User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 12:35:49 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is why you have your wheels pointed straight ahead when waiting at an intersection to turn left. -- If wheels turned, the impact puts you in the path of the oncoming vehicle in the lane you are waiting to cross over. Or in my case, it allowed me to stomp on the gas and move out of the way of the car that ended up occupying the spot mine had just been. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 12:47:44 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Know How to Respond to a Rear-End Wreck Doctors and car accident injury lawyers see it all the time. Severe cases of whiplash, head trauma, or other injuries that would not have happened if the victim hadn’t stepped on their brake during the impact. It’s an impulsive move to apply the brake and brace when you can see that a crash is going to happen. But, keep in mind that this response can lead to more serious injuries. When you’re in a rear-end crash, don’t hit your brake. Instead, allow the car to take on the force and distribute it. The car lurches forward or hitting the curb will result in less damage to you, but more damage to your car. Anything to reduce injuries to the people inside the vehicles is always the better option. You don’t need to accelerate, but if you have time, you can plan on where to direct your car. Guardrails, curbs, and shoulders are always best because they can help slow your momentum while likely only causing damage to your vehicle. But, keep in mind that diving into other lanes of traffic is not safe. Virginia Injury Law This is a lot like the Monty Hall and airplane on the treadmill. The above poster explained the result of the experiment I laid out. Brakes on equals more damage to your car and less acceleration to objects inside your car. Brakes off equals less damage to your car, higher acceleration of your car into the stationary objects inside your car. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 12:55:29 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Know How to Respond to a Rear-End Wreck Doctors and car accident injury lawyers see it all the time. Severe cases of whiplash, head trauma, or other injuries that would not have happened if the victim hadn’t stepped on their brake during the impact. It’s an impulsive move to apply the brake and brace when you can see that a crash is going to happen. But, keep in mind that this response can lead to more serious injuries. When you’re in a rear-end crash, don’t hit your brake. Instead, allow the car to take on the force and distribute it. The car lurches forward or hitting the curb will result in less damage to you, but more damage to your car. Anything to reduce injuries to the people inside the vehicles is always the better option. You don’t need to accelerate, but if you have time, you can plan on where to direct your car. Guardrails, curbs, and shoulders are always best because they can help slow your momentum while likely only causing damage to your vehicle. But, keep in mind that diving into other lanes of traffic is not safe. Virginia Injury Law Lol. That's pretty stupid, even for a lawyer. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 12:59:18 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistorySontar-ha! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:05:28 PM EDT
[#5]
It looks like the IIHS guys that study this stuff are in the "no brakes" camp.
 Inside IIHS: Rear testing for whiplash prevention |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:06:55 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She was probably looking at her cell phone Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I lived on a busy (35mph) street. I was waiting to turn left, into my driveway. I always kept an eye on the rear view mirror, for the exact reason you're describing. Sure as shit, a Volvo wasn't slowing down, so I pressed back, into the seat and head rest, and lifted off the brake pedal. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/512966/20150213_171623_zpsesq5o7u2_jpg-2827279.JPG "I was checking on my kids, in the mirror," was her excuse. "They're in fucking car seats! They're not going anywhere!" I was fine, but my truck was totalled. She was probably looking at her cell phone Eh, cell phone, kids... doesn't matter. She wasn't looking where the fuck she was supposed to be looking. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:12:07 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It looks like the IIHS guys that study this stuff are in the "no brakes" camp.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkeFAZf7J9EI didn't hear them mention brakes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:14:02 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Guys it's the force of acceleration that hurts your body. Foot hard on brake pedal will lessen that acceleration forward. Yes, the cars will sustain more damage this way from not giving to the force. The punching bag analogy is backwards. You aren't the one punching. You are a mass inside the bag. The heavier more unmovable bag will keep concussive force from being applied to you. Anyway there's probably no time to react. Head against the headrest will help you from being smacked. ETA: beat bad When that car hits, the force is applied to your car and you will accelerate HARD regardless. However resisting the motion will reduce the distance that the energy is expended in, making the acceleration more intense. Allowing the vehicle to accelerate slightly more slowly by not locking the brakes, you have increased the distance that the energy is expended in, and transferred significantly more energy to the vehicle in front of you. Either way you are going to get accelerated hard. Brakes tend to shorten the duration and sharpen the blow. Rolling will lengthen the duration and soften the blow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:18:29 PM EDT
[#9]
Pull forward, brake hard, raises rear of your vehicle. Fucker can end up under my SUV
