Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / January 2008
It's not MY fault
|
|
Thread rating:  |
John B. - 23 Jan 2008 18:58 GMT Just gotta love how some people justify their car accidents. Overheard from a woman at a local diner today at lunch.
"My car is TOTALED! There was nothing I could do! She made a dead stop right in front of me! I didn't see her until I hit her!"
Then, OBVIOUSLY you were driving too fast for the road and/or conditions if that was the case. Like for whatever reason, she shouldn't have stopped so that you couldn't have hit her. Huh?!?!? That's like saying "The car shouldn't have been in the intersection going through their green light, because then I wouldn't have hit them while I was blowing through the red!" DUH!!!!
John B.
Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) - 24 Jan 2008 00:14 GMT >Just gotta love how some people justify their car accidents. Overheard from >a woman at a local diner today at lunch. > >"My car is TOTALED! There was nothing I could do! She made a dead stop >right in front of me! I didn't see her until I hit her!" The woman she hit must have been driving a stealth bus. =))
Too bad it didn't kill the stupid bitch.
>Then, OBVIOUSLY you were driving too fast for the road and/or conditions if >that was the case. Like for whatever reason, she shouldn't have stopped so [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >John B. --
Half drunk is a waste of money.
Alexander Rogge - 24 Jan 2008 15:40 GMT > Just gotta love how some people justify their car accidents. Overheard from > a woman at a local diner today at lunch. > > "My car is TOTALED! There was nothing I could do! She made a dead stop > right in front of me! I didn't see her until I hit her!"
> Then, OBVIOUSLY you were driving too fast for the road and/or conditions if > that was the case. Like for whatever reason, she shouldn't have stopped so > that you couldn't have hit her. That's not always correct. If a stupid driver stops suddenly for no legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the road.
I saw such a Sloth yesterday. It was in the middle lane and holding up traffic. The Sloth suddenly locked-up the brakes, skidded into another lane, and stopped in front of a truck. Drivers were swerving around on both sides, and the Sloth was almost rammed by several drivers.
Another problem is the LLBing Sloths that swerve in front of the right-lane traffic and then try to stop, and also the Sloths that pull out from intersecting streets and stop in front of the approaching traffic.
John B. - 24 Jan 2008 16:06 GMT > > Just gotta love how some people justify their car accidents. Overheard from > > a woman at a local diner today at lunch. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the > road. I thought the driver that rear-ends another vehicle is always at fault. No matter the circumstances. If someone just makes a dead stop in the middle of the road for no reason - yes, they're a frickin' moron. But if you hit them, you were driving too close to be able to react and do the same. And hopefully, the cars behind YOU are paying attention!
Never assume ANYTHING while driving and always expect the unexpected. That's why I've never rear-ended anyone. Even if they WERE stopped in the middle of the road.
John B.
Brent P - 24 Jan 2008 17:21 GMT >> > Just gotta love how some people justify their car accidents. Overheard > from [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > That's why I've never rear-ended anyone. Even if they WERE stopped in the > middle of the road. Guess you haven't had someone change lanes 3 feet in front of you and then NAIL the brakes for a full decel stop.
Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) - 25 Jan 2008 01:17 GMT >Guess you haven't had someone change lanes 3 feet in front of you and >then NAIL the brakes for a full decel stop. If someone does that, I will get an "at fault" ticket for that.
But I'm also not going to bother to hit the brakes, and, with luck, that's the last time the idiot will pull such a maneuver.
--
Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
Scott in SoCal - 24 Jan 2008 16:12 GMT >> Just gotta love how some people justify their car accidents. Overheard from >> a woman at a local diner today at lunch. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the >road. No, it's the fault of the idiot that was following too closely.
A defensive driver ALWAYS leaves himself an out. The car in front of you might stop suddenly for any number of reasons - a dog (or a kid) might run out into the road. A boulder might fall down from the adjacent slope (this actually happened on PCH a couple of weeks ago). If you rear-end someone, the only time it is NOT your fault is if the guy cuts in front of you and then immediately slams on his brakes, like the swoop and squat insurance scam.
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
N8N - 24 Jan 2008 16:19 GMT > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:40:30 +0000, Alexander Rogge > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > guy cuts in front of you and then immediately slams on his brakes, > like the swoop and squat insurance scam. I've had that happen to me more than a few times. I don't think that all of them are scammers, they're just people not looking far enough ahead. "Let me get around this guy driving really slow... vroooooom.... OH S**T THERE'S ANOTHER CAR IN FRONT OF HIM!" I haven't hit any of these morons (yet, knock on wood) but they do try pretty hard sometimes.
