Good Advice for Older Drivers

[dmp]

My original Front Wheel pic...75?mph..

http://www.miatapix.net/coppermine/albums/userpics/wheellarge.jpg



BIG pic..

 

[fuzzykitten99]

Often lowered cars simply handle better - giving the driver MORE control of their car. It's not always for looks.

low-rider's are for guys who can't get it up... :tng:

I agree with the SUV stance. I think it is actually people who buy an SUV, that have never driven a vehicle that big in their lives. They buy them because they are the new trend, not because they truly need them.

Growing up in MN, my whole family - both sides (the ones that can drive) has owned a truck or SUV at one time or another. I had an 87 Bronco II as my first suv at 17, and it also was my first stick-shift. Tim and I had a 97 chevy 1500 before we traded it for a 4dr car when I was preggers with Nathan.

My grandma drives an 89 Chevy Z71 with oversize tires, dual exhaust, chrome step rails, lite-up moon visor, wind jammer, and bull rack. <insert Tim Allen grunt here>

Dad has a 2005 Ford F350, custom painted candy apple red, and oversize tires, etc.

Mom has a 79 Dodge Ram, big tires, duals, etc.

Basically, I can't think of one of my immediate family that doesn't own a truck or hasn't in their driving lifetime. They (as well as I) are less likely to have an accident as a result of not being able to handle a large vehicle. Tim just got his Class A license (yay for him! he passed first try yesterday!) so he can drive the biggest out there.

oh, and if you want to see (and make fun of) the little ricer rockets, check this site out. www.ricecop.com

 

[The ClayTaurus]

D

 

[dmp]

<picture of big truck>

That truck is ricey...should be on Ricecop.com, too

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I am printing these out for use.

 

[fuzzykitten99]

That truck is ricey...should be on Ricecop.com, too

um, no, this truck would be rejected for lack of adhering to the definition of a ricer. Believe me, people have tried it just to be smartasses or otherwise. I am a regular on that site.

Definition of a ricer ( http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ricer ) :

(Ricer: from the latin word Ricarius meaning to suck at everything you attempt)

A person who makes unecessary modifications to their most often import car (hence the term "rice") to make it (mostly make it look) faster. The most common modifications are (but not limited to):

- Huge exhaust that serves no purpose but to make the car louder
- Large spoiler on the back that looks like something Boeing made for the 747
- Lots of after-market company stickers they don't have parts from, but must be cool
- Expensive rims that usually cost more than the car itself
- Bodykit to make the car appear lower, usually accented with chicken wire
- Clear tail lights and corner signals
- A "performace intake"- a tube that feeds cold air to their engine usually located in areas of excessive heat (behind or on top of the engine)
- Most of these riced cars (a.k.a. rice rockets or rice burners) are imports; Honda Civics, Accords, Integras, CRXs, RSXs, Del Sols Mitsubishi Eclipses, Lancers, Subaru Imprezas, however there are some domestics such as Chevrolet Caviliers, Dodge Neons, Ford Focus; small, slow, economy cars designed specifically to go slow. Please note that some Supras, Skylines, WRX's and other higher performance imports are designed to go fast, and are therfore not always considered rice. It really depends on the severity of the case.

The "ricer" attempts to make their car "performance" by adding the modifications listed above. These ricers are not confined to any one ethnic group or color, however different ethnic groups are known for certain styles. Honda Civics with big spoilers and 4" exhaust tips are considered to be ricers.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

um, no, this truck would be rejected for lack of adhering to the definition of a ricer. Believe me, people have tried it just to be smartasses or otherwise. I am a regular on that site.

Is that your truck?

 

[USViking]

(all emphasis added):

If I had the ability to revoke driving privileges on the spot I bet traffic congestion would go down 50%. MOST people aren't good drivers, no matter what their traffic accident/speeding ticket record shows.

I wish my car could reach 60 mph in 4 seconds (WTF for?). You raised a question though...'do we need'. Of course not...unless you're being chased by a group of thugs in a car that takes FIVE seconds to reach 60mph.

That's not exactly true. Going 90mph on an empty freeway at noon is completely safe (driving is never "completely safe", and driving 90 is less than half as safe as driving the speed limit), assuming the car is in good shape. Trying to go 90, or even 40mph in some circumstances on a crowded freeway can be deadly,however.

