I'm on the expressway, in the fast lane driving and minding my own business, when some asshole in an SUV nearly hits me when he tries to cut in front of me. His action forces me to go into the left shoulder, where there is an 18-wheeler parked there. Now, the shoulder is slick with ice, and my car has ABS, so any attempt to slow down results in well, I can't completely slow down with ABS active.
I end up clipping the rear of the Tractor-trailer. Fortunately, I was able to limit the damage to a broken left headlight, a large dent on the front left, and a rather large scratch in that same area.
To add insult to injury, the Police deem this accident as my fault, if only because I am unable to provide any witnesses who can confirm that I was cut off (no one bothered to stop when I hit the truck). And I don't have a license plate of the damned vehicle, all this happened too fast.
There goes my low low insurance rate. Now I have to fork over 4 times as much per month.
If I could find that damned SUV driver, I'd probably do things too nasty enough to be in these forums. The odd thing is, the SUV was a Suzuki Grand Vitara, the same one my ex drives. Not a really good sign, huh?
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
While sorry to hear that doesn't seem to be enough, it's all I got.
Sorry to hear that.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I also hate SUV's. All the grace of a garbage truck driven by some dimwit on a cell phone. I had many a near death experience with SUV (Stupid Useless Vehicles) back when I rode my bike to work.
Now I have an airbag and fear nothing mortal.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
SUV's are just one more sign of the complete rot that has taken hold in our society these days. It's the ultimate example of mobile conspicuous wealth.
Now, there are some legitimate uses for SUV's out there. Technically, my dad owns an SUV -- it's an '02 Subaru Outback. But the Outbacks are really more of a station wagon, anyway.
And all that safety bullshit that everyone spouts for those damn vehicles of death? If I were made dictator-of-the-world for just one day, the first thing I'd do is wipe every last frelling SUV off the face of the planet.
*sigh*
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
The odd thing is, the SUV was a Suzuki Grand Vitara, the same one my ex drives.
Coincidence? Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
A thought strikes me...can you drive a car in the US while talking on (and holding) a mobile phone?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Not very well. THere are "hands free" speakerphone type devices and the kind that make you look like a Secret Service agent with the earbud wire runnig down your back but most idiots I see driving are holding their phones with one hand and driving while in animated conversation about god knows what that cant wait untill they get the fuck home.
I just heard today that some lawmaker wants to pass legislation forcing SUV drivers to be subject to all the weight and safety requirments that commercial trucks have to meet.
It'll never happen because most SUV's would need to be recalled for safety deficiencies.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Now I have an airbag and fear nothing mortal."
Don't fear the SUVs. Fear the undead ghouls that drive them.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
If you mean is it legal to do that, PsyLiam, then yes it is legal. Unfortunately it leads to many traffic accidents, along with people just not wanting to put on their seat belts.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Gotcha. I was just wondering because it's recently been made illegal here to use a mobile phone while driving without a hands free kit.
Still, people not putting on seat belts? Didn't everyone grow out of that in the 80s?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
It was probably decreed that any requirement to wear them violated the Constitution or something daft like that.
Can't stand Suzukis, fucking jumped-up jeeps is what they are.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
I believe it's illegal to talk on a phone without a headset or such in NYC, and I heard rumor that it would be so in all of Tennessee, like, today, but I heard nothing more of it. My only real problem with it is that it's safer for me to hold the phone to my ear while driving than it is for me to try and put the headset on while driving. So either I wear it all the time, even though I don't get that many calls, or I need one of them radio-based ones.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
There's nothing wrong with SUVs in and of themselves. Its the people that drive them that you have to worry about. Personally I'm getting a little sick and tired of people that go spouting off about how much they hate SUVs when its not the vehicle's fault, just the stupid fuck that's driving it to piss you off. I spend a lot of time in an SUV, as my girlfriend drives one. And they're great vehicles to have, especially around here in the winter time.
Its the people that have SUVs without using them for what they're made that you need to get your anger out on.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
So, uh, just about every SUV owner out there, then?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Omega: My only real problem with it is that it's safer for me to hold the phone to my ear while driving than it is for me to try and put the headset on while driving.
Really? Can't you just put the little bud on the dashboard, and then stick it in your ear?
But yeah, the radio ones are the most convenient.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Or you know, don't take calls when you've driving.
Its not like you're a doctor or something.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veers: If you mean is it legal to do that, PsyLiam, then yes it is legal. Unfortunately it leads to many traffic accidents, along with people just not wanting to put on their seat belts.
I think the seatbelt should not function at all if the phone is on: after all, the cell phone user is taking everyone erlse's life in their hands by distracting themselves while driving, so why not their own?
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
Come to think of it, the fucking sap probably was on his cellular. Besides, even a long drone from my horn didn't detract him from forcing me into that truck.
Does anyone know if a traffic lawyer can fight this? I've just been served with a ticket for careless driving. Not good.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
Don't bash SUV drivers. Fortunately, it has become apparent that the absolute WORST drivers are now required to display a circular hazard warning emblem on their cars. Anytime you see anyone driving with this emblem on their car:
RUUNNNNNN!!!!!!! YOUR LIFE IS IN DANGER!
