Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011
Results 151 to 158 of 158

Thread: dangerous vehicles

  1. #151

    Re: dangerous vehicles

    Heya Ronnie12

    There are some inherant problems with some 4wds due to the pupose for which they were built (high centre of gravity for ground clearance) but like most things where problems are found they find fixes or work arounds eventually.

    I don't believe the US data is applicable to Australian conditions due to the fact we have very different road laws and vehicle construction standards. In many states (all? ) of the US it is deemed unconstitutional to require drivers or passengers to where seat belts, hence many deaths and injuries caused would be avoided here.

    Additionally the American habit of taking big to the extreme sees huge heavily powered vehicles like F350 F450's Suburbans and Hummers entering into the debate. Vehicles of this size are extremely rare here. So if these are some of the vehicles being quoted for things such as "death rate for the largest SUVs ......is 8 percent higher than the occupant death rate for minivans and upper-midsize cars like the Ford Taurus and Toyota Camry" the comparison is very unfair. The same goes for emmision and consumption figures.

    If you have specific Australian data on the subject I would be interested to see it, as I believe there will be huge difference due to the differing nature of Aussie vehicle choice and safety requirements.

    You have said yourself that the vehicles aren't so much unsafe as the people driving them, so in my mind it appears that rather than banning the vehicle, education is what is needed. That being the case I think your efforts would be better spent lobbying the transport department requiring a specific endorsement and test for 4wds over a certain tonnage or specification, and/or approaching insurance companies with any research you may have and suggest they offer discounts to those that have successfully completed a certified 4wd training and safety course.


  2. #152

    Re: dangerous vehicles

    Dear FNQCairs
    At least you have taken the time and put together a well constructed letter. However I must say that
    it is only commonsence that:
    Vehicles with a high centre of gravity are not as stable on conering.
    Vehicles weighing 2.5 tonnes will never have the same handling, braking as a normal car.
    Vehicles weighing 2.5 tonnes with large steel bull bars involved in side impacts override side protection on normal cars and I have personally witnessed deaths attibuted from this.
    Please dont try and convince me otherwise.
    I have stated on two previous occasions that driven within their boundaries by responsible drivers they normally dont present a problem and its only the small minority that turn them into lethal weapons, just a trip to Double Island on a weekend is enough evidence.
    I can recall one accident where a so called modified 4 x 4 careered out of control and decapitated two people in Brisbane from a side impact.
    A number of these vehicles never leave the road, and are driven by inexperience drivers usually women and I am certain the day is coming shorly where special licences will be a necessary for everybody. I am not a prude and want all these vehicles taken off the road, but I see the need from better controls.
    cheers
    ronnie

  3. #153

    Re: dangerous vehicles

    Quote Originally Posted by ronnie12
    I have stated on two previous occasions that driven within their boundaries by responsible drivers they normally dont present a problem and its only the small minority that turn them into lethal weapons, just a trip to Double Island on a weekend is enough evidence

    Yes the death at double island point everyweekend is a appalling! what are you talking about!!


    I can recall one accident where a so called modified 4 x 4 careered out of control and decapitated two people in Brisbane from a side impact.

    Where and when? Or is this just another carnage at Di statement!!


    A number of these vehicles never leave the road, and are driven by inexperience drivers usually women

    I'll let Roz respond to this one!!! But on behalf of my wife ( who drives very well) not only are you statements unfactual and emotive They are also now sexist!! >


    and I am certain the day is coming shorly where special licences will be a necessary for everybody


    I have no problem with improved driver training , what ever the vehicle



    I am not a prude

    No you are not !! what you are is unprintable on this site!







    ronnie

    Merry christmas Ronnie
    Alcohol doesn't agree with me, but i sure do enjoy the argument!!!

  4. #154

    Re: dangerous vehicles

    Ronnie the problem is your arguments are just too "A Current Affair" for my liking.
    A Barina with standard width wheels will stop faster than one with wide wheels and it will probably corner better when pushed also.
    Anyone who has ever held a cams license (I have) will know that cornering ability is a function of weight, wheelbase, grip (function of weight) and engineering ie technology. Ever watched the truck racing on speedweek!!!!

    A 4wd... granted it has a higher C of G (as a result of suspension height)when measured incorrectly on one plane only -centerline vertical. But in the real world a 4wd has a higher percentage of it's overall bulk (big heavy drivetrain and chassis) low in relative terms. Why? because a real world estimation of C of G must include wheel base.
    4wd = heavy low in in its overall height and a wide wheelbase = the C of G argument does not hold water today on average.

    If your C of G argument was here and now 25 years ago on some vehicles you would have a valid point. You will do better directing this argument toward the new crop of micro vehicles with micro wheel bases and micro tyres, I would be far safer sliding sideways down the road at 100kph in a 2005 Nissan patrol than a 2005 micro vehicle from a rollover perspective and possibly no worse for wear compared to a ford falco either!

    Braking.
    Ever seen 20 tonnes of semi trailer lockup down the highway? I have! No way would I like to compete with one of those in an emergency breaking contest in any modern family vehicle. As in C of G and handling breaking is a function of much more than just weight alone. Mass production 4wds can brake just as fast as mass production family vechiles even better sometimes, some 4wds stop incredibly well today.