SUVs aren't the problem. I'm for freedom. Everyone should drive what they can afford to drive. That said, see my comments re: driver education days? My wife's F150 can take 50mph on-ramps at 75mph sometimes (You tried it, huh?- well whadda' cool guy you are! What happens when the F150 can't take the ramps "sometimes"?)...wide sticky tires help...so does my m@d Sk|llz behind the wheel.

It sounds like you outa' start by revoking
your own damn license, and if you really
drive as you have said you do above, then
I hope someone else revokes it for you, for life.

What a fricken wingnut.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

(all emphasis added):


It sounds like you outa' start by revoking
your own damn license, and if you really
drive as you have said you do above, then
I hope someone else revokes it for you, for life.

What a fricken wingnut.

You should revoke mine as well. Shit, I've hit more than 90 travelling on empty highways. Just out curiousity, how did you come to this conclusion?

driving is never "completely safe", and driving 90 is less than half as safe as driving the speed limit

Is there some equation that relates safeness to speed?

 

[sitarro]

You should revoke mine as well. Shit, I've hit more than 90 travelling on empty highways. Just out curiousity, how did you come to this conclusion?
Is there some equation that relates safeness to speed?

Ask any real race car driver and they will tell you that the most dangerous place to drive fast is on public highways. The environment is not a controlled one and the people around you are, in most cases, extremely inept at the skill of driving. Here you come tooling along in what you think is a beautiful high performance car that gives you the feeling that you can handle anything that comes up....ahhh youth....you know everything and are supremely capable of all. 90 miles an hour and a few nails in your lane, or a car going 30 miles an hour slower moving unexpectantly into your lane and suddenly your offensive driving style puts you in a hell of a lot of trouble. The first thing you find out is that little car of yours handles much better in a straight line in perfect conditions than the way it is handling now that it has been put into a less than ideal angle to the road. All of this is happening at a very fast rate yet it feels like slow motion, almost like in a movie. Unlike the movies that make you think it is so easy to get out of trouble you are heading for the concrete barrier that will change the look of that RX-8 into something that may actually look better but since you think that it looks good the way it is you may be disappointed.
The fact is that even if you were in a real performance car the results would probably be no better but at least you would be driving something that didn't look like it was designed by three blind mice and cost nearly 30,000 dollars. That front end. . . ewwwww, give me a 330ci anyday.
Here in the Houston area there is at least one kid a week involved in a one vehicle accident, either a car or a motorcycle, they learn that speed is not always your friend and just because a car seems capable it doesn't mean the person driving it is.

 

[USViking]

You should revoke mine as well. Shit, I've hit more than 90 travelling on empty highways. Just out curiousity, how did you come to this conclusion?

Is there some equation that relates safeness to speed?

Ever heard of braking distance?

The equation is:

(x² ÷ 20) + x = Overall braking distance in feet. (x = speed)

Under ideal conditions, of course.

I'll help you with some answers:

Braking distance at 60mph is 240 feet,
braking distance at 90mph is 495 feet.

As long as the highway is really and truly "empty",
at least it is only your own health and property
which you are endangering with your reckless behavior.

 

[dmp]

Ever heard of braking distance?

The equation is:

(x² ÷ 20) + x = Overall braking distance in feet. (x = speed)

Under ideal conditions, of course.

I'll help you with some answers:

Braking distance at 60mph is 240 feet,
braking distance at 90mph is 495 feet.

As long as the highway is really and truly "empty",
at least it is only your own health and property
which you are endangering with your reckless behavior.

Except my car stops from 60mph in 114 feet and from 70mph in 153 feet

 

[dmp]

(all emphasis added):


It sounds like you outa' start by revoking
your own damn license, and if you really
drive as you have said you do above, then
I hope someone else revokes it for you, for life.

What a fricken wingnut.

I wish my car could reach 60 mph in 4 seconds

(WTF for?).

Because it'd be fun.

Going 90mph on an empty freeway at noon is

completely safe (driving is never "completely safe", and driving 90 is less than half as safe as driving the speed limit)

,

First half -driving is never completely safe. Sure. Of course. Most people do THOUSANDS of things each year which aren't 'completely safe'. Flying in an airplane...Bungee jumping...taking a shower...I choose to identify my risks and minimize those risks through careful preperation and a bit of skill.

