Morbid M5 Story

Blazer

The muppet was doing 170mph on a 1.5 mph runway and lost control over the embankment at the end. The car flew 200 feet through the air and hit a tree and went on fire.
Basically it was his dad's car but that's beside the point.
The fact was that he thought he had the skill to drive at 170mph and control the car..fvckin idiot...
I just pity the other guys killed..idiots like this always get someone else killed as well.

read the below for a very good idea of how long it took him to get to 170mph and how much space he needed to stop
basically it took him over a 1 mile to get to 170mph and since the runway was only 1.5 miles long he was already running out of space to stop..
http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=111545&page=14

JohnCleary

The question is... why teh fcuk do you have trees at the end of a runway?

rabbitinlights

At the end of the runway was a steep drop/embankment and the tree's were over 150ft away at the bottom of the embankment.

Waste of a good car.

Blitzkrieger

I always thought the point was to A)Stop or B)Take off before reaching the end of a runway regardless of what's at the end of it.

Alkers

galwaytt wrote: »

It's fairly irrelevant what car he was driving. He made the news because it was 500hp. If he'd done the same thing in a 100hp car, the same no of people could have been killed, but far less coverage/outcry. We only have to think of those multiple accidents we've had in this country - and donegal springs to mind, unfortunately - where there were modest cars involved.

It's important that the car is not the focus of attention, otherwise, technically, we shouldn't have any cars capable of breaking the speed limit. so even a Smart Car would be outlawed...........this same ratchet situation has occurred in motorcycling, which I do a lot of, and there is no evidence of power restrictions influencing accident statistics - witness, France. Appalling safety record, yet all their machines have been capped at 100bhp for years.
Stupidity, you see, can overcome any engineering obstacle...........:rolleyes:

You'd be hard pressed getting a 100HP car with 5 people in it to travel 200feet airborne...

MrPudding

Simona1986 wrote: »

You'd be hard pressed getting a 100HP car with 5 people in it to travel 200feet airborne...

A tard like that would always find a way to kill himself, 500bhp just made it easier, faster and more spectacular.

MrP

smemon

Too much top gear i reckon for this guy.

I don't believe power is the problem here, nor experience. i think it all comes down to common sense as all driving does.

Simple math would probably have saved this guy (if indeed this was an accident).

He probably thought a runway is a runway and will have more than enough tar to reach top speed and back. Doubt he did the math and his thought was to hit top speed - not even thinking about if he'd have time to stop or if he'd run out of road.

It's just like the clowns who will START overtaking when there are big 'road narrows in 200m' signs ahead, and they end up swerving/braking hard/causing general danger. All down to lack of cop on and awareness, it's not rocket science and you don't need extra tuition to drive a bigger/better car. Same basic principles apply.

unkel

smemon wrote: »

I don't believe power is the problem here, nor experience. i think it all comes down to common sense as all driving does

Well said.

Traumadoc

most of the bad crashes I have treated is young guys pushing small cars to fast for the roads, ie doing 100 kmph on a country lane in a 1 liter polo and someone pulls out from a side road or they cannot take the corner.

In other countries young people drive far more powerful cars than here but have a better safety record eg Australia.

Plug

pburns wrote: »

That's an extreme case. I know of builders buying and insuring their 18yr olds on Scoobies and Evos - but an M3!?!?

Thats what I thought until I saw him flying around in it. The mother ad father own an m5(white) and a big range rover supercharged thing.
He has a bebo profile somewhere with the car. If I find it i'll show you.

Matt Simis

smemon wrote: »

I don't believe power is the problem here, nor experience. i think it all comes down to common sense as all driving does.

WTF is the angle some people are going for here?

Power - a normal (150bhp in the US) road car simply wouldnt have reached those speeds so quickly with that many occupants. Its unlikely he would have felt the need to fully avail of a family saloons top performance in the same manner as a performance car . Power and Performance were clearly the motivation behind the speeding and the car facilitated this. So did his parents.

Experience - Would have shown him the required distance to accelerate and the effect each 10mph has on stopping distance. A few minor and more average "everyday driving" scares would have prompted him to evaluate what he was doing and reduced the need to impress (strangers on forums, friends etc) to the degree he took it.

Parents - Yes they are sad (presumably) their son is dead, but they handed him the keys to the car he died in when he clearly had an inappropriate attitude and lack of experience. Being sad "for the rest of their lives" is a joke of a response to their complete negligence to their child and the effect it had on the other families involved.


Im young, had/have big cars, so Im biased against neither. But car power and experience are paramount.