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
It's a toss-up. BMW drivers tend to be vapor-brains, but Mercedes drivers tend to be real assholes. As to which is more dangerous... *shrug*
--Jonah
Posted by LOA (Member # 49) on :
Okay, let me start this off by saying that I KNOW I'm not going to win, so don't jumnp all over me... I'm just speaking my mind....
SUVs are great... I LOVE them..... no, I don't own one, but I definately hope to someday! There ARE valid reasons to own them, and not everyone driving around only has one to "look cool" or show off.... Now, I can understand what y'all are saying about some people using them as a "status symbol" and the fact that SUV drivers suck.... you're right, a some of them do... BUT, so do those damn kids driving around in their little souped up rice rockets and those old people driving around in their big ol' boats. Oh, and don't forget the moms in the minivans and the teenagers in the beaters. Don't blame the cars, blame the people.
I'm just saying.... people suck. Some people shouldn't be allowed to drive. Yet they are... it's CRAZY! But it happens.... don't blame the car, blame the driver......
Oh... and as for cell phones.... yes, they can be a distraction for some people. But so can putting on mascara or lipstick, which a lot of people (women) do, changing the radio station or CD, which I think we probably ALL do when driving, and dealing with kids and/or other passengers in the car.
It goes back to the same thing - drivers are the problem. Some people shouldn't drive. But they do. And that sucks.
~LOA
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
It seems that asshole drivers are either in: very old cars they don't really care about crashing, or those SUVs in which they think they are invincible.
Almost all my close calls involve those vehicles. My accident involved one of those vehicles. And now it has cost me. Dearly.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Uh-oh... Now I'm going to get rolling. Liz brought up a lot of points that all roll together in my head into one macropoint. I guess I call it the distinction between "liscensed operators of motor vehicles" and "drivers". The former category encompasses all the fucktards who somehow managed to get the DMV to issue them a card that says they know what they're doing behind the wheel. The latter category is people who have taken the time and spent the effort to acquire a degree of finesse behind the wheel. Let me elucidate.
I have no problem with SUVs in theory. I personally am planning on eventually owning no less than four cars between me and my fiance�. A Ford Bronco to haul stuff (infrequently driven), a Ford Crown Victoria police interceptor for long-distance schleps and trips to the grocery store (somewhat more frequently driven), my DeLorean for other in-town trips and the occasional weekend getaway (fairly frequently driven), and whatever car Jen eventually sets her heart on for much the same purpose for her.
The reason I lay all that out is because some people seem to think an SUV is the only vehicle they need. Bull. It's fine for bringing home cement and cinder blocks to build a garden wall. It's wasteful overkill for dropping your six-year-old off at school.
As for the other matters. I have a multi-disc CD changer so I don't have to twiddle with the radio en route, and even then the controls are repeated on the steering wheel. I am getting a cel phone next week, and I plan on only having it turned on when I am neither driving nor anyplace where it would be disruptive (restaurants, cinemas, buses, etc.). The most reckless thing I do while driving is to occasionally be eating something.
Now on to the finer points. One of the reasons I think most people shouldn't be allowed to drive SUVs is because they have no sense of the size of their vehicle. I've lost track of the number of SUVs that have almost clipped my front end off cutting in front of me on the freeway -- or who almost drift sidelong into me because they fill their lane so much they have no leeway for inattention.
Then there are all the little things. Speeding. Darting in and out. Tailgating. Peeling out. Changing lanes or turning without signaling. There are so many, and they add up to such big results. *sigh* All are signs of someone who doesn't know enough about how cars work to be in good conscience permitted to operate one... and someone who is so self-centred they definitely shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel of a two-ton-plus killing machine.
--Jonah
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by LOA: Oh... and as for cell phones.... yes, they can be a distraction for some people. But so can putting on mascara or lipstick, which a lot of people (women) do, changing the radio station or CD, which I think we probably ALL do when driving,
People should not put on make-up when driving. And fiddling with the radio isn't really the same, since it takes second at most (changing CDs is another matter, and also shouldn't be done).
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: I personally am planning on eventually owning no less than four cars between me and my fiance�. A Ford Bronco to haul stuff (infrequently driven), a Ford Crown Victoria police interceptor for long-distance schleps and trips to the grocery store (somewhat more frequently driven), my DeLorean for other in-town trips and the occasional weekend getaway (fairly frequently driven), and whatever car Jen eventually sets her heart on for much the same purpose for her.
Thank god America continues to defy it's worldwide image of gross overspending and waste. Three whole cars, for slightly different types of driving? How often do you need to haul stuff? Why is one car good for trips to the grocery store, but not other in-town trips? And who the fuck actually owns a Delorean in real-life?
Good to see you're making sure the woman only has one car though. Keep her in her place!
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
God forbid they have kids, their driveway would require its own parking lot attendant.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The house I grew up in (in Miami) was bought a cuban family taht folowed their cultural tradition and made the landscaped front yard into a circular parking lot for their SIX cars. They paved the back yard too, for when their relatives come over. Makes me sick.
Nobody needs three or four cars...two I could see, if one was work and the other for recreation but four?!?
