The sad thing is that most of us like to be in control of our own destiny - but in driving, we can seldom achieve it 100%. However responsibly we may drive, there will always be the prat for whom everyone else has to make allowance, or indeed repair the damage.
These guys (wot? no girls?) who need to show off must have some other deficiency that they feel they need to compensate for ...
Oz (as was)
|
My best man was a coffee salesman who drove everywhere just about flat out. Despite vigorous tellings off and warnings from ourselves, his girlfriend and many others he still persisted. It culminated in a head on crash outside Crieff on the way to our Hogmanay get together. Luckily they and the other driver were just shaken up and had seatbelt bruises (a tribute to the Astra they were in - it was a mess). The story was that he had been running late (as he always was) and had got "stuck" behind a car doing 25 mph in a very twisty 30 limit on the road to Comrie. After all off 50 seconds "fuming" the road straightened and the National limit sign appeared.
Needless to say he went for the overtake having floored the accelerator and passed the car in front reaching about 60 by the time he got to the next bend on the road. This he didn't make and hit a car head on coming the other way with about 60% overlap. The other car ended up in the hedge, he ended up sideways across the road, with both cars totalled.
We go along that road a few times a year on the way to the west coast, and each time I look at the length of that straight and think I'd be hesitant about overtaking a milk float with flat batteries on my motorbike.
I think he got 7 points and a two week ban (luckily he could take leave but had to plead to get one that short) as the charge of Reckless Driving was reduced to Careless Driving. His attitude was that he completed the overtake, got back on his own side then lost it on the bend going too fast - still shake my head at that. The police apparently wanted to do him for overtaking in the face of oncoming traffic, but the argument seemed to be the straight was so short that he couldn't see any traffic coming!
The reason for the above story is that even an experience like that hasn't changed his driving style. He slowed down for 6 months, not because of the accident, but the 3 points for speeding he already had on his license added to the 7 for this put him on 10 - one flash of the camera and he would be over the 12. That was until the 3 points expired after 6 months, then unbelievably normal service was resumed.
Some people never learn...
|
Very sobering Chris - just hope I never come across him !
Seriously though, it's amazing what chances people will take to save just a few seconds. Your pal has an attitude problem and probably believes it wasn't his fault because he's a perfect driver and if it weren't for those other idiots on the road, he'd never have been involved in an accident would he.
|
|
|
"Many drivers who are fast, aggressive and inconsiderate are quite happy with the way they drive and do not accept that it is unsafe.
They tend to think that their behaviour is more common than it really is, and that it is the result of external pressures rather than their own choice.
These rationalisations create barriers to attitude change, and need to be challenged to allow scope for change"
Source:- Roadcraft.
|
|
|
|
|
Well Volvoman you rightly put it into perspective, his lunacy could have had far more reaching consequences as you say.
Let's face it sitting in my garage is just a lump of painted metal with two tiny blemishes, better than me lying
in a hospital with a different story to tell, or worse.
Why is it that whenever I see a Subaru Imprezza they are nearly always driven in a reckless manner, Are they the ultimate "old boy racer car".
Remember seeing one being driven around a large roundabout, still wonder to this day how that car stuck to the road at the speed he was doing.
PS. was realy annoyed last night as you can see but my wife was asleep in bed and I could not let off steam telling her, not that she would be interested.
|
|
Little difference between the road and rally versions of the Impreza (at least I think thats the case) therefore what is a very high performance car for the money gets abused on the road?
|
>Little difference between the road and rally versions of the >Impreza (at least I think thats the case) therefore what is a very >high performance car for the money gets abused on the road?
That's what Subaru would like the the boy racers to think. But how about for a start (on the rally version): rollover cage, four point belts, fresh tyres chosen by experts for the conditions/surface, brakes/transmission/steering checked/serviced several times a day, mechanics swarming over it whenever they get the chance to keep it just as perfect as it can be in every respect. Most important of all, though: nobody coming the other way fitted as standard.
Chris
|
|
|
|
Yes Mal and at least you got home to see your wife in bed.
I might catch some flak now but I often wonder about the sanity of manufacturers selling super high performance 'racing' cars when these are not compatible with normal driving conditions on public roads. Surely there's always gonna be the temptation to push such a cars to its limits, safe in the knowledge that the computerised driver error recovery module will save the day.