    A bit more on Weight V Handling, do some searches world wide on high performance high dollar vehicles (you know.... the ones with V10 engines etc etc) then compare their cornering/stooping ability/weight with a 2005 holden commodore!
    Although this would continue the Ronnie run of unfair comparisons but a person could advocate the abolition of mass produced family vehicles if they so chose after that comparison based solely on rollover/braking/cornering etc - Ronnie??

    Really if you would like to make a modern real world difference in crash safety for every vehicle out there lobby each respective state authority to allow quality seats, 4 point harnesses and roll cages fitted as a valid vehicle safety upgrade. Just try and argue the point to any track modified stock race car driver to swap his rollcage and harness for crumple zones airbags and a seat belt. But dont forget to wear a helmet when you say it, those bitch slaps have got to sting!

    Dare you to make a difference!
    Also while you are at it lobby also for a baby capsule standard that does not simply pander to price and ease of manufacture. ie somethin akin to maximum standard instead of a minimum standard in this case.

    Special licenses will be a political move not a scientific move much the same as your overall argument. These subjects are usually aired in the media with a manic component that sucks in the gullible and the misdirected/undirected.

    People die all the time from eating food lets advocate smoothies for everyone or simply license some to be allowed to chew.

    I have no doubt something like special vehicle licenses will happen sometime but it will be because of individuals in Government regulatory departments needing to justify their current and continued employment/power by acting on the vocal manic political/social engineering concerns expressed by the minority.
    If science and the real world was behind regulation in this country we would have 1/3 less in total employed in government and government spillover positions. How many dangerous vehicle trips (by definition every trip is dangerous) Ronnie would that free our roads by every year! Careful you could be more the problem than the cure

    cheers fnq

    Ps and edit, bullbars today do not have significant strength in an impact over an identical vehicle without one. It may be argued that a bullbar will spread the load V time and decrease side intrusion (the big killer) on small vehicles in a T bone.
    A more logical but still manic approach to the entire debate would be to ban all classes of vehicles except for those that are the most versatile and can cover the majority of vehicular needs. At least that way no innocents will be allowed the choice to own a vehicle that purposely puts them at heightened risk on our roads.




  5. #155

    Re: dangerous vehicles

    Owen, Owen, Owen, I had perfectly sumed you up the first time. Thats it ignore the obvious, just put your head in the sand. Once you start with the kindergarden talk you have already displayed your personally and lost out the argument.
    If you choose to believe the dribble you have written ignoring the obvious you are then a fool.
    ROFL
    Perhap you can quote the "dribble" that I have written.
    I gave you every opportunity to present unbiased, verifyable facts and was quite happy to debate them.
    Contrary to your opinion, I can be swayed if the facts are there.
    As I stated, to support your case you must provide evidence that the 4wd design was the CAUSE of the accident. As I stated you must therefore produce documentation to demonstrate that in the same conditions another vehicle design WOULD NOT produce similar results in terms of rollovers, deaths etc.
    Until you have done so you have nothing but a theory.
    Until you have do so you cannot be taken seriously. Your arguements will remain childlike and will continue to illicit the same types of response from me. i.e. To treat you like a child.

    Learn to debate properly or run along.
    Attempt at least to adequately answer the responses I have presented and you may have some hope of being treated as an intelligent adult with a differing point of view.

    Thus far you have just ducked it by projecting upon me your belief that I won't be swayed regardless. You know nothing of me, but each time you duck the responsibilty of backing up your claim it speaks volumes of you.

    Owen
    Cheers,
    Owen


    The whole world's mad save thee & me (but I'm not too sure about thee)

  6. #156

    Re: dangerous vehicles

    Dear FNQ Cairns, I really must thank you for once an intellegence response. Yes you do have valid points, I dont agree with all of it sorry, but honestly respect your honesty and opinions.
    Luckly only a very small majority of Ausfish members constantly not only embarras themselves but lack any tack or intregity whatsoever and obviously completely out of their depth. I am certain most would agree.
    Merry Christmas
    Ronnie

  7. #157
    CHRIS_aka_GWH
    Guest

    Re: dangerous vehicles

    here's an interesting link i found while trying to find a 4WD fatality on straddie


    http://www.transport.act.gov.au/word/crashrates.doc

    crash rates per capita are falling while 4WD owership is doing .....




    how ya going on that single cause thing ronnie ? (hint - the above has a classic)

  8. #158

    Re: dangerous vehicles

    Finding time,

    I got involved in a topic a few weeks back, it attracted a few female hating #meat heads, it will almost certainly do the same again.

    So.... I'm not sure how to respond, without getting down to that level but will try.

    Ronnie 12,

    I find that comment very insulting, I am sure I am not the only one.

    You like to pass judgement on other peoples statements, yet here you are with something that is based on nothing but misogyny.

    What do you base your comment on Ronnie?

    Where are all your facts and figures please? The last lot appeared to come from the USA and you were applying them here. I think somebody else pointed this out..... You certainly know how to 'talk the talk' but why should I have to accept what you've written is based on truth, when you are not supplying a link or a way to check your information. It just becomes spin.

    Roz.
    GO THE CRUISER UTES!

    ....OH WHAT A FEELING!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us