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
IT HAPPENED AGAIN!!!!
This time, I was forced into oncoming traffic by an asshole in a Toyota RAV 4, where I was hit by opposing traffic.
Again, no major damage. Both my car and the other car I hit were able to slow down enough to avoid major damage. Hit in the same spot too as the first time.
THIS time, it is not my fault. The driver of the other car I hit concur that this was due to that asshole SUV driver who cut me off and forced me into oncoming traffic.
I don't care what anyone says now. SUV DRIVERS SHOULD BE SHOT ON SIGHT!!!
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
And what are you going to say when someone cuts you off in a car identical to yours?
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
You have something called a 'horn.' When someone tries to cut you off, use it.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: A thought strikes me...can you drive a car in the US while talking on (and holding) a mobile phone?
You can't in Queensland anymore... just upped the fine: $400 and 3 demerit points.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Tahna,
Next time someone tries to cut you off, lay on your horn, and flash your headlights. That tends to cause them to reconsider. If they don't, and they hit you, then the accident is on THEM, while if you swerve to avoid them, the accident could be legally considered your fault.
I don't know how bad traffic is there, but you also might want to consider giving yourself more space between vehicles. I try to give three seconds to the vehicles in front of me, and if possible, I prefer to avoid having vehicles on either side of me (not always possible, but easier on a highway).
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Try that on on of our German Autobahn's! You would be dead in five minutes! (no speed limit, two lanes, heavy traffic, no money for extensions...)
Not that I would like to promote reckless driving, far from it. But I am also one of those drivers who give others a wide berth. But to what effect? Idiot drivers frequently squeezing their way into the nice gaps I leave as safety margins - which would eventually force me ever further back.
The end result? I now have gone back to the old way of NOT leaving that much space between myself and the one in front.
Oh and thank god that here there are not that many SUV's, because most of those that I have met were of the "arsebrain-driver" variant.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: I don't know how bad traffic is there, but you also might want to consider giving yourself more space between vehicles. I try to give three seconds to the vehicles in front of me...
Now, I know Americans are terrible, terrible drivers, but surely they have the same rule we do about leaving adequate stopping distance between yourself and the traffic in front?
And the horn isn't some magical knowledge given device, y'know. People can and do ignore it. Especially if they are on their mobiles at the time.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Indeed. Horns and headlights are about as strong a deterrent against being cut off as my middle fingers are. If you drive a small car (or anything smaller than an SUV, really), you ARE going to draw the shortest straw in traffic, so you just have to be twice as assertive and do unto those SUV numbskulls as they do unto you (or something). With luck, you can even get them to topple over. B)
"And who the fuck actually owns a Delorean in real-life?"
Nay, the question is, who the fuck would actually want to own a Delorean in real life? The two-ton-stainless-steel-gullwinged-monstah exclusivity factor would wear off within a day, mainly because the cars are about as speedy as crap through a funnel, and they're not the most practical vehicles, either. There's a reason DMC went out of business, you know. B)
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
*flat look* I love them and have loved them since 1985. Yes, most 'stock' DeLoreans have problems. Mine isn't stock. But, moving on... I wanted a DeLorean since I was about ten years old, so that was pretty much a given. Jen is in lust with the new Ford GT40, and some day when she saves up $150,000, she'll probably get one. *heh* I inherited my grandmother's old Crown Vic that my cousins had been steadily tinkering with for close on twenty years. And all that's missing out of that list is something to haul the big stuff. I don't like pickups and neither does Jen. We both agree, however, on liking the Ford Bronco, so that's covered.
As for four cars for slightly different purposes... Well, the DeLorean has six cylinders to the Crown Vic's eight, and is more fuel-efficient for, say, going to work -- plus it's a lot easier to park. But the Crown Vic has much better trunk space (shopping) and a back seat (cooler and various other crap for road trips). And I apologise for my unclear wording up there. Of all these cars, the only one I consider 'mine' is the DeLorean. The two big ones will be joint property. But I'm the one who usually drives when we go shopping together. *shrug*
Bear in mind also that Jen obviously doesn't have her GT40 yet, and we don't have the Bronco either. A two-car garage doesn't seem that excessive, and by the time we do have all four, we'll be living in the house we're going to build up in Northern California, and underground parking was an early no-brainer. I've never liked how garages spoil the appearance of a house, the way most contemporary builders do it.
--Jonah
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
Snay: I did. Both times, the drivers were intent on driving me into an accident.
In the second case, the driver wanted to make a left turn at the last minute, and forced me into oncoming traffic. No amount of horning was going to dissuade this driver.
It just seems I am a cut-off magnet for SUVs and assholes in worthless cars. I never get cut off by anyone driving a regular car.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
I swear I am going to weld an I-beam on my front bumper just for those idiots who have no clue. I have an SUV and the people that are always causing me to swerve or jam on the breaks are freaking bangers in rice rockets.
