|
Professor Bling posted:I raced it down a frontage road and then, yeah, through the gates and across the crossing. My first car was a 78 Maverick with the straight six. This was in 2002. I was insanely stupid in that thing.
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 03:52 |
|
|
Yeah, the racing school is in no way a cumulatively terrible idea. Sure, you're going to have some people that take that experience and flip to be dangerous irresponsible children, but let's face it, they were going to be terrible irresponsible dangerous people anyway, now with a modicum of car handling skills.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 22:48
|
|
|
I actually encountered one of those kids who thought that because he had been to racing school he was somehow a god among mortals when it came to driving. That said, the fact that his father got him an M3 when he turned 16 probably had something to do with it. He liked to brag about how his dad took away his keys for 2 weeks because he found the top speed attained on his GPS was 130 mph (he said he went out on 128 at 2am to do it). I went in his car once, and while my perceptions of what constitutes fast driving have changed since then, I'm pretty sure he was whipping around residential districts doing 60 mph in 20-30 mph zones. I never heard whether he got killed in an accident, but I hope if he did that he didn't take anyone else with him. It's a pity too because he was a pretty cool guy otherwise. I think he would have driven that way regardless, his father did give him an M3 after all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
is this him? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZVrnd9V7sk
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
Tha Chodesweller posted:My first was because some shitheel merged into my lane without looking and was about to hit me. Instead of collecting free money, I swerved into a truck. Not even close! About a month ago an 80 year old man decided my car did not exist and merged into my lane ripping my whole driver's side front fender clean off. He didn't even stop but thankfully I caught up with him at a light about half a mile down the road. He seemed genuinely sorry about it and I got a statement from him and the cops that he would "take care of it". Insurance companies ruled it a 50-50 because New York is a no fault state. Apparently I didn't do enough to avoid the accident. After 2 weeks of appeals I got it improved to 75-25 and got 75% of the damage covered. I had to pay like $150 out of pocket.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
My first car was a 998cc (61ci?) Fiesta. Looking back the only thing I'd change would be to make sure my second car was that Volvo 340 I missed out on, rather than the Vauxhall nova I ended up with. I was a monumental twat in that car, it's amazing I never crashed it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
Toymachine posted:Insurance companies ruled it a 50-50 because New York is a no fault state. Apparently I didn't do enough to avoid the accident. Did they actually tell you this or did you infer it? Because it really wouldn't surprise me if an insurer cited "you didn't avoid the accident sufficiently so you're equally at fault" as a reason to assign blame. Did the police find fault or rule it as a no-fault accident?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
Geoj posted:Did they actually tell you this or did you infer it? Because it really wouldn't surprise me if an insurer cited "you didn't avoid the accident sufficiently so you're equally at fault" as a reason to assign blame. It's a legitimate argument, but it isn't typically 50%. As a driver you have a duty to maintain a proper lookout and if you have the last clear chance (especially in contributory states) to avoid an accident, and you fail to attempt to do so, you could be assigned some fault. The whole no-fault thing has nothing to do with liability decisions, it is solely related to how medical coverage works in that state. As a point of reference, I've put, and seen, anywhere from 10-50%, depending on how egregious it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 00:36
|
|
|
