Car disintegrates-100 Mph wreck against bridge post

[Nerys Ghemor]

We know the serious shit happens at 88 MPH.

This is heavy.

Is there something wrong with gravity in the future?

Fastest I've taken a car up to is 125mph or so. Did that for a few minutes one afternoon on I-40 when I was getting my doors blown off by the semis. Took it up to 125 for a few minutes, but was still getting passed by the trucks and wasn't comfortable. Maintained 105 or 110 after that until I got to the AZ border on that trip. I figure the trucks were doing 135 easy.

Now that you say AZ it makes sense--I was seriously about to ask you where on I-40 you ever managed to get up to THAT speed. You can bet it wouldn't have happened between Memphis and Little Rock. (I STILL remember that stretch even from when I was little...I have never seen a more truck-infested stretch of road in my life.)

What I am impressed with, from that article, is the fact that there weren't a whole bunch of secondary wrecks as a result of this idiot. Half the time, the witnesses and how THEY react are almost as dangerous.



As for the highest speed I've ever been up to, compared to a lot of you I'm apparently quite a wuss...I'd say just a little over 90 is the limit of it (though on some occasions I did that on a pretty sharp curve at midnight when I knew the cops and other cars weren't around to see me do it).

Fastest I ever drove personally was like 155mph. Fastest I was a passenger for was 170 in a Viper.

Driver was a raging lunatic too, so that made the ride all the more exciting.

Was that on a track, or actually out on the road?

 

[DonIago]

I am more and more glad I live in VT. You might be able to get a car up to 100 on our single interstate here, but one way or another you won't maintain it for very long.

 

[JonathonWally]

Fastest I ever drove personally was like 155mph. Fastest I was a passenger for was 170 in a Viper.

Driver was a raging lunatic too, so that made the ride all the more exciting.

Was that on a track, or actually out on the road?

Englishtown

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Awesome.

Glad you were doing that on a track and not the interstate! Bet it was a blast!

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

The fastest i've ever driven was about 120 mph in my 04 Sentra.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I got my '86 Nova up to 110 once.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

I got my '90 New Yorker up to 117 once. She was a good car.

 

[sidious618]

He should've died. Anyone driving at 100 miles an hour on a highway deserves to die.

No. Anyone driving 10 under the speed limit on the highway deserves to die.

 

[broberfett]

The awesomeness of this clip can not be exaggerated.

 

[Trekker4747]

He should've died. Anyone driving at 100 miles an hour on a highway deserves to die.

No. Anyone driving 10 under the speed limit on the highway deserves to die.

Well, that too.

 

[Deckerd]

When you have a bump GET YOUR CAR OFF THE ROAD. DON'T STAND AROUND ARGUING THE TOSS WHILE RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC GETS BOTTLENECKED BOTH WAYS.

Agreed, but first take some pictures (with your cell, or an actual camera if you have one). It's always best to document these things quickly and completely to avoid potentially nasty legal problems.

For that matter, you may wish to consider taking a video of events (if possible) if you get pulled over for any reason, particularly if you are asked to do anything like a field sobriety test which is based on the officer's judgement. Never know when you're going to wish you had.

We don't have that system in the UK. It's just breathalysers, so no judgement on the part of the cops is required.

 

[Hugo Rune]

When you have a bump GET YOUR CAR OFF THE ROAD. DON'T STAND AROUND ARGUING THE TOSS WHILE RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC GETS BOTTLENECKED BOTH WAYS.

Agreed, but first take some pictures (with your cell, or an actual camera if you have one). It's always best to document these things quickly and completely to avoid potentially nasty legal problems.

For that matter, you may wish to consider taking a video of events (if possible) if you get pulled over for any reason, particularly if you are asked to do anything like a field sobriety test which is based on the officer's judgement. Never know when you're going to wish you had.

We don't have that system in the UK. It's just breathalysers, so no judgement on the part of the cops is required.

Nope. Breathalysers are not always available (being about £1500 a piece), so we have Fit Test officers, normally dedicated Traffic Officers trained to perform tests on the road, and in the last instance Section 4 of the Road Traffic Act - Driving a vehicle whilst being unfit to do so. It allows any officer to arrest if the symptoms of drunkness (or, actually any other form of substance abuse which impairs driving ability) are detectable by an officer. So if I think you've been drinking, and your eyes are red, you're slurring, you can't keep on topic etc etc they can be arrested to be brought in and put on a proper breathalyser. Or if the car smells of cannabis and you're driver looks glazed and/or is giggling...