My wife's F150 can take 50mph on-ramps at 75mph sometimes

(You tried it, huh?- well whadda' cool guy you are! What happens when the F150 can't take the ramps "sometimes"?)

What happens when I can't take a ramp at 75? I try it at 65. (shrug).

Tell me ONE thing I wrote where I indicated I drive dangerously? You cannot. Here's what you are doing. You are reading what I typed, and having a heart attack because I do things you're affraid of. Those things include: Understanding and using a car's handling capabilities under proper circumstances. Thumbing my nose to the LIE "Speed Kills". Exercising good judgement while in traffic; planning my lane changes, and manuevers ahead of time. 'Actively' participating in driving, as opposed to simply getting in the car and only worrying about ONE tiny aspect - strict following of the speedlimit. I'm sure I could go on.


Speaking of speed limits...I So rarely ever speed it's as though I could say 'never'...unless you call 67 in a 60 'speeding'. If you do, there's no help for you...just stay the hell out of the left lane.

I think the problem is, you don't have driving skill, so 90mph seems 'oooh! dangerous!'. I bet if I showed you my pistol, you'd fall down and worship the 'boom stick'. Must be 'magic spirits inside'!

 

[dmp]

Oh! here's something you'll LOVE! I took this video last year....Careful, I wouldn't want you getting scared and having an 'accident' in your pants...


Top Speed run, downtown, during traffic, and in a school zone, while drinking and having sex

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Ask any real race car driver and they will tell you that the most dangerous place to drive fast is on public highways. The environment is not a controlled one and the people around you are, in most cases, extremely inept at the skill of driving.

I never said I went high speeds in traffic. You must have missed the word "empty." Besides, where else is there to drive? Private highways? What a stupid statement. The most dangerous place to drive is the only place you can drive. Brilliant.

Here you come tooling along in what you think is a beautiful high performance car that gives you the feeling that you can handle anything that comes up

There's no thinking, there is only truth.

....ahhh youth....you know everything and are supremely capable of all.

ahhh old age, you still know everything, but no longer are capable of any of it.

90 miles an hour and a few nails in your lane,

When was the last time you saw a pile of nails on the freeway? Leave the cartoon scenarios at home. If the roads truly were as dangerous as you paint them, people would have blowouts all over the place.

or a car going 30 miles an hour slower moving unexpectantly into your lane and suddenly your offensive driving style puts you in a hell of a lot of trouble.

I don't travel more than 8-9 over the speed limit when there are other cars on the road. And if a car moving that much slower than me moves into my lane, that's their fault and not mine. Besides, part of the skill of driving is looking ahead, seeing old farts like you in oversized Buicks, and staying the hell away from your lane-straddling asses.

The first thing you find out is that little car of yours handles much better in a straight line in perfect conditions than the way it is handling now that it has been put into a less than ideal angle to the road.

What?

All of this is happening at a very fast rate yet it feels like slow motion, almost like in a movie.

It's happening fast, yet slow. Got it.

Unlike the movies that make you think it is so easy to get out of trouble you are heading for the concrete barrier that will change the look of that RX-8 into something that may actually look better but since you think that it looks good the way it is you may be disappointed.

Unless there aren't any concrete barriers around. I know it's hard for people like you to understand, but just because I like to open 'er up on a long stretch of EMPTY highway with no concrete barrier or trees or other obstacles for me to run into in case an invisible car pops out of nowhere and swerves into my lane, or a pile of ACME nails throws my car into a violent barrel roll, that doesn't mean that I open 'er up everywhere. It's called situational awareness.

The fact is that even if you were in a real performance car the results would probably be no better

So that is basically implying that I drive a real performance car, as you would expect that if mine was not, a real performance car would improve my chances.

but at least you would be driving something that didn't look like it was designed by three blind mice and cost nearly 30,000 dollars.

Actually, you can get one for just under 26, but whatever. Doesn't bother me if you don't like the way it looks, it keeps me from seeing 350 of them every time I go driving.

That front end. . . ewwwww, give me a 330ci anyday.

Speaking of seeing 350 of them every time I go driving... would you like an IPOD and some Gap Jeans to go with it?