In another thread someone posed the question do drivers of safe cars drive more aggressively because they feel safe ? Quite probably they might and likewise drivers of superfast sports cars might well be tempted to go just that little bit too far/fast in enjoying all that responsive power with tragic consequences. Don't know what the answer to all this is BTW and certainly wouldn't like to see us al reduced to 30mph electric cars.
|
I have to say that I disagree with you there V.
The cars with the highest accident rates are usually the base models, the 1.2 Novas etc., which are chosen by people who are a high insurance risk and then drive accordingly. By the time you have either earned the money to pay a high premium, or accrued enough NCB to be able to afford insurance on an Impreza, the chances are that you've calmed down quite a bit.
That's not to say that all young drivers are nutters, but if insuring all 18 year olds was as profitable as it is with the safe ones, then someone would have come in and brought the premiums down substantially by now.
In any case, I know you can drive like a lunatic in a 950 Fiesta, or put a Nissan Sunny 1.3 estate in a hedge on a 90 degree bend. I'm not saying that people would be any safer if they did, but an accident at 70 mph isn't going to hurt substantially less than one at 110. People who drive dangerously will always kill themselves, the worst an Impreza can do (unless it's stolen anyway) is put a smile on their face while they're doing it, maybe at a higher speed.
|
Anyone can drive badly in any car, so do try not to stereotype the "turbo nutters" in their bewinged Imprezas and Evos - or the very young for that matter. Far more problems are caused by the hordes of unthinking idiots, almost all of whom would consider themselves safe drivers, who seem to consider 40mph an all-purpose speed equally suited to empty open A-roads and school drive-bys.
Going back to the original incident, it was your perception that this was a dangerous overtaking maneouvre. Probably it was - overtaking on a bend is certainly cretinously stupid at any time - but there are other factors.
Foremost among these is the instant accelerative ability of the car in question. If you've never driven a genuine high performance car, and very few people have, it can be difficult to appreciate just how far removed they are from the average in terms of their ability to gain speed quickly, and shed it equally quickly if need be. What would be a suicidally dangerous overtake in a family saloon can be achievable with a perfectly sensible margin of safety in a performance machine.
This is not an excuse for risk taking, but there does need to be an appreciation of differences in perception. I am bemused and occasionally amused by how many people seem to regard being overtaken as a personal affront, despite the fact that they are usually travelling about 20mph below the speed limit in clear conditions, and I have every right to overtake them if I can do so safely. I'm not doing it to "show off", I'm not compromising their safety and I'm not denying their right to exist - I just want to get by.
|
I would class as bad, or at least inconsiderate, driving the incident this morning when the car in front of me on a wide straight 30 mph road with good visibility was doing 25 mph.
He was probably polishing his halo for being a safe driver.
And probably goes past the local primary school at chucking out time at the same speed, still with his eyes fixed on the road straight ahead.
(I didn't overtake as I couldn't have done so without topping 30)
|
Yesterday I found myself travelling at 30mph on a 40 road because I didn't know the limit. I was on a road I'd not travelled before (average width single carriageway) and was on the lookout for speed repeater signs, one of which I just about saw, VERY faded out about 50 yards before the sign telling me I'm about to enter a 30 zone. That sign was nice and bright on a luminous yellow background, what a pity the 40 repeater signs couldn't have been at least marginally visible.
I only say this because I realise the drivers behind were probably cursing me for going too slow and there were no overtaking opportunities at all.
I know there was a point to this post when I first starting typing but right now I can't for the life of me remember what it was!
|
|
|
|
David & Burnout2 - I really wasn't trying to suggest that driving a sportscar = being a nutter or that the drivers of these cars are by definition worse (or better for that matter !) than anyone else. I didn't mean it and I didn't say it.
If you read my post you'll see that I also mentioned drivers of 'safer' cars possibly being seduced into driving more aggressively simply 'cos they feel safe in that car. For example, do drivers of cars with traction control take chances on wet roads that they shouldn't simply because they feel they can ? What about the oncoming driver who sees the manouevre and feels threatened by it and reacts in a way that causes an accident because he didn't know that your car could handle that manoeuvre safely ?
