nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Dash cam saves your ass (no Roundabout stuff please :)

Mycroft H

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRC7RO2tOJQ

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

fullstop

CiniO wrote: »

First of all he should have left indicator when leaving roundabout. But let's drop it.
It took him 7 seconds with right indicator after leaving roundabout. Surely that can be misleading enough.

CiniO wrote: »

So?
Does this justify keeping the indicator for extra 6 seconds?

Wait, was it 7 or 6? 5 max I say. Also your ruler in the pic...you start it against the kerb on the left and don't go as far as the centre line on the right. Anything for an argument though, eh?

CiniO

Jesus. wrote: »

I've said it before but I've found that the people who are constantly banging on about safety and sound very self-righteous about driving are actually the among the most dangerous there are. Cinio's video of himself driving a few pages back displayed an aggressiveness that you get from folk who believe they're infallible and turn into as*hles when they get behind the wheel.

I'm gonna drop the moped rider talk, as I presented my point, but no one seems to agree with me - so no point in discussing further.
Ehh whatever - surely according to all of yous riding motorbike with right indicator on the right side of the lane for good few seconds, and then suddenly changing to left indicator and turning left without checking mirrors is right behaviour. Well fair play.

Anyway what you said above about my video really got me thinking.
Only video I posted few pages back is that one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r45LqSBHpM

Are you seriously saying that this video displayed an aggressiveness that you get from folk who believe they're infallible and turn into as*hles when they get behind the wheel.

I'm absolutely astonished here, where do you see any aggressiveness in my driving on that video?

I'm sure Cinio is a sound chap in real life but when some people get behind the wheel of a car, their entire demeanor changes. I know, I've been in cars with some of them.

Well you've never been in the vehicle with me - or wait - maybe you were but you don't even know about it. Over last 7 years, I've driven at least 40,000 passengers in Ireland, so that accounts for almost 1% of population. Big chance you were my passenger once. Yet I never heard a complaint, so possibly wasn't that bad.

RainyDay

hairybelly wrote: »

In regards the the cyclist video. I'm always amazed and just how loonie some of the cyclists on this site are. If you go to the communiting & transport forum or cycling forum, theres an old thread about wearing hiviz clothing, and nearly every cyclist is against it.
I actually got banned on an old account because I argued that if you didnt wear hiviz while cycling at night you're only looking to be hit.

apparenlty a little red light on the back should be sufficient enough according to them :rolleyes:

I think you'll find that what many cyclists (and others) argued against was compulsory hi-vis, which is a different story all together.

Do you have hi-vis on your car? Are you only looking to be hit?

bladespin

RainyDay wrote: »

I think you'll find that what many cyclists (and others) argued against was compulsory hi-vis, which is a different story all together.

Do you have hi-vis on your car? Are you only looking to be hit?

The onus of protection should always be on those that pose the greatest danger, not exactly the cyclist.

Jesus.

CiniO wrote: »

Are you seriously saying that this video displayed an aggressiveness that you get from folk who believe they're infallible and turn into as*hles when they get behind the wheel.I'm absolutely astonished here, where do you see any aggressiveness in my driving on that video?

Yes, it was aggressive. You were travelling at a slow speed and should simply have stopped close to the offending car like you did. That would have been sufficient to make them aware they made an error. There was no need to give it the full blast there. I wouldn't have.

Its in incidents not too unlike these (only a bit less straightforward, say 70/30 or so) that people blasting horns and losing their rag in close proximity with one another that leads to bust ups and all sorts on the sides of the streets. I've only seen your driving in that clip and adding that to your arguing the toss on here all the time, I'd make a calculated guess that you'd be more susceptible to getting into, lets just say "situations", than a driver that was more calm and less aggressive.

I stand by what I said about the people who are constantly on about safety, rules, regulations etc and arguing about them constantly. They think they're 100% right all the time and that actually makes them more dangerous than the average more relaxed driver IMO. I've seen it with my own two eyes on more than a couple of occasions.

CiniO

Jesus. wrote: »

Yes, it was aggressive. You were travelling at a slow speed and should simply have stopped close to the offending car like you did. That would have been sufficient to make them aware they made an error. There was no need to give it the full blast there. I wouldn't have.

Are you crazy. I pretty much proceeded emergency braking. Couldn't really stopped much faster. Other driver clearly didn't see me, as he started pulling out. What should I do - wait there until he crashes into me? That's what the horn is for - to warn other drivers about danger. And that's exactly what I did.
If you think this was aggressive horn to tell him he's a idiot, then there's really something wrong with your perception of such events.
I can definitely tell you, that using horn there was the most correct thing to do.

Its in incidents not too unlike these (only a bit less straightforward, say 70/30 or so) that people blasting horns and losing their rag in close proximity with one another that leads to bust ups and all sorts on the sides of the streets.

Well I can assure you - I never initiate road rage, and I really try hard to avoid using horn as kind of aggressive device to tell someone that he's a muppet (it's hard sometimes to resist, but in vast majority of cases I do resist). What you are suggesting above that I'm kind of driver that gets annoyed by any idiot and gets furious is very very far from true. You just don't know me, so stop commenting.

I've only seen your driving in that clip and adding that to your arguing the toss on here all the time, I'd make a calculated guess that you'd be more susceptible to getting into, lets just say "situations", than a driver that was more calm and less aggressive.

That's just ridiculous. You call me aggressive driver because I used the horn in moment when it was badly needed to warn other driver of danger.
Maybe you just don't know what the horn is for.

I stand by what I said about the people who are constantly on about safety, rules, regulations etc and arguing about them constantly. They think they're 100% right all the time and that actually makes them more dangerous than the average more relaxed driver IMO. I've seen it with my own two eyes on more than a couple of occasions.

