Speeding Porsche with no plates involved in horror N11 crash

[Willie Trombone]

I didn't say that? I disagree with your statement of Speeding = reckless driving, that's the entire point of what I wrote. If your car can't do 140 comfortably, it's reckless to drive that fast.

So who gets to decide? You, the driver? Don't you think anyone who loses control at high speed didn't already make that decision? Besides, how do you make that decision in the absence of data? You don't know what's around the next blind corner or rise. You don't know when a part on your vehicle is about to fail.

The speed itself is irrelevant.

How can you rule out speed as a factor in the outcome of one or more moving bodies colliding?

A huge issue, especially in Cape Town, is bad speed limits, e.g. west coast road's 70, it "makes" people break the law as it's very easy to do way higher speeds on it safely, so they get accustomed to breaking the speed limit.

It makes you do nothing of the sort. If you're unable to control your vehicle yourself you shouldn't be on the road.

And why shouldn't I worry about someone who loses control at 120? Or 80? Or 60? Or 20?

You should worry about hitting anything at any speed, but speed should be a factor in determining the level of concern, or do you disagree?

 

[Magnum]

Actually physics 101 - two cars hitting each other at 96km/h isn't doubled, the amount of force is still the same if the car was doing 96km/h and hitting a wall vs hitting the car.

Uhm go count again.

 

[rietrot]

Well, according to you speeding is a victimless crime, so why do you care? The thing is, due to speeding the closure speed is even faster which lessens your time to react, if some speeding guy is doing something stupid in front of you. Say you going a 120, and they going 190, closure speed is 310km/h, which is 86m/s. The slower you go, the more time you have to react.

Speed isn't the problem.

 

[Willie Trombone]

Uhm go count again.

How about you do the counting and let us know what you think is wrong with the statement.

 

[Johnatan56]

So who gets to decide? You, the driver? Don't you think anyone who loses control at high speed didn't already make that decision? How can you rule out speed as a factor in the outcome of one or more moving bodies colliding? Speed was not a factor until it was. It makes you do nothing of the sort. If you're unable to control your vehicle yourself you shouldn't be on the road.

You should worry about hitting anything at any speed, but speed should be a factor in determining the level of concern, or do you disagree?

Who gets to decide: someone who's qualified in it, which it seems wasn't done for most roads.
My point was that a blanket statement of speed = reckless driving, it's not, my point is that circumstances dictate speed.

E.g. in the US, in order to slow people down in suburbia, you just create small outcroppings from the side that narrow the road, people will not feel comfortable driving as fast and slowing down.

Doing 140kmph on the N2/major highway is perfectly fine most of the time if traffic is clear, good visibility and your car can easily manage it.

Going 140kmph if any one of those factors are not there is reckless driving, e.g. old car or bad visibility or traffic/multiple cars or road conditions not good or you don't know the roads, etc.

 

[DMNknight]

Crumple zones is a stupid idea to start of with. That's why you build something solid like a rollcage if you really plan on crashing. Or why a motorbike helmet is solid. A solid object absorbed the kinetic energy better over a larger surface. A crumple zone does nothing but squash the people inside the car on any real impact.

Actually no. They're a brilliant bit of engineering.
A well designed helmet will crack right through, expending kinetic energy away from the neck or skull, a few newtons away from where the (average) skull or neck will break.

Crumple zones are also what allow you to make an effective roll cage, so that you're diverting the deadly kinetic energy away from the cage in the first place.
Look at any Formula 1 car and the crashes they have. Only in exceptional circumstances do those guys not walk out of a crash on their own feet.
That's effective crumple zones and brilliant engineering at work.

 

[supersunbird]

Crumple zones is a stupid idea to start of with. That's why you build something solid like a rollcage if you really plan on crashing. Or why a motorbike helmet is solid. A solid object absorbed the kinetic energy better over a larger surface. A crumple zone does nothing but squash the people inside the car on any real impact.

If they made cars more solid/rigid, then more people will die from things like torn arteries and things happening to their brain and neck at lower crash speeds than currently. Crumple zones slow down the impacts severity on the vehicle occupants, so less forces act on their bodies.

Why do the motorbike helmets have so much padding inside? Why not have the outside not flush to the skull?

 

[Magnum]

How about you do the counting and let us know what you think is wrong with the statement.

Go do delta v for both situations and post the difference.

 

[rietrot]

Oh jeez. Yep, all those hundreds or thousands of engineers employed by every car manufacturer must be wrong, and you must be right.

Just a tidbit - crumple zones are designed to absorb and deflect energy away from the passenger cell of the car. If they, as you say, simply "squashed" people in a real impact, don't you think they would have had the sh*t sued out of them by now?

Those engineers and their crash test that they do are focused on low speeds and to make sure the car gets written off in a small bumper bashing.

This isn't my ideas. Look at any real motor sport that's concerned with safety at high speed. They have solid rollcages.

 

[Willie Trombone]

Go do delta v for both situations and post the difference.

No, that's your job. Or does your capacity stop at being contrary?

 

[rietrot]

Actually no. They're a brilliant bit of engineering.
A well designed helmet will crack right through, expending kinetic energy away from the neck or skull, a few newtons away from where the (average) skull or neck will break.

Crumple zones are also what allow you to make an effective roll cage, so that you're diverting the deadly kinetic energy away from the cage in the first place.
Look at any Formula 1 car and the crashes they have. Only in exceptional circumstances do those guys not walk out of a crash on their own feet.
That's effective crumple zones and brilliant engineering at work.

Look at how solid a formula 1 car is. Nothing crumbles.

 

[supersunbird]

Speed isn't the problem.

No, but it lessens your time to react to the other guys bad driving (or whatever), whether he or you are the one speeding.

 

[supersunbird]

Those engineers and their crash test that they do are focused on low speeds and to make sure the car gets written off in a small bumper bashing.

This isn't my ideas. Look at any real motor sport that's concerned with safety at high speed. They have solid rollcages.

Do they have a roll cage around the engine compartment area (where the crumple zones are) and the rest of the car or just where the occupants are?

 

[Magnum]

No, that's your job. Or does your capacity stop at being contrary?

I have already been Peer reviewed and have been found to exceed required expectations. No need to prove it.

 

[Splinter]

Those engineers and their crash test that they do are focused on low speeds and to make sure the car gets written off in a small bumper bashing.

This isn't my ideas. Look at any real motor sport that's concerned with safety at high speed. They have solid rollcages.

So from being designed to squash occupants they are now designed to write the car off.

Are you going to go for a 3rd option or is this your final answer?

 

[Magnum]

Do they have a roll cage around the engine compartment area (where the crumple zones are) and the rest of the car or just where the occupants are?

The whole car is a pipe frame. Weight and strength thing....Body pannels are just for looks and aerodynamics.

 

[RedViking]

Fun reading through all the expert opinions. My question is just....

Was his fog lights on or off?

 

[rietrot]

So from being designed to squash occupants they are now designed to write the car off.

Are you going to go for a 3rd option or is this your final answer?

Dual purpose.

 

[rietrot]

No, but it lessens your time to react to the other guys bad driving (or whatever), whether he or you are the one speeding.

You should drive at an appropriate speed. Sometimes that is less than 120. Use your own discretion and don't end up in a metal fireball

 

[Cray]

Crumple zones is a stupid idea to start of with. That's why you build something solid like a rollcage if you really plan on crashing. Or why a motorbike helmet is solid. A solid object absorbed the kinetic energy better over a larger surface. A crumple zone does nothing but squash the people inside the car on any real impact.