I'm really not trying to generalise here, simply making the point that these are all factors (to a greater or lesser extent) in the carnage which occurs on our roads. If you're walking down the road and want to overtake someone it's unlikley to have any real consequences if you misjudge it but if you do so in a car at 70mph and get it wrong there may well be very serious consequences not only for you but for others. You may feel justified and safe in the manoeurve but you're still putting others at risk. We all need to act responsibly in our cars however old, new, fast, slow, big, small, cheap or expensive. I agree that anyone behind the wheel can be a nutter but it strikes me that producing and marketing cars on aggressive racing type characteristics is likely to attract a certain number of hotheads to try to test their skills to the limit. If they wish to do this on private land I have no objection and wouldn't mind a go too (have already done a rally course at Brands Hatch and very much enjoyed the thrill) but doing so on public roads is a big no no for me and thrills like that need to be reserved for designated areas.
|
Volvoman - no-one could diasgree substantively with your arguments. We're all subject to exactly the same laws and responsibilities, and the fact that the limits and capabilities of our vehicles differ does not change this in the slightest degree.
However, you seem to be implying that an awareness of these limits and capabilities is potentially dangerous - an invitation to unnecessary risk taking. On the contrary, I believe that an awareness of how your car will react to given inputs in a variety of road conditions is crucial to safe driving. As an example, I regularly drive two cars - a 2.0 Honda Accord, and a BMW 328.
The former has no traction control and, without much weight over the front wheels, limited grip off the line in the wet. The BMW has far more grip, is much more powerful and the ASC prevents any noticeable wheelspin. Do I drive these cars differently when looking for an opportunity to join a busy roundabout in the rain? Oh yes! So, yes, I am driving more "aggressively" in the BMW - I would say assertively - but I'm doing so equally safely.
There are plenty of morons suffering from delusions of invulnerability, but that problem predates the introduction of the seatbelt.
|
Hi Burnout - not really implying anything, just asking the question. As I said in my original post, I don't have the answers to any of this but, then, the really interesting questions in life are the ones that have no answers aren't they. I certainly wouldn't argue, for example, that because seat belts might induce some people to take chances and cause accident means we should abolish them. However I remain convinced that in some circumstances certain features (usually performance related) can and do contribute to aggressive, intimidating, or even reckless behaviour that causes accidents. As to whether we are driving within our cars' capabilities and our skills at any given time, that's a matter of debate but I reckon that we should all beware of the effect our actions may have on others who don't appreciate what we are about to do or, indeed, share our belief that it's a safe thing to do in the circumstances.
There are no easy answers to any of this however if all of us just thought again about the real need for that high speed overtaking manoeuvre there would be fewer accidents.
I say again, however that fast car does NOT equal maniac and, who knows, I might decide to buy one before I'm too old :-)
Equally, however, owners of supercars need to be responsible in their use and aware of the relative limitations of the vast majority of other vehicles on the road. When we drive, no matter how good our cars and finely tuned our skills are, we cannot and do not do so in isolation.
|
|
In my own experience drivers of proper sports cars, such as Porsche 911, tend to be safer drivers, at least in relation to how they drive in my presence. They usually don't tail gate or intimidate me, or swoop from lane 3 to a motorway exit. They tend to wait and then move when it is safe to do so. I expect this is because they have nothing to prove and can easily make up lost time by zooming off once I am out of the way.
|
|
|
Well said Volvoman. The number of high performance cars I see in the ditches around here (quite a few Imprezas) at this time of year suggests to me that many of the people driving them are not good enough for the car and are driving recklessly. They can not judge the car's capabilities accurately even though they think they can and are therefore a danger to the rest of us. That's leaving aside the issue of whether the rest of us are good enough to get them out of trouble when they misjudge an overtake when they inevitably do. Maybe there needs to be a compulsory training scheme for high powered cars and a heavy penalty for driving one without passing a test.
Chris
|
Personally I feel the stereotypical middle-aged lady driving at a constant 40mph whatever the speed limit or conditions is a dangerous hazard. Impatience prevails in most of us after being subjected to this for more than a few miles, often culminating in a dangerous overtaking manouver.