Here in the Houston area there is at least one kid a week involved in a one vehicle accident, either a car or a motorcycle, they learn that speed is not always your friend and just because a car seems capable it doesn't mean the person driving it is.

Well, there in Houston, you must have a bunch of idiot drivers. There are a bunch of them here, too. It doesn't really prove much about MY driving ability. Other than that you're really good at making generalizations.

 

[dmp]

Word.

 

[sitarro]

Often lowered cars simply handle better - giving the driver MORE control of their car. It's not always for looks.

Really? Is that why race cars are so low to the ground??????duh

As i said, if I'm running from somebody whose car can run to 60 in FIVE seconds, I'll have a head start. It's not about NEED with performance cars...it's about 'desire'.

Again it really isn't about you. It's about someone that is so incredibly over their head (most of the driving public) with that type of acceleration. The typical driver doesnt have the brain or the reflexes to handle a car with that much raw power. It's kind of like the problem that has come about with the rice rocket ninja bikes. Naive parents get sucked into buying one of those for their kid and he runs it into a tree within a month(it has become a very serious problem for some, I see it as thinning the herd). . .too much vehicle for the maturity and experience.
Besides, with the kind of money a car like that costs, you could buy a small tail dragger plane in great shape. With that you can get up in the air and not worry as much about speed limits and actually make money with it.

Yup - they look very much like this, although I was only going 75mph.

I was talking about regular stock SUV tires with the tall sidewalls, the footprint is much smaller at high speeds. Obviously 13'' low profile tires are different but cute picture anyway.

Don't blame the SUV - blame 'yourself'. If you can't see around a vehicle in front of you, align your car differently within your lane. I learned this while commuting 500 miles a week in my miata. I learned to watch for the glare of brake lights on the median barriers. I learned to watch the back end of the car/truck in front of me. If it rises, they are slowing. Is it the fault of my house, or the bird who didn't see it?

Yea , so what. I drove a Triumph 30 years ago and learned defensive driving habits also, that doesn't mean that everyone knows them or cares. My post was not about you, you obviously take driving seriously and because of that you actually pay attention to what is going on around you. . .that has nothing to do with handing John Q. Public the keys to a 7 foot tall 6000 pound rolling living room that neither has the braking power to stop it effectively or the handling ability for the average driver to not tip it over or lose control in an emergency manuever.

People who can be lulled by an SUV can be lulled by ANY car.

true but sitting in a vehicle that deadens the feel of the road and is so high that you don't feel connected to said road tends to make the public more prone to get way too comfortable. Add a DVD player(yea I know it is against the law to have it visible to the driver. . . I still see them every day.)some booze, and recline that leather lazyboy they call a seat and it's off to never never land.

I'd argue SUVs are more efficient - often, they can carry SEVEN or more people. More people/cargo transported per trip. For my RX8 to carry 7 people, I'd have to make two trips. Two trips at 18mpg is worse than ONE trip at 12mpg

Why not a Greyhound bus, it carries a shitload of people? Most of the time the 6000 pound 10 mile to the gallon SUV is used for one person to commute to work or go to the store, it is rare that I see 2 people in them much less 7.

Says who? I don't know anyone who feels invincible. You're speculating and adding drama for effect, sir.

Are you kidding? I know you have to be more observant that that. The bigger the vehicle the worse the tailgater in many cases(not all of course). I don't see a lot of people in Miatas tailgating.

More likely than what? Roll overs are the cause of people being stupid. "OMG! My tire blew! I'd better flip this sommbitch!"

Again, I am speaking of the ignorant public not car fanatics. There was a special report on the many rollovers that were happening since the SUVs became popular, it might have been "48 Hours" or "60 Minutes" that I saw it on. The majority were happening with women and it was usually in emergency manuevers.

Of COURSE Physics comes into play. Physics isn't the cause of roll overs. Roll overs happen because people aren't paying attention. For instance:

SUV in Middle lane. Crazy guy in GEO passes on the right, cutting off the SUV. The SUV has to swerve hard and because people buy Tires based on DURABILITY not TRACTION, the tires give way, the SUV slides...hits the Median, and flips.



Don't blame the SUV.

