Aventador Crash - Moment of Impact

Drummerboy08 · 02-04-2014 10:57AM

GreeBo wrote: »

Again for the umpteenth time, no one is saying its 100% of anyones fault. Both drivers are at fault.

Hold on, do we know 100%, fact, that the Lambo was speeding? We can guess, create theories, assume based on it's noise and visual, but we do not know that the car was speeding. Unless i've missed some evidence that shows it was?

What we do KNOW is that the Mazda pulled out in front of it.

Marty McFly · 02-04-2014 10:58AM

GreeBo wrote: »

Well people seem happy to agree he was doing @30-35mp/h, I'll leave it as an exercise for you to convert that to kp/h.

Drivel my good man, the word is drivel. Its like "drive", but more L-elly.

:pac: Oh you really are one of them types aren't you? :pac:

I'm well aware of the word drivel my good man nice try at being condescending though. I chose the word dribble on purpose because it describes quite accurately how I picture you as you type.

GreeBo · 02-04-2014 10:58AM

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Lots of people saying 100% Mazda.

I was clearly only including people holding sensible opinions!

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Hold on, do we know 100%, fact, that the Lambo was speeding? We can guess, create theories, assume based on it's noise and visual, but we do not know that the car was speeding. Unless i've missed some evidence that shows it was?

What we do KNOW is that the Mazda pulled out in front of it.

And we also know the Lambo couldnt slow down enough to prevent themselves from getting airborne and taking out two other cars.

02-04-2014 11:00AM

GreeBo wrote: »

Drove into him? Are we watching the same video? So the mazda drove into him and somehow launched him into the air in the same direction he was already going? Handy to be able to turn off physics like that.

He drove right out in front of him giving him absolutely no time to react, its not much different to just driving into him as there is nothing the lambo driver could have done. From the lambos perspective the mazda would just have appeared a few metres in front of him.

I'm convinced that's its you watching a different video as the more I watch it the more I cannot fathom people laying any blame on the lambo driver.

I would not give 0.1% of blame to the lambo driver, he had right of way and in my opinion did not appear to be driving fast. Personally I don't even care if he was I'd still lay all the blame on the mazda driver as its his job to judge the situation and if he can make it out or not.

mb1725 · 02-04-2014 11:04AM

Two days on and not one ounce of sympathy for the innocent E46!!!

GreeBo · 02-04-2014 11:04AM

Legend Ugly Passport wrote: »

He drove right out in front of him giving him absolutely no time to react, its not much different to just driving into him as there is nothing the lambo driver could have done. From the lambos perspective the mazda would just have appeared a few metres in front of him.

I'm convinced that's its you watching a different video as the more I watch it the more I cannot fathom people laying any blame on the lambo driver.

I would not give 0.1% of blame to the lambo driver, he had right of way and in my opinion did not appear to be driving fast. Personally I don't even care if he was I'd still lay all the blame on the mazda driver as its his job to judge the situation and if he can make it out or not.

I disagree. He should have been able to slow down enough to prevent the near write-off type accident that occurred. Mr Mazda didnt shoot out of a side road, he crawled out.

I think the highlighted sentence gives us all the insight we need on your opinion:
Speeding = woo-hoo!

Drummerboy08 · 02-04-2014 11:06AM

GreeBo wrote: »

And we also know the Lambo couldnt slow down enough to prevent themselves from getting airborne and taking out two other cars.

But that doesn't definately prove that the car was speeding - any number of the factors, including impact into another car could have caused that.

Stallingrad · 02-04-2014 11:09AM

Here's my take.

Mazda driver pulls out without looking, and without hearing the oncoming loud noise. Not observing or listening.

Lambo driver did not have time to react or brake, not sure anyone here would have either. That is because:
A) Going too fast - uncertain

A car just pulled out right in front of you from a T junction - certain.

Mazda 100%. I'd like to see their insurance quote next year.

02-04-2014 11:10AM

GreeBo wrote: »

I disagree. He should have been able to slow down enough to prevent the near write-off type accident that occurred. Mr Mazda didnt shoot out of a side road, he crawled out.

I think the highlighted sentence gives us all the insight we need on your opinion:
Speeding = woo-hoo!