Geoj posted:Did they actually tell you this or did you infer it? Because it really wouldn't surprise me if an insurer cited "you didn't avoid the accident sufficiently so you're equally at fault" as a reason to assign blame. It was one of the first things my insurance guy told me. New York laws are pretty lovely unless you have something on film showing blatant fault for one party. The whole situation was weird as hell. The guy blatantly merged into my car (he had long scratches and damage on his rear, right panel) but when the cops showed up they sort of made it sound like I was trying to scam the poor guy out of money. They gave me a hard time for actually following him and waiting for him to stop after a hit and run. I'm a guy in my mid-twenties driving a black Camaro and he was a 80 year old guy in a silver Cruze with veteran plates so who knows what they wrote on the police report. I covered my rear end and took photos of everything, wrote down his number (to his Jitterbug he had no idea how to use) and asked him if he would mind signing a statement that his insurance "would take care of it" like he promised. My insurance rep called him the next day and it turned out the old man had pretty severe dementia. His daughter eventually got involved and our whole little agreement meant jack. Despite being a danger on the road, his insurance company kept fighting for every penny. My rep was a pretty nice guy who saw through everyone's bs and pushed it through two appeals to get more money for me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
Geoj posted:Or you end up with a cop who doesn't want to stick his neck out and calls it a no-fault accident, which in insurance terms is the same as being at fault.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:18
|
|
|
^ Have you checked your insurance policy for rate hikes lately?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:28
|
|
|
I love that corner. South Mountain in Phoenix, Az.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:28
|
|
|
The hoodie flying on his head is the best bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:39
|
|
|
Geoj posted:^
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 07:56
|
|
|
Just had some guy aggressively tailgate me at 55 mph because I had the gall to honk when he took a foot out of my lane on a curve when I was beside him. It's amazing how much of the idiocy clears up the moment you leave Philadelphia County. Seriously, if you can't keep your car inside the lines, get a smaller car, drive slower, or better yet just don't drive at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 13:06
|
|
|
I was one of the people you share a road with today  I was on I-10, cruising at my normal 76mph. I got passed by a Mazda2 who was probably doing 85-90, and being the resourceful fellow that I am, I gave him about a half-mile of lead before I *ahem* maneuvered to maintain visual contact. Lo and behold, pop over a hill and see the trooper pulling out from the median just in front of me as he lights up the poor Mazda2. I was laughing for the next mile. Then I was sad that I lost my cover and resumed normal cruise. Trooper bait: better than any radar detector ever made! The best part is it's free! Limited availability though... And let me preempt commentary on the subject by stating I am aware of the following: 1) I shouldn't speed and I am a terrible unsafe driver blah blah blah 2) I'm a jerk for letting some poor unsuspecting fool take the $252 ticket for doing 85+ on I-10. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
Beach Bum posted:
If the conditions were good and traffic light I have no problem at all with 15-20 over. If it was I-10 in West Texas 85MPH is the speed limit and he'd have been golden.  I've acted as trooper bait for others out there on I-10 with my cruise control set at a nice round 100MPH. I know when people are trailing using me as bait and I don't mind. I'm going to drive that fast anyways, someone might as well get some benefit. The sight lines out there are good enough that my eyes and the detector will see the Troopers long before the see me. Usually. Unless they are using planes or that instant-in poo poo. Then I'm hosed. Only been nabbed out there once when the limit was 65MPH. I was doing 95. He let me off saying "Just try to keep it under 80 out there." I love my little 'get out of jail free' CHL. Never been ticketed when I present that to an officer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:It was in 2004 on a car that I've sold since then so I doubt it. I was just relating a story of where there was an accident of someone totally at fault (the lady who rear-ended me at a red light) ended up having it be a no-fault. I think it was because the lady's husband showed up and after shouting at me for getting his wife in a wreck probably verbally worked over the trooper. I was the lame no-power delivery guy who just stayed quiet and thought "She rear-ended me. She is at fault" and got hosed. Again, this isn't how liability works in a no fault state. You can't rear end someone or hit a parked car and get off by saying its a no fault state guess I don't owe you a dime (except to a certain degree in MI, but that is unrelated).