Either way you arrest to ascertain at a station what is going on in their body, be it through breath samples, blood, urine.

Roadside breathalysers are nice tools, but not 100% effective so judgement has to be used by the officer too. Not to all UK drivers, NEVER refuse to take a roadside breath test, 'cos it's an arrestable offence to say "No" when required to do so. The number of times UK drivers having watched too much US cop-show TV have said "I know my rights, you can't do nothing" have ended up in a van on the way to the station when refusing to supply a sample.

Fools.


Hugo - Traffic Cop in training it would appear....

 

[Deckerd]

It sounds like a Fit Test officer merely looks for the symptoms of being under the influence of drink or drugs. Do they make people walk in a straight line or touch their nose etc etc? I would have thought in the absence of a breathalyser, any officer would take someone in who smelled of booze or slurred their speech.

 

[Pingfah]

Roadside breathalysers are nice tools, but not 100% effective so judgement has to be used by the officer too. Not to all UK drivers, NEVER refuse to take a roadside breath test, 'cos it's an arrestable offence to say "No" when required to do so. The number of times UK drivers having watched too much US cop-show TV have said "I know my rights, you can't do nothing" have ended up in a van on the way to the station when refusing to supply a sample.

Fools.


Hugo - Traffic Cop in training it would appear....

When you say not 100% effective, does that mean they could make you appear to have a higher BAC than you actually do?

 

[Hugo Rune]

It sounds like a Fit Test officer merely looks for the symptoms of being under the influence of drink or drugs. Do they make people walk in a straight line or touch their nose etc etc? I would have thought in the absence of a breathalyser, any officer would take someone in who smelled of booze or slurred their speech.

No they have a whole gamut of little tests they can use - its mostly designed to look for the signs of drug use rather than just for alcohol, but cos they are trained their evidence for "grounds for arrest" holds up better in court if it is required.

Pingfah - actually quite the opposite. The number of times that I have used the ESD (Electronic Screening Device - aka, roadside breathalyser) and the result has been BELOW what is expected. Note that it only has three results: No alcohol; Pass (i.e. alcohol in the drivers breath but below the threshold); and Fail (arrest). It does not give micrograms/l or anything. It's a tool used as best evidence to take someone off the street you suspect has alcohol in their system and put them on a proper Evidential Breathalysing Machine at the station. And it regularly seems to give out No Alc/Pass when the comments from the driver or the suspicion of the officer gives other evidence. I tested a guy the other week who admitted to having 3 southern comfort and cokes within the past hour before testing and passed. The equipment is useful but far from foolproof. The again I've arrested people who failed on the ESD and then scored under the threshold at the station, so no further action is taken.


Hugo - starting nights tonight and will be out on the hunt for drink-drivers when there are no other calls coming out

 

[Deckerd]

Hugo Rune, the scourge of lawbreakers.

Do you let them off if they can tell you how many decks were on the Enterprise E?

 

[Hugo Rune]

No, only if they can recite the original production order of season 1 of TOS whilst walking backwards and touching their nose with alternating fingers

 

[Deckerd]

Harsh, but fair.

 

[Pingfah]

Pingfah - actually quite the opposite. The number of times that I have used the ESD (Electronic Screening Device - aka, roadside breathalyser) and the result has been BELOW what is expected. Note that it only has three results: No alcohol; Pass (i.e. alcohol in the drivers breath but below the threshold); and Fail (arrest). It does not give micrograms/l or anything. It's a tool used as best evidence to take someone off the street you suspect has alcohol in their system and put them on a proper Evidential Breathalysing Machine at the station. And it regularly seems to give out No Alc/Pass when the comments from the driver or the suspicion of the officer gives other evidence. I tested a guy the other week who admitted to having 3 southern comfort and cokes within the past hour before testing and passed. The equipment is useful but far from foolproof. The again I've arrested people who failed on the ESD and then scored under the threshold at the station, so no further action is taken.

So the Southern COmfort guy, did you arrest him after he admitted that?

I'm scratching my head as to why anybody would admit that when they have passed a breathalyser test.

 

[trekkiedane]

ImageShack doesn't miniaturize this animation, see my post in the thread bomb thread.