I LIKE TO SMOKE WEE posted:

Maker Of Shoes posted:

Look at this terrible derail I started. Here's a thing from a GIS of "dumb car thing"



Discuss

Olivil posted:

I personally prefer the USDM one...

The Door Frame posted:

I would argue that the massive Bro-Trucks and giant SUV's are the problem in that equation. I hate not being able to buy any of the super cool, tiny, foreign cars for fear of becoming paste under a truck driven by someone who has no need for, and doesn't pay enough attention to safely use, a vehicle that obnoxiously large. It's a lot of the same problems that motorcycles and scooters have, the vehicle itself is pretty safe as long as you aren't a moron and wear helmets, jackets, etc, but the real danger in riding is almost exclusively from other drivers on the road who won't bother to look before swerving into your lane and smashing your vehicle beneath them. Even if a FourTwo collided with a modern sedan, the sedan would crumple, making the occupants of both vehicles significantly safer than if it hit a larger vehicle that was structurally reinforced to handle the weight of the vehicle, the torque from the engine, and the stress of towing.


My anecdotes are much more tame, but my sister's Baby-daddy has an F-250 super duty that he parks at our place on his visitation days and parking behind it makes me really uncomfortable because his license plate is about level with the dash in my Civic. He could just back up on top of my car with no problems if he were so inclined, or just didn't look before reversing. My car is stock USDM with no adjustments to the ride height and his only has dealer upgrades, no real aftermarket stuff. My car would be perfectly safe if I were to hit or be hit by a normal vehicle, even vans and most SUV's would be ok because my car would take the hit in a crumple zone and safely buckle, keeping the majority of the force from reaching the cabin. Hell, I was able to smack into a ~110lb buck at 85 miles an hour and then drive for 400 miles after forcing the panel back out of the wheelwell because the crumpled metal deflected him away from the interior of the car instead of holding shape and sliding him over the hood.
No matter how safe I should be on the road, all of the crumple zones in the world can't protect me from a bumper that's just going directly over the safety features of my car in a crash

Linedance posted:

I saw one of these godawful monstrosities on the road today. I had to look it up to see what had offended my senses so grossly.

MB AMG63 GLE coupe.
It is loving enormous. It dwarfed the X5 that was driving beside it. I don't blame the owner for buying it, because people will buy any old poo poo without seemingly looking at it first. I blame Mercedes Benz for designing it in the first place. I think the design brief was "who cares if it looks grossly obese, we'll sell them by the dump truck. Make the rear end bigger. You ever see the stern of a container ship? That's your inspiration."
It's not just that it's enormous that makes it so offensive, hell a Yukon or an Escalade is enormous too, it's that it's so loving awful looking in the process.
It should never have been made.

Fayez Butts posted:

it would be cool if you werfe a paraplegic and the trigger was the clutch

MrYenko posted:

No, it simply allows the airfoil to operate at a higher angle of attack than would otherwise be possible. The VGs themselves still impart a small parasitic drag.

88h88 posted:

I'm the sticker on the bumper that suggests he overheard me loving my girlfriend last night.

(I love stickers/decals you can infer other meanings from)

ChickenOfTomorrow posted:

HEY GUYS MY MOM GOT ME BRACES

Krakkles posted:

I'd be curious to see the actuarial justification for how a WRX is more likely to be rear-ended. I guess maybe if you have a tendency to tailgate and brake at the last minute? I'd think that would still be on the other driver behind you.