And I'm ashamed to say I've based the above description on my own mother...
|
|
|
|
You have framed your argument carefully so I'm confident that you're a fairly intelligent person, but no matter how good the phrasing, it's fundamentally flawed. I agree that a high performance car is probably a safer car in which to perform an overtaking maneouver that in say a 1.3 Sunny would need the car to be thrashed, that much is obvious, but that added margin of safety is diminished entirely if it leads the driver to attempt overtaking or cornering that is way beyond most "ordinary" cars but is, in turn, at the outer limit of the car or driver's ability. When this point is reached, the added accelerating/decelerating/cornering ability then acts against the interests of the road users present because the speeds at which all this happening are greater, making impacts more serious and offers less time to other road users attempting to take evasive action.
|
|
That post should have been in response to Burnout - these threads sometimes do that don't they
|
|
|
|
Overtaking in my opinion can be done safely if the car can cope. I taught myself not to attempt any manouvres in my old e reg Polo unless there was a 10 mile clear straight stretch after 1) the accelerator cable snapped as I was overtaking (luckily I was just pulling back in but it was very embarassing to then have to pull off, engine screaming to an early death) and 2) on another occasion when the thing lost power as I was halfway past a lorry. The 309, although not a performance car of any description, felt far safer and did have that extra 'go' to overtake safely where appropiate. The Impreza driver described comes across as dangerous but I agree with the view that what is dangerous in one car, needn't be in another. I have been terrified by my mother when she has tried manouevres in various underpowered little cars, yet felt safe in a twin turbo Supra that to anyone else would have appeared to be driven by somebody with a death wish.
|
The bigger the difference in speed between the vehicles travelling fastest and the vehicles travelling slowest the more risk there is. So driving too slowly relative the other traffic and driving too quickly are both dangerous no matter what you're driving. Trouble is, while we can choose to drive slower, we can't always choose to drive faster if the vehicle we're driving, or the circumstances, won't allow it. However many turbos you have wedged under your bonnet you're stuffed if a tractor turns right across your path because the driver looked before you had even started your manoeuvre. The tractor could equally be a fiesta with a couple of kids in the back.
Incidentally I witnessed the tractor incident a couple of years back on the A49. Sierra Cosworth 4x4, two middle-aged men, one John Deere gearbox. Almost indistinguishable.
Chris
|
|
Based on that philosophy, overtaking shouldn't be allowed on a two-way, two lane road, ever.
|
|
|
It seems this thread may have been spawned by my query about drivers behaving according to their perceived invulnerability in whatever they are driving - followed by the expected arguments from the 'moderate' and 'immoderate' camps. A closely related hypothesis is that the Degree Of Risk taken depends much more on the driver than on the car - as explained by the owner of first the Polo, then the 309.
I have always refused to accept the suggestion that a given driver is safer in a higher-powered car because he can 'accelerate out of trouble' (neglecting that he can equally accelerate into it). I accept that, being used to a slow car, he may be safer while he gets used to the quicker one; but after that, he will adjust and take the same chances as before (as he perceives them). The rest of the world will just be slightly more vulnerable than before because of his less predictable behaviour [please read She instead of He where appropriate].
Discuss.
|
Andrew T: Given drivers are likely to be safer in a higher-powered car for reasons beyond the car's power "in reserve". Such cars generally also have far superior brakes as well as handling than "lower-specification" cars.
You mentioned, when describing the driver of the faster car, I quote "...The rest of the world will just be slightly more vulnerable than before because of his less predictable behaviour...".
I would suggest that no other driver should be unpredictable, if you are as observant as you should be when driving, you should not be "surprised" by other drivers' actions.
Final point: there is much frustration on the roads, heavy traffic, traffic "calming" (irritation) schemes which add to stress. The chances to overtake after many frustrating miles behind a convoy of traffic are being minimised by road narrowing, pinch points, ever more traffic lights and so on. For many drivers, the chances to overtake reduced in number by traffic "calming", mean that risks will be taken which, in years gone by, perhaps would not have been.
|
James J - the problem is how can I be aware (or, most importantly, certain) of the driving capabilites of the guy behind me, the power and acceleration characteristics of his car, his ability to safely execute the manouevre he's just committed himself to or, indeed, the reaction of
the driver coming in the opposite direction ?
If someone does something that I rightly or wrongly perceive to be dangerous I'm bound to react aren't I ?
|
We have 2 factors that are here being mixed in varying proportions:- Car and Driver.
It is my opinion that
(a) It is a great advantage to have a powerful car and I consider it essential on occasion to develop a degree of "snap acceleration" BUT
(b) The more powerful they are the more demanding they are to drive. It takes many years of responsible fast motoring to master acceleration sense in a car like a 911.
All this of course applies to you, there is of course no way of knowing what chummy is going to do.
(you can make an experienced guess, but that is not knowing)
|
"I would suggest that no other driver should be unpredictable, if you are as observant as you should be when driving, you should not be "surprised" by other drivers' actions."