I also love the idiots that will see you sitting at the stop line at a green light because there is nowhere for you to go, pass you in the other lane, cut in front of you within the intersection, and then stop in the middle of the box. Or worse yet, do this to you while your heading for the last open car-space on the other side of the intersection, so YOU look like the idiot hanging out in the middle of the intersection...
nate
Harry K - 24 Jan 2008 16:29 GMT > > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:40:30 +0000, Alexander Rogge > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > other lane, cut in front of you within the intersection, and then stop > in the middle of the box. <snip>
I had one pull that on me in Lewiston, was behind me coming up to the stop light, moved into the right hand lane, light turns green, he enters a very short merge lane (2 lane into one) across the intersection then cut into the only lane ahead of me. No problem except 1/2 block later he stopped all traffic so he could make a left turn into a parking lot.
Harry K
Motorhead Lawyer - 24 Jan 2008 22:10 GMT > If you rear-end someone, the only time it is NOT your fault is if the > guy cuts in front of you and then immediately slams on his brakes, > like the swoop and squat insurance scam. Oh, hell ... and here I thought it was just a mechanical failure when a brake line broke and I wasn't able to effectively use two-wheel braking on a wet surface.
Back to self-flagellation, I guess. -- C.R.
Scott in SoCal - 25 Jan 2008 02:47 GMT >> If you rear-end someone, the only time it is NOT your fault is if the >> guy cuts in front of you and then immediately slams on his brakes, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >a brake line broke and I wasn't able to effectively use two-wheel >braking on a wet surface. Give me a break. I have owned over a dozen cars, including at least a half-dozen Illinois Beaters that were so rusted out they had NO FLOORPANS. Several of them had more than 100,000 miles on the odometer. Some of them burned a quart of oil per tank of gas, knocked like a coffe can full of marbles because they had 11:1 compression and were running on regular unleaded gas, and I've even had one engine that completely siezed up because I blew a radiator hose but kept right on driving it (hoping to reach my destination before it died). However, I have NEVER had my brakes fail. EVER.
Brakes are one of the most reliable systems on a car. The chances of even a partial failure are infinitesimally small. And, if they do, then I still say it's still your fault because you obviously didn't maintain your vehicle very well. :)
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 25 Jan 2008 06:06 GMT > Give me a break. I have owned over a dozen cars, including at least a > half-dozen Illinois Beaters that were so rusted out they had NO [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > right on driving it (hoping to reach my destination before it died). > However, I have NEVER had my brakes fail. EVER. I've had at least three brake failures I can think of off the top of my head. The first was when a hose broke on my '75. I was still learning things rapidly back then.... thankfully it was where I had to go through standing water so I had allowed a lot of extra braking distance (the drums get wet and they lose braking ability) In fact I thought that it was the drums being wet. When it didn't go away I started looking for a problem.
Another was when the brake line on my 73 that goes from the front to the rear developed a pin hole leak on the side that is totally blind and hidden from inspection. The pedal went to the floor as I was putting it in another parking place where I could work on it.
The third was maybe a year and half ago. Another hidden pin hole leak, this time in a line running along the axle. Again the side I couldn't see in an inspection. I carry brake fluid in the car and drove home slowly.
Then there was one this past summer, a rear wheel cylinder went on me... although that doesn't really count because there was really no loss of braking capacity, just a puddle of brake fluid in the garage under the tire....
> Brakes are one of the most reliable systems on a car. The chances of > even a partial failure are infinitesimally small. And, if they do, > then I still say it's still your fault because you obviously didn't > maintain your vehicle very well. :) You must have been rather lucky, that's all I can say. I had to REPLACE all the brake lines to the rear brakes on the torqueless wonder car because they rusted through. I've replaced a lot of brake lines in my life and I'm not that old and I don't work on cars for a living.
Scott in SoCal - 25 Jan 2008 15:24 GMT >I've had at least three brake failures I can think of off the top of my >head. You truly have a Black Cloud hanging over your head.
>> Brakes are one of the most reliable systems on a car. The chances of >> even a partial failure are infinitesimally small. And, if they do, >> then I still say it's still your fault because you obviously didn't >> maintain your vehicle very well. :) > >You must have been rather lucky, that's all I can say. Yeah, me, everyone in my family, and everyone that I know have never had this particular misfortune, so we must all be extraordinarily lucky.
>I had to REPLACE >all the brake lines to the rear brakes on the torqueless wonder car >because they rusted through. Thanks for reinforcing my point. Yes, had you not performed this essential maintenance on your car there might well have been a brake failure. However, because you performed the necessary repairs, no failure actually occurred.