Well, you can have your own opinion - I don't really care.

dashcamdanny

I to agree with Cinio. He stayed on the horn till he was noticed and the offending driver stopped.

If the other driver takes offence, then tough cheese. They really should pay more attention before they get hurt.

That was a perfect example of what a horn is for .

Jesus.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

That was a perfect example of what a horn is for.

There's another example but I'd be banned if I linked the website

joujoujou

CiniO wrote: »

[...] Big chance you were my passenger once. Yet I never heard a complaint, so possibly wasn't that bad.

Maybe they were too scared to say a word?

CiniO

joujoujou wrote: »

Maybe they were too scared to say a word?

Out of 40,000 (only estimated) I'm sure there'd be at least a few who opened their mouth if they felt there was something to say.

punisher5112

joujoujou wrote: »

Maybe they were too scared to say a word?

Probably so shocked went home and didn't know how they got there:D:pac:

I have many complaints in so don't know how carrying the public you can get away with none.

I have had complaints for smiling

:rolleyes:

joujoujou

CiniO wrote: »

Out of 40,000 (only estimated) I'm sure there'd be at least a few who opened their mouth if they felt there was something to say.

You aware I'm joking, don't you?

bladebrew

That scooter video is hilarious! It shouldn't be funny but it is, the scooter doesn't even have rear view mirrors?!

punisher5112

bladebrew wrote: »

That scooter video is hilarious! It shouldn't be funny but it is, the scooter doesn't even have rear view mirrors?!

I know i was crying really with laughter and made the missus look and she actually laughed...:pac:

Jesus.

They shouldn't be funny but some of the crashes in those Russian videos have me in stitches!

hairybelly

RainyDay wrote: »

I think you'll find that what many cyclists (and others) argued against was compulsory hi-vis, which is a different story all together.

Do you have hi-vis on your car? Are you only looking to be hit?

No they were downright against hiviz and claimed on many occasions that wearing black clothing in the night while cycling made no difference what so ever as long as they had a light.

Yes, my car does have reflectors like all cars do, and all service vehicles, lorries etc have reflector strips on the rear and side.

I am aware some bikes have reflectors too, but its simply not adequate due to the tiny size of them. Similar story with the lights on bikes. I see week in week out tiny little lights in the distance and its impossible to make out what it is until you get very close.

bladespin

hairybelly wrote: »

I see week in week out tiny little lights in the distance and its impossible to make out what it is until you get very close.

You're not driving to suit the conditions so.

[Deleted User]

bladespin wrote: »

You're not driving to suit the conditions so.

Are you advocating that everyone drives at below 50kmh after dark!

bladespin

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you advocating that everyone drives at below 50kmh after dark!

Not even for a second (for me anyway :P), we have to drive to our ability, if you cannot make out what's in front of you you either need glasses or to rethink your approach speed.

[Deleted User]

bladespin wrote: »

Not even for a second (for me anyway :P), we have to drive to our ability, if you cannot make out what's in front of you you either need glasses or to rethink your approach speed.

The point is that if an object is unlit, you will NOT see it until it is in the beam of your lights.

In the real world all motorists drive with a bit of hope that a black hole hasn't made an appearance in front of them!

bladespin

Op mentions seeing small lights but not being able to make out what they're on until they're very close, nothing about cyclists being unlit.

[Deleted User]

bladespin wrote: »

Op mentions seeing small lights but not being able to make out what they're on until they're very close, nothing about cyclists being unlit.

He is referring to dim lights that are not visible until the driver is only a few metres away from it.

Anyway final comment on a video page!

v638sg7k1a92bx

Does anyone know what the smallest dash cam available is, ideally something like my toll tag.

joujoujou

Ask here --> http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056815237

josip

Genuine question to the bikers out there.
I'm a motorist/cyclist but have never ridden a mo-bike.
Back to the scooter-biker crash video (Uh-oh)
If I was a car driver in the lead biker's position, I usually would have given a glance in my left mirror for undertakers (bikers, scooters, mobikers, Ron Massey, etc)
In a similar incident in the past, I've had to brake and stop when confronted with a rapidly approaching undertaker. This gave the undertaker room to avoid me on the left.
But from cycling I appreciate that once you start a turning maneuver, you can't abort it as immediately as a car due to the change of balance.
But I don't have mirrors on the bike and don't tend to get undertaken

My question for bikers is, if the lead biker had looked in his left mirror and seen the approaching idiot, could he have done anything to avoid closing the door or was he already fully committed?

wonski

6 pages and 3 days of discussion and not a single video posted.

Must be new low for this thread.

irishmover

Just as well I always keep a proper eye on cars indicators in other lanes. Managed to see this indicator straight away. I jammed on but doesn't look like I did. Camera makes it not as bad as it was. Have no idea how the hell they managed to avoid the Yaris.

wonski

irishmover wrote: »

Just as well I always keep a proper eye on cars indicators in other lanes. Managed to see this indicator straight away. I jammed on but doesn't look like I did. Camera makes it not as bad as it was. Have no idea how the hell they managed to avoid the Yaris.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eppBeVI_1g

FYP;)

Private video.

irishmover

wonski wrote: »

FYP;)

Private video.

Working now?

TBi

josip wrote: »

My question for bikers is, if the lead biker had looked in his left mirror and seen the approaching idiot, could he have done anything to avoid closing the door or was he already fully committed?

If he had checked again possibly. All bikers should do a mirror check then a shoulder check before committing to a turn. If lucky he could have stopped before the turn but generally once you commit to a turn it's hard to uncommit without dropping the bike. However even if he had stopped there was such a small gap between him and the curb that the moped driver might have clipped him just going past.

Although as a motorbiker in the centre of a normal lane you do not expect anyone to undertake you. Ever. If there was a bicycle then you would have passed it out and known to double check for it.