I wouldn't say he crawled out,he drove out and he started his maneuver when the lambo was already nearly on top of him. You haven't a clue about reaction times or the mechanics of how easy it is to launch a car into the air in a crash.

BMJD · 02-04-2014 11:19AM

Stallingrad wrote: »

Car crash thread.

vibe666 · 02-04-2014 11:27AM

GreeBo wrote: »

So a car in front of you was able to stop in time, due to a hazard appearing and you have a problem with him doing it (and also little faith in your wifes ability to stop in time)? Perhaps you should try the 3 second rule if 2 isnt enough for you? What if it had been a cow wandering into the road, should he have ploughed into it to avoid inconvenience you and your wife?

I was actually 4 seconds behind him when it all started and he began to slowly brake and I was already braking because of him braking and seeing the golf, but didn't think the megane would be stupid enough to rapidly stop to let out an almost stationary vehicle who could pretty much spend all day sitting safely on very wide central area in the middle of the road.

my priority was giving my 7 months pregnant wife (with limited driving experience, driving a car she was unfamiliar with that she had only owned for about an hour) behind me, plenty of room to stop as she would not have anticipated someone jamming on their brakes and coming to a complete stop in the middle of the N11 and would have had limited visibility of what was happening ahead due to concentrating on following me in my Pajero.

as it was, the car behind her only just stopped short of hitting her even with the extra room of me pulling to the side and the long queue of cars behind them had similar experiences.

feel free to judge for yourself anyway, pretty much everyone here has already seen it.

NSFW audio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_aaW9uaKNc

Red Nissan · 02-04-2014 11:53AM

vibe666 wrote: »

I was actually 4 seconds behind him when it all started and he began to slowly brake and I was already braking because of him braking and seeing the golf, but didn't think the megane would be stupid enough to rapidly stop to let out an almost stationary vehicle who could pretty much spend all day sitting safely on very wide central area in the middle of the road.

my priority was giving my 7 months pregnant wife (with limited driving experience, driving a car she was unfamiliar with that she had only owned for about an hour) behind me, plenty of room to stop as she would not have anticipated someone jamming on their brakes and coming to a complete stop in the middle of the N11 and would have had limited visibility of what was happening ahead due to concentrating on following me in my Pajero.

as it was, the car behind her only just stopped short of hitting her even with the extra room of me pulling to the side and the long queue of cars behind them had similar experiences.

feel free to judge for yourself anyway, pretty much everyone here has already seen it.

NSFW audio.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_aaW9uaKNc

Dashcam saves your life thread?

Bio Mech · 02-04-2014 12:27PM

GreeBo wrote: »

I disagree. He should have been able to slow down enough to prevent the near write-off type accident that occurred. Mr Mazda didnt shoot out of a side road, he crawled out.

I think the highlighted sentence gives us all the insight we need on your opinion:
Speeding = woo-hoo!

We get we get it. Anyone who enjoys driving is immature and if you drive a nice car you are automatically at fault even if you have right of way. Does that sum it up?

GreeBo · 02-04-2014 12:52PM

Bio Mech wrote: »

We get we get it. Anyone who enjoys driving is immature and if you drive a nice car you are automatically at fault even if you have right of way. Does that sum it up?

Not at all, I enjoy driving and have a nice car.

Driving at an inappropriate speed and not paying enough attention to your surroundings makes you at least partially at fault.

"Right of way" is a fantastic argument often trotted out by cyclists after then get t-boned by a car. Having "Right of way" isnt a carte blanche to drive like you are the only car on the road.

GreeBo · 02-04-2014 12:53PM

vibe666 wrote: »

I was actually 4 seconds behind him when it all started and he began to slowly brake and I was already braking because of him braking and seeing the golf, but didn't think the megane would be stupid enough to rapidly stop to let out an almost stationary vehicle who could pretty much spend all day sitting safely on very wide central area in the middle of the road.

But you didnt know why he was stopping, there could have been a cyclist or motorbike on the ground in front of the megane for all you knew; thats why we are supposed to leave ample stopping room.

Unexpected things cause accidents, not expected things.