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 25 Jan 2008 16:14 GMT >>I've had at least three brake failures I can think of off the top of my >>head.
> You truly have a Black Cloud hanging over your head. No, my parents' neighbor has had at least two brake failures that I know of. I helped him fix one of them...
Hell, even the girl I worked with, who was driving a ten year old mercury that was her grandfather's car, had a line go on her.
>>> Brakes are one of the most reliable systems on a car. The chances of >>> even a partial failure are infinitesimally small. And, if they do, >>> then I still say it's still your fault because you obviously didn't >>> maintain your vehicle very well. :)
>>You must have been rather lucky, that's all I can say.
> Yeah, me, everyone in my family, and everyone that I know have never > had this particular misfortune, so we must all be extraordinarily > lucky. If you all are driving beaters like described. Do you even keep a car for a decade scott? People I know keep cars to the bitter end.
>>I had to REPLACE >>all the brake lines to the rear brakes on the torqueless wonder car >>because they rusted through.
> Thanks for reinforcing my point. Yes, had you not performed this > essential maintenance on your car there might well have been a brake > failure. However, because you performed the necessary repairs, no > failure actually occurred. The failure did occur. It just occured in the driveway. And it wasn't my car at the time.
N8N - 25 Jan 2008 16:54 GMT On Jan 25, 11:14 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> In article <fcvjp35atckct3k00r0jhepvjh27k4k...@4ax.com>, Scott in SoCal wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > The failure did occur. It just occured in the driveway. And it wasn't my > car at the time. I can say that I have had a brake failure as well; was driving my then- girlfriend's car. It seems to be far more common in cars that have spent their lives in the Rust Belt. The car was a 15 year old Monte Carlo that had spent most of its life in the Cleveland area. It appeared to be sound, but one of the main brake lines broke as I was backing out of a steep driveway.
The car was disposed of later that year as the frame was also found to be rusty.
nate
DanKMTB@gmail.com - 25 Jan 2008 14:05 GMT > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:10:13 -0800 (PST), Motorhead Lawyer > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - > DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com" I bought an 85 Firebird in 95. The brakes failed on the way home. The car had been sitting, and the brakes worked during the "systems check" before I drove the car home. The fuel lines were rusted, and apparently the "stress" of checking them in the sellers driveway was all that it took - first time I tried to apply them on the road the pedal went to the floor with no result.
Interestingly enough, I drove the car like that for 3 months without incident until my dad discovered the lack of brakes. Being older, wiser and more financially secure now I wouldn't' do it again, but safe driving practices allowed me to avoid an accident with downshifting being my only brake (parking brake was toast as well). I wouldn't have taken it into Boston traffic, but it did OK for the suburbs.
Harry K - 25 Jan 2008 16:05 GMT > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:10:13 -0800 (PST), Motorhead Lawyer > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - > DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com" I've had one failure since 1951 but it was expected and I drove some real beaters also - ones that would have had the reg pulled by a cop if I had been stopped. The one failure was on a new (to me) old F250 with a leaking master cylinder. I was aware of it and was on the way to Lewiston to have my brother fix it (head mechanic at a ford dealer). Last hint of brakes was just before I reached the top the Lewiston, Id hill on US 95. That is about 2,000 ft, 6 percent grade for 6 miles. Lots of truck escape routes and I was eyeballing each one. Got to his house and he told me to follow him via back streets to the shop. I swear he hit every stop sign in both Clarkston and Lewiston before getting there.
So, Yes, I had a failure but No it wasn't a surprise.
Harry K
Motorhead Lawyer - 26 Jan 2008 01:48 GMT > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:10:13 -0800 (PST), Motorhead Lawyer > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > right on driving it (hoping to reach my destination before it died). > However, I have NEVER had my brakes fail. EVER. Lucky you.
> Brakes are one of the most reliable systems on a car. The chances of > even a partial failure are infinitesimally small. And, if they do, > then I still say it's still your fault because you obviously didn't > maintain your vehicle very well. :) Apparently, moving to the Left Coast has softened your brain so that you do not remember the white winter roads of Cleveland, Ohio, that do nasty things to metal brake lines. Lucky you.
FWIW, had the surface not been wet at the time, I would have managed a stop with only the two remaining brakes. I would show you the math but - you are beneath my dignity. Lucky you. -- C.R. Krieger
Scott in SoCal - 26 Jan 2008 05:08 GMT >> However, I have NEVER had my brakes fail. EVER. > >Lucky you. Yeah, to hear all of you guys talk, I must be the luckiest man alive.
Maybe I'll run out and buy a lottery ticket...
