Is this the end of "Real" 4x4's ?

If I were transport minister:

- The driving license would include extra emergency stops, skid control, observation tests, car sympathy, driving economically, basic maintenance, first aid, some theory eg ABS, and all the stuff done in advanced driving such a wheel grip.

- you'd need to take it every 3 years (the test)

- the top 10% would get insurance discounts

- bottom 10% get a red flashing light on their roof

- you'd need a special license to drive trailers, 4WDs, forward control vehicles. Right now you can pass in an Excel, then drive a Suburban with a trailer. Hmm. 4WD test would just involve understanding of the extra vehicle and ensuring we don't have people driving around with centre diffs locked etc.

- speed limits would be 10% lower in the wet

- if you can't do the maths you lose your license

- there would be a special squad of police cars that find people who don't move over to the left, pull them out of their cars, administer a swift kick in the gonads and then let them drive on. Females...well I'm sure we could think of something.

- there would be usability ADRs on car stereos

- speeding cameras would be signposted clearly and in places where they're needed registration and other taxes lowered, as we'd be making a shedload of $ out of all the extra licenses and renewals

- pedestrians would be reinforced to cope with impact to cars

- anyone leaving more than 1m between cars when parallel parking has to retake their test

- ditto for anyone breaking the 2 second rule

- alcohol limit goes to 0%

- special 4WD only lanes on the highway

- police cars would have to obey the road laws except during an emergency. If they didn't we'd find all the people who had been kicked in the nuts for not moving over and even things up.

and on the second day I'd think of some more improvements :-)

totally agree with rmp's views - especially those who do not keep left!!!

:idea: :roll: Don't know why I didn't think of this earlier!
This would keep BB in his job in the mattress shopfor ever!!!


Why don't we just wrap all cars in double bed mattresses, so all pedestrians will just bounce off, added bonus that if you get tired driving just pull over and hey presto, instant bed!

But on a more serious note ,if they make the front of vehicles more crumplier, what happens when a collision occurs with another vehicle ,or worse a wall, then what , ban all walls???????


wake up to reality, peds on footpath ,cars on road, keep em separate ,no problems!!! :wink:

And times haven't changed much, not have the names!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fernockulated

:idea: :roll: Don't know why I didn't think of this earlier!
This would keep BB in his job in the mattress shopfor ever!!!

Why don't we just wrap all cars in double bed mattresses, so all pedestrians will just bounce off, .....

---

Not a completely good idea, as the pedestrians bounce off the mattress then would hit the road injuring themselves and still the 4WD will get the blame.

Better to have Velcro covered mattresses and the pedestrians would just stick to the car, giving you time to pull over and stop, then peel them off and send them on their way un-injured. :D :D

Serious stuff this car V pedestrian issue. It is all in the physics (dynamics) of the accident. Young children get run over (causing all manner of other injuries) while adults get run under. Fitting a traditional bull-bars to cars and 4WD turn adults into children in terms of the dynamics of the incident.

The last bit of the story that never gets mentioned, because it doesn't suit the anti-4WD protagonists, is that fitting the traditional bull bar means that the dynamics of the scenario is the same as a pedestrian being hit by a forward control van or a truck.

Diana

I can't read the article in 'Drive', because its been removed, but what seems to have been forgotten, or deliberately ignored, by many of the anti-bullbar mob, is that most modern bullbars follow the shape of the parent vehicle pretty accurately, and so an impact from the bullbar actually emulates that of an impact from the car itself. The bullbar on my P38 is at the same height and has almost the same profile as the original bumper. The upright part of the bar curves back at exactly the same angle as the front of the car, and it is made up of a 3 inch diameter aluminium pipe so it is curved and will cause a minimum of damage.

But if you hate bullbars you will hate bullbars, no matter what design they are. That's the problem.

Willem

i put it down to darwinism and natural selection..... you step out in front of me, you fail natural selection!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rmp

- bottom 10% get a red flashing light on their roof

:-)

---

Brilliant idea. Get that man a banana :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sprint

i put it down to darwinism and natural selection..... you step out in front of me, you fail natural selection!

---

I'd say that is precisely the process of NS working. ;)

As someone who has been hit by a car I may be able to provide some special advice to pedestrians:

KEEP OFF THE BLOODY ROAD WHEN YOU SHOULDN'T BE THERE.

Its pretty a simple idea, and since my rather quick lesson on the matter I've found it a very effective principle to follow.

Harm minimisation is great, and I agree that things like fishing rod tubes are not OK in urban areas but there really needs to be more personal responsibility for pedestrians. As it stands I think legally a pedestrian always has right of way (correct me if I'm wrong here) and I actually think that should change.

BTW, id be interested to know what percentage of people hit by cars are run over by a Taxi while drunk..