dmp
Senior Member
My original Front Wheel pic...75?mph..
http://www.miatapix.net/coppermine/albums/userpics/wheellarge.jpg
BIG pic..
http://www.miatapix.net/coppermine/albums/userpics/wheellarge.jpg
BIG pic..
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
dmp said:Often lowered cars simply handle better - giving the driver MORE control of their car. It's not always for looks.
fuzzykitten99 said:<picture of big truck>
dmp said:That truck is ricey...should be on Ricecop.com, too
Is that your truck?fuzzykitten99 said: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.
dmp said: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.
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?USViking said:(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.
Is there some equation that relates safeness to speed?driving is never "completely safe", and driving 90 is less than half as safe as driving the speed limit
The ClayTaurus said: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 ClayTaurus said: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?
USViking said: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.
USViking said:(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.
dmp said:I wish my car could reach 60 mph in 4 seconds
USViking said:(WTF for?).
Going 90mph on an empty freeway at noon is
,USViking said:completely safe (driving is never "completely safe", and driving 90 is less than half as safe as driving the speed limit)
My wife's F150 can take 50mph on-ramps at 75mph sometimes
USViking said:(You tried it, huh?- well whadda' cool guy you are! What happens when the F150 can't take the ramps "sometimes"?)
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.sitarro said: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.
There's no thinking, there is only truth.sitarro said: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 old age, you still know everything, but no longer are capable of any of it.sitarro said:....ahhh youth....you know everything and are supremely capable of all.
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.sitarro said:90 miles an hour and a few nails in your lane,
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.sitarro said: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.
What?sitarro said: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.
It's happening fast, yet slow. Got it.sitarro said:All of this is happening at a very fast rate yet it feels like slow motion, almost like in a movie.
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.sitarro said: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.
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.sitarro said:The fact is that even if you were in a real performance car the results would probably be no better
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.sitarro said: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.
Speaking of seeing 350 of them every time I go driving... would you like an IPOD and some Gap Jeans to go with it?sitarro said:That front end. . . ewwwww, give me a 330ci anyday.
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.sitarro said: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.
dmp said:Often lowered cars simply handle better - giving the driver MORE control of their car. It's not always for looks.
dmp said: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'.
dmp said: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.
dmp said: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.
dmp said: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.
dmp said: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.
dmp said: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.
dmp said: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.
dmp said: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.
dmp said: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.
dmp said::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:
Really? Is that why race cars are so low to the ground??????duh
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.