02-04-2014 01:05PM

GreeBo wrote: »

But you didnt know why he was stopping, there could have been a cyclist or motorbike on the ground in front of the megane for all you knew; thats why we are supposed to leave ample stopping room.

Unexpected things cause accidents, not expected things.

So you are telling me that when you drive along the road and leave 3 seconds between you and the car in front are you prepared to stop from 100km/h if a car drives out of a blind gateway between you and the car in front?

Your posts are basically saying, yes everyone should be able to stop in the above situation.

You cant always be prepared to stop, it would destroy the flow of traffic on all main roads if people slowed down every time they saw a car waiting at a junction, just in case they drive out.

GreeBo · 02-04-2014 01:10PM

Legend Ugly Passport wrote: »

So you are telling me that when you drive along the road and leave 3 seconds between you and the car in front are you prepared to stop from 100km/h if a car drives out of a blind gateway between you and the car in front?

Your posts are basically saying, yes everyone should be able to stop in the above situation.

if a car pokes its head out and directly onto a 100km/h road then chances are there is going to be a crash.
If Im driving through the city (where there are cars parked on both sides of the road) Im going to slow right down and assume something *could* happen.

For the last time, Im not saying he should necessarily have been able to stop and avoid the crash; he should however have been able to slow enough to not cause nearly so much (collateral) damage.
To me it seems like he either wasnt paying enough attention for the speed he was driving OR just went for it.

and yeah you can dramatically say "oh the children" all you want; come back to me after you paint the road with a silly child that runs out in front of you.
You can be as "right" as you want in that situation all you want.

Mycroft H · 02-04-2014 01:12PM

Legend Ugly Passport wrote: »

So you are telling me that when you drive along the road and leave 3 seconds between you and the car in front are you prepared to stop from 100km/h if a car drives out of a blind gateway between you and the car in front?

Your posts are basically saying, yes everyone should be able to stop in the above situation.

You cant always be prepared to stop, it would destroy the flow of traffic on all main roads if people slowed down every time they saw a car waiting at a junction, just in case they drive out.

No, it would give you a chance to react. That is all.

I honestly think some people here would benefit from sitting a few ROSPA lessons

dr.fuzzenstein · 02-04-2014 01:13PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Not at all, I enjoy driving and have a nice car.

Driving at an inappropriate speed and not paying enough attention to your surroundings makes you at least partially at fault.

"Right of way" is a fantastic argument often trotted out by cyclists after then get t-boned by a car. Having "Right of way" isnt a carte blanche to drive like you are the only car on the road.

And "I pulled out right in front of him because he should have seen me and stopped! He wasn't paying attention! I won't pay for this accident!" is an argument usually trotted out by people who can't drive, don't look out, don't heed the ROTR and are now trying every trick in the book to weasel their way out of yet another claim. It's when you know you don't have a leg to stand on, but are desperately trying every lame excuse to deflect some of the blame away from yourself and onto the other driver.

If I follow your argument logically, every single accident is avoidable, it is never, or very rarely, only one person's fault, it usually takes two to do something stupid.
What happens next? One of the drivers gets blamed, usually based on the ROTR, whoever decides the blame will not spend as long as we have looking over the case, it's a 5 minute process, along the lines of car A had right of way, car B pulled out, car B at fault, next case.
In an ideal world there would be a panel of people looking over each and every accident and scrutinise the actions of all the participants, looking over evidence, checking onboard data and video footage, if available, questioning witnesses and making a series of calculations regarding speed, braking distance, etc...
They would then apportion an exact percentage of blame, i.e. driver A is 26.3% to blame and car B is 73.7% to blame.
Mostly this does not happen.
I'd be interested in two things. What was the real-life outcome of this and can we have a poll for this thread along:
1: Mazda at fault
2: Lambo at fault
3: 50/50
4: Obligatory Atari Jaguar

justsomebloke · 02-04-2014 01:15PM

Stallingrad wrote: »

Here's my take.

Mazda driver pulls out without looking, and without hearing the oncoming loud noise. Not observing or listening.

Do we know he didn't look? If there were enough parked cars in his view, due to the height of the Aventador he just mightn't of been able to see it full stop.

challengemaster · 02-04-2014 01:18PM

justsomebloke wrote: »

Do we know he didn't look? If there were enough parked cars in his view, due to the height of the Aventador he just mightn't of been able to see it full stop.