>Apparently, moving to the Left Coast has softened your brain so that >you do not remember the white winter roads of Cleveland, Ohio, that do >nasty things to metal brake lines. Lucky you. You know all those beaters I told you about? I owned them all when I lived in Illinois. Why do you think the floorpans and rear quarters rusted out?
>but - you are beneath my dignity. Whatever.
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 26 Jan 2008 06:30 GMT >>> However, I have NEVER had my brakes fail. EVER. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Maybe I'll run out and buy a lottery ticket... Scott, I crawl under my cars to inspect the brake lines... any hint of rust I will paint the line with whatever expensive rust inhibiting paint I have on hand. Stuff like POR15, eastwood products, etc.* Still, I have had pin holes develop in spots that I could not inspect nor treat. On the 73, a pin hole developed on the back side of the line that runs in the drive shaft tunnel to the rear of the car. The line to all visual inspection looked perfect. It ran next to the fuel line and upon removal I found that rust developed along that side of the brake line only, invisible to me.
*I'd imagine someone might advise me against this practice, but it has worked well for me. I've not yet had a line fail where I could and did treat the rust soon enough. *knock on wood* The only time I've replaced a line that I have previously painted is when I've replaced a hose or line attached to it. Either as a 'while I was there' or the fitting had rusted to the line so I ended up just braking the line to get things apart despite my best efforts to free the fitting. That said, I tend to put large globs of grease on brake line fittings when I am in there. The grease eventually develops a crust of dirt and under it all the fitting stays nice.
>>Apparently, moving to the Left Coast has softened your brain so that >>you do not remember the white winter roads of Cleveland, Ohio, that do >>nasty things to metal brake lines. Lucky you.
> You know all those beaters I told you about? I owned them all when I > lived in Illinois. Why do you think the floorpans and rear quarters > rusted out? The PO's replaced the lines before you got the cars and they didn't live long enough in your care to fail again?
Scott in SoCal - 26 Jan 2008 07:03 GMT >> You know all those beaters I told you about? I owned them all when I >> lived in Illinois. Why do you think the floorpans and rear quarters >> rusted out? > >The PO's replaced the lines before you got the cars and they didn't live >long enough in your care to fail again? On *all* of my beater cars?
That's a truly *amazing* run of luck.
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 26 Jan 2008 07:11 GMT >>> You know all those beaters I told you about? I owned them all when I >>> lived in Illinois. Why do you think the floorpans and rear quarters [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > That's a truly *amazing* run of luck. How old were your beaters? Vegas usually didn't live long enough for a typical brake line to fail in a place like Chicago. Either the engine gave out or the body rusted away inside what, like five years on average? I know it was an exceptional vega that made it to eight.
But yeah, you're lucky or something, completely outside my personal experience.
Scott in SoCal - 26 Jan 2008 21:25 GMT >>>> You know all those beaters I told you about? I owned them all when I >>>> lived in Illinois. Why do you think the floorpans and rear quarters [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >How old were your beaters? Generally 7-15 years old. The oldest was a '67 Firebird 400 that I bought in the fall of 1982. I also owned two '68 Rustangs with no floors, one of which had a 302 with (originally) 11:1 compression. That was the one that blew a coolant hose, overheated, and siezed up on me. :)
>Vegas usually didn't live long enough for a >typical brake line to fail in a place like Chicago. Mine was a '73, and I owned it in '82. I sold it that fall when I went away to college. It was still running in '84 when I lost track of it.
>Either the engine >gave out or the body rusted away inside what, like five years on average? >I know it was an exceptional vega that made it to eight. Once again my luck runs amok. :)
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 26 Jan 2008 21:47 GMT >>>>> You know all those beaters I told you about? I owned them all when I >>>>> lived in Illinois. Why do you think the floorpans and rear quarters [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> >>How old were your beaters?
> Generally 7-15 years old. The oldest was a '67 Firebird 400 that I > bought in the fall of 1982. I also owned two '68 Rustangs with no > floors, one of which had a 302 with (originally) 11:1 compression. > That was the one that blew a coolant hose, overheated, and siezed up > on me. :) 7 years old is too young. The older end of the range is the brake failure area. the '68 mustang if you had one of the front hoses go you would have had to have replaced the steel line that it connects to along with it. The rest of the system would have a few more years yet.
>>Vegas usually didn't live long enough for a >>typical brake line to fail in a place like Chicago.
> Mine was a '73, and I owned it in '82. I sold it that fall when I went > away to college. It was still running in '84 when I lost track of it. An exceptional vega.
>>Either the engine >>gave out or the body rusted away inside what, like five years on average? >>I know it was an exceptional vega that made it to eight.
