Wow! Speed does kill.

MrPudding · 10-06-2005 4:10pm #1

Inappropriate speed of course.

MrP

quarryman · 10-06-2005 4:14pm

what's the background behind this? why is it on display?

IANOC · 10-06-2005 4:16pm

wtf

madrab · 10-06-2005 4:18pm

thats one hungry car

RicardoSmith · 10-06-2005 4:18pm

Informative post :rolleyes:

MrPudding · 10-06-2005 4:35pm

RicardoSmith wrote:

Informative post :rolleyes:

God. I am sorry if it didn't come up to your exacting standards for thread quality. I will try harder next time. Again apologies.

MrP

MrPudding · 10-06-2005 4:38pm

quarryman wrote:

what's the background behind this? why is it on display?

Sorry, forgot this bit

> La police a tout nettoyé (elle n'aurait pas dû) et a tout remonté pour
montrer ce qui peut arriver.
The police cleaned up most of it although they should not have! and then put it back together to show to the public what can happen.
> Le conducteur de la moto Honda circulait à une très grande vitesse et
> il n'a pas vu la Golf. La police suédoise a estimé la vitesse de la moto à
environ 250 km/h lorsqu'elle a percuté la voiture. La voiture avait deux
passagers et le motard a été retrouvé à l'intérieur de la voiture.
> La vw s'est retournée sous la force de l'impact et est retombée (un
> peu plus de 300 m) du lieu de l'impact.
> Les trois personnes (deux dans la voiture et le motard) ont été tués
> sur le coup.
The rider of the Honda was going at high speeed and did not see the VW Golf. The swedish police estimate that the spped of the bike was around 250 km/h when it colided with the car. the car had 2 passenger and the biker was found inside the car. The VW was turned over due to the impact and fell back a little more than 300 meters from the point of impact.
The 3 people (2 in the car and the biker) were killed instantly.

quarryman · 10-06-2005 4:43pm

I'm no mechanic but i reckon the Golf's a write-off.

MrPudding · 10-06-2005 4:45pm

quarryman wrote:

I'm no mechanic but i reckon the Golf's a write-off.

XT_Dweezil · 10-06-2005 4:57pm

There is a Swedish Bikeshow every year in Gothenburg and this car was put up as a sign to bikers to be careful.

The family of the people travelling in the Golf actually requested it.

saobh_ie · 10-06-2005 5:07pm

It could be equally sucessful as part of a campaign to promote safer driving in cagers, ie. don't pull out in front of bikes because they can actually hurt you.

AMurphy · 10-06-2005 7:13pm

So we'ed have to assume from this VW "small but tough" ad, you are only safe if the bike is in the car and the driver outside.

Con9903 · 10-06-2005 9:52pm

Looks a bit staged

green-blood · 10-06-2005 10:45pm

bull-cough-brown stuff

bike moves car 300 yards.... eh no, especially not with that amount of absorbtion damage.... total lie...

look if you are going to drive about with no passanger door you are encouraging nosey bikers in for a peek :-)

RicardoSmith · 10-06-2005 11:20pm

MrPudding wrote:

God. I am sorry if it didn't come up to your exacting standards for thread quality. I will try harder next time. Again apologies.

MrP

Just don't let it happen again...

MrPudding · 11-06-2005 1:15pm

300 meters, not yards. Not much difference but still. This is the bit I have trouble believing myself. I am not sure what a bike weighs, I would presume 100 or maybe up to 200 KG. Travelling at 250 KPH that represents a lot of kinetic energy. I am not sure if it is enough to move the car 300 meters. It does mention that the car was flipped on its roof. I reckon this would make it easier to move as there would be much less friction with the road.

MrP

BrianD3 · 11-06-2005 2:13pm

IMO there's no way the bike pushed the car 300 metres down the road and I also doubt that the bike was doing 250 km/h on impact. I would say it was doing significantly less. A bike may be relatively light but it's very solid as it's basically an engine on wheels plus the front is narrow (so any impact is very concentrated) The result is that bikes have a tendency to slice deep into cars rather than push them down the road. This is especially true for side impacts as all cars are weak when hit in the doors.

If the impact speed was higher still I'd expect the bike to slice right through the car i.e go in one side and out the other :eek: I have seen some horrendous crashes where bikes collided with cars. Car drivers think they're safe in collisions with bikes but this is not true in many cases. Sometimes the biker is thrown clear and survives while the car occupants are crushed inside the car by the bike.

Victor · 11-06-2005 2:14pm

Could have been on a slope.

Capt'n Midnight · 11-06-2005 2:45pm

Wet roads, also static friction coefficient is a lot higher than dynamic. It's like the old thing with ABS. The bike could weigh 1/3 of the car and the energy is 1/2m v SQUARED. so yeah there is enough energy to do this.

