Rear-Ended; New Bumper?

#31

On 7/9/09 8:22 AM, in article h34qtn$os8$7 (AT) news (DOT) datemas.de, "Brian Smith"
<Halifax (AT) NovaScotia (DOT) Canada> wrote:

Quote:

E. Meyer wrote:

That all sounds great, totally reasonable & in fact, driver's ed in 1965
taught the bumper rule. If you try it around here (Dallas), one of several
things will happen every time: another car will try to pull into the gap
between you and the car in front if that gap appears big enough; the cars
behind you will start honking because you are blocking access to the turn
lane by being stopped so far back; the driver behind you will stop, get out
of the car and come up and start yelling (like they do in D.C.). I have
found the half-car-length rule to be more practical & just as safe.

The space between vehicles is not great enough for any idiot to think
about squeezing into, there just isn't room.

Depends what you are driving - If its anything with a long hood (& I'll
concede that leaves out most Hondas) and/or the thing in front has a long
trunk (like an LTD), bottom of the tires is about one car length & I have
seen it happen enough times to know its true.

Quote:

As far as blowing horns and people walking up to "chat" that's fine and
easy to ignore.

Usually its the guy who just missed the once-every-5-minutes turn light
because some jerk wouldn't pull up 5 feet to let him into it. Easy to
ignore, but still...

#32

E. Meyer wrote:

Quote:

Depends what you are driving - If its anything with a long hood (& I'll
concede that leaves out most Hondas) and/or the thing in front has a long
trunk (like an LTD), bottom of the tires is about one car length & I have
seen it happen enough times to know its true.

Maybe the idiots where you are are more stupid than where I live. I
have driven a lot of miles and there haven't been a large number of
people that will try to squeeze in between my vehicles and the one in
front. But that's truly not relevant to the practice I mentioned.

Quote:

Usually its the guy who just missed the once-every-5-minutes turn light
because some jerk wouldn't pull up 5 feet to let him into it. Easy to
ignore, but still...

That is not my concern. I am not going to make room for someone behind
me and then have the fellow behind him bump me in to the vehicle in
front of me. It's only time and it's more affordable than repairs,
especially unnecessary repairs.

#33

On 7/9/09 8:48 AM, in article h34sfm$os8$10 (AT) news (DOT) datemas.de, "Brian Smith"
<Halifax (AT) NovaScotia (DOT) Canada> wrote:

Quote:

E. Meyer wrote:

Depends what you are driving - If its anything with a long hood (& I'll
concede that leaves out most Hondas) and/or the thing in front has a long
trunk (like an LTD), bottom of the tires is about one car length & I have
seen it happen enough times to know its true.

Maybe the idiots where you are are more stupid than where I live.

What can I say. Dallas was just rated the number two place for road-rage in
the US (just behind New York). You have to go with the hand you're dealt.

Quote:

have driven a lot of miles and there haven't been a large number of
people that will try to squeeze in between my vehicles and the one in
front. But that's truly not relevant to the practice I mentioned.

Usually its the guy who just missed the once-every-5-minutes turn light
because some jerk wouldn't pull up 5 feet to let him into it. Easy to
ignore, but still...

That is not my concern. I am not going to make room for someone behind
me and then have the fellow behind him bump me in to the vehicle in
front of me. It's only time and it's more affordable than repairs,
especially unnecessary repairs.

#34

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

Quote:

The discussion isn't about people. The discussion is about
corporations, specifically insurance companies, and their way--"deny,
deny, deny". Where do you think the "back pain" came from?

You're incorrect. The original discussion was about the damage to
Elle's vehicle. This off shoot of the topic came about when this was
posted the following;

Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy (AT) ExtraGrumpyville (DOT) com> wrote in
news:Lld5m.105564$d36.69201 (AT) bgtnsc04-news (DOT) ops.worldnet.att.net:

Quote:

If you are unhurt, just go for the cosmetic repair.

Of course if it were me, I'd be screamin' neck, back and other
maladies and interviewing sleazy lawyers!

JT

That is where the people came into the discussion. When it was made
obvious that there are people with extremely low ethics and standards
out there, that only think about what they can get out of others
(whether businesses or other people) for nothing.

#35

E. Meyer wrote:

Quote:

What can I say. Dallas was just rated the number two place for road-rage in
the US (just behind New York). You have to go with the hand you're dealt.

Well, I have to say that is too bad. I guess they'll just have to try
harder for the next time period until they are number one. :^)

#36

Dillon Pyron <invaliddmpyron (AT) austin (DOT) rr.com> wrote in
news:fkma55lf3o7j0glv766gs9s22cg35eh091 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

..