How about I change it to any vehicle with a high center of gravity? 18 wheelers driven by "professionals" end up on there side almost everyday around the country because of the high center of gravity that is so strong that having a long trailer behind it doesn't help keep them upright once they are put in a situation that promotes it.
In a perfect world all vehicles would come with better performing tires but reality is different. People don't know enough to realize the importance of good tires, their idea of a good tire is one that lasts 60,000 miles. The ignorant public thinks that if a speedometer says 130 that the vehicle can be driven safely at that speed, that is reality. Most don't know how to make sure the correct air pressure is in the tires. . . once again you are mistaking the publics knowledge of cars with your own.

How can you argue Vans are safer? My wife's F150 SuperCrew is MUCH stronger - MUCH more able to withstand an imact than the typical minivan. It's higher. The steel frame would deflect the force sideways. Plus...have you EVER tried to clean pea gravel out of a mini-van carpet?? My brother's Town and Country Minivan gets 15mpg. Our truck gets as good as 14mpg, AND goes thru mud like nobody's business...

I feel vans are safer for numerous reasons. Most of the vans today are not the tall, top heavy good times vans. Mini vans tend handle more like cars depending on the loads being carried. When I say safer I am not talking about side impact but because they have a lower center of gravity they would be less likely to roll over if broadsided. If your only concern is the ability to withstand a crash then a M-1 tank would be the correct choice. SUV drivers should be concerned that their vehicles can take a hit because they have less of an ability to avoid what would cause a wreck. Why should I be less safe because I am driving a reasonably sized vehicle, is that fair?
My father left us with a Pontiac Montana extended van when he died. I drove it for awhile had a completely different experience from your brother's Town and Country. This van had a 3.4 liter six and had room for seven comfortably. I drove it on numerous trips where I saw rediculous gas mileage for a vehicle that was quite fast and handled like a car. In town and on the highway at any speed it would average 25mpg always. I experimented with the trip computer one night to see what the best mileage I could achieve. On flat grade at 75 mile an hour I was getting 25-26, as I slowed to 65 the mpg increased to 27-30, dropping down to 55 it was getting 29-32. It was empty but I also took it on a few trips with 4 people and lost only a few mpgs.

:bs: Cars weren't around when you were in Highschool.

I have owned 10 cars in my life and driven many others(I am on the road a lot and try to get different rental cars, usually convertibles). My vehicles have ranged from VW Beetles(67 and 71 super beetle), 2 Triumph Spitfires, a Corvair(my first car, a 65), A Jeep CJ-5 with lift kit and big Gumbo mudders, a Taurus wagon(pile of crap), a 911(not much fun cross country), and 2 Toyota trucks(extended cab 4 wheel drive), one of which I still drive today with 140,000 miles on it. I didn't have a car in high school, I had a Husky 250 that had a light set for enduro riding that was street usable. My girlfriend had a Jeep Comando that she did considerable damage to the car she hit when she pushed on the accelerator instead of the brake.
I used to enjoy driving fast in sports cars but now I have found that I want a vehicle with multiple purpose and is not too expensive to operate so I can spend my resources on other things like the taildragger my brothers and I are about to get for fun and aerial photography.



:tng: :usa:

 

[dmp]

Really? Is that why race cars are so low to the ground??????duh

Uh? Yeah...that's one reason race cars are so low to the ground. Lower center of gravity.

I was talking about regular stock SUV tires with the tall sidewalls, the footprint is much smaller at high speeds. Obviously 13'' low profile tires are different but cute picture anyway.

Those were 15" thank you very much. And if you were specifically talking about SUV tires, then indicate as such - more credibility than trying to specify after the fact I'll get my wife's truck up to 90 and get a pic for ya.

Yea , so what. I drove a Triumph 30 years ago and learned defensive driving habits also, that doesn't mean that everyone knows them or cares. My post was not about you, you obviously take driving seriously and because of that you actually pay attention to what is going on around you. . .that has nothing to do with handing John Q. Public the keys to a 7 foot tall 6000 pound rolling living room that neither has the braking power to stop it effectively or the handling ability for the average driver to not tip it over or lose control in an emergency manuever.

Okay?

true but sitting in a vehicle that deadens the feel of the road and is so high that you don't feel connected to said road tends to make the public more prone to get way too comfortable. Add a DVD player(yea I know it is against the law to have it visible to the driver. . . I still see them every day.)some booze, and recline that leather lazyboy they call a seat and it's off to never never land.

