Cyclists cocks up inside overtake

On 12/05/2017 01:09, JNugent wrote:
On 11/05/2017 20:17, TMS320 wrote:
On 11/05/17 11:30, MrCheerful wrote:
On 11/05/2017 10:10, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/05/17 21:30, JNugent wrote:
On 10/05/2017 20:35, TMS320 wrote:
On 10/05/17 05:43, wrote:
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/drive...5jsGlRAE01C.01




It's a road with a 40mph limit. No way did that RR crash into the
bus at
less than 40mph. One hopes the injury, damage and the air bag
recorder
are sufficient evidence to give the driver enough points to keep him
away from other road users for a while.

I wouldn't be so sure.

It's not often that a vehicle will be driven into a stationary
obstruction at 40mph in an urban environment, and in any case, body
damage on modern vehicles can be very deceptive.

It's not difficult to see the difference between skin damage and
structural damage.

As you know, rumpling
panels are designed for absorbing shock and directing energy away from
vehicle occupants.

Indeed. This one clearly didn't.

The driver only had minor injuries, I think that shows how incredibly
safe modern vehicles are. The apparent severity of the crash would have
killed or maimed for life someone in a car from just 20 or so years ago.

The mid-90's were not primitive times in automotive times. There is no
straightforward way of knowing the difference.

To be fair, perhaps Mr C's "20 or so years ago" needs to be read as
"more than 30 or so years ago".


worth looking at the test of a 2015 car to its identical version from
1998 The 98 is destroyed, the 2015 looks very survivable, so yes, just
20 years ago cars were far less safe for occupants and the general public.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/enthus...cid=spartanntp