shitty way to lose a young life,

[Mr Revhead]

Imo this crash screams "inexperienced driver having no idea how to control a car" or "idiot trying to do snakeys then having no idea how to control a car"

Why are motorcyclists restricted to 250cc on certain license levels?

[sergei]

Imo this crash screams "inexperienced driver having no idea how to control a car" or "idiot trying to do snakeys then having no idea how to control a car"

Why are motorcyclists restricted to 250cc on certain license levels?

Power to weight of motorbike far surpasses of a car, even regular 250cc bike beats many performance cars there on acceleration, and that if you make a mistake you are much more likely to play superman and then die.
Bikes are inherently unstable, and if motorbike would be invented today it would never become road legal. No one sane would allow such machine to be on the road. They are road legal only due to historical reasons.

[Mr Revhead]

Yes, but that doesn't answer my question

[79rolla]

[quote="pc"
High powered cars certainly get to higher speeds quicker... but how many crashes are directly related to how quickly someone got to the speed they started to loose control?
Where are the statistics to indicate that the power of a car has any real bearing on whether an accident would have happened or not?
[/quote]

in my corolla if i hit something to make me loose traction, a few stones ect it will grab traction strait after, if it was more powerful it could loose traction alot easier if not careful, making control harder to regain.. meaning a inexperienced driver would crash easier, i also remember a while ago a kid wrapped himself around a power pole in a town, driving a subaru, the sooner you get up to speed more chance of a crash, foot to floor geting up to speed in a powerful car can be dangerous.. and lets remember its not as fun to foot it and fly up the road in the middle of town if its slow.

if you think power restrictions wold do nothing to the road toll your living in a dream world with unicorns and fairy's..

[Elmo]

Lets remember the power restrictions of the bikes was set MANY years ago when 250cc wasnt all that fast, yet was still a biggish bike. That to needs to be revised.

[l1ttle_d3vil]

High powered cars certainly get to higher speeds quicker... but how many crashes are directly related to how quickly someone got to the speed they started to loose control?

The issue isn't how fast the car can get to the speed of losing control - this varies with every accident - the issue is how easily it can lose traction. This is directly related to how "powerful" a car is, not how fast said car is travelling at the time of crashing.

I've lost traction in a dead straight line with no more than 50% throttle in my 800kg/240hp Corolla, and it could easily have ended badly. I can hardly break traction in my 1.8L Camry when I try. In the wet.

[pc]

Lets also remember that bikes have two wheels, are much higher power to weight ratio, are completely unforgiving if you hit anything at any speed, and are very different when you loose grip at the driving wheel mid corner. apples and watermelons

1270KG/140hp = 1000KG/82KW about the same as an AE92/AE82 FXGT

800kg/240hp? how is that relevant? a high powered car is 1/2 that amount of power.

So lets recap my dream world with unicorns and fairy's with headline fatalities in recent memory.
- toddler killed by mid powered rear drive (coroners report not out yet)
- 3 killed in dangerously modified car, excessive speed, and alcohol, mid powered car.
- 6 kids backed over in driveways and killed last year.

Anyone got more to add to the list?

[Mr Revhead]

Lets also remember that bikes have two wheels, are much higher power to weight ratio, are completely unforgiving if you hit anything at any speed, and are very different when you loose grip at the driving wheel mid corner.

So? the basis of the rule is higher power = more potential for disaster. Which is the applicable part to this discussion.

Do you have statistics for every death in front of you? With detailed info on the power of the car concerned? I don't and I'm willing to bet quite a lot you don't either.

Answer this: How can excessive power NOT be more dangerous in inexperienced hands?

Not every 17 year old will die in a high power car. And not everyone can handle even a basic car. But the chances of a 17 year old having a bigger crash in a higher power car are much higher.
Yes there is some prevention in the insurance costs etc. But now that things like old WRXs etc are so cheap. Thats not so much of of an issue anymore.

I still am not sure restrictions are the answer. But I fal to see a logical argument against such a measure if it was ever introduced.

I think more effort in driver training is what is needed. But I'm begining to sound lke a broken record on that one...

[metal_sean_head]

It doesn't help that the AA defensive driving course to reduce your time on restricted license is a complete joke.

Didn't teach me anything i didn't already know.

[Mr Revhead]

Mine was a cruise around town and the country....

[MR2SIK]

I learnt that space savers smoke up good

[DRFTIN]

Yeah, pretty hard to wheelspin for 100m with 60hp, even in the wet.

is that still what everyone thinks the guy in the s15 did?

[Mr Revhead]

It appears so.
Do you have info to the contrary?

[metal_sean_head]

Mine was a cruise around town and the country....

Yeah i made a poster for the "homework" with 2 coloured pencils. I went to 4x 1 hour classes. And then a drive of just the full license course.