Or since the bike hit the front of the car it may have turned it too so that the wheels were pointed in part in the direction of travel.

Bikes cutting cars that jumped lights almost in half is far too common. Unfortunatley all the bikers can do is take into account that if they get hit by a car then it's most likely the car in the wrong but they will come off worse.

Con9903 · 11-06-2005 5:07pm

was it a head on collision? Also the MK3 golfs are big ****ing tanks, it would be no easy task to move one of those

danniemcq · 11-06-2005 5:11pm

quarryman wrote:

I'm no mechanic but i reckon the Golf's a write-off.

i'm sure west coast custums could sort it out!

"you've got to pimp my ride"

Con9903 · 11-06-2005 5:16pm

LOL I could imagine it now....*puts on voice*..."Ok we got a 19 year old guy named Hans, its clear from his car thats he's interested in Motorcycles, lets try and incorporate that into his car........"

Victor · 11-06-2005 5:32pm

Con9903 wrote:

was it a head on collision?

I'm guessing teh bike T-boned the car. :rolleyes:

Con9903 · 11-06-2005 6:41pm

ah ha :rolleyes:

Son_of_Belial · 11-06-2005 6:46pm

Well, if anyone is thinking of speeding any time in the near future either under or above the influence of alchohol, they should consult the kangaroo in the video which can be found here or the lady who can also be found here (WARNING: Not for the squeamish!!)
I think that gets the point across pretty forcefully.

Direct links edited for the sake of the children, its an icky site - Mike.

fletch · 11-06-2005 6:47pm

Scary!

lomb · 12-06-2005 9:25am

MrPudding wrote:

God. I am sorry if it didn't come up to your exacting standards for thread quality. I will try harder next time. Again apologies.

MrP

hmmmm note too self dont offend MrP

Alfasudcrazy · 12-06-2005 12:49pm

Son_of_Belial wrote:

Well, if anyone is thinking of speeding any time in the near future either under or above the influence of alchohol, they should consult the kangaroo in the video which can be found here or the lady who can also be found here (WARNING: Not for the squeamish!!)
I think that gets the point across pretty forcefully.

Direct links edited for the sake of the children, its an icky site - Mike.

I think that Orgish site is unsuitable for average viewing - especially children - some of the stuff on there can be quite shocking :rolleyes:

lomb · 12-06-2005 1:12pm

Alfasudcrazy wrote:

I think that Orgish site is unsuitable for average viewing - especially children - some of the stuff on there can be quite shocking :rolleyes:

Agreed, no links to ogrish are suitable for the VAST majority of people.

Our man in Havana · 12-06-2005 1:35pm

Linking to ogrish means instant banning at my place of work.

MrPudding · 12-06-2005 2:40pm

Bond-007 wrote:

Linking to ogrish means instant banning at my place of work.

It's quite nasty alright. I would be very surprised if it wasn't banned in my place of work. That said I wouldn't be willing to try it to check.

Probably not a good site to link to on an open board.

MrP

jackal · 14-06-2005 4:06pm

Apparently what is displayed in the picture is not the actual car and bike involved in the crash, as they both would have been cut to bits by the emergency services. Its a recreation, hence why it doesent look quite right.

Lord Nikon · 14-06-2005 5:32pm

How did they know the bike was going that fast? Did they view the broken speedo on the bike after the crash or something, or plain guesswork?

RicardoSmith · 15-06-2005 8:48am

jackal wrote:

Apparently what is displayed in the picture is not the actual car and bike involved in the crash, as they both would have been cut to bits by the emergency services. Its a recreation, hence why it doesent look quite right.

How do you know that? I originally thought it fake, used for an safety ad campaign or something, or even a fine art sculpture turning the biker<car on its head (I'm just back from an Art college degree show). So thats why I want to know more about it.

prospect · 15-06-2005 8:53am

saobh_ie wrote:

It could be equally sucessful as part of a campaign to promote safer driving in cagers, ie. don't pull out in front of bikes because they can actually hurt you.

WTF!!! :mad:
Some of you fuppin bikers really have opinions of yourselves.
I think it was quite obvious that the biker doing 250KMH was completely 100% in the wrong.

Cop the fup on grasshole :mad:

RicardoSmith · 15-06-2005 8:59am

prospect wrote:

WTF!!! :mad:
Some of you fuppin bikers really have opinions of yourselves.
I think it was quite obvious that the biker doing 250KMH was completely 100% in the wrong.

Cop the fup on grasshole :mad:

Why is that obvious? The car could simply have pulled out in front of a biker from a side road. You just can't tell from a static picture.