> Once again my luck runs amok. :) Scott in SoCal - 26 Jan 2008 23:50 GMT >>>Vegas usually didn't live long enough for a >>>typical brake line to fail in a place like Chicago. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >An exceptional vega. Wow. And yet it was so normal in all other respects - it burned a quart of oil per tank of gas, it had enormous rust holes in vitrually every body panel, and it would backfire loudly whenever I floored the accelerator pedal.
What I wanna know if, why doesn't my astounding luck manifest itself in more useful ways, such as by making me independently wealthy? I could definitely do with a bit of "FU Money" right about now...
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 27 Jan 2008 02:18 GMT >>>>Vegas usually didn't live long enough for a >>>>typical brake line to fail in a place like Chicago. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > every body panel, and it would backfire loudly whenever I floored the > accelerator pedal. You don't understand, a normal vega died of those conditions much earlier! So the PO must have taken good care of it!
> What I wanna know if, why doesn't my astounding luck manifest itself > in more useful ways, such as by making me independently wealthy? I > could definitely do with a bit of "FU Money" right about now... I still think you just don't keep a car long enough.
Scott in SoCal - 27 Jan 2008 03:23 GMT >>>>>Vegas usually didn't live long enough for a >>>>>typical brake line to fail in a place like Chicago. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >You don't understand, a normal vega died of those conditions much >earlier! So the PO must have taken good care of it! Riiight... That's why all the rust was ALREADY THERE when I bought it, as was the oil consumption problem and the backfiring problem.
Give it up, Brent - your theory has no basis in fact.
>> What I wanna know if, why doesn't my astounding luck manifest itself >> in more useful ways, such as by making me independently wealthy? I >> could definitely do with a bit of "FU Money" right about now... > >I still think you just don't keep a car long enough. I think you're insane.
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 27 Jan 2008 05:07 GMT >>>>>>Vegas usually didn't live long enough for a >>>>>>typical brake line to fail in a place like Chicago. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >>You don't understand, a normal vega died of those conditions much >>earlier! So the PO must have taken good care of it!
> Riiight... That's why all the rust was ALREADY THERE when I bought it, > as was the oil consumption problem and the backfiring problem. It was VEGA, duh. Those things came from the factory with rust. They would likely rust away in pure nitrogen atmosphere. The engine, same thing, there's absolutely no way a PO could stop steel piston rings from eating away an AL engine block*. If he could avoid those problems with a vega he could have probably waved the same magic wand and turned it into a new yellow corvette!
> Give it up, Brent - your theory has no basis in fact. So you're saying I (and everyone else who lives in rust areas and has replaced brake lines) care for my cars in a shitty manner because I've had brake lines fail. Tell me scott, what am I missing in brake line care? Should I be waxing them every thursday night?
>>> What I wanna know if, why doesn't my astounding luck manifest itself >>> in more useful ways, such as by making me independently wealthy? I >>> could definitely do with a bit of "FU Money" right about now...
>>I still think you just don't keep a car long enough.
> I think you're insane. So tell me scott, why I have I had to replace so many brake lines and hoses living in the chicago salt environment over the last 20 years?
What part of brake line care am I missing? Keep in mind I treat any rust I can see with the proper sort of paints, I seal fittings in grease, etc and so on. So, what am I missing? (of course on cars not mine those things weren't done)
*For those that don't know, the chevy vega used an aluminium engine block WITHOUT cylinder sleaves. It relied on a racing engine casting process to distribute particles of a hard material (I forget what) throughout the casting evenly such that the surface would hold up to the piston rings. Problem was, when trying to use a process designed for low volume racing engines to make high volume economy car engines it didn't work so well. The distribution was not optimal and the vega's engines quickly scored and wore the cylinder walls. The result being problems such as consuming a quart of oil with every tank of fuel.
Scott in SoCal - 27 Jan 2008 17:13 GMT >So tell me scott, why I have I had to replace so many brake lines and >hoses living in the chicago salt environment over the last 20 years? If you'll recall, I said brakes won't fail if you maintain them properly. Replacing rusted out lines and old hoses is proper maintenance.
QED.
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 28 Jan 2008 02:14 GMT >>So tell me scott, why I have I had to replace so many brake lines and >>hoses living in the chicago salt environment over the last 20 years? > > If you'll recall, I said brakes won't fail if you maintain them > properly. Replacing rusted out lines and old hoses is proper > maintenance.
> QED. And yet you seem to claim you've not had to so much as replace a hose or line.
So, scott, do you remove the brake lines from your car to inspect them and put them back in for rust on the surface that cannot be seen? If so, how often do you do this?
