quote:

Originally posted by mcrimm:
The FWD outfits did fine - including mine.

If my Tundra was front wheel drive I would hardly ever need 4WD.

quote:

Originally posted by Shifferbrains:

RAV4’s are front drive.

My wife's is 4WD (or is it AWD?).

quote:

Originally posted by Doc H.:
But I had 4-wheel drive!

LOL! So many people think that AWD/4WD makes them immune from the effects of ice and snow.

"That is a Sequoia."

I'm better identifying vehicles that are upright.

Here's what speed and reckless inexperience will get you:









By the way, the article of course got the facts wrong. This accident did not happen at 630am. Hooper ave at that time, even on the weekend, would be packed at that time. They just didn't notice the Porsche lodged in the building until that time. The accident happened much earlier, like 2am.

The car had a dash cam. These idiots were traveling at about 140mph on Hooper when the driver lost control. That road is posted a 50mph zone.

Porsche goes airborne into second story: 2 men dead in New Jersey crash

JAI-LEEN JAMES, JOSHUA CHUNG AND GUSTAVO MARTÍNEZ CONTRERAS | ASBURY PARK PRESS | 5:05 pm EST November 11, 2019

TOMS RIVER, N.J. – Police released the identities of the two men who died after the red Porsche in which they were riding went airborne into the second story of a real estate office in New Jersey early Sunday.

Braden DeMartin, 22, and Daniel Foley, 23, both of Toms River, were deceased when emergency units arrived on scene, police said.

Police said the sports car driven by DeMartin was speeding when the vehicle lost control, hit the median and went airborne into the second story of EXIT Realty Elite. The accident happened around 6:30 a.m. Sunday, police said.

There are a lot of pics at the link...

https://www.app.com/story/news...building/2554431001/

quote:

Originally posted by Scuba Steve Sig:

quote:

Originally posted by kz1000:
Assuming he was cited for Failure to Control.

When I defend these cases in court I always wonder what an officer's mentality is for issuing a ticket like this in a one-vehicle, one-occupant accident. What purpose would giving someone a ticket for this serve? People make mistakes, with the high center of gravity, it probably wasn't that severe of an accident. The guy got his car totaled and is out his deductible. His insurance rates will increase. He's going to be sore. He had a bad day. His insurance will pay for the guardrail, in some states the accident report with property damage against the State will ding his driving record (in Iowa it does if the officer said you caused monetary damage to someone's lawn). Unless per se negligence needs to be established with a ticket or the officer observed it, I just don't see the point and it seems pretty chickensh#t. I'm all ears though.

Because their failure to control their vehicle screwed up traffic for the other thousand drivers who managed to keep their vehicles under control at that interchange? Or their failure to control their vehicle required emergency responders to show up? How many additional accidents happened because of the traffic caused by this person's failure?

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:
Though I am almost positive that is a Sequoia as RAV4s are not RWD nor would they have a 6 lug spare. Also only the new RAV4s rear hatch open up. The older ones open to the side.

I know that interchange very well.
When dry and in a properly suited vehicle it can be done at a decent rate of speed.

The interchange on the opposite side of the highway going from N 71 to W275 can be done at a much much higher rate of speed.

Yeah, that is a Sequoia.
Northern Kentucky, near Cincinnati?

quote:

Originally posted by Scuba Steve Sig:

quote:

Originally posted by kz1000:
Assuming he was cited for Failure to Control.

When I defend these cases in court I always wonder what an officer's mentality is for issuing a ticket like this in a one-vehicle, one-occupant accident. What purpose would giving someone a ticket for this serve? People make mistakes, with the high center of gravity, it probably wasn't that severe of an accident. The guy got his car totaled and is out his deductible. His insurance rates will increase. He's going to be sore. He had a bad day. His insurance will pay for the guardrail, in some states the accident report with property damage against the State will ding his driving record (in Iowa it does if the officer said you caused monetary damage to someone's lawn). Unless per se negligence needs to be established with a ticket or the officer observed it, I just don't see the point and it seems pretty chickensh#t. I'm all ears though.

Ohio (where this collision occurred) is (or at least was I have not lived there in 14 years and don’t keep up on everything) an at fault collision state. Being anytime there is a collision someone must be cited so it is really not the officer making the decision in instances where they did not actually observe the collision. It would be the State Legislature making that decision.

I lived in Ohio and was cited for an accident the officer did not see. I was just a young kid and the officer did not even bother to ask me or the person that was in the car with me what happened. Just listened to the old guy driving his scooter on the wrong side of the road.
Thankfully I had a camera with me and took lots of pictures. Of course this was before the digital age so I had to get them developed then plead my case in traffic court. To which I won and the citation was dismissed.
State Farm did their own investigation and agreed I was not at fault so when scooter man tried to file a claim they told him to pound sand.
He then opted to sue me so again had to go to court and I brought the pictures and my attorney provided by State Farm along with the original citation being tossed. I won that lawsuit too.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Shifferbrains:

RAV4’s are front drive.

