Thread: High performance cars and young drivers

They already do that. But not every state. Plus some people are given examption . Seems its more important that dad keeps his v8 than kids lives.

The other thing is the cars we had in the 1980s were very under powered compared to today's cars. But we probably also drove with dad at a younger age. One of the passengers was 28. Stupid is as stupid does.

Originally Posted by Chucaro

After the terrible accident in west of Brisbane yesterday, there are people that would like to ban young drivers for driving high performance cars.
I am not sure if that it is the answer, IMO a better education and driving training curses will be a better solution.

I think it's exactly the solution. Give me one valid reason why a 17 year old should be behind the wheel of a v8??? Mandatory insurance in Europe means that until you're in your 20's, the insurance costs (assuming you can even get a quote) effectively imposes a ban on overpowered cars for younger drivers - anyone under the age of 20 is driving something up to a 1.3 or 1.4l engined car. Yet we still manage to get from A to B.

I can't see how restricting the power of cars the young ones are allowed to drive is going to have much effect. There are small 4 cylinder cars on the road these days that are every bit as quick as most V8's - they are certainly still capable of getting up to high enough speeds to cause a lot of carnage if they're involved in a prang. In fact, it could be strongly argued that many of the smaller less powerful cars afford significantly less protection to their occupants than do most modern V8's and sporty models etc.

My young bloke has a little 1.8 litre sporty thing that would blow the doors off most V8's on the road - I'd hate to be in it in a prang though. Admittedly, it's a rotary with a couple of turbo's, so in some states, the young ones wouldn't be allowed to drive it. We are fortunate in that our young bloke does drive this thing sensibly and we have no concerns about him owning / driving it. It's a bit of a hobby for him these days and rarely gets taken out of the shed in any case - his daily driver is my old D2.

If the young are not allowed to drive V8's etc. they will just drive lesser powered vehicles at whatever speed they can get out of them if they are that way inclined. The "damage" is not likely to be less.

I agree with Arthur - PROPER driver training is the only way. Other than a few very specific driver training courses (which most of our young ones NEVER get access to) - Australian driver training courses are generally structured to teach a candidate how to pass a driving test and get a licence - NOT how to drive a car properly and handle it in emergency situations etc.

PROPER driving skills training which is not specifically aimed at just getting you through a test with some doddering old inspector who probably couldn't drive a greasy stick up a dog's bum anyway should be a mandatory subject in all of our kids' schools. In a couple of cases I know of where this is the case (where my brother's kid goes to school in Adelaide for example) - the results speak for themselves.

Originally Posted by mike_ie

I think it's exactly the solution. Give me one valid reason why a 17 year old should be behind the wheel of a v8???

We have that here already. One can't even drive an old Land Rover County V8 yet one can drive a Holden V6 with a bigger engine and much more power. But the authorities have ruled V8 = bad.

Personally, I'm against the limits on what new drivers can drive.

I do believe that they should not have access to turbocharged/supercharged/v8'd motors because theres more peer pressure from there mates to "give it stick" when they know its a quick car. I have to say that driver education in Australia is ****, I was shocked to see what instructors are teaching and NOT teaching learner drivers.
I come from Scotland where my first car was a Vauxhaul Belmont with a 1.2 litre engine, I bought it for $400 and the insurance (3rd party only) was $1500 for one year. When i did my driving lessons at the age of 17 I was taught wet weather driving, sleet/snow driving, night driving, change a wheel, long trip preperations, fueling, defensive driving, how to check mechanicals etc. when I passed my test the local council put all us young drivers through an advance driving test (free) where we were put on skid pans (awesome!) and a risk assessment course where we would identify the hazards and change driving techniques to suit them. We were taught how to perform basic first aid at a crash site, tyre choices etc. etc. It was a great idea and it reduced our already extortionate insurance premiums. I still had the "racer" attitude but was aware of my limits. I did have an accident (not at fault) and to this day I think the skid pan training saved my life.
Also theres the problem here that comes with a multi-cultural country where any one from any country seem to just get issued an Australian license and allowed to drive how they would in their country of origin. Some absolute shockers out there!I was surprised when I moved here that they didnt need me to do an Australian driving test, I was expecting it and I think it is something they should do.

A study was done back in the 80s comparing drivers who had done advanced driver training and those that didn't - statistically there was no difference in accident rates.

When they looked into why they found that 'common sense" drivers gained experience for the course but these people were not the type to get into accidents anyway. They other group treated the course as a means to learn how to drive faster - their attitude was that "I have done an advanced driver course so I know how to drive fast in all conditions" - these type of people actually had higher rates of accidents which was balanced to some extent by the "common sense drivers" lower rates.

Just about everything has been tried to get these new drivers to drive more responsibly and nothing has worked - is a fact of life for the "I am invincible and I am the best driver in the world set" That is not to say we should do nothing but there is no one solution to the issue.

Garry

Originally Posted by p38arover

We have that here already. One can't even drive an old Land Rover County V8 yet one can drive a Holden V6 with a bigger engine and much more power. But the authorities have ruled V8 = bad.

Personally, I'm against the limits on what new drivers can drive.

Exactly, the anti-V8 crew are a bunch of un-educated nancy footed clowns anyway, the type that hit the brakes in traffic before they move into the slip lane to turn right etc, you know what I mean.

The number of cylinders does not dictate how fast something goes!!!

If they want to restrict cars for younger drivers (and I'm a Green P Plater) then IMO it should be done on power to weight ratios with speed and acceleration factored in! There should be an actual mathematical formula, not a beaurocratic stab in the dark to keep bogans out of Falcons and Commodores.

For instance I just finished installing a new engine in my dune buggy, a 0.6L Yamaha factory road bike engine, the whole vehicle weighs 350kg, and with 85hp it's an absolute weapon, would accelerate faster than a Commodore if you could retain grip. And that is a 4 CYLINDER 0.6 LITRE MOTOR!!! So don't tell me a Range Rover classic is going to send me head first into a telegraph pole just because it's asthmatic old motor has 8 cylinders!!

Oh and the number of idiots that tell me I shouldn't be driving my Td5 Discovery because it's a "turbo" need to get their facts right too!

Some people

Sorry that became a bit if a rant!

Cheers
Will