shitty way to lose a young life,

[Adamal]

Bullshit that roads don't make a difference. Most of the roads on NZ have corrigations all over the place, uneven surfaces, crap patchwork to fix them up and off camber.

Can you find a single case of a road causing a crash?

I don't know, can you find the part of my statements where I was saying that the roads were DIRECTLY responsible rather than saying they were a contributing factor?

[DXROLLA]

Again i agree with the above statement, i beleive the roads are shit some are quite good mind you. But it all still comes back to the mentality of some people, when driving no matter where you always have to be aware of whats around you and whats happening including the road, ive hit a few potholes when driving around also come across a small land slip up the port hills coming around a corner and that never made me go flying of the side of the hill smashing into trees and killing all my friends.

[Mr Revhead]

Say it like that and you could argue that a gentle curve on a 50 kmh stretch was a contributing factor in a person 3 times the limit crashing while doing 180kmh....

[Bling]

Bullshit that roads don't make a difference. Most of the roads on NZ have corrigations all over the place, uneven surfaces, crap patchwork to fix them up and off camber.

Can you find a single case of a road causing a crash?

I don't know, can you find the part of my statements where I was saying that the roads were DIRECTLY responsible rather than saying they were a contributing factor?

So in the case above, is the corner eroded, pot holed, off camber or uneven? Is the piece of road that bad that you can't drive it or was it speed that caused the accident. Making a claim that most roads have corrigations all over the place is a big call so I hope you have proof to back it up? I see a lot more fine roads than ones with issues.

[Adamal]

Say it like that and you could argue that a gentle curve on a 50 kmh stretch was a contributing factor in a person 3 times the limit crashing while doing 180kmh....

No, thats adding factors to support your arguement In this case, alcohol, which wasn't mentioned in the previous situation, was it?

But how many situations could have been avoided if the roads were in better condition?

[Mr Revhead]

But how many situations could have been avoided if the roads were in better condition?

I would bet zero or very close to zero.

[Bling]

But how many situations could have been avoided if the roads were in better condition?

About a million less situations than could have been avoided if people weren't driving like muppets. Fact.

[sergei]

Say it like that and you could argue that a gentle curve on a 50 kmh stretch was a contributing factor in a person 3 times the limit crashing while doing 180kmh....

No, thats adding factors to support your arguement In this case, alcohol, which wasn't mentioned in the previous situation, was it?

But how many situations could have been avoided if the roads were in better condition?

Even roads are bad, if the driver is aware and drives to the condition then there is no problem with potholes, camber, gravel etc.
With NZ population density you cannot have perfect roads every where.


I come from pothole kingdom btw, and I know what bad roads really are. People still drive.

Do people in Finland state that their roads are crap, because it snows every year? Do they blame snow for their crashes?

BTW spending even more money on roading is big mistake in my opinion. Instead they should extend rail network, so people don't have to use roads.

[Mr Revhead]

NZ can't afford a decent commuter rail system

[Adamal]

Bullshit that roads don't make a difference. Most of the roads on NZ have corrigations all over the place, uneven surfaces, crap patchwork to fix them up and off camber.

Can you find a single case of a road causing a crash?

I don't know, can you find the part of my statements where I was saying that the roads were DIRECTLY responsible rather than saying they were a contributing factor?

Is the piece of road that bad that you can't drive it or was it speed that caused the accident.

By adding 'or' into your question gives the impression that it was caused by only one factor and not a combination of both.

Go back and reread what I've said. I didn't say the roads were what caused the crash. I said they MIGHT have made it if the roads were in better condition.

The lady blatently blamed the roads for the accident

She might be lying out her ass, but probably not. Especially if its Northland. Country roads are even worse.
Hell, there are even some roads up North which are still gravel.

I'm not saying that the roads are the sole factor that they crashed. If you do take the roads at the posted speeds, they should have been fine if they weren't doing anything else stupid.
However, if people ARE doing excessive speeds, then a better road surface is more likely to aid them in getting round the corner than crashing.

[tsoob]

don't lower the car and run normal sidewall?
elaborate how that makes things safer?????

lower center of gravity = better road holding capabilitys.
sidewall of tyre - I dont see how this effects the road holding capabilitys.

I have driven hundreds of different cars over the years, and find that when a car has those things done to it it holds the road better than a standard car.

1) lowering car incorrectly (superlow springs, or even cut springs) will result in shorter suspension travel and would put shocks in non-working range. If non-captive springs are used consequences can be very dire.
2) Low side wall + pot hole = burst tyre and/or damaged/split wheel
3) Tyre side wall is part of suspension, messing with that and that makes the car handle worse.
4) Centre of gravity does not help if you are hitting the bump stop frequently.
5) Lowering the car incorrectly (by employing mentioned above methods) increases bump steer which is much more dangerous than body roll.
6) Body roll is not inherently bad, having too stiff suspension can be a very dangerous thing.

all these things you speak of here are based on illegal modifications.