As you are saying, it's not the vehicle, it's the driver. Driver's crash their vehicles. "Mechanical error" as the cause of a crash is very rare. What you're doing is looking for the WORST POSSIBLE scenario, and applying it to every situation. Add a DVD Player...hell, I bet with all that room inside the guy's prolly gettin' a blow job and smoking pot too! Yeah! SUVs are the DEVIL!

Why not a Greyhound bus, it carries a shitload of people? Most of the time the 6000 pound 10 mile to the gallon SUV is used for one person to commute to work or go to the store, it is rare that I see 2 people in them much less 7.

Yup - the bus argument is even better. 40 people at 7mpg is more efficient in terms of transportation than 1 person at 30mpg. But again, you are blaming the SUV for how the owners USE them. That's just not right. And my wife's truck gets TWELVE mpg, thank you very much. Some newer SUVs and trucks get close to 20mpg. One or two SUVs gets close to 30.

Are you kidding? I know you have to be more observant that that. The bigger the vehicle the worse the tailgater in many cases(not all of course). I don't see a lot of people in Miatas tailgating.

Not even close. People who tailgate tailgate because they haven't a clue what 'awareness' means. SUV-drivers or otherwise.

Again, I am speaking of the ignorant public not car fanatics. There was a special report on the many rollovers that were happening since the SUVs became popular, it might have been "48 Hours" or "60 Minutes" that I saw it on. The majority were happening with women and it was usually in emergency manuevers.

...that's because people are idiots...not that SUVs are bad. Again, the problem is with the operator, NOT the vehicle.

How about I change it to any vehicle with a high center of gravity? 18 wheelers driven by "professionals" end up on there side almost everyday around the country because of the high center of gravity that is so strong that having a long trailer behind it doesn't help keep them upright once they are put in a situation that promotes it.

okay? yeah - you can change it. Doesn't matter though. It's not the high center of gravity - it's the operator's ability to control the truck with a high center of gravity. Left alone, the truck wouldn't spontaneously flip over.

In a perfect world all vehicles would come with better performing tires but reality is different. People don't know enough to realize the importance of good tires, their idea of a good tire is one that lasts 60,000 miles. The ignorant public thinks that if a speedometer says 130 that the vehicle can be driven safely at that speed, that is reality. Most don't know how to make sure the correct air pressure is in the tires. . . once again you are mistaking the publics knowledge of cars with your own.

Then teach them. (shrug). Why don't we pressure our lawmakers to enforce more-strict guidelines for whom we license? I'd say, though, any car from the factory would have tires rated to at least the highest point on it's speedometer - Likewise I'd say 95% of cars haven't the power to achieve their speedo's highest number

SUV drivers should be concerned that their vehicles can take a hit because they have less of an ability to avoid what would cause a wreck.

Less of an ability than what? a van? If there is any measurable difference, it's the result of an operator not taking full advantage. Again, blame the operator - NOT the vehicle.

Why should I be less safe because I am driving a reasonably sized vehicle, is that fair?

What does fairness have to do with anything? Who cares? If you want to drive a vehicle 'you' consider 'reasonable' so be it. I'm sure there are people who drive SMALLER cars who bitch bout YOUR 'land yacht'.

I drove it on numerous trips where I saw rediculous gas mileage for a vehicle that was quite fast and handled like a car.

Now you're just being silly...handled like a car? Maybe a big ol' heavy car.

In town and on the highway at any speed it would average 25mpg always. I experimented with the trip computer one night to see what the best mileage I could achieve. On flat grade at 75 mile an hour I was getting 25-26, as I slowed to 65 the mpg increased to 27-30, dropping down to 55 it was getting 29-32. It was empty but I also took it on a few trips with 4 people and lost only a few mpgs.

My 'compact' gets about 17mpg in town...20 on the highway.

 

[sitarro]

I give up Darrin, I refuse to waste anymore time on this. Drive what you want as fast as you want, you and Clay are the experts on this and everything else ...cough, cough. . .bullshit..cough

I didn't see a bored smiley.

 

[Mr. P]

I haven’t read all the thread. I’d just like to say this, no matter how good a driver someone may be (or thinks they are), it only takes ONE typical Dumb ass driver to do something stupid and kill you.

Motor on. Or should I say speed on?