Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 87356	2008-02-18 05:51:00	Are New Zealanders Bad Drivers?	legod (4626)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
641505	2008-02-22 01:30:00	There is NO excuse for people driving below 100Km on the open highway with motor vehicle and their safety provisions nowadays. Oh? What safety provisions are those then? I had a crash at 50km in an old 1963 car I had once. Damage = 1 dent in the overrider. Then there was my 1987 Toyota at 40km. Damage = entire front of car. I'd hate to think what the results would be at 100km, even 80km. And where I live its 100km all over the place. Only mad people would actually do 100km the entire way, especially in winter.	pctek (84)
641506	2008-02-22 01:32:00	Just out of interest, has anyone ever seen a car being pulled over for going too slow in a 100k zone? Where we live (admittedly a rural are) we are constantly frustrated by people doing 80-90k with 30 or so car's backed up behind. There are few passing areas and the frustration just makes poeple do extremely dangerous passing manouveres. I have lost count of the number of times we have spotted a police car driving in the opposite direction yet doing nothing about the situation. We have witnessed on more than one occasion a driver getting agro and overtaking on the straight with no oncoming traffic. Guess who get's pulled over doing no more than 110k? (that's an estimation obviously). The traffic backed up behind the slow driver are still there while the traffic cop is busy writing out his quota for the day!! Anyone dare to tell me it's not about revenue gathering? BTW, this slow driving is not confined to lady drivers or the oldies. Just got a $300 ticket for speeding, fact is a was passing a 5 car\trailer convoy ALL following too closely to allow separate passing, so put the pedal down on a open straight, perfect weather etc and snapped by a F**king camera/van. Got the police flyer about myths\facts about speed cameras etc. What a lot of bollocks. I have been driving 27+ yrs, and they are trying to tell me that a hidden camera is a deterrent!. I think they have it the wrong way around, an income generator 1st, deterrent 2nd. Hands up those who would check their speed if they SAW a speed camera as apposed to those that get a ticket after the fact. This was a very big issue in England when I lived there, and in the end, the police had to have the camera's (there was no such thing as mobile van/cameras) all out in the open. The Police stance on deterrent 1st is a crock of **** in my view.	SolMiester (139)
641507	2008-02-22 01:37:00	Oh? What safety provisions are those then? I had a crash at 50km in an old 1963 car I had once. Damage = 1 dent in the overrider. Then there was my 1987 Toyota at 40km. Damage = entire front of car. I'd hate to think what the results would be at 100km, even 80km. And where I live its 100km all over the place. Only mad people would actually do 100km the entire way, especially in winter. LOL, you are comparing your 1963 crap or Toyota junk with a 2000 Calais? ..get a grip nana! Anti-lock, track-control etc etc.This car is design for safe traveling at twice the legal speed limit......jeez	SolMiester (139)
641508	2008-02-22 01:40:00	Anti-lock, track-control etc etc.This car is design for safe traveling at twice the legal speed limit......jeez LMAO ROFLMAO you actually think there is such thing as being safe in a vechile ! :eek: :lol: :D	tweak'e (69)
641509	2008-02-22 01:44:00	LMAO ROFLMAO you actually think there is such thing as being safe in a vechile ! :eek: :lol: :D Will you have a laugh mate, I did high speed driving courses at Brand Hatch and been driving 27+ yrs, never had an accident. I am current driving the best personal vehicle I have ever had. Yes, there is safe in a vehicle, if there wasnt, do you think I would be driving my 3wk old daughter around in a car?	SolMiester (139)
641510	2008-02-22 01:46:00	The Police stance on deterrent 1st is a crock of **** in my view. the idea is you won't speed for fear of there being a camera. just like how driving drunk around christmas is a sure fire way to lose a licence Oh? What safety provisions are those then? I had a crash at 50km in an old 1963 car I had once. Damage = 1 dent in the overrider. Then there was my 1987 Toyota at 40km. Damage = entire front of car. I'd hate to think what the results would be at 100km, even 80km. uh, it's called a crumple zone the front end of your car may have been smashed, but that saved you spleen coming loose and you dying a few hours later from internal bleeding provided the cabin is intact, ie the doors open, the steering wheel didn't impale you and your legs are free, the rest of the car is only there to absorb the impact it isn't uncommon in a head on collision to have a heart rip from the aorta. killing within minutes. the crumple zone is there to lessen the forces that car from the 60's would score very low on safety today for that reason plus nowadays we have ABS, traction control, power steering, better suspension, better chassis characteristics, better handling, better tyres, seatbelts, airbags, steering wheels that detach from the column and countless other design features	motorbyclist (188)
641511	2008-02-22 01:49:00	Will you have a laugh mate, I did high speed driving courses at Brand Hatch and been driving 27+ yrs, never had an accident. I am current driving the best personal vehicle I have ever had. Yes, there is safe in a vehicle, if there wasnt, do you think I would be driving my 3wk old daughter around in a car? no such thing as a safe machine. the human body isn't made for impacts over 30kph (falling from a tree, basically) though today's cars are built to do 200kph and remain stable (especially german ones on their autobahns), the human body isn't. says the one with the motorbike :lol:	motorbyclist (188)
641512	2008-02-22 01:57:00	no such thing as a safe machine. the human body isn't made for impacts over 30kph (falling from a tree, basically) though today's cars are built to do 200kph and remain stable (especially german ones on their autobahns), the human body isn't. says the one with the motorbike :lol: Exactly. The new nissan GT-R (skyline that's not a skyline) goes comfortably at 350 it seems. The car can do that fine. Now you tell me that you have ffast enough reaction times for that to be ok. The thing is, 200, 350, or 2000 is all fine if you're at silverstone or bonneville. But go from bulls to wanganui like that and I think we might as well start saving for your headstone. 100 isn't safe. People die at less all the time. Just stick to the speed limit, and respect other drivers. Even slow ones.	Thebananamonkey (7741)
641513	2008-02-22 02:05:00	Will you have a laugh mate, I did high speed driving courses at Brand Hatch and been driving 27+ yrs, never had an accident. I am current driving the best personal vehicle I have ever had. Yes, there is safe in a vehicle, if there wasnt, do you think I would be driving my 3wk old daughter around in a car? "high speed driving courses at Brand Hatch" don't be a tosspot. Experience didn't stop Mike Hailwood, many time world champion motorcyclist and later a Formula 1 driver being killed when a truck turned in front of him.	PaulD (232)
641514	2008-02-22 02:17:00	"high speed driving courses at Brand Hatch" don't be a tosspot. Experience didn't stop Mike Hailwood, many time world champion motorcyclist and later a Formula 1 driver being killed when a truck turned in front of him. Tosspot?! Think you are missing the point, I didnt say crashing at high speed is safe..d**khead, I said driving such and such vehicle, designed to travel safely at those speeds, ie:, no speed wobble or vibrations, non-locking braking systems, advance damping sytems for bumps!! Paul, your father in law is the kind of person who creates accident as people get frustrated having to follow behind him.	SolMiester (139)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22