Scott in SoCal - 28 Jan 2008 15:37 GMT >>>So tell me scott, why I have I had to replace so many brake lines and >>>hoses living in the chicago salt environment over the last 20 years? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >And yet you seem to claim you've not had to so much as replace a hose or >line. Like you keep saying, I'm obviously the luckiest man in the universe.
>So, scott, do you remove the brake lines from your car to inspect them >and put them back in for rust on the surface that cannot be seen? If so, how >often do you do this? I live in SoCal, where rust on vehicles simply does not exist except on cars that were brought in from other states. About all I have to do is inspect the brake hoses for cracks and other problems.
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Brent P - 28 Jan 2008 15:43 GMT >>>>So tell me scott, why I have I had to replace so many brake lines and >>>>hoses living in the chicago salt environment over the last 20 years? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>And yet you seem to claim you've not had to so much as replace a hose or >>line.
> Like you keep saying, I'm obviously the luckiest man in the universe.
>>So, scott, do you remove the brake lines from your car to inspect them >>and put them back in for rust on the surface that cannot be seen? If so, how >>often do you do this?
> I live in SoCal, where rust on vehicles simply does not exist except > on cars that were brought in from other states. About all I have to do > is inspect the brake hoses for cracks and other problems. What did you do to maintain the steel brake lines of your rusty beater cars? How did you inspect the blind side of the lines?
Studemania - 28 Jan 2008 22:42 GMT > On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:14:57 -0600, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I bought a 12 year old California 1960 ,odel car in San Francisco along wiith parts to upgreade drive;ine. Being from a rust belt, I figured that I would spray penitrant on the fasteners for a few weeks before starting disassemble. Just as a rest, I put a short box wrench on the (clean) rear spring hanger bolts and found them to be about as tight as I would expect to find on a new car. I didn't put a torque wrench on them, so can't quote ft-lbs. I paid little attention to the underside of the car except to remember that there was no rust noticable nor work needed.
Alexander Rogge - 25 Jan 2008 04:41 GMT >> If a stupid driver stops suddenly for no >> legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the >> road. > > No, it's the fault of the idiot that was following too closely. The Sloth should be at fault for being stupid, and then slithering away from the mess that it caused.
> A defensive driver ALWAYS leaves himself an out. Drivers should not suddenly stop in the road for no legitimate reason. Drivers should react to the same hazard at about the same time. It is when drivers react to brake lamps instead of the actual hazards that the crashes often occur.
Scott in SoCal - 25 Jan 2008 15:34 GMT >>> If a stupid driver stops suddenly for no >>> legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >The Sloth should be at fault for being stupid, and then slithering away >from the mess that it caused. Unfortunately, that's not the way our laws are written.
>> A defensive driver ALWAYS leaves himself an out. > >Drivers should not suddenly stop in the road for no legitimate reason. Lots of things shouldn't happen. The wreckless driver is prepared for them anyway.
>Drivers should react to the same hazard at about the same time. It is >when drivers react to brake lamps instead of the actual hazards that the >crashes often occur. Have you ever seen the movie "Disturbia?"
In the first few minutes of the movie, a man and his son are driving home from a fishing trip. As they are talking in the car, an SUV passes them. After the pass, the son (who is driving) starts tailgating the SUV, which completely blocks his view of the road ahead. After a few minutes, the SUV suddenly swerves to the left to reveal a broken-down car blocking the lane. Because the kid was tailgating the SUV, he had no time to react and he rammed the stalled car at full speed, launching himself and his father into the air and flipping the car over onto its roof. A pickup truck coming from the other direction then crashes into them, killing the father.
Who is at fault for this collision? The moron who was changing a tire in the middle of the road? The SUV driver who waited until the last possible moment to swerve out of the way of the stalled car? Or the stupid teenager who tailgated a view-blocking SUV for MILES and didn't leave himself an out?
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Alexander Rogge - 26 Jan 2008 06:29 GMT > Have you ever seen the movie "Disturbia?" > In the first few minutes of the movie, a man and his son are driving [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Who is at fault for this collision? It's the fault of those stupid SUV developers that sell cars that you can't see around when you're parked next to them or driving behind them. It may also be the fault of the pick-up driver for not anticipating the hazard. If I see a stalled car in the lane on the other side of the road, I slow down and try to accommodate anybody who may cross the centre line to pass.
Of course, maybe the tailgater is another one of those drivers that doesn't like other drivers in front of him. There was another CLB yesterday that was happy blocking the centre lane and two drivers. As one driver started tailgating, the CLB stepped on the brakes and tried to slow down, until somebody moved in front. Then the CLB started honking and flashing its headlamps. There was no traffic in the lane ahead of it, and the right lane was open. What is it that they don't understand about Keep Right Except To Pass?