That doesn't abstain him from his responsibility of making sure the way is clear before moving. If you can't tell, don't fúckin move!

Stallingrad · 02-04-2014 01:29PM

justsomebloke wrote: »

Do we know he didn't look? If there were enough parked cars in his view, due to the height of the Aventador he just mightn't of been able to see it full stop.

So do you use give it a lash and hope for the best? If he had looked (and listened) he would have seen (and heard) it was not safe to pull out.

Having said that I wonder if this would have happened if the Lambo was an orange Ford Transit.

dantastic · 02-04-2014 01:34PM

I wonder what people would have been saying if the aventador would have been a lycra clad cyclist doing 40mph...

justsomebloke · 02-04-2014 01:56PM

Stallingrad wrote: »

So do you use give it a lash and hope for the best? If he had looked (and listened) he would have seen (and heard) it was not safe to pull out.

As I said due to the height of the car it mightn't of been visible if other cars were objecting his view however a standard car would of been visible due to it's height, so having looked he saw no car coming and pulled out.

As for what the driver could hear I can't judge in the same way I couldn't judge if the avetador was speeding so can't comment on it.

Caliden · 02-04-2014 01:58PM

dantastic wrote: »

I wonder what people would have been saying if the aventador would have been a lycra clad cyclist doing 40mph...

He wouldn't have been hit because he isn't as wide as an aventador.

Bio Mech · 02-04-2014 02:05PM

dantastic wrote: »

I wonder what people would have been saying if the aventador would have been a lycra clad cyclist doing 40mph...

Lycra or not I would be saying its primarily the fault of the mazda. just like I am now.

Lambo, micra, bicycle, horse it doesn't really matter. If you pull out and its not clear to do so you have liability IMO.

REXER · 02-04-2014 02:17PM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

And "I pulled out right in front of him because he should have seen me and stopped! He wasn't paying attention! I won't pay for this accident!" is an argument usually trotted out by people who can't drive, don't look out, don't heed the ROTR and are now trying every trick in the book to weasel their way out of yet another claim. It's when you know you don't have a leg to stand on, but are desperately trying every lame excuse to deflect some of the blame away from yourself and onto the other driver.

If I follow your argument logically, every single accident is avoidable, it is never, or very rarely, only one person's fault, it usually takes two to do something stupid.
What happens next? One of the drivers gets blamed, usually based on the ROTR, whoever decides the blame will not spend as long as we have looking over the case, it's a 5 minute process, along the lines of car A had right of way, car B pulled out, car B at fault, next case.
In an ideal world there would be a panel of people looking over each and every accident and scrutinise the actions of all the participants, looking over evidence, checking onboard data and video footage, if available, questioning witnesses and making a series of calculations regarding speed, braking distance, etc...
They would then apportion an exact percentage of blame, i.e. driver A is 26.3% to blame and car B is 73.7% to blame.
Mostly this does not happen.
I'd be interested in two things. What was the real-life outcome of this and can we have a poll for this thread along:
1: Mazda at fault
2: Lambo at fault
3: 50/50
4: Obligatory Atari Jaguar

1

Marty McFly · 02-04-2014 02:25PM

Bio Mech wrote: »

Lycra or not I would be saying its primarily the fault of the mazda. just like I am now.

Lambo, micra, bicycle, horse it doesn't really matter. If you pull out and its not clear to do so you have liability IMO.

He meant if you replaced the Lamborghini with a cyclist

. Since a few seem to be trying there best to make excuses for the Mazda and lay blame on the Lamborghini.

dr.fuzzenstein · 02-04-2014 02:41PM

Marty McFly wrote: »

He meant if you replaced the Lamborghini with a cyclist . Since a few seem to be trying there best to make excuses for the Mazda and lay blame on the Lamborghini.

Replace the Mazda with a cyclist and you'd have a war on your hands...

Caliden · 02-04-2014 02:46PM

If the aventador was going faster the accident wouldn't have happened.

Solution: Increase speed to avoid accidents.

Aventador Crash - Moment of Impact

Comments