All that means is that he was driving above his ability. It does NOT mean the car could not have been controlled by a good driver. Seriously. The problem is, most people (especially men) think they are much better drivers than they really are. If they ever go out to the track and take some high performance driving classes, they suddenly realize the truth. Or else they crash at high speeds on the street and say "there was no possible way to correct, the car just crashed itself".

 

Nope in this case due to the speed differential the s2000 is most clearly at fault. The biggest problem here is not specifically the speed at which the s2k was traveling but the Speed differential between the two vehicles. There was at 20-30mph difference and that's what caused the accident. Why? Think about it...if both vehicles are going 65MPH and there's a 50ft difference between the two and the SUV makes a lane change no accident. because the s2000 will still be 50ft behind the SUV when it makes the lane change...no speed differential and the S won't be gaining on the SUV

If the speed is 70MPH for the S2000 and 65MPH for the SUV with the same 50ft difference. If the lane change takes 5seconds to complete then the S2000 will have closed 37 feet and still be 13 feet behind the SUV....no accident.

If the S2000 speed is 95 and the SUV is 65MPH with the same 50ft difference the s2000 will have traveled 220 feet in the time it takes the SUV to lane change....and wham we have an accident.

Think about though...I assumed a 50ft difference between the cars...the s2000 could have been 150ft behind the SUV when it started it's lane change and still have had an accident occur(braking by the s2000 might have saved him the farther back that he was).

Speed differential is what played the most factor in this accident and in that respect the s2000 was responsible for that. The problem is a 25-30MPH speed differential, you close so quickly with other cars that it's hard to react. That speed with that level of traffic was reckless any way you spin it.

 

Correction. No arguing with YOUR logic.

 

This statement simply ignores the rule of physics and human reactions in a situation like this. As someone stated above, if the relative speeds of both vehicles were less, the reaction by either driver may have been different. There was probably about a 30mph differential! How can you possibly say the reaction time, and the resulting accident, would have been the same?

 

You guys are ignoring the fact that I said it would have happened, given a similar situation. Granted, the S2000 would not have been near the SUV, and therefore would have avoided the accident. The speed put him in the situation, but did not directly cause the accident. The SUV did not begin his lane change until the S2000 was basically in his blind spot (just of driver's side rear fender). He lurched into the middle lane, not a standard lane change at all.

I understand that the speed is what put him in the situation, but that is fate. Had he been doing 70 and the SUV 65, who is to say that the EXACT same scenario would not have played out 2 miles down the road? That you cannot control. You need to think of it as a scientific experiment. Control all variables except one. One of the variables being the position of the S2000 relative to the SUV. All things equal (position, direction, reaction, etc) except for speed, the same thing would have happened.

With respect to driving beyond his limits, DUH! This car (pretty much NO car) is designed to to basically make an instantaneous lane change at 95. Its not like he planned to do this maneuver like someone would set up a turn on a race track. It was a reaction....in the 1/10's of a second range. Whenever NASCAR or IROC crashes occur, do you say that they were driving beyond their ability? The circumstances generally dictate what happens within a split second, and the driver is just supposed to avoid those circumstances (and this driver did by not changing lanes....he did everything in his ability to avoid an accident, except for speed, which is a variable). He was well within his ability at 95, but when the circumstances dictated, it quickly went outside of his ability. Personally, I do not anticipate being cut off......I am a defensive driver, but only when needed (like avoiding contact with the S2000 after the impact). Using this reasoning is like saying if you get cut off doing 45 in a 35 and you swerved to avoid contact, and lost control (due to the happy rear end of our car), it is your fault, because you were driving beyond your limits, and you were speeding. Everything needs to be taken in the context of the situation.

You can argue all you want, but given the situation (position of the cars, direction, and reaction) the result would have been the same had he been doing 70. Speed is what put him in the situation, but once again, that is fate (luck, etc). I think the guy should definitely get a speeding ticket for excessive speed, but not a citation for causing an accident (plus the bill of totalling his car). The fact is, had the SUV not changed lanes, or had even used a blinker, chances are the driver would have recognized the move earlier, and would not have had to react as he did. The illegal lane change is what caused the accident.

I know it would not have been his fault, because the EXACT same thing happened to me a few years ago (I was doing 50 in a 35 and was cut off by a guy doing 45). The TPD officer gave us both speeding tickets, and cited the other driver with a "moving violation - Illegal Lane Change" that he determined to be the cause of the accident. I got points for the speed, and he got points for the accident, and his insurance had to cover it.

Definitely. Might not have prevented it, but it would have given the driver a much greater chance of correcting after the reaction.



John

 

Wrong. If the S2K was going 70 closing on the 65MPH SUV, the odds go way up that the SUV would have seen him. The odds also go way up that even if the SUV still changed lanes without a signal that the S2000 dealing with a 70MPH speed and only a 5MPH differential speed would not have lost control, in fact a tap of the brakes rather than a swerve would probably have worked.

95MPH is a speed for the track, or maybe an open desert hiway, not for moving through other traffic. You risk your life but far worse you risk innocent people.


Steve

 

 

A 40mph differential is like going 10mph, and someone passes you going 50mph. Unless you're looking for someone going 50mph (and thus are looking a quarter mile behind), you are not necessarily going to realize the danger, esp. if everyone else is going 5-15mph around you. An example of this situation is driving through a really slow school zone when someone passes through at 50mph.

Closing speed for 10mph vs 50mph is the same as 55mph vs 95mph. Einstien became famous based on the theory of relative movement, and it applies here. It's not as important what the speeds were as what the *relative* speeds were, with regards to reactions and correct decision making by the SUV driver.


As far as the right-of-way arguments go, if someone is driving by at 150mph and you switch lanes at 45mph, who is at fault? (keep in mind that the 105mph speed differential means that in order for a collision to occur, the lane switcher has to start while the other car is a considerable distance back, since the closure rate is ~320ft/sec) . If you assume the 150mph is at fault (due to excessive speed), at which point does fault switch to the lane-switcher? What if the speeder was going 250mph? Does the speeder ever get responsibility for the collision due to excessive speed vs "right of way"?

 

Not on this forum. We have a lot of "kids" here, the lack of logic is sometimes unbelievable.



Steve

 

Hit that nail right on the head....