Speeding article

[Zedder]

No, cause people have a tendency to believe in things like ghosts, deities, and centrifugal forces when they try working things out on their own.

Wait! Don't tell me, you're an expert.

[scumdog]

[COLOR="#139922"]

guess which group you're in.

Hey Akzle, put in a fair bit of effort and you could almost climb up to the level of his group...

[scumdog]

let me let me let me guess .... Huh .. NOT the very small group you belong to ...

Huh,, to be a group there has to be more than one member...

[rastuscat]

i would expect the one doing 110 to better, on account of it has more energy to transfer into les powerpole, resulting in less remaining in the car. something to do with exponential something or other.
even if i'm wrong, surely i have a right to drive into a powerpole at whatever speed i want?

also, it's almost irrelevant. two identical vehicles with identical safety features et al will do the same in a crash: crumple around the box.
done by crumpling front and rear, transferring energy around the cage and dispersing it, this is why we have A pillars in front and torque boxes in back. (talking uni-bodys here, not SUVs with rigid chassis') hit the pole at 160 for all i care, the energy will still be directed away from the occupants. (unfortunately.)( i think cagers should heave to wear neck belts, so they're actually going to wear the consequences of their tomfuckery)

guess which group you're in.

nicely avoiding the physics.

Answer this then, it seems I have to be extreme to make a point.

Vehicle A hits Object A at 30 kmh.

Vehicle B hits Object B at 100 kmh.

Both objects are identical. Both vehicles are identical. the only variable is the speed of impact.

Which vehicle suffers greater damage?

[davereid]

nicely avoiding the physics.

Answer this then, it seems I have to be extreme to make a point.

Vehicle A hits Object A at 30 kmh.

Vehicle B hits Object B at 100 kmh.

Both objects are identical. Both vehicles are identical. the only variable is the speed of impact.

Which vehicle suffers greater damage?

Doesnt alway work in the favour of the slower driver though.

If vehicle A hits vehicle B, vehicle B has so much inertia, it will be able to stop vehicle A, and push it backward. So the occupants of the speeding vehicle increase their chances of survival as the have more deceleration time. On the other hand, the slow vehicle is bought to a halt, then accelerated away in the other direction.

Which is why, the drunken speeding arsehole often walks away after killing the innocent non speeding motorist.

[arcane12]

First thing - are they saying only 25% of people do more than 100 (eg. 105, 110) in a 100 zone? That sounds like BS to me. If I drive at 50 around town, the cop behind me usually gets upset.

And, not pointing fingers at individual members of our fine policing force, but if *'the police' want to enforce a 4km/h tollerance short or long term then I think they really need to get their own ship in order. Not that I am speaking my support for the current limits, or tollerances, just saying there might be a little hypocrisy here.

note:
* 'the police' refers to the policy makers rather than the individuals who are tasked to carry those policies out.

[Asher]

I have always felt that the police speeding to catch a speeder is just dripping in some twisted hypocritical logic, kinda like shooting people to catch a murderer.

[GrayWolf]

Loving your logic.

So two vehicles with traction seatbelts, 20 fucken airbags, crumple zones etc hit poles. One is doing 100 kmh, and one is doing 110 kmh.

Which one will generate the greater energy from the crash? Which one will have the greater damage?

Both will be industrially munted, but which one is worse? By your logic, they will both be the same.

Go on, answer that.

Rastus, how DARE you bring a sensible argument to the thread... This is KIWIBIKER goddammit!!!!!

[GrayWolf]

even if i'm wrong, surely i have a right to drive into a powerpole at whatever speed i want?

Using that premise, agreed ONLY if the rest of us taxpayers have the right to refuse to pay for your Medical expenses in the result of any injury/trauma/damage you receive or cause

Fair enough?

[p.dath]

What I want to know is, if a vehicle travels along a straight road at 150km/h with no side roads and no traffic. How the fuck can they crash?

One of the most common occurrences I can think of that people have said has happened to them here is an animal running out in front of them.

Diesel or other spills on the road is also another common occurrence.

You get the odd person also talking about bird attack, or a bird flying across their path which they strike.

Then there is the obvious mechanical failure.

[Zedder]

I'm surprised this thread is still going.

Dave- made it quite clear KBers were trying to justify breaking the law and we're way out of our depth with the physics.

Interesting though, no explanation of it at all from him and, if he does know something (specialist cop or physics teacher?) perhaps he could take a leaf out of Rastuscat's book regarding approach etc. Knob!

[caspernz]

nicely avoiding the physics.

Answer this then, it seems I have to be extreme to make a point.

Vehicle A hits Object A at 30 kmh.

Vehicle B hits Object B at 100 kmh.

Both objects are identical. Both vehicles are identical. the only variable is the speed of impact.

Which vehicle suffers greater damage?

How dare you introduce logic into this??

But I'll share one funny story to put speed and mass into a similar context. Back some years, in a fridge semi trailer unit loaded to around 35 tonne all up, I'm sitting in a right hand turn bay and just as I rolled to a stop I felt a little bump...similar to a small pothole. As I turn right, I glance in the mirror to see a car oozing all its liquids onto the deck, bonnet crumpled into an A and drivers' face imprinted with a steering wheel...well, under all the blood anyway. My speed at impact would have been 2-5 kmh, Police later estimated his at around 65-70 (in a 50 zone). Damage to truck was only a few paint scratches on the docking bar, car was written off.

The contributing factor in this case was a couple of lovely looking young ladies in skimpy summer attire on the right hand side of the road...so maybe speed isn't the problem at all, it's all down to managing the distractions, while keeping ones' focus on the task at hand.

[bogan]

I'm surprised this thread is still going.

Dave- made it quite clear KBers were trying to justify breaking the law and we're way out of our depth with the physics.

Interesting though, no explanation of it at all from him and, if he does know something (specialist cop or physics teacher?) perhaps he could take a leaf out of Rastuscat's book regarding approach etc. Knob!

Don't be silly, he's a Uni student I think, all they know is how little everyone else knows

[Zedder]

Don't be silly, he's a Uni student I think, all they know is how little everyone else knows

What!! I could have been dealing with an undergrad! Ffs!!!!!

[bogan]

What!! I could have been dealing with an undergrad! Ffs!!!!!

And he might not even be an Engineering undergrad, he could be an arts major... shudders...