Blitzkrieger · 15-06-2005 9:31am

The whole thing sounds fishy. I'd believe some of the biker might have been found inside the car, but you'd think most of him would have been caught on the roof. I also don't believe a bike hitting a Golf with the hand brake off in the middle of and oil slick would push the car 300 meters. Flipping it onto the roof and pushing the whole thing along just would not happen.

You might as well say it was hit by 42 cambodian fighting midjets.

saobh_ie · 15-06-2005 6:51pm

Hey, Did you see me defending anybody doing 250km/h on public roads? I just made an observation that that picture would also be good for a safety campaign for car drivers as well as motorcyclists.

Open a few eyes perhaps, perhaps tell people that was the result of a lower speed collision, something everyday perhaps like 140km/h, and make the point that bikes can enter cars at lower speeds too.

Or even tell people that getting hit by a bike going 50km/h broad side, 400kg @ 12m/s with a point load area of 500 x 600mm hitting your car door is going to put your door half way through the drivers or passengers seat really badly hurting you.

I don't pretend to be an expert or faultless (although I know a couple of those types of riders, seriously) on the road but I can honestly say I've never put anybody’s in imminent mortal danger. However in a recent accident somebody pulled out in front of me (putting themselves in danger in this case) and knew nothing about it until they heard a great big bang as I glanced off them after a massive evasive effort. A few weeks previously a car had come through a red light in excess of seventy km/h and nearly took out myself and the car in the lane beside me as we were pulling away from the lights (I went after that guy and educated him but didn’t report him to the Gardaí which I should of in hindsight.)

DubTony · 15-06-2005 7:48pm

saobh_ie wrote:

Hey, Did you see me defending anybody doing 250km/h on public roads? I just made an observation that that picture would also be good for a safety campaign for car drivers as well as motorcyclists.

How did that British campaign go years ago?
Was it ... "Think once, think twice ... THINK BIKE !!!!!"

Now we should think once - think twice - think bike ... oh, and then watch out for the fúcking arsehole lunatic who'll cover that 200 metre gap before you're foot's all the way off the clutch.

MrPudding · 15-06-2005 8:09pm

A mate of mine crashed into a bridge, after badly losing control, up north years ago. They were able to approximate his speed at various points during the "incident." They measured depths of rubber on the road from the skids and the amount of deformation in the metal of the bridge. He was obviously "involved" at the time but reckons they were pretty spot on.

Amazing what they can do.

MrP

Hotblack Desiato · 15-06-2005 11:52pm

prospect wrote:

WTF!!! :mad:
Some of you fuppin bikers really have opinions of yourselves.

Try using the roads sometime while not cocooned in a metal cage, trust me you will see things from a new perspective.

By far the most common car / bike accident is caused by the car breaking a light or pulling out from a minor road/parking spot right into the path of a biker.

Some of the time it's "sorry mate I didn't see you" (i.e. didn't really look carefully enough) other times they see the bike coming, decide they can chance it, but misjudge the gap and pull out - bang.

This happens all the time and a motorcyclist always has to be alert for morons pulling out. Car drivers take chances when they see a bike coming they certainly wouldn't take if it was a 40 tonne truck bearing down on them. I think that was the OP's point.

I think it was quite obvious that the biker doing 250KMH was completely 100% in the wrong.

If true, yes, but it's obviously a reconstruction. Who knows the facts of the original incident - if, in fact, there was one?

Cop the fup on grasshole :mad:

Language Timothy. Why do you seem to have a problem accepting that points of view different to yours exist and are equally valid?

Balfa · 16-06-2005 3:40pm

Why do you all have to question the artcile? What do the police have to gain by lying and saying the bike was doing 250+ or that they travelled 300m? Why can't you just accept it at face value?

btw, a 260kg bike+rider doing over 250km/h will have enough momentum (20800kgm/s) whereby if you suddenly add 1300kg of car and two occupants to it, the whole package will be doing about 48km/h after the collision.

Now you put a car on its roof at 48km/h and see how far it goes. And like someone said, it could have been on a slope, or in the wet, or anything.

Blitzkrieger and the sentiment of lots of people on this thread wrote:

I also don't believe a bike hitting a Golf with the hand brake off in the middle of and oil slick would push the car 300 meters. Flipping it onto the roof and pushing the whole thing along just would not happen.

Well physics suggests otherwise.

prospect · 16-06-2005 3:50pm

Some of you people are so closed minded I laugh.

I can guarntee you that if the bikers of this counrty, stayed in lane, didn't squeeze and weave between cars, didn't use hard shoulders, didn't use bus lanes, didn't drive on the white line, didn't ignore 'No Overtaking' signs, did use their indicators etc, the number of accidents involving bikes would drop dramatically.

If you guys wanna drive around like lunatics, accept the consequences.

drdre · 16-06-2005 3:52pm

guys at the end of the day speed does kill:o

"like i really give a ****" he he he!!