Quote:

I have been taught (for at least the last 20 years) to see the bottom
of the tires in front of you, and to keep your foot on the brakes
until the guy behind you is stopped.

The bumper thing went out with 2&10

I think your 20-year thing may be out-of-date as well.

Last I heard, the new "safety" operating procedure is to leave at least one
car-length between you and the vehicle in front when you first stop, until
somebody comes to a stop behind you (in order to prevent being pushed into
the car in front should you be rear-ended). At that point you're supposed
to creep forward to the "bottom of the tires" viewpoint, leaving just
enough room to be able to pass the car in front should it happen to stall
or its driver die of boredom.

The irritating thing about this approach (at least for somebody who has a
manual transmission and has been driving for 31 years) is that the entire
time a light remains red, cars are now steadily creeping forwards, taking
up that slack. If one is undesirous of burning up six months of one's
clutch life at each red light, one ends up being left six car-lengths
behind the position of the next car once that car has crept up with all the
other creepers ahead of him.

--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

#37

Brian Smith wrote:

Quote:

Joe wrote:

Why's that?

It's the American way. You must recognize their battle cry, SUE,
SUE, SUE! :^)

Not to mention a very old (by this time) girlfriend from the 1960's...

JT

#38

Joe wrote:

Quote:

On 2009-07-09, Brian Smith <Halifax (AT) NovaScotia (DOT) Canada> wrote:

Joe wrote:

Why's that?

It's the American way. You must recognize their battle cry, SUE, SUE,
SUE! :^)

I recognize the battle cry, just never understood the selfish
reasoning. People never fail to prove to me that my expectations are
too high. And they're not very high at all...

I'll have you know that my expectations are very high... Six figures or
more!!!

JT

#39

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

Quote:

In article <000ee053$0$14525$c3e8da3 (AT) news (DOT) astraweb.com>,
Joe <joe (AT) spam (DOT) hits-spam-buffalo.com> wrote:

It's the American way. You must recognize their battle cry, SUE, SUE,
SUE! :^)

I recognize the battle cry, just never understood the selfish
reasoning. People never fail to prove to me that my expectations are
too high. And they're not very high at all...

The discussion isn't about people. The discussion is about
corporations, specifically insurance companies, and their way--"deny,
deny, deny". Where do you think the "back pain" came from?

Man... You said a mouthfull there.

I have only been in a three accidents in my driving experience. None
were my fault but they all occurred back in the good ol' days - pre 1970.

In every case, settlement was pretty routine and prompt and no lawyer
was ever consulted.

But I fear that today's situation would be drastically different. It
seems that no one is up to facing their responsibility. As a result, the
trial lawyers are enjoying a field day.

BTW, if you are in a physical damage accident only, forget about any of
these guys offering their services. If you're injured, they'll be
banging down your door!

Grrrrr

JT

#40

Thus spake Tegger <invalid (AT) invalid (DOT) inv> :

Quote:

Dillon Pyron <invaliddmpyron (AT) austin (DOT) rr.com> wrote in
news:fkma55lf3o7j0glv766gs9s22cg35eh091 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com:

.

I have been taught (for at least the last 20 years) to see the bottom
of the tires in front of you, and to keep your foot on the brakes
until the guy behind you is stopped.

The bumper thing went out with 2&10

I think your 20-year thing may be out-of-date as well.

Last I heard, the new "safety" operating procedure is to leave at least one
car-length between you and the vehicle in front when you first stop, until
somebody comes to a stop behind you (in order to prevent being pushed into
the car in front should you be rear-ended). At that point you're supposed
to creep forward to the "bottom of the tires" viewpoint, leaving just
enough room to be able to pass the car in front should it happen to stall
or its driver die of boredom.

The irritating thing about this approach (at least for somebody who has a
manual transmission and has been driving for 31 years) is that the entire
time a light remains red, cars are now steadily creeping forwards, taking
up that slack. If one is undesirous of burning up six months of one's
clutch life at each red light, one ends up being left six car-lengths
behind the position of the next car once that car has crept up with all the
other creepers ahead of him.

Well, since there are about six of us left who can drive a stick, the
clutch life is a non issue :-Q

I have a friend who insists on the car length, but also says one
should use that length so that everyone can start moving at the same
time.
--

- dillon I am not invalid

"Jimmy, I'm sorry your girlfriend turned out
to be a cylon."
-Special Agent Tim McGee, "NCIS"