Politely, this is dreamland, impolitely it's cobblers.
I know a man whose wife was killed and who was seriously injured by the driver of a truck on the oncoming carriage who nodded off. I don't they or even the driver of the truck predicted it.
I have witnessed dozens of drivers reading maps, papers or reaching into the back seat to get something whilst doing motorway speeds. Yes, I observed them and hung back off them, or if I saw it while I was passing made sure I kept my eye on them if they caught up with me later. Doesn't mean they're only idiots I'll encounter on the journey, just the ones I've noticed and do you know what, I bet plenty of people have had cause to nominate me as the biggest fool they've encoutered on the road that day. Thankfully so far I don't believe I've ever caused an accident, but I'm damn sure there isn't a force field around my car.
There is nothing predictable about driving, believing it is places you in the comfort zone, which carries its own risks.
|
There is nothing predictable about driving
NWS, I agree with you there. It is impossible to predict exactly what others are going to do.
James J - did you mean by everyone being predictable that as a good driver you should anticipate any possible course of action?
As an example take waiting at a roundabout. A car is on it coming round to me but signalling left. It would be too easy to predict that it will turn off leaving it safe for me to pull out. I've saved being in a few accidents by not believing everyone's signals and only pulling out if the other driver genuinely is turning off.
James
|
As an example take waiting at a roundabout. A car is on it coming round to me but signalling left. It would be too easy to predict that it will turn off leaving it safe for me to pull out. I've saved being in a few accidents by not believing everyone's signals and only pulling out if the other driver genuinely is turning off.
Totally agree with that point James, and I've said this before. The only sensible way is to treat every other driver as a possible idiot, and not to trust anything they might be doing until you're sure. And all the time ignoring the horns of other drivers behind you who might be less patient/more reckless than you are.
HF
|
James
As you intimate, it's all about having "something in reserve".
But not only power, but braking, cornering, distance, visibility and everything else.
If you keep (say) a five percent margin in hand you can cope with everything but the totally unexpected.
Drive on the limit of any one factor and sooner or later you'll exceed it.
|
Well this isn't necessarily about a lunatic driver (but probably), but it's certainly about an idiot and selfish driver. Thought I'd just put it in because this thread is becoming really emotive and serious.
Tonight, rush hour, driving up the main road. Queue of maybe 7 or 8 cars waiting to turn right into the station car park, traffic coming down heavily the other way so they were probably in for a long wait. Single lane road but room for cars to pass to the left of this queue. Guy in front of me did so, so did I. Till we came to the start of the queue, and guy in front suddenly swerved across in front of car number one in the queue, RH indicator suddenly flashing. The position of his car stopped both my progress and anybody who might have been in the RH side of the lane. Edging out ever further, believing that the oncoming traffic would flash him and he'd have beaten the queue. They didn't ;)
I wouldn't have bothered posting this because it's probably a daily occurrence, but my day was made when, due to horns and stubbornness from other drivers, the guy eventually gave up, swerved back out in front of me, raced up the road and took the next first right - obviously planning on coming back down the road and STILL beating his queue of patient waiters by being able to turn left.
Just, in my opinion, another example of pure selfishness, self-importance, and idiocy.
HF
|
Ahh but what you need to understand HF is that his time is more precious than everyone else's and he's entitled not to be held up by mundane stuff like other traffic. After all, he's got a train to catch and who knows what sort of catastrophe will result if he misses it ?
He's a top driver and he knows it's safe to do these things and that he's in complete control of the situation. He never has accidents, he only sees other people having them and this just goes to proove how superior he is. He never makes mistakes - only other people do that, impeding his oh so important progress when they do so.
In reality you should be proud to have witnessed such superb driving skills and will hopefully have learned enough from our hero 'Top Driver' to emulate this technique.
HF - Just think how wonderful life would be on our roads if all us mere mortals could drive like that !
|
Ahh but what you need to understand HF is that his time is more precious than everyone else's and he's entitled not to be held up by mundane stuff like other traffic. After all, he's got a train to catch and who knows what sort of catastrophe will result if he misses it ?
>>He's a top driver and he knows it's safe to do these things and that he's in complete control of the situation. He never has accidents, he only sees other people having them and this just goes to proove how superior he is. He never makes mistakes - only other people do that, impeding his oh so important progress when they do so.