There was also another merge-impaired driver yesterday that pulled in front of me at 20 below my speed. I moved left to pass and the Sloth started honking at me. What was the problem, except its failure to accelerate to the speed of traffic? They don't want other people in front of them, but they seem to like holding up everybody else.
Eeyore - 26 Jan 2008 10:33 GMT > >> If a stupid driver stops suddenly for no > >> legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The Sloth should be at fault for being stupid, and then slithering away > from the mess that it caused. You're a f.cking IDIOT.
It's all ME ME ME with you.
Graham
Studemania - 25 Jan 2008 19:11 GMT > > Just gotta love how some people justify their car accidents. Overheard from > > a woman at a local diner today at lunch. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > right-lane traffic and then try to stop, and also the Sloths that pull > out from intersecting streets and stop in front of the approaching traffic. Obviously, you stopped and gave your name and address to theose in the accident. During that time did you hear the front driver eplain what happened? Peerhaps a right-rear brake shoe grabbed. Don't give us just paart of the story.
Eeyore - 26 Jan 2008 10:30 GMT > That's not always correct. If a stupid driver stops suddenly for no > legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the > road. No, a crash is the fault of the idiot who was travelling too fast, too close behind.
Graham
Alexander Rogge - 26 Jan 2008 18:11 GMT >> If a stupid driver stops suddenly for no >> legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the >> road. > > No, a crash is the fault of the idiot who was travelling too fast, too close > behind. The fault should be with the driver that caused the crash. It's like JLEDI otherwise, when everybody else is expected to swerve around the Sloths while they talk on the phone and do other stupid things that are not related to driving.
Eeyore - 26 Jan 2008 18:53 GMT > >> If a stupid driver stops suddenly for no > >> legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Sloths while they talk on the phone and do other stupid things that are > not related to driving. Look you blithering idiot, YOU are supposed to keep a SAFE DISTANCE.
It's *people like you* who CAUSE ACCIDENTS with your MFFY attitude.
Graham
Scott in SoCal - 26 Jan 2008 21:26 GMT >> >> If a stupid driver stops suddenly for no >> >> legitimate reason, a crash is the fault of the idiot that stopped in the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >It's *people like you* who CAUSE ACCIDENTS with your MFFY attitude. May you be "swooped and squatted" by 1000 insurance scammers.
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS - 24 Jan 2008 16:42 GMT > Just gotta love how some people justify their car accidents. Overheard from > a woman at a local diner today at lunch. > > "My car is TOTALED! There was nothing I could do! She made a dead stop > right in front of me! I didn't see her until I hit her!" What if a kid had run out in front of the car. You have to make a dead stop. Those behind should always allow for that possibility but they never do.
gpsman - 25 Jan 2008 04:51 GMT I suggest "It's not MY fault" as the official motto of r.a.d. -----
- gpsman
N8N - 25 Jan 2008 15:40 GMT > I suggest "It's not MY fault" as the official motto of r.a.d. I suggest "gpsman can DIAF" instead.
Please give cites of any instance when a regular poster has been involved in any kind of collision and ever tried to absolve himself of responsibility (unless he clearly was not responsible.)
I can tell you for a fact that you're not going to find one from me, as the only instance where I've ever made an insurance claim on one of my vehicles was when the Fabulous BeaterPorsche was hit while parked at the curb in front of my house.
As usual, your posts show no substance or evidence of any critical thought, and instead you're simply trying to stir up trouble by being inflammatory, insulting, and derogatory without any reason to be so. We see right through you; get help.
nate
Studemania - 25 Jan 2008 19:21 GMT > > I suggest "It's not MY fault" as the official motto of r.a.d. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > nate No one expects anything fair or logical from SADDAM. If something seems to make sense, we re-read it.
gpsman - 26 Jan 2008 16:08 GMT > > I suggest "It's not MY fault" as the official motto of r.a.d. > > Please give cites of any instance when a regular poster has been > involved in any kind of collision and ever tried to absolve himself of > responsibility (unless he clearly was not responsible.) Why, is a collision required to attribute fault...?!
> I can tell you for a fact that you're not going to find one from me, Pfft. The majority of your posts describe your difficulties negotiating traffic, and I don't remember you ever accepting any responsibility...
Not your fault, right...?
Nobody should ever choose a lesser velocity than yourself *and* have the audacity to be to your front causing you to disengage your CC, should they...?
