spitfires
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: Safety inspection?

To: "Simmons, Reid W" <reid.w.simmons@intel.com>, <spitfires@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: Re: Safety inspection?
From: "Fred Thomas" <vafred@erols.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 19:11:07 -0400
Sorry Reid, never met a Spit owner or for that matter a LBC owner that would
be in favor of such a organziation for obvious reasons.  "FT"
>
> I see it coming.... a new non-profit organization:
>
> SpOADD
>
> Spitfire
> Owners
> Against
> Drunk
> Drivers
>
> :-) :-)
>
> Reid
> '79 Spitfire (original owner)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nolan Penney [mailto:npenney@mde.state.md.us]
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 12:34 PM
> To: Laura.G@141.com
> Cc: spitfires@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Re: Safety inspection?
>
>
>
> >>> Laura Gharazeddine <Laura.G@141.com> 07/14 3:18 PM >>>
>
> >The lesson? When there are drunks on the road, there's no safe driving
> technique that'll save you from them.
>
> There are quite a number of techniques that can help save you from drunks.
>
> 1, observe your surroundings and notice the drivers that appear drunk.
> 2, avoid them.  Pull off the road and let them pass, take a different
exit,
> etc.  If they aren't near you, they can't hit you.
> 3, use your nimbleness to avoid the accident.  Duck dart and weave, just
> like in boxing.
> There are several others, but I think you get the drift.  No, I'm not
saying
> getting hit is your fault, but most times, the hit could have been
prevented
> in some way by you.
>
> >A little British steel and a full frame goes a pretty good way against
> plastic door panels and the cheap and fast >construction of many of todays
> bigger cars.
>
> No, they don't.  First, British auto steel wasn't good steel.  Second, a
> frame does a lousy job in a wreck compared to monicoe construction.
That's
> why it's used in many applications, in part.  It's light, it's strong.
> Frames work great when they're a cage around you, like a NASCAR roll cage
or
> a Volvo, not when it's lying below you like a pickup truck or a Spitfire.
> In that case, the energy isn't absorbed well.  That's why people died in
> those old tanks of the 50's with the car looking good after the wreck, and
> they live today with a car that looks thoroughly squashed.
>
> >not many cars have a fighting chance, do they? (There have been a couple
of
> horrific accidents in So. Cal in the >past couple of days-involving SUVs)
>
> Mostly because the SUV has a bumper height above most vehicles, and
because
> it has a frame.  The SUV frame fails to absorb energy, so the impacted
> vehicle must.  That energy is imparted high on the impacted vehicle, above
> it's energy absorbing members.  A Spitfire is extremely low, in an impact
> another vehicle will tend to climb it, just like I said.
>
> >People who are nervous drivers (For whatever reason) tend to make more
> mistakes and _cause_ accidents.
>
> A major complaint and problem with SUV drivers is their confidence in
their
> invulnerability.  This has also been noted with Volvo drivers.  Those that
> have no fear drive most dangerously.  Those that well understand their
> danger drive the best.  That's why old fart bikers don't ride like kids on
> crotch rockets.
>
>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>