My wife's is 4WD (or is it AWD?).

Technically, it is a FWD biased AWD system.
Though in years past Toyota has designated 4wd badges to the Highlander and RAV4s which I never understood.
They now get AWD designation and badging but I am not sure when they made the switch even though the system is the same.

Failure to control citation:
1- As an underlying charge to another violation, i.e, OMVI or Driving under Suspension.
2- If the crash results in injury or damage to any property other than the vehicle owners. If he damaged the guard rail in this crash, it has an owner (State of Ohio) who can go after the vehicle owners insurance.
3- Driving like an idiot in very bad weather.
If there was no damage to any other property, and everything else was kosher, I generally did not cite.
Even though departmental policy required a citation whenever a violation of traffic law caused the crash.

All wheel drive does not equal all wheel stop.

quote:

Originally posted by Scuba Steve Sig:

quote:

Originally posted by kz1000:
Assuming he was cited for Failure to Control.

When I defend these cases in court I always wonder what an officer's mentality is for issuing a ticket like this in a one-vehicle, one-occupant accident. What purpose would giving someone a ticket for this serve? People make mistakes, with the high center of gravity, it probably wasn't that severe of an accident. The guy got his car totaled and is out his deductible. His insurance rates will increase. He's going to be sore. He had a bad day. His insurance will pay for the guardrail, in some states the accident report with property damage against the State will ding his driving record (in Iowa it does if the officer said you caused monetary damage to someone's lawn). Unless per se negligence needs to be established with a ticket or the officer observed it, I just don't see the point and it seems pretty chickensh#t. I'm all ears though.

People should NOT be encouraged to drive recklessly. Any driver who ends up wheels up in a single car accident was driving recklessly. That does NOT have to be "witnessed" because the application of Newtonian Physics will prove that. Were I a trooper on a scene like this I would write the driver for speed exceeding conditions, reckless driving, AND failure to maintain control.

Of course I am just a bit prejudiced against SUV and pickup drivers, been bullied onto the shoulder or median much too often by drivers who think size means Right of Way.

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:

quote:

Originally posted by Doc H.:
But I had 4-wheel drive!

LOL! So many people think that AWD/4WD makes them immune from the effects of ice and snow.

And gravity. So many 4WD SUVs in the ditch almost every weekend coming down the west side of Snoqualmie Pass, during ski season.

quote:

Originally posted by Scooter123:

People should NOT be encouraged to drive recklessly. Any driver who ends up wheels up in a single car accident was driving recklessly. That does NOT have to be "witnessed" because the application of Newtonian Physics will prove that. Were I a trooper on a scene like this I would write the driver for speed exceeding conditions, reckless driving, AND failure to maintain control.

Not in KY you wouldn’t. Can’t write someone for a traffic violation for something the officer did not see.
Only two you can write for are Leaving the scene of an Accident and DUI but those are both misdemeanors and not violations and are also arrestable.

quote:

Originally posted by Scooter123:

Any driver who ends up wheels up in a single car accident was driving recklessly.

Really? Always? Every time? Without exception?

I had a blow-out on a narrow bridge, driving at the posted speed limit under conditions in which it was safe to do so (daylight, good visibility, dry road).

Slid into the guard rail, bounced back, and overturned.

Driving recklessly? I don't think so.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Scooter123:

Any driver who ends up wheels up in a single car accident was driving recklessly.

Really? Always? Every time? Without exception?

Yeah, that's just a ridiculous assumption to make.

Just as well grease it while it's upside down.

quote:

Originally posted by FishOn:

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:

quote:

Originally posted by Doc H.:
But I had 4-wheel drive!

LOL! So many people think that AWD/4WD makes them immune from the effects of ice and snow.

And gravity. So many 4WD SUVs in the ditch almost every weekend coming down the west side of Snoqualmie Pass, during ski season.

In Idaho we used to say that 4WD will just get you stuck in a worse place than 2WD.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Shifferbrains:

RAV4’s are front drive.

My wife's is 4WD (or is it AWD?).

The engine is transverse and most of the power transmits through the front axles. They are a front drive setup with a power transfer unit that will provide some power to the rear tires.

quote:

Originally posted by Shifferbrains:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Shifferbrains:

RAV4’s are front drive.

My wife's is 4WD (or is it AWD?).

The engine is transverse and most of the power transmits through the front axles. They are a front drive setup with a power transfer unit that will provide some power to the rear tires.

Is that true for the hybrid models?

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Shifferbrains:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Shifferbrains:

RAV4’s are front drive.

My wife's is 4WD (or is it AWD?).

The engine is transverse and most of the power transmits through the front axles. They are a front drive setup with a power transfer unit that will provide some power to the rear tires.

Is that true for the hybrid models?

Yes sir.