Someone talking about me?
|
|
The implication here is that whilst perfection is required of slower drivers, errors of judgment are understandable for the rapid.
|
Interesting thread. I believe that those that drive on the limit will do so whatever car they are in.
The limits of acceleration, speed & breaking may change but as soon as they become familiar, the same attitudes will "out".
Someone mentioned the driver of a 911 not tailgating, being patient etc. This has mothing to do with that car and everything to do with the sensible chap/chapess that's driving it. They would be the same in a battered Fiesta 1.1.
Moreover, when you see baseball cap in his Nova or white van man tearing across four lanes of motorway without giving a toss - do you really think that giving him 3.6 litres and muscular stopping ability is going to help?
Nothing beats observation, experience & patience.
|
The only certainty on the road is that ALL other driverss are prats - drive as if they are.
How many times have you had a prat 6" from your rear who then complains because you weren't going fast enough for him to drive at safe distance - the classic window down screaming at you to learn to drive cause they nearly drove into the back of you.
How about waiting for 5 mins at red lights behind a car, light goes green, car pulls of and then slow drastically 'cause the old person driving decides now is a good time to put on his driving gloves. then proceeds to swerve back and forth taking up two lanes on a dual carriageway as he struggles to put said gloves on. Then can't see why drivers are beeping at him.
As to accel out of trouble, long ago I used to overtake lorries the classic slow way, keep to 70 during manouver and hope the driver sees you all the way. After my first near miss I changed to the "fly past as fast as possible". Done this countless times with police behind me and never had a problem - have had 85+ during the overtake but always slowed done asap
|
How many times have you had a prat 6" from your rear who then complains because you weren't going fast enough for him to drive at safe distance - the classic window down screaming at you to learn to drive cause they nearly drove into the back of you.
I got precisely that on the way to work on monday morning. He was 2 foot behind the back bumper, felt he had to give me a mouthful at the lights when he stopped for 'driving to close to him" !!!!!!
I have to grow old - but I don't have to grow up
|
Regarding Steve S "drive on the limit will do so whatever car they are in", and the general consensus about Porsche drivers usually being more considerate...
My own view is that people who have a fast, powerful car will not usually feel the need to flaunt it, as it is obvious to everyone that their car is infinitely more powerful. However, some of those with more mundane (and bottom of the range) cars feel the need to prove something by their driving. This is a hopelessly vague generalisation, but I hope you get the drift.
In my mind it's similar to the boy racers - Dougie, my mechanic, says he spends a considerable portion of his time (and earns considerable revenue) from under 20s trying to make a Saxo look like something it isn't, fitting parts which have cost many times the value of the car. These lads want to impress, but can't afford a real grunt of a car, so this is how they express themselves. Then they go out driving the car at it's limits, often with the inevitable consequences.
You have to remember that cars are engineered to match their maximum performance, so driving at 100 in a 3 litre something is a completely different kettle of fish to doing the same in a Fiesta. I'm not necessarily trying to suggest that a performance car would be any safer, but at least the car is running well within it's tolerances (brakes etc)
|
|
The other factor for the Porsche driver is that he is probably going to feel less pressure to overtake wherever possible due to the performance advantage. I ride a sports bike and drive a car and on the bike I don't feel that I have to take every opportunity to overtake because with the incredible acceleration available I know there will be another passing place along shortly. In the car though I tend to feel that if I don't overtake when I can there might not be another chance for miles. I try not to take unnecessary risks but the added pressure is there (even if it is self-induced).
|
"I'm not necessarily trying to suggest that a performance car would be any safer, but at least the car is running well within it's tolerances (brakes etc)"
Precisely the point that I made earlier.
If neither car nor driver are being pushed to their limits the likelyhood of an accident is minimised.
|
|
Another point that may or may not be relevent is that if I had £60ks worth of Porsche I'd be fairly carefull with it...
|
Smokie,
I think we see things similarly here. The point I was trying to make is hard to prove because these people you accurately describe: -
"under 20s trying to make a Saxo look like something it isn't"
seldom end up being able to afford supercars. If they do, it's hopefully after they have gained more experience and/or grown up.
When you do put them in one - i.e. they borrow or even steal one - the results are all to predictable!
I agree totally that a car with easier power, better handling and good brakes is a safer proposition than one without - in responsible hands.
As an ex-911 driver myself, I still think that the jerk that's thrashing his (XR3i/Nova GTE/Saxo/plumber's van or whatever), all over your tail would behave just as stupidly if he had a better car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