IF you do things properly all these things you mention are irrelevant.

I do not advocate illegal mods sergi,

If you lower a car correctly (particularlly the common popular cars) you will improve the handling.

Having less sidewall will not make a car handle worse, it may however make it feel worse (bumps etc)

[79rolla]

fore inexperienced drivers low profile tiers can be dangerous because the hold the road relly well but have little warning befour loosing traction, where as a higher sidewall will flex alot more and you have more warning when approaching its limits, as with stiffer suspension, there is less give so if something goes wrong there is little warning. and on nz roads stiffer suspension cannot absorb bumps aswell..

my mates first sti was written off after less then a week, fully loaded and hit water and hydroplaned then rolled a few times, luckily everyone was alright but a contributing factor was the fact it was boned, so there was no give when something went wrong..

the road was also a factor because it was grooved so water could pool, but we cannot have perfect roads in this country because its all on volcanic ash that is still moving and settling and soft as well, down in the south island roads are generally better because the flats are made of shingle mostly

[1I1]

Anyone that drives the stretch of road between Awahuri and Feilding will know the corner i am going to refer to. There is a bend when going into Feilding that has a dip on the inside of the bend and can upset the cars balance. When going along in my Lancer (stock super soft springs/shocks with body roll, lots of tyre side wall) the car hits it and swooshes around - not really a nice feeling at times but as I always expect it I've never had an issue going through. Come through in the Corolla (low profile tyres, low stiff suspension) and the car remains compossed and is actually takes the dip nicer than the Lancer....

I would go as far as saying I'm as comfortable doing 120k through the bend in the Corolla as doing 100k in the Lancer (Hypothetically speaking ofcourse)

[tsoob]

Anyone that drives the stretch of road between Awahuri and Feilding will know the corner i am going to refer to. There is a bend when going into Feilding that has a dip on the inside of the bend and can upset the cars balance. When going along in my Lancer (stock super soft springs/shocks with body roll, lots of tyre side wall) the car hits it and swooshes around - not really a nice feeling at times but as I always expect it I've never had an issue going through. Come through in the Corolla (low profile tyres, low stiff suspension) and the car remains compossed and is actually takes the dip nicer than the Lancer....

I would go as far as saying I'm as comfortable doing 120k through the bend in the Corolla as doing 100k in the Lancer (Hypothetically speaking ofcourse)

this is what im getting at. if you modify it correctly and stick to the conditions then it WILL handle better.

we are getting a fair bit o/t here.

still think that the laws need to make an example of this kid.

In the states this has 5-10 years written all over it

[Bling]

I'm not saying that the roads are the sole factor that they crashed. If you do take the roads at the posted speeds, they should have been fine if they weren't doing anything else stupid.
However, if people ARE doing excessive speeds, then a better road surface is more likely to aid them in getting round the corner than crashing.

So are you saying roads should be engineered and continuously repaired to cope with drivers that drive excessively fast / illegally?

If the road surface is better then people will just go faster, so it won't solve anything imo.

How fast should we be building them for, 200km/h sound enough? Will people still complain about the road condition if they hit the corner at 2130km/h in a car / conditions that aren't suitable? Yes they will. None of this matters though, as mentioned many times, if you drive to the rules you should be fine. If you manage to end up off the road while driving within the law / current conditions, then yes the road MAY have something to do with it.

[Adamal]

So are you saying roads should be engineered and continuously repaired to cope with drivers that drive excessively fast / illegally?

Stopped reading here. When you stop taking things out of context (eg making out that my argument is that roads should be made fast enough to drive excessivly fast / illegally) THEN we'll talk

[Bling]

However, if people ARE doing excessive speeds, then a better road surface is more likely to aid them in getting round the corner than crashing.

Ok explain what you mean by this then if you aren't saying roads should be suitable for faster speeds to aid people getting around the corners if they are going too fast.

[Mr Revhead]

or drunk
Or being idiots

[Adamal]

However, if people ARE doing excessive speeds, then a better road surface is more likely to aid them in getting round the corner than crashing.

Ok explain what you mean by this then if you aren't saying roads should be suitable for faster speeds to aid people getting around the corners if they are going too fast.

Ahh right, sorry. Missed that part.

What I'm getting at is if the roads were better, there would be less margin for error. Doesn't matter how many tickets you dish out, or how many drink driving ads or campaigns you put up, people are going to do stupid things on the roads.

Then, as mentioned above, there are roads that are dangerous in the wet. Who is to say that someone who is driving to the conditions may not have an accident due to this?

Let me put it to you like this: Is having better roads making them any less safe?

[Mr Revhead]

BUT HOW CAN THE ROADS BE BETTER IF THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THEM?
edit: accidental caps!