Dash cam thread 2 (car videos only, no commenting on videos)

blade1

ganmo wrote: »

has to be a fake, keep an eye on the blue arrow sign, it should be hit by the van but it doesn't wobble or anythin

Yes,went straight through the sign without damaging it!

inforfun

And no sign of car or other debris after cammer passes the roundabout.

Alanstrainor

blade1 wrote: »

Yes,went straight through the sign without damaging it!

I played it back a couple of times and it looks more like the car just squeezes in between the sign. I can't seem to find anything on this on google, despite the video telling us where this was. But at the same time, this would be a very good fake and I fail to see why someone would go through all that effort for something so meaningless...

ganmo

Alanstrainor wrote: »

I played it back a couple of times and it looks more like the car just squeezes in between the sign. I can't seem to find anything on this on google, despite the video telling us where this was. But at the same time, this would be a very good fake and I fail to see why someone would go through all that effort for something so meaningless...

video editing course?

Pretzill

It must be a fake - there isn't any reaction from the cam driver - I think I'd be slowing down a bit if that happened in front of me?

blade1

ganmo wrote: »

video editing course?

It's not rocket science.
I had my dashcam on in park mode today at home and look what it picked up while I was out!!:eek::pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhkcgUAhopE

fritzelly

ganmo wrote: »

has to be a fake, keep an eye on the blue arrow sign, it should be hit by the van but it doesn't wobble or anythin

Yep, the car appears behind the sign after starting to fly up

bladespin

One from this morning.

PaddyWilliams

bladespin wrote: »

One from this morning.

Wow, what an arsehole!

humberklog

^^^Might just be KKV's Citroen C5 acting up.

inforfun

bladespin wrote: »

One from this morning.

Not having a go at you, bladespin or blaming you.
But thanks to speed checks everywhere, no one is overtaking the safest way: as quickly as possible. Move lane, speed up, move back. Slow down. Done.

Quazzie

inforfun wrote: »

Not having a go at you, bladespin or blaming you.
But thanks to speed checks everywhere, no one is overtaking the safest way: as quickly as possible. Move lane, speed up, move back. Slow down. Done.

The problem with this is, and I notice this a LOT because I travel with on cruise control, I end up overtaking the same car multiple times along a stretch of motorway. The reason is they are doing as you say, but then they slow down slower than I am, so I've to overtake them again, and rinse and repeat. Surely varying your speed so often on a motorway is more dangerous than maintaining a constant speed?

inforfun

In my experience it is people who arent on cruise control who go from 120 to 110 and back to 120 when there is some hills to overcome which indeed results in overtaking the same person several times.

inforfun

inforfun wrote: »

And no sign of car or other debris after cammer passes the roundabout.

Which is entirely possible as that roundabout is the size of a football pitch

But the looks of it on Google maps, it is also not the first time this happened, in 2015 there was 1 more sign.

Seve OB

PaddyWilliams wrote: »

Wow, what an arsehole!

bit over the top
he clearly had a blind spot when pulling out to overtake.

a silly mistake but hardly an arsehole

Seve OB

Quazzie wrote: »

Surely varying your speed so often on a motorway is more dangerous than maintaining a constant speed?

how does that even make sense?

gaynorvader

Travelling at a constant 120 and never overtaking is safest, but if you're travelling at 120 and come up behind someone going 110, you can either reduce your speed or overtake, if you're overtaking it's safer to reduce the amount of time spent overtaking so you might accelerate to 140, except that's not allowed for some reason.

inforfun

Seve OB wrote: »

bit over the top
he clearly had a blind spot when pulling out to overtake.

a silly mistake but hardly an arsehole

A good example of the blind spot indeed.
At the same time you can ask the question whether C5 did check his mirrors again after he had left home that morning.
At the speed OP is going he can hardly have surprised the C5 the way you can get surprised on the German motorways. 1 second there is nothing, the next someone doing 250 is on you arse.

inforfun

https://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/7512823/f96d4629/kijk_eens_in_je_spiegels.html

Quazzie

Seve OB wrote: »

how does that even make sense?

Well if everyone is maintaining a constant speed, then overtaking can be planned a lot further back in advance. In a perfect Autonomous car world, every car would be doing a constant 120km/h on the motorway and there would never be a need for overtaking.

josip

inforfun wrote: »

https://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/7512823/f96d4629/kijk_eens_in_je_spiegels.html

Hard to be sure, but to me it looks like the cam vehicle stopped partially on the carriageway.




Daft

inforfun

Not that it matters a lot but i think it is a police car.
And clearly never heard of the Dutch reach.

artanevilla

Seve OB wrote: »

bit over the top
he clearly had a blind spot when pulling out to overtake.

a silly mistake but hardly an arsehole

If his mirrors were positioned correctly he wouldn't have a blind spot.

Quazzie

artanevilla wrote: »

If his mirrors were positioned correctly he wouldn't have a blind spot.

:D:D:D

Are you serious?

ganmo

artanevilla wrote: »

If his mirrors were positioned correctly he wouldn't have a blind spot.

in situations like that I keep an eye on my rearview mirror so I'd know a car is moving out to overtake.

tedpan

Not sure what this guy was on, maybe on the mobile? Total Danger on the road, the truck was far closer than it looked..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lKMRNY83s8

lambayire

Either drunk or on the phone or possibly both.

inforfun

Totally pissed, having a stroke while on the phone is my guess. No way you drive that bad if you only have 1 of those 3 going on.

Isambard

inforfun wrote: »

Not that it matters a lot but i think it is a police car.
And clearly never heard of the Dutch reach.

Shock I imagine but the car that hit the police car, (positioned to protect the stopped car) made a right balls of reversing.

GreeBo

Isambard wrote: »

Shock I imagine but the car that hit the police car, (positioned to protect the stopped car) made a right balls of reversing.

I thought it was perfect, he had the white line right down the middle of his car?