I need an M-21 Vulcan canon on my truck.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Well, I suppose if it's all right to hate all Muslims after 9/11, then it's OK to hate all SUV drivers because you had an accident caused by one. I mean, this is just ridiculous. So you had two accidents, both caused by SUV drivers. So what? It's not that statistically impossible given how many of the things are on the roads now. I drive one, Wizzy drives one, Perrychops will be driving one as soon as he works out how to build a safe underground car park in an earthquake zone. . . I haven't caused any accidents and drive in full awareness of the size of my car. This thread is pointless. Why's it even in the Flameboard? Next!
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Never mind SUV drivers. There is a far greater menace. White van drivers. I know it's stereotypical, and the Commission for Driving Equality will probably hunt me down for this, but anyone who drives a white van has less skill than my cat. I passed my test about a month ago, and I've already been cut off about 5 times by white vans. And they always drive too close
quote: This thread is pointless. Why's it even in the Flameboard?
What, as opposed to the endless threads about religion/Iraq/gun control, etc. Although I suppose they require a degree of actual thought and debate. Well, before they harden into a succession of dogmatic rants at least.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
Better the white vans than the black unmarked helicopters! Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The worst menace on the road are whitr pickup trucks with those idiotic, extra large side mirrors. I alomst lost my head to one of those ehile I was on a bike: bastardnailed me in the ear with that mirror as he sped by me.
kill them all.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
Man....I was SURE i nailed nim.....
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
haha.
I was wearing a pair of Koss headphones (the biiig kind) and I got part of my shoelace caught in the spoke si I was leaning down to untangle it when I got nailed by the dickhead in the pickup's side mirror in my right ear: the force shattered the headphone on that side, silced a 3" cut around my ear and knocked me to the ground. I sat up, yelled a string of curses at the driver and saw the driver slow down-almost to a stop. I thought that redneck fuck was going to come back after me, but he just drove away. I ended up having to walk my bike the three miles back to the dorm (I bent the front rim by gracefully falling on top of it).
Now, whenever I see some yokel friving a white pick-up with the big mirros, I want to do a lil' Ultraviolence.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Ooh, deconstructing sterotypes, fun. I'm going to have to chime in on the side of the banger b0iz here. I've been a proud owner of one of those dinky little rice rockets for two years and I have YET to cause anyone to slam on the brakes or veer into another lane or (Quetzalcoatl forbid) crash through any action of mine, thankyouverymuch. Now, just as there are ostensibly SUV owners who do adjust their driving style accordingly when they clamber behind the wheels of their barely-disguised trucks, there are also law-abiding ricers who can still discern road from track even from the inside of their souped-up deathtraps, and white pickup-owning rednecks who have not yet made it their mission to decapitate every pedestrian within a ten-mile radius of their trailer park, so let's stow the sweeping generalizations, eh?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Now, I know Americans are terrible, terrible drivers, but surely they have the same rule we do about leaving adequate stopping distance between yourself and the traffic in front?"
Of course we do. But when have we ever followed rules?
Jason: Not to sound matronly or anything, but where was your bicycle helmet during all this?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
This was 12 years ago: bicycle helmets were occasionally seen on pro riders, but that's about it. Besides, if the mirror had nailed me in the back of the neck/head, I'd certainlty be dead, helmet or no.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
White-van drivers, now there's a thought. There is, I have to admit, something completely bizarre about their behaviour on the road. I think it basically comes down to most such vehicles generally not being owned by the people driving them - they're work vehicles, say, or are hired for one reason or another.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
If I'm going to have to single out a group to hate, it'd have to be old people. They drive slowly, they have no regard for anyone around them, and I'd be willing to bet that a large number of them have worse eyesight than a blind dog.
Plus they have (I'm sure) that old person arrogance of "I've been around for ages, so I am automatically better than everyone else".
Hate them.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Well, so they're overcautious. Give me annoying over maniacally dangerous any day.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
But they're often dangerously overcautious. Plus they pay no attention to anything, and cause long queues in the doctors.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
You guys should just place your elderly out on icebergs to die a final dignified death, its the Canadian way.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Forced Viking Funerals at age 80.
Except my Grandma: she'd kick your asses.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
*nervously conceals the flashing red jewel on his palm*
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
The most annoying thing on German roads are Audi and VW station wagon drivers - the businessman types who are always in a hurry and will try to knock you off the road even if you are already 20 mph beyond the speed limit...
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
If there's anything I hate about certain types of drivers, its those that smoke in their car. Especially those that smoke in their car with children in it too. Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
SUVs aren't the problem ... 18-wheelers are the real hazard around Maryland ...
A couple of weeks ago, two doctors were driving on I-83 into Baltimore City. They were married, probably worked at Hopkins, and had their two kids in the back seat of their H2.
The driver lost control, and got clipped by an 18-wheeler. As if that wasn't bad enough, the impact sent the H2 into the path of a SECOND 18-wheeler. The end result was a crunched H2, two dead MDs, and two (somehow) still living kids in the backseat.
You probably saw on the news the gas tanker that overturned in South Baltimore. For whatever reason (perhaps due to the liquid shifting weight in the trailer), the driver lost control, the truck went OFF the bridge, and crashed onto 95, exploded into a big ball of flame and smoke, and killed several people, and shut down 95 for a day or so.