[79rolla]

defensive driving is a joke, just pointed out basic safe driving, nothing about controlling a car, my brother did a loss of control course and it actuly stuck with him, im lucky enough to have had alot of time in paddocks but would still like to do proper driver training.. it needs to be mandatory, and its a shame the group that were doing it in Auckland got closed... needed to expand imo.. but what can you expect in nz?

[pc]

Lets also remember that bikes have two wheels, are much higher power to weight ratio, are completely unforgiving if you hit anything at any speed, and are very different when you loose grip at the driving wheel mid corner.

So? the basis of the rule is higher power = more potential for disaster. Which is the applicable part to this discussion.

Do you have statistics for every death in front of you? With detailed info on the power of the car concerned? I don't and I'm willing to bet quite a lot you don't either.

Answer this: How can excessive power NOT be more dangerous in inexperienced hands?

Not every 17 year old will die in a high power car. And not everyone can handle even a basic car. But the chances of a 17 year old having a bigger crash in a higher power car are much higher.
Yes there is some prevention in the insurance costs etc. But now that things like old WRXs etc are so cheap. Thats not so much of of an issue anymore.

I still am not sure restrictions are the answer. But I fal to see a logical argument against such a measure if it was ever introduced.

I think more effort in driver training is what is needed. But I'm begining to sound lke a broken record on that one...

I have no access to any useful statistics, but that is my point. Neither, it seems, does anyone else, I have asked if anyone does but no useful replies. There is no real evidence presented to support either view.

acceleration <> big crash
velocity (and the object hit) = big crash

You hate the nanny state but are convinced that a power limit rule would help death statistics, and "see no logical argument against such a measure?"
I see many logical arguments against having such a rule because it will negatively affect many people.
There is no logical argument for it because there is no data presented that would indicate it would have any positive affect.

I would be in agreement for a power limit rule for new drivers if there was some *evidence* that there is a significant over representation in death/injury statistics.

[B1NZ]

I would be in agreement for a power limit rule for new drivers if there was some *evidence* that there is a significant over representation in death/injury statistics.

Just from recent memory there seems that most of the fatal crashes that have made the news involve mid to high powered cars with younth involved, The rate of young drivers killed when WRX's crash is over represented IMO and insurance companies acknowledge this with higher premiums for younger drivers and/or no cover at all.

Everytime I hear of a fatal crash involving a young person I cringe and expect the car involved to be something along the lines of WRX/EVO/Vtec Honda/GTX/Silvia/Skyline etc etc... which it usually is unfortunately

[Dell'Orto]

Yeah, pretty hard to wheelspin for 100m with 60hp, even in the wet.

is that still what everyone thinks the guy in the s15 did?

Nope, just stating a fact.

[Mr Revhead]

You hate the nanny state but are convinced that a power limit rule would help death statistics, and "see no logical argument against such a measure?"
I see many logical arguments against having such a rule because it will negatively affect many people.
There is no logical argument for it because there is no data presented that would indicate it would have any positive affect.

Whoa slow down on your assumptions!
No, I cannot see a logical arguement against it. Just like I can't see a logical arguement against limiting all cars to 100kmh. But damned if I want that to happen!

It's really simple.... Power = greater chance of a crash. Correct or not?
Thats what it comes down too.

[sergei]

There are problems with hardlimiting speed to max speed limit:
1) 100kph in 50 zone
2) botched up overtake (ie morons speeding up while you overtake)
3) even at 50 it is possible to kill someone or yourself

50kph is already lethal speed.

NZ needs driver training, at least teaching people how to handle cars on the wet.
Psychological evaluation of the driver, before giving driver licence is a must. How many with bipolar, maniac depression, schizo and people with low IQ are driving in NZ? I have seen an elderly that was barely walking and fully blown alzeimers filling up his car at gas station, he definitely should not drive, as he is not physically fit to drive..

Speeding is not a big problem in NZ. Used to be, not any more.
There are a lot of people who drive drunk. Even if they are just below limit they are already very dangerous, and that is compounded with their incompetence overall.

On every single workplace I have beet at, there was beer-o-clock. They would drink 3-4 bottles of beer in course of couple of hours and drive home. This is culture here in NZ. It should be illegal to have beer-o-clock unless person either takes public transport or has designated driver.

Then comes in incompetence. I have done a lot of driving in NZ.
I learnt the following:
1) Aucklanders are the most arrogant and most oblivious drivers that don't even know basic rules and drive like sheep.
2) Kiwis in general cannot drive competently: they have no idea about corners, corner approach, overtaking or courtesy.
3) Immigrants (from Asian countries in particular) that never driven before in their life pose serious risk because they got their licence without enough training.

Boyracers crashing is a media hype. What about under aged drunken idiot who crashed on the bridge and dropped her un-seatbelted mates in the river? How many stories you hear like that? Too many.

Although boyracers pose some danger, generally middle aged males are worst (especially when it comes to overtaking).

Everybody thinks that they are good drivers. This mentality kills.