BrianD3 · 16-06-2005 4:20pm

Balfa wrote:

btw, a 260kg bike+rider doing over 250km/h will have enough momentum (20800kgm/s) whereby if you suddenly add 1300kg of car and two occupants to it, the whole package will be doing about 48km/h after the collision.

Only if it's an elastic collision which it clearly isn't.

Balfa · 16-06-2005 5:37pm

BrianD3 wrote:

Only if it's an elastic collision which it clearly isn't.

no it's not an elastic collision, because the two become stuck together, but that doesn't change the law of conservation of momentum.

saobh_ie · 16-06-2005 6:14pm

Some of you people are so closed minded I laugh.

I can guarntee you that if the drivers of this counrty, stayed in lane, didn't squeeze and weave between cars, didn't use hard shoulders, didn't use bus lanes, didn't drive on the white line, didn't ignore 'No Overtaking' signs, did use their indicators etc, the number of accidents involving bikes and cars would drop dramatically.

If you guys wanna drive around like lunatics, accept the consequences.

Every group of drivers has a bad element, a dangerous element and a homicidal element. But as it stands with bikes making up a ridiculously small percentage of road traffic (2% or somethin ?!?!?!) theres more bad car drivers than there are motorcyclists.

Hotblack Desiato · 17-06-2005 12:50am

prospect wrote:

Some of you people are so closed minded I laugh.

First of all, what exactly do you mean by 'you people'?
Cars and bikes aren't mutually exclusive, most bikers drive a car too, I drive a car regularly, I just don't commute by car.

What's closed minded about saying that the biggest safety issue as regards motorcyclists is the failure of car drivers to look out for them and to yield when the bike has the right of way? This is fact and the insurance claims data of the motorcycle insurers bears this out. 75% of car-bike accidents are squarely the fault of the car driver according to the insurers - most commonly failing to yield to a bike or changing lane into the path of a bike.

Perhaps the insurers are just making all this up, or they're closed minded too, eh?

I can guarntee you that if the bikers of this counrty, stayed in lane, didn't squeeze and weave between cars, didn't use hard shoulders, didn't use bus lanes, didn't drive on the white line, didn't ignore 'No Overtaking' signs, did use their indicators etc, the number of accidents involving bikes would drop dramatically.

That's a pretty big generalisation there pilgrim.

I can equally say that car drivers don't give a damn about the safety of anyone outside their metal cage, are more interested in tuning their stereo, picking their nose or lighting a fag than driving safely, have no idea what to do on a roundabout or when a road has more than one lane, think indicators and mirrors are for ornamental purposes, and have the observational powers of Stevie Wonder without his guide dog. But that would be generalising :rolleyes:

If you guys wanna drive around like lunatics, accept the consequences.

Ah, the blame-shift. This is where things get nasty. "Sure if he hadn't been on a bike he would have been grand when I hit him." If there were no motorcyclists, there would be no motorcycle accidents... By kidding yourself that all motorcyclists are lunatics and if anything happens to them it's their fault, you don't need to try to be a better driver, to observe for bikes and not just cars, to give them room when passing, etc. Much easier that way isn't it?

Blitzkrieger · 17-06-2005 6:38am

Balfa wrote:

Well physics suggests otherwise.

You get on a bike, I'll borrow my friends Golf and we'll see who's right?

You're over-simplifying the physics. The door of the Golf might be a soft point, but the main mass of the bike is going to hit the floor pan. I've had friends in similar accidents (at lower speed, thank god) and every time the front wheel has stayed on the ground while they were thrown over the car and the bike slammed into it's side. Add in side impact absortion by the Golf and crumpling of the bike - it's just not going to hit the car high enough and hard enough to roll it over. You could make the bike out of cast iron and it still wouldn't do it.

lomb · 17-06-2005 7:22am

ninja900 wrote:

That's a pretty big generalisation there pilgrim.

not really, i have never seen a biker, except a scooterist and even they weave in slow traffic obey the law and not weave in and out of traffic, overtake ridiculously etc, and i doubt anyone else has either.
u guys have a deathwish and i wouldnt spill my milk if i creamed u thru no fault of my own.
i also someday hope to get a cruiser bike and i most definately wont b overtaking people who already are doing the legal limit, weave into or out of traffic etc. mayb i dont want to die yet?

Kermitt · 17-06-2005 8:08am

jackal wrote:

Apparently what is displayed in the picture is not the actual car and bike involved in the crash, as they both would have been cut to bits by the emergency services. Its a recreation, hence why it doesent look quite right.

i think you're right jackal. the drivers airbag has deployed.. (see 3rd pic) and this would not happen with a side impact or rollover as the sensors are in behind the front bumper. looks a bit like a reconstruction loosely based on fact.

Wow! Speed does kill.

Comments