Even an Army truck killed someone ... some yahoo in a ricer cut off a woman, who was forced to swerve into the path of an Army truck. Keep in mind that the DC/Balt corridor is littered with Army bases, and its not uncommon to see convoys of Humvees and trucks in forest green on 695 and 95. Anyway, the woman's car was crushed, she was killed, and the beltway didn't move for hours and hours.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
The driver lost control, and got clipped by an 18-wheeler.
So the Hummer driver lost control, and it's the 18-wheeler's fault? Say wha?
Even an Army truck killed someone ... some yahoo in a ricer cut off a woman, who was forced to swerve into the path of an Army truck.
Again, say wha? It's hardly the truck or truckdriver's fault. The danger here is, as usual, human stupidity.
Posted by Flying Minister (Member # 1177) on :
You just need to drive something other drivers can't miss seeing, and are afraid to hit. Now I have a beautiful 1991 Olds NinetyEight Regency Elite in the garage, but my everyday car is a 1974 Ford LTD. Over 2 tons of thick american steel, full frame construction, 6 inch steel I beams in the doors and fenders, dented, oxidized paint, and cancer in more than one spot. In other words, you can't miss seeing this car even if you have your head up your ass. And even big trucks and SUV's steer clear of it when I'm on the road.
I'm also not afraid to get hit when I'm in it. Only once has someone tried to cut me off while I was in this car, and he ended up with $4000 damage to his truck. I on the other hand just had a couple of small scratches on the bumper. I drove home, and he had to wait for the tow truck. Plus I made him pay to re-chrome my bumper, an $800 bill.
In other words, idiots on the road don't bother me that much. I say let them hit me. It's their funeral not mine.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Feeling invunerable is always a good thing to do while using something that can cause death. Hooray!
And how do you know that it's American seel? Does it feel different from other sorts of steel?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
While there are diffrent grades of steel, I'll veer away from that for now.
My own car (Buick Century Limited) was in a small crash before I bought the car that resulted in the front bumper being bent in on the passenger side. Ir also resulted in over $3,000 in damage to the forward wheel well of the SUV that cut of the previous owner (a friend o' mine) and frame damage as well.
So much for SUV's being safer than cars.
Thankfully, there was a cop eating his lunch outside that witnessed the whole thing and gave the SUV driver the ticket for running the stop sign (and they say cops are never around when you need them).
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Cars get cancer?
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
Three times the charm......
A Buick Rendezvous (another SUV) cut me off so closely on the expressway that I nearly lost control of the car and flipped over. Fortunately, I was able to regain control before anything else happened.
Horn didn't work again.
I don't get it.
With each increasing day, I am hating SUVs more. Never mind the drivers. It is the SUVs that make these damned drivers do these stupid things.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Check your car for stickers that say "RUN ME OFF THE ROAD!" It might explain things.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Or maybe you should stay off the 401...
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Or become a better driver...
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Or take a bus. B)
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
How can one be a bad driver by getting himself cut off all the time? It is not my fault that these numbskulls in Numbskullmobiles decide to cut in at the most opportune time.
Cartman: I may have to. I have yet to receive an adjusted insurance quote for the first accident. If it costs too much, then I may be forced to take the bus. Not good though as I am an onsite Technician, and a car is part of the job description.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Well, I nearly caused an accident yesterday. And I normally consider myself to be a careful and respectable driver. I was driving along a dual-carriageway in bad weather conditions (1 inch snow on the road, kind of slight snowish rain still coming down). The car in front of me kept going slower and slower (even though the weather conditions were improving), so I gave a signal and went to overtake him. What I didn't realise was that a large BMW came from behind, closing fast. Good thing a friend of mine was with me and noticed the BMW, so at the last second I managed to get back into my lane and avoid a crash. And I did check the mirror. I must have overlooked him. (Ok he should have had his headlights on in these conditions, but anyway.)
Now I could blame the driver of the BMW for driving too fast or for not having his headlights on, but the fact remains that it actually was MY fault for not noticing him earlier.
I'm just telling you this to show you that it might not always be the other one's fault. Why were these SUV drivers cutting you off anyway? Were you crawling on the fast lane?
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
The first two times were on the Fast lane, and I was driving a few points above the speed limit as traffic on the other lane. I would normally go ahead and go pass this other vehicle, but then said other vehicle cuts me off.
The third time I was driving at the speed limit on the far right lane. SUV on the left lane was going a little slower. I am about to pass him when he cuts me off.
It is not possible that I was at fault. I wasn't going like a speed demon nor a turtle. We're talking about normal everyday driving, unless that is not allowed anymore.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Well statistically, there is a bit of a problem. You're not exactly the only person driving in Toronto, and I don't believe our accident rates are particularly notable in N. America. So either you're a magnet for bad drivers or you're doing something wrong.
On a more anecdotal note, where exactly on the 401 are you driving?
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Now I could blame the driver of the BMW for driving too fast or for not having his headlights on..."
Well, you should, because it's mandatory to have your headlights on and reduce your speed in poor weather conditions. If you drive like your BMW friend did and someone doesn't see you and rams your car, you're at fault.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
Again.... I refer to my post concerning the circular Hazardous Driver emblem.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: "Now I could blame the driver of the BMW for driving too fast or for not having his headlights on..."