MarkN

You need a lot more than common sense when you are driving a car with 500bhp at your right foot. An M5 is not a car for any 18 year old unless they are an F1 driver or on the way to being one - end of.

Mr. Presentable

Curiosity, but, how long would they have been airborne? Enough to think about what was happening?

doubledown

Good God.......that's awful.

The poor car!

meathstevie

Little side remark about loaded guns : there's nothing dangerous about a gun loaded or empty either. Same as with a car, the user makes it safe or dangerous.

LuckyStar

Hi,
I am just wondering, how do cars such as an M5 feel like to drive? As in, how is driving, say, a 2.0L car different to a 1L? Is it that the bigger the engine, the faster the car accelerates? My car is 1.2L.

meathstevie

Luckystar. In general that would be the gist of the story, the more powerfull/bigger the engine the faster the car but that rule doesn't always apply. Some cars are built for comfort and could be a 3000cc while a 1.8 performance car leaves the 3 litre standing but provides far less comfort. Some 1.6's are rather nippy and fun to drive while still being very comfortable while some other 2 litres are sluggish pigs to drive.

Take for example the average American bouncy castle on wheels. Big 3000cc V6 under the bonnet and a European 1.8 turbo makes it look like a wheezing terminal ox that handles like a crooked shopping trolley. ( Pardon me the little exageration )

Victor_M

meathstevie wrote: »

Luckystar. In general that would be the gist of the story, the more powerfull/bigger the engine the faster the car but that rule doesn't always apply. Some cars are built for comfort and could be a 3000cc while a 1.8 performance car leaves the 3 litre standing but provides far less comfort. Some 1.6's are rather nippy and fun to drive while still being very comfortable while some other 2 litres are sluggish pigs to drive.

Take for example the average American bouncy castle on wheels. Big 3000cc V6 under the bonnet and a European 1.8 turbo makes it look like a wheezing terminal ox that handles like a crooked shopping trolley. ( Pardon me the little exageration )

LOL Meathie Stevie you are not exaggerating at all, I'm in california at the moment and have been narrowly avoiding death for the last month in a V6 Pontic Grand Prix, My mothers Starlet is quicker and handles infinitely better. No traction control or ABS on a car with a V6, I mean WTF, it's irresponsible, second only to the Opel Vectra it's the worst car I've ever driven.

Luckystar, I thought/think you are/were taking the Mick with that question.

Holsten

doubledown wrote: »

Good God.......that's awful.

The poor car!

Aye, what a waste of a M5....

Seth Brundle

LuckyStar wrote: »

Hi,
I am just wondering, how do cars such as an M5 feel like to drive? As in, how is driving, say, a 2.0L car different to a 1L? Is it that the bigger the engine, the faster the car accelerates? My car is 1.2L.

A 2L car when compared to a 1.1L should has more reserve power which enables quicker acceleration.
The likes of the current M5 is a beast and would require advanced driving skills in order to be able to use it. It has plenty of driver aids and the power can be reduced using the iDrive but in the right hands they are fun to drive.

TheBazman

We had an M5 hired in the UK for a weekend and I drove it for a few hours. It is an absolute beast, however saying that it can be driven sensibly. You just need to respect what it is, as it is fairly effortless to see 120-140 mph.

E92

Don't BMW give you some sort training course when you buy a new M5?

ninty9er

Plug wrote: »

I know a chap who was 17 when his parents bought him a brand new m3 and also he is aloud to drive the parents m5.

Dad's friend has a simple system. You drive the Almera or MINI for 2 years without major incident, you get to drive the 740. Both eligible candidates have passed that test and one more is about to. All 3 are under 24.

unkel

Matt Simis wrote: »

WTF is the angle some people are going for here?

I hear you, Matt. But perhaps there's a cultural / social aspect in what way people are taught to drive. Here in Ireland it is to get an eye test and pay €15 and that's your license sorted (and a wee theory test on top of that these days). Where I got my license, you have to prove that you are a competent driver before you get your license. You're not allowed to drive if you do not have a license. I can assure you that I would have been safe driving a BMW M5 when I was 18 with my full license (not that I did drive anything like that back then)

Young drivers are getting a hard time in this country because of lack of training most drivers get and especially because some of their young male peers act the eejit by playing chicken or driving into trees or ditches at silly speeds for the circumstances / their experience

LuckyStar

Victor_M wrote: »

Luckystar, I thought/think you are/were taking the Mick with that question.

Well you thought wrong didn't you. :rolleyes:

Meathstevie and kbannon, thanks for explaining it to me.