> As usual, your posts show no substance or evidence of any critical > thought, Are you trying to make me cry...? -----
- gpsman
Nate Nagel - 26 Jan 2008 18:27 GMT >>> I suggest "It's not MY fault" as the official motto of r.a.d. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Why, is a collision required to attribute fault...?! Well, since the primary goal of driving (besides reaching your destination) is to not crash, crashing is a pretty good indicator of fault. And outside of incredibly rare instances, at least one party is always at fault in a crash.
>> I can tell you for a fact that you're not going to find one from >> me, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Not your fault, right...? Well, since I seem to *only* have difficulties driving in the metro DC area, I would posit that it must be the average DC-area driver that is the problem, not that I suddenly become less skilled and aware within 30 miles of the city.
> Nobody should ever choose a lesser velocity than yourself *and* have > the audacity to be to your front causing you to disengage your CC, > should they...? Not if they're not in the rightmost lane.
>> As usual, your posts show no substance or evidence of any critical >> thought, > > Are you trying to make me cry...? No, I'm trying to make you go away. Every time you post the group IQ drops.
nate
 Signature replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) - 26 Jan 2008 20:54 GMT >>>> I suggest "It's not MY fault" as the official motto of r.a.d. >>> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >No, I'm trying to make you go away. Every time you post the group IQ drops. Since kill filing S&DDAM and GPSMoron, I've found the reading experience in the group to be much better.
I started thinking about it the other day. If those two morons won't respond to each other, why should I bother reading their retarded posts?
I *KNOW* gpstard is sitting over there, just itching for your responses and laughing; he's got you hook, line, and sinker, like S&DDAM had me for so long.
--
Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
Scott in SoCal - 26 Jan 2008 21:28 GMT >Since kill filing S&DDAM and GPSMoron, I've found the reading >experience in the group to be much better. > >I started thinking about it the other day. If those two morons won't >respond to each other, why should I bother reading their retarded >posts? Amazing, isn't it, how those two never attack each other?
It's like there is some sort of secret non-aggression pact among trolls...
 Signature Please don't give financial rewards to trolls - DO NOT CLICK on any URLs containing "calrog.com"
David Poole - 26 Jan 2008 22:08 GMT >>Since kill filing S&DDAM and GPSMoron, I've found the reading >>experience in the group to be much better. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >It's like there is some sort of secret non-aggression pact among >trolls... It is very amazing, and that realization was the catalyst in my decision not to play with them any more. It was fun for a while. That neither of them seems to want to discuss things with the other just reinforces the fact that they are not here to discuss things with the adults.
--
This temporary .sig is to identify myself, as a nym shift has occurred.
In the past, I have spent time pursuing certain trolls around, and have decided this is no longer an activity I wish to waste my time on. As such, I have kill filed R.A.D.'s two main trolls. Thus, I am retiring the 'adaptive' nyms I have generated in response to "Aunt Judy"'s nym shifts. These have included, but not been limited to:
Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) Ted Kennedy Murdered His Pregnant Mistress (and many variants)
David Poole - 26 Jan 2008 22:13 GMT >That >neither of them seems to want to discuss things with the other just >reinforces the fact that they are not here to discuss things with the >adults. rephrased: they are not here to discuss things like adults.
--
This temporary .sig is to identify myself, as a nym shift has occurred.
In the past, I have spent time pursuing certain trolls around, and have decided this is no longer an activity I wish to waste my time on. As such, I have kill filed R.A.D.'s two main trolls. Thus, I am retiring the 'adaptive' nyms I have generated in response to "Aunt Judy"'s nym shifts. These have included, but not been limited to:
Murderous Speeding Drunken Distracted Driver (Hector Goldstein) Ted Kennedy Murdered His Pregnant Mistress (and many variants)
gpsman - 27 Jan 2008 04:39 GMT > >>> I suggest "It's not MY fault" as the official motto of r.a.d. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > fault. And outside of incredibly rare instances, at least one party is > always at fault in a crash. Do you often hear swooshing sounds in the vicinity of your head...?
> >> I can tell you for a fact that you're not going to find one from > >> me, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the problem, not that I suddenly become less skilled and aware within 30 > miles of the city. So.. your inability to deal with DC traffic is the fault of DC traffic, and not your own limitations...?
> > Nobody should ever choose a lesser velocity than yourself *and* have > > the audacity to be to your front causing you to disengage your CC, > > should they...? > > Not if they're not in the rightmost lane. Oh. So they can't even move left to pass if you're in the vicinity...?!
> >> As usual, your posts show no substance or evidence of any critical > >> thought, > > > Are you trying to make me cry...? > > No, I'm trying to make you go away. Every time you post the group IQ drops. Not your fault, huh...? -----
- gpsman
|
|
|