Well, you should, because it's mandatory to have your headlights on and reduce your speed in poor weather conditions. If you drive like your BMW friend did and someone doesn't see you and rams your car, you're at fault.
On the other hand, you should always look over your shoulder before you change lanes. It's called the "blind spot" for a reason.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
quote:So the Hummer driver lost control, and it's the 18-wheeler's fault? Say wha?
I didn't say it was EITHER of the 18-wheeler's fault (although the guy who went off the bridge was, from what anyone can tell, his fault). And I don't know what part of your anus you reached into to decide that it was.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Exactly when did you decide to start hating everything and everyone?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I think everyone's had to pull back in when they were about to overtake, because someone else came up behind them too suddenly, at one time or another. Most of the time it comes down to the Blind Spot, or the other car just going too fast, so some sort of visibility problem that isn't your fault - like the other car not having its lights on when they really should have.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Don't most newer vehicles have daytime running lights anyways?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I always thought they are just on cars whose owners are too stupid to ever turn off their headlights.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
quote:Exactly when did you decide to start hating everything and everyone?
February 1st of this year at 6:57pm and twenty-nine seconds. Would you like the milisecond, too, or is the above sufficient to quench your incesent curiousity?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Don't most newer vehicles have daytime running lights anyways?"
Actually, I heard somewhere once that "daytime running lights" were a Canadian thing, but I don't know if that's true or not.
"I didn't say it was EITHER of the 18-wheeler's fault.... And I don't know what part of your anus you reached into to decide that it was."
I suspect he got it from the fact that you prefaced your anecdote with "SUVs aren't the problem ... 18-wheelers are the real hazard around Maryland ...". You didn't say "18-wheelers are the real hazard, with the exception of the story I'm about to tell".
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Daytime running lights are mandatory in Europe only in Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland), as far as I know. But definitely not in Germany. And I am actually against the idea - in spite of my experience on Sunday. The reason? Most drivers I have met in my ten years of driving experience turned their lights on when the daytime or weather situation made it necessary. Only a very small minority did and does not. However, with ever more cars being equipped with ultrabright Xenon lights you are glad when they don't have their headlights on. The thought that all these cars would have their headlights on all day, even in brightest sunshine - of which we have a lot - sends shivers down my spine.
Besides, having your headlights on all the time makes for less economic fuel consumption. And though you Americans don't have to worry about that, WE in Europe and in Germany in particular have seen fuel prices soaring in recent years thanks not only to OPEC but to a very high so called "Eco-tax".
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
On a vaguely car related issue; I heard on the radio today that in-car GPS systems have female voices in the UK and US and male voices virtually everywhere else,is this true? and if so, why?
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Actually, at least with BMW, Mercedes and Audi cars you can choose what kind of voice you would like to have - male or female.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
In Italy, it's now the law that all cars drive with their lights on all the time - and I don't mean just the side-lights, I mean the headlamps. I'm not sure whether that's a Italian law or something required by the EU - if it's the latter I'm sure we'll be hearing about it fromt he right-wing press very soon. . .
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
It's certainly not EU law - not yet that is. And I hope it will never come about for the reasons given in my post above.
BTW, what are "side-lights"? Never heard of such a thing. Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Side lights are the lower-intensity bulbs located next to the main lights.
"Actually, at least with BMW, Mercedes and Audi cars you can choose what kind of voice you would like to have..."
Yes, thankfully. "Please turn left here." in a soft female voice is so much more assuring than "HIER LINKS MACHEN!" is in a hard male one. B)
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
*LOL*
And about the side-lights: thanx for the info. I'm not sure that we have them in Germany. (I know that German cars look somewhat different in the US and other countries, mainly because of different requirements concerning the various lights.)
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lee: I'm not sure whether that's a Italian law or something required by the EU - if it's the latter I'm sure we'll be hearing about it fromt he right-wing press very soon. . .
It's Italian. Compared to most EU directives, that's far too sensible.
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
I don't like daytime running lights because I ride a motorcycle. Motorcycles have been required to have the headlights on at all times since the early 70's, it was a way for us to be seen. Now with all cars on the road shining headlights, people are tending to ignore headlights again and it is putting motorcycles in the ignore catagory.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: "Actually, at least with BMW, Mercedes and Audi cars you can choose what kind of voice you would like to have..."
Yes, thankfully. "Please turn left here." in a soft female voice is so much more assuring than "HIER LINKS MACHEN!" is in a hard male one. B)
In the aircraft industry, both military and civilian, the voice that tells you things like "Terrain - Pull up!" is frequently referred to as "Bitchin' Betty" because of the female voice. It was discovered that a female voice gets the pilot's attention a lot quicker and easier than a male one. Yes, most pilots are still male, but even the female pilots respond more readily to the female voice.
B.J.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
For some reason, I thought daytime running lights were usually the parking lights: the orange lights located on the car's corners. At least, those are the lights (if any) that I usually see lit during the daytime around here.