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 16:15
|
|
|
My solution for "trooper bait" is to only buy cars so limp wristed they can't speed.  Getting a car with a MPG estimator was a game changer too, I feel money being siphoned out of my bank account whenever I floor it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 16:21
|
|
|
tetrapyloctomy posted:Just had some guy aggressively tailgate me at 55 mph because I had the gall to honk when he took a foot out of my lane on a curve when I was beside him. It's amazing how much of the idiocy clears up the moment you leave Philadelphia County. Seriously, if you can't keep your car inside the lines, get a smaller car, drive slower, or better yet just don't drive at all. That is how everyone drives there. It is completely retarded. Everyone crosses over the line on the inside of curves. Oh look, two non-related pileups of 35 and 40 cars on PA highways because it snowed a bit. http://m.nydailynews.com/1.1558935 Didn't this same thing happen a few weeks ago? And literally several times a year? I really don't know what they're doing in that state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 16:33
|
|
|
Hey, sorry if this is now not kosher in the thread. I read the first few pages (and didn't feel like going through ALL of a 53 page thread...) and people were posting photos of traffic nightmares. I thought I'd do the same because this one is a shocker. Apologies if it's a repost or if this is no longer cool in this thread... This is the top of Elizabeth street in Melbourne. It's a roundabout that has a tram intersection in the middle of the roundabout. Red arrows indicate the way on, yellow indicates the way off. The double red arrows at the bottom indicate that you've got a service lane as well as a road that merge AT the round-about which causes loving chaos in peak hour. Same thing happens on the top right, but I forgot to draw it there as well. Yellow indicates exits. Blue shows which direction the trams travel in. If you are unlucky, you can get yourself trapped into a lane that literally just puts you in a loop around the round-about without being able to exit. Get stuck in that and then you'll have to merge while driving through a round-about. Good luck with that. It is 2 lanes wide on the left hand side, but 3 lanes wide on the right hand side. So eventually, a bottleneck develops. On top of the 2 other bottlenecks that happen as people are trying to get onto the roundabout in the first place. Cars and trams are going through this roundabout in every direction possible and it's one that you almost point your car in the right direction, squeeze your eyes shut and pray that nobody hits you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
That would be a beautiful creation in SimCity.  That does seem to be one of the worst layouts I've seen yet though. It's like some committee decided roundabouts are mandatory and despite many good reasons to not do it, they did it anyways. Putting it on top of a rail junction is just insult to injury. What do those zig-zag lines over the lanes signify? Is it warning drivers to slow down or be ready to brake?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 17:03
|
|
|
BlackMK4 posted:I love that corner. South Mountain in Phoenix, Az. sure the corner's sharp but looking at the slow mo it looks like he barely turned the wheel. Of course he went off-road. Is his reaction time laggier than 56k?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 17:04
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
CannonFodder posted:I was just relating a story of where there was an accident of someone totally at fault (the lady who rear-ended me at a red light) ended up having it be a no-fault. Oh, OK - I read it as "lady rear-ended me, it was ruled no-fault but her insurance still ended up paying most of my damages." Bovril Delight posted:It's a legitimate argument List of things the insurance industry doesn't consider legitimate when increasing rates and/or denying claims: I can't really see "we are arbitrarily declaring you didn't do enough to avoid the accident" as anything but "this way we get to avoid covering damages and put at-fault accidents on everyone's record." Geoj fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Dec 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 17:04
|
|
|
It's hard to tell from the photo but aside from the dotted white line in front of eat train track, are there lights or anything to alert drivers that hey, a tram is coming and you should not be on the train tracks? Do they just stop everyone with lights outside the roundabout with enough lead time before a tram gets there?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 17:05
|
|
|
Hammer Floyd posted:The double red arrows at the bottom indicate that you've got a service lane as well as a road that merge AT the round-about which causes loving chaos in peak hour. You've just reminded me of one of Coventry's most egrerious road design decisions, which only got fixed fairly recently. Behold:  Doesn't look too bad, right? But that road you see appearing from the bottom right corner is the exit of a one-way loop past Coventry station, the road parallel and above it is a slip road from Coventry's beautiful ring road and the road that takes a hard 90* left under a building is the entrance to said one-way loop. Now obviously on a UK roundabout you give way to the right, which means that people trying to leave the station give way to people coming off the ring road in that direction, many of whom are likely trying to get to the station. The result is you can end up with traffic completely unable to leave, whilst more traffic comes off the ring road into the one-way system, blocking exiting traffic as it does so. I've witnessed tailbacks go all the way around that block clockwise, down the slip road and back out onto the ring road because of it. This in turn causes compound problems elsewhere because there's a second much smaller loop infront of the station itself, where again people can't get out of the loop but traffic can keep piling in. Also there's a small car park in the middle of that, so you can be stuck trying to leave a space that some other stuck person needs to get into. It's one of the only situations where adding traffic lights to a roundabout has made it flow more smoothly, but for the longest time there were no lights at all on this roundabout. Trying to make a right turn from the station in rush hour was one of the most difficult bits about driving in this stupid city.