the people driving slow and way below the speed limit.

Now I thought this was weird but I starting seeing for myself how this is so true. When everyone is sticking to the speed limit or slightly above it, you get into a groove and not worry about the cars around you. So, everyone drives properly.

However, as soon as someone is driving below the speed limit and slow, then you have to change lanes, look out for other cars, dodge cars, etc. and as a result, your concentration is scattered, leading to conditions for accidents.

Speed kills of course, buts that when you going twice over the speed limit on a busy road i.e. you're being stupid.

But it would be great that this thought of slow drivers causing more accidents would become more widely known.
Click to expand...

How on earth does raising the speed limit stop "slow drivers".
 
Pitbull said:
You're wrong

The higher the speed the less resistance the wall will have.

easy test. Hit a plank with your fist at half strengh.... You'll prob bust your hand. Hit it at full speed: Your fist will go thru the plank and your hand will have no pain at all :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

:confused:
 
web said:
:confused:
Click to expand...

He is correct, but in a totally arbitrary way.
The difference in resistance you will feel when going though 2 meters of steel and concrete at 200Km as oppossed to 120Km will hardly be something you live to tell about.
 
BobbyMac said:
I smacked into a taxi that turned in front of me. Mercedes Benz E series, speed: 108km/h, airbags deployed (all of them), my injuries: zero, taxi driver - paralysed (luckily he had no passengers). Taxi was going < 20 when he jumped into my lane (didn't check blind spot).

I have a lot of faith in the safety features of Mercedes Benz.
Click to expand...

:eek:

But not Taxi drivers obviously :D
 
He is incorrect it has nothing to do with resistance, its all about the force been exerted by the objects. His logic makes no sense ?
All he is doing is using more force to overcome the resistance of the object. If i hit a wall at 100km the wall might stand but i will be dead, if i hit the same wall at 200km the wall will most probably be demolished but my car and i will most probably be in tiny pieces all over the freeway ?
 
web said:
He is incorrect it has nothing to do with resistance, its all about the force been exerted by the objects. His logic makes no sense ?
All he is doing is using more force to overcome the resistance of the object. If i hit a wall at 100km the wall might stand but i will be dead, if i hit the same wall at 200km the wall will most probably be demolished but my car and i will most probably be in tiny pieces all over the freeway ?
Click to expand...

Nope.

Take a standard wall not this reinforced 2meter thick wall mentioned above. I know of a bike that went thru a car, sliced the car in halve. The bike actually looked like it could be repaired. That was like a Bullet going thru sheet metal.

Any case. I'm looking for pictures of bullets shot at the same object at different speeds. I had it on my PC somewhere. This will give you an indication of the damage received at higher speeds.
 
web said:
He is incorrect it has nothing to do with resistance, its all about the force been exerted by the objects. His logic makes no sense ?
All he is doing is using more force to overcome the resistance of the object. If i hit a wall at 100km the wall might stand but i will be dead, if i hit the same wall at 200km the wall will most probably be demolished but my car and i will most probably be in tiny pieces all over the freeway ?
Click to expand...

I think that is what I said?
 
Pitbull said:
Nope.

Take a standard wall not this reinforced 2meter thick wall mentioned above. I know of a bike that went thru a car, sliced the car in halve. The bike actually looked like it could be repaired. That was like a Bullet going thru sheet metal.

Any case. I'm looking for pictures of bullets shot at the same object at different speeds. I had it on my PC somewhere. This will give you an indication of the damage received at higher speeds.
Click to expand...

How many walls are built next to the freeway that will be destroyed at 200km/h? The only walls I know of are bridge pillars and in case you might not have realized, they're pretty solid. Good luck trying to cut through that "like a bullet". :)
 
web said:
I know what you meant, but don't encourage him he might try proves us wrong! For the next month, oh well its better than Race and Religion arguments !:D
Click to expand...

1. We where talking about speed at impact car vs car.
2. The example used was a wall I didn't do the example, I said that you will survive driving thru a wall.

Maybe that will clear it.

A car driving 160 hits a car driving at 20 head on you pls tell me which is the worst off ?
 
Last edited:
Pitbull said:
1. We where talking about speed at impact car vs car.
2. The example used was a wall I didn't do the example, I said that you will survive driving thru a wall.

Maybe that will clear it.

A car driving 160 hits a car driving at 20 head on you pls tell me which is the worst off ?
Click to expand...
Look at it this way - should the person traveling 160 be charged with murder (if he survives) if the occupants in the vehicle traveling 20km/h are all killed?

On a highway in South Africa where traffic is flowing, the minimum speed is 60km/h and the maximum is 120. If the speed limits were followed (head on collisions are not good examples of speed kills comparison to be fair), fewer fatal accidents will happen.
 
Someone mentioned that your reaction time will be more when you drive slower.

Wrong

You can drive as slow as you want, if you're to close to the guy in fron of you, you can still crash into him. I had a guy rear end me on Hans Streydom drive on a saturday morning going so slow that my speedo didn't even move. Did going slow help him? No. What would have helped him? Keeping his distance.

In the 80s there used to be a campaign to raise awareness of safe following distances. I remember one of the adds had a guy on a motorbike, with a little speech bubble that read "one thousand and one, one thousand and two....." You should have at least two seconds worth of distances (relative to the speed you're doing) between yourself and the car in front of you. This gives you enough time to react and enough time to avoid whatever is in front of you.

It never ceases to amaze me how invincible people think they are when they're behind that wheel. They think they can drive on someone's ass at any speed and will be able to stop in time. I remember one guy in a Merc driving so close to me that I couldn't see the Merc emblem on the nose of his car, and I thought by myself, I don't even have to touch the brake, all I have to do is take my foot off the accellerator and he'll be straight into me - there's no way in hell he'll be able to react in time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X