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
I think it depends on the make of the vehicle, I have had some which have the headlights on and some which just use the parking lights.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I've never actually gotten out of any car I've driven to look, but the sidelights have always been the first setting you turn the lights control to, the second turning the actual headlamps on. I seem to vaguely remember something in the Highway Code about leaving your sidelights on at night if parked on a main road or within 10m of a junction or something. Apparently we'll actually have to re-qualify when we move to NZ, that'll be fun. . .
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay:
quote:Exactly when did you decide to start hating everything and everyone?
February 1st of this year at 6:57pm and twenty-nine seconds. Would you like the milisecond, too, or is the above sufficient to quench your incesent curiousity?
It's been for much longer than that. At least a year.
quote:Originally posted by Austin Powers: And about the side-lights: thanx for the info. I'm not sure that we have them in Germany.
How many light settings do you have on your car? Almost every car I've ever seen has 3:
1/ Side lights 2/ Headlights (dipped) 3/ Main Beam/Full Beam
The idea being that you use dipped headlights at night, in well lit areas, and full beam lights when there are no streetlights or other cars. Although as you say, a large number of cars have dipped headlights that are as bright as Full Beam lights (either that, or they are actually driving with their main beam on. Which I'm sure should be illegal, and possibly is). People forget that the main point of headlights is not to allow you to see, rather it's to allow other cars to see you. And considering the brightness of some headlights, you're lucky if you can see anything at all for the blinding light in your rear view mirror.
I don't actually think that you're ever suppossed to drive with just side lights, since I don't think they make any difference at all to how well other cars can see you.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"People forget that the main point of headlights is not to allow you to see, rather it's to allow other cars to see you."
If that were true, there would be no reason to have high beams. I would think that actually being physically able to see the road on which you're driving is certainly at least as important as other people seeing you.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
But how often do you use high beams, anyway? And I've just realised that American highways are more likely to have long stretches without other cars or lights, but I'll ignore that and carry on so there...
Er, where was I? Oh yeah. There are actually very, very, very few times that most people ever use their full beam over here. Sure, we have motorway stretches without lights, but very rarely (or, indeed, never) are they deserted. And even then, you don't really have trouble seeing the road. The only time people do use their full beams on a regular basis is really driving along small country lanes, and a large number of people never do that.
But, to word it in Tim-satifactory-fashion...
"Most of the time, the main point of headlights is not to help you to see the road, but to allow other cars to see you."
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
But how often do you use high beams, anyway?
There's a twisty, hilly and sometimes deserted road through a park that I drive home on at night. More than one, come to think of it. So rather often.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I'm ignoring American roads and anyone who lives out in the sticks. So there.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, maybe in England you can see the road at night without your headlights. But that's not true in other places.
Don't know how you can see anything through all that fog, anyway.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Actually, plenty of people use high beams all the bloody time. They seem to subscribe to the "I use them to see, not to be seen" school of thought. Or maybe it's just that low-beam headlights just aren't as dipped as they used to be. As an evil SUV driver, I'm way higher off the road than most car drivers, and I still get blinded sometimes by oncoming traffic. But whenever I encounter someone who really feels they need their lights on full despite being faced by oncoming traffic (me), I win the duel. My extra lamp pods, that only come on when I'm on high beam, provide so much illumination they can hypnotise a fox at 200m!
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Actually, I use high-beams at night all the time - that is if no car is coming in my direction or if I am not driving through a village.
I live in a rural area after all - wooded I might add - and none of our roads are lit, apart from roads in villages. So everybody I know uses high beams as often as possible - and certainly not to BE seen, but to SEE.
quote:For some reason, I thought daytime running lights were usually the parking lights: the orange lights located on the car's corners. At least, those are the lights (if any) that I usually see lit during the daytime around here.
That's one thing I meant with different appearances of cars in different countries. Here in Germany we don't have these orange "parking lights". We have lights to signal which are sometimes orange, but nowadays at least the casing is mostly white, for aesthetic reasons. The function of "parking" lights is carried out by our "side-lights".
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
quote:"Most of the time, the main point of headlights is not to help you to see the road, but to allow other cars to see you."
No, that's the point of the dimmed (side) lights. The full (main) lights are solely for road illumination in really really really thick fog or whatever. Or you were simply saying, albeit in a somewhat convoluted manner, that both side- and main lights are headlights and you just meant the former. Maybe.
I = TEH SEMANTICS KING!
[ February 11, 2004, 07:38 AM: Message edited by: Cartman ]
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Daytime running lights are the low intensity lights in your main headlight casing that come on when the vehicle is on. In our truck, however, these lights turn off when the parking brake is on. The parking lights are the lights on the corners or, on older vehicles without wrap-around head/taillights, marker lights on the side (also on newer Audis and VW on the front fender). And Liam, you really should include highways and people in the sticks, as I travel on an unlight highway for about 15 minutes and then down a hilly, twisty, wooded road to get to my house and without high beams at night, you can't see much of anything (unless its a full moon).
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lee: Apparently we'll actually have to re-qualify when we move to NZ, that'll be fun. . .
I think you can drive for a year on a UK licence before having to take the test (one of my friends may be working in NZ during his gap year an we were talking about this).