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:sure the corner's sharp but looking at the slow mo it looks like he barely turned the wheel. Of course he went off-road. Is his reaction time laggier than 56k? Simple target fixation. That is all. It's how you tell an experienced driver from a n00b. Always look where you want to go and the car will follow, to the best of its abilities of course. You keep staring at that rock off the side of the road and you _will_ hit it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
As he crests the rise I think he completely loses front-end traction (possibly a bit of a yump?), the car doesn't turn-in relative to the applied lock, but there's no obvious squeal. From the car, at least. Also, from today: Pull out to pass a truck, as does the guy behind me, and some oik in a Seat Leon accelerates up the inside of us and cuts out in front of me. I was maybe five car lengths from the truck at this point, probably had a 15mph speed differential over it. I could understand if I'd been a zombie sat in the outer lane for the past half mile, but it was pretty obvious I was pulling out to maintain my speed past the truck. He's lucky I wasn't driving the 10mph faster I would normally do, it'd have closed the door on him right where he needed to pull out. As it was, there wasn't any danger, he was just being a knob. I don't have a problem with undertaking if it's because your inside lane is moving faster, and the person in the outside lane should have pulled in ages ago, but if there's a slow vehicle being overtaken by someone who, though faster, is still slower than yourself, that's kind of just how life is. It's not like I don't try to keep from holding up people who I see coming up behind me quick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:Also, from today: Pull out to pass a truck, as does the guy behind me, and some oik in a Seat Leon accelerates up the inside of us and cuts out in front of me. I was maybe five car lengths from the truck at this point, probably had a 15mph speed differential over it. I could understand if I'd been a zombie sat in the outer lane for the past half mile, but it was pretty obvious I was pulling out to maintain my speed past the truck. He's lucky I wasn't driving the 10mph faster I would normally do, it'd have closed the door on him right where he needed to pull out. That's standard procedure for getting anywhere in the US, frequently drivers here are afraid of trucks and will dither about in the truck's blind spot, taking ages (if ever) to muster the courage to pass.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 22:26
|
|
|
xzzy posted:
Im reasonably sure (Since they are the same in South Aus as Victoria now) that the zig zag lines mean you've either got a school zone or a pedestrian crossing coming up, So if its a school zone you gotta drop to 25kph and give way when kids are present. If its a ped crossing you gotta give way to EVERY pedestrian on the crossing
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
That's actually fairly smart. Here in the US they slap up "must stop for pedestrians" signs right at the crosswalk and hope that's good enough. School crossings are usually pretty well marked though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
One of the things I do while driving is think of reasons why people do not indicate their turns and lane changes. I've been trying to come up with a comprehensive list, but if you have any more, I'd love to hear them! Reasons not to indicate:
Did I miss any? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 22:58
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Did I miss any?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Did I miss any? A friend of mine said his mom won't use signals because she doesn't like the noise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
You forgot: I don't give a poo poo & If I indicated people would know what I was going
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Did I miss any?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
FogHelmut posted:That is how everyone drives there. It is completely retarded. Everyone crosses over the line on the inside of curves. Oh, don't I know it. Lincoln Drive can be a horror show due to skinny lanes, lots of curves, and no appreciable shoulder. You just have to try to stagger with the other lane, because people just refuse to stay between the lines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
Deeters posted:A friend of mine said his mom won't use signals because she doesn't like the noise. I rode with a guy one time who would properly signal when approaching a turn lane, get into the lane and roll to a stop at the light, and once stopped would manually shut off his blinker because he didn't like the noise. ONCE. I'll never get in that car again. :twitch:
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 03:52 |
|
|
xzzy posted:My solution for "trooper bait" is to only buy cars so limp wristed they can't speed. Beach Bum posted:a Mazda2 who was probably doing 85-90 I once got zapped by one of Northern Virginia's Finest who said my 4-cylinder Tacoma was doing 83 in a 55. It was not, in fact, in free-fall or somehow assisted by rockets, but it was kind of dirty. After trading it in for a much faster Audi I realized, rather sadly, that at least around the DC Metro there is little better trooper shield than driving a car that says 'I can afford a lawyer.'
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2013 00:48
|
|