How many countries have a driving theory test now, BTW?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"My extra lamp pods, that only come on when I'm on high beam, provide so much illumination they can hypnotise a fox at 200m!"
My dad had a Dodge Charger back in the '70s and early '80s. At some point, he replaced the high beam bulbs with aircraft landing lights. I doubt that even your SUV can beat that.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
I assume eventually he had to remove them as your increasing weight in the back seat caused the lights to angle ever skyward, to the point they became a danger to aircraft. . ?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Lee wins.
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: No, that's the point of the dimmed (side) lights. The full (main) lights are solely for road illumination in really really really thick fog or whatever.
I don't think so. I've been told by proper driving instructors that side lights don't actually increase the distance you can be seen from to any apreciable level. In fact, he said that you should never use them. If it's dark enough to put lights on, put on your (dipped) headlights.
Lee's right though. Either dipped headlights are extremely bright now, or more and more people are driving with their full beam on. It's gotten to the point that I hate driving from Liverpool to London when it's dark out, as I end up getting extremely sore eyes from overbright headlights.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Plus the danger that Lee might be on the road. I mean, we already know how erratically the elderly tend to drive. And it'll be even worse if he's driving toward you and his super headlights reflect off your hair and blind him.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Part of the problem is with the increasing number of trucks and SUVs on the road. Low beams or no low beams, their headlights are at about the same level as a car's rear-view mirrors. As for the rice rockets and their Xenon headlights, I'm willing to bet they don't know how to properly adjust them, going by the shafts of light they project -- they're not pointed down far enough usually.
I'm not sure about the rest of the world, but the auxiliary lights alongside the main headlights are called "parking lights" here in the US. I know in California, at least, it's illegal to drive with just those on, day or night. Which is annoying to me, as I'd gotten in the habit of turning them on whenever I'm driving to act as running lights. Some cars have additional lights mounted on the front fenders that come on when you engage the turn signal to illuminate the direction you're turning.
And for God's sake, don't use your high beams in the fog. The brighter the light, the more it reflects off the fog and the less visibility you'll have. Duh. Best thing to have in that case is yellow fog/driving lights mounted below or in your front bumper.
--Jonah
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
You must have popped out to the kitchen for a snack, and maybe missed a couple of pages of this discussion, Timothy. The point is, you DON'T drive towards incoming traffic with your headlights on full beam.
As for fog lights, they're pretty standard here. . . I think. All cars have to have at least one extra red light at the back - I'm not actually sure about at the front. But yeah, using your lights on full-beam in fog is a recipe for disaster.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
True.
Anyway, here, front fog lights are not standard equipment (at least not on the standard models) but usually only available as an extra or in combination with a (bi-)xenon-light package.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"The point is, you DON'T drive towards incoming traffic with your headlights on full beam."
You're right. I don't. Though that doesn't necessarily mean that you don't.
That, and the joke doesn't work, otherwise. But far be it from you to let that stand in the way of facts, eh?
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Again with the Nixpicking. You know full well what context that particular 'you' was being used in.
But far be it from YOU to let that stand in the way of being a smartass, eh?
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
And it'll be even worse if he's driving toward you and his super headlights reflect off your hair and blind him.
Liam's hair would fluoresce enough on its own to blind oncoming traffic for miles.
I've been told by proper driving instructors that side lights don't actually increase the distance you can be seen from to any apreciable level. In fact, he said that you should never use them. If it's dark enough to put lights on, put on your (dipped) headlights.
You have now spread fear, uncertainty and doubt throughout my system. Rarely, if ever, do I ignite my low or high main beams, and since I have never been pulled over for it, the side lights on my car are either bright enough to pass for mains or I'm at the center of a vast conspiracy. Ngh.
I'm not sure about the rest of the world, but the auxiliary lights alongside the main headlights are called "parking lights" here in the US.
Huh? Then what the heck are you supposed to use them for, maneuvering in dark garages?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The problem with SUV's is that some of the current monsters are so high off the ground that their normal beams are right in your eyes anyway.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: You have now spread fear, uncertainty and doubt throughout my system. Rarely, if ever, do I ignite my low or high main beams, and since I have never been pulled over for it, the side lights on my car are either bright enough to pass for mains or I'm at the center of a vast conspiracy. Ngh.
[
When you drive a vehicle only a little bit bigger than Stuart Little...who can tell the difference?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
That joke would work better if you hadn't repeated the word "little" twice in one sentence. Bad writing, boy. Bad writing.
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: And it'll be even worse if he's driving toward you and his super headlights reflect off your hair and blind him.
Liam's hair would fluoresce enough on its own to blind oncoming traffic for miles.
My hair isn't fluorescent, it's grungy/ greasy. Keep up. And remind me to find some better photos of myself the next time I want to engage in blatent egomania.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: My hair isn't fluorescent, it's grungy/ greasy. Keep up. And remind me to find some better photos of myself the next time I want to engage in blatent egomania. [/QB]
So is it Psyliam the "three headed monster" or "Village People 2004"?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"But far be it from YOU to let that stand in the way of being a smartass, eh?"
Damn straight.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Well then.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
He showed you there.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Well, with Tim, nothing COULD stand in his way. Literally.
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)