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:25:42 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Question for the No Brakes Group: You are going to get rear ended, you will not have the brakes on. The offending vehicle is 8,000 lbs traveling 40 mph at impact. There is nothing in front of you, you will coast to a stop whenever. Would you rather be in a 4,000 lb car, or a 20,000 lb dump truck? Explain why. Avoid using phrases like "Duh," think a little further than that. *The structure of the dump truck will obviously not be crushed, assume it is the same for the car. So "duh". But you also have to think of it in terms of impulse and peak acceleration. Force applied over time is impulse. The amount of energy absorbed over the time of the collision is the same with brakes on or off, however with brakes off, the length of time the force is applied, is longer. If you jumping from a 2nd floor window into some material, do you want that material to resist like concrete or like nylon webbing? Either way the force is the same. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:25:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is a pretty simple physics(and even mental) experiment. Sit a brick on the floor with an accelerometer on it. It, in effect, has the brakes applied. Have another brick on wheels and roll it into the stationary brick at x velocity. Put the accelerometer brick on wheels. This one, in effect, has no brakes applied. Hit it with the moving brick at the same velocity. Which reading do you think will read the most Gs? I don’t *know* the answer but I assume the brick with wheels is going to read lower Gs. For folks familiar with areas prone to sandstorms, the road signs clearly state - pull off roadway, release brakes. To my mind, that is because in the event of being struck from behind by another vehicle, less energy will be exerted upon the passengers of the stopped vehicle if the brakes are released. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:26:19 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It looks like the IIHS guys that study this stuff are in the "no brakes" camp. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkeFAZf7J9EThat video has ZERO to do with whether retarding your car's forward motion by applying the brakes is good or bad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:27:49 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I sing “Jesus take the wheeeeeeel”  This made me laugh 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:29:21 PM EDT
[#14]
Put car in park and exit vehicle?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:29:29 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is incorrect. When that car hits, the force is applied to your car and you will accelerate HARD regardless. However resisting the motion will reduce the distance that the energy is expended in, making the acceleration more intense. Allowing the vehicle to accelerate slightly more slowly by not locking the brakes, you have increased the distance that the energy is expended in, and transferred significantly more energy to the vehicle in front of you. Either way you are going to get accelerated hard. Brakes tend to shorten the duration and sharpen the blow. Rolling will lengthen the duration and soften the blow. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Guys it's the force of acceleration that hurts your body. Foot hard on brake pedal will lessen that acceleration forward. Yes, the cars will sustain more damage this way from not giving to the force. The punching bag analogy is backwards. You aren't the one punching. You are a mass inside the bag. The heavier more unmovable bag will keep concussive force from being applied to you. Anyway there's probably no time to react. Head against the headrest will help you from being smacked. ETA: beat bad When that car hits, the force is applied to your car and you will accelerate HARD regardless. However resisting the motion will reduce the distance that the energy is expended in, making the acceleration more intense. Allowing the vehicle to accelerate slightly more slowly by not locking the brakes, you have increased the distance that the energy is expended in, and transferred significantly more energy to the vehicle in front of you. Either way you are going to get accelerated hard. Brakes tend to shorten the duration and sharpen the blow. Rolling will lengthen the duration and soften the blow. You only move forward after your car impacts you. Brakes lengthen the amount of time it takes your car to accelerate into you, after being struck. No brakes means it accelerates more quickly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:30:45 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When your car gets pushed into the car in front of you from the impact, YOU will be liable for the damage. Ask me how I know. That wasn’t the case with two people I know who got pushed into other vehicles. The car that hit them was liable for all damage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:31:10 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:31:58 PM EDT
[#18]
I pump the brakes if I’m stopped and someone is approaching. I want them to see the changing lights.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:33:32 PM EDT
[#19]
4 low and drive over car in front of me?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:34:09 PM EDT
[#20]
I predict this to be GD's new "plane on a treadmill."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:36:16 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don’t *know* the answer but I assume the brick with wheels is going to read lower Gs. For folks familiar with areas prone to sandstorms, the road signs clearly state - pull off roadway, release brakes. To my mind, that is because in the event of being struck from behind by another vehicle, less energy will be exerted upon the passengers of the stopped vehicle if the brakes are released. Let's do another thought experiment. Your car has the option of being welded, bolted, and concreted to the road where you sit. The car beside you is freewheeling. There is an egg on the dash, just laying there in each car. Both cars are struck by the same force, from behind. Which egg moves further back in each car? It's a trick question. The egg doesn't move and neither does the driver. The car is pushed into them. Which car will be driven forward the furthest and fastest? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:37:17 PM EDT
[#22]
Arms/hands off wheel, crossed over chest, chin tucked. Don't brace your legs.
If you sit close to the wheel, don't tuck chin. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:38:36 PM EDT
[#23]
Remove gun from waistband, unload if it’s a Sig?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:39:17 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I predict this to be GD's new "plane on a treadmill." It's already made an ass out of GD a few times. I don't think any of the physics flunkies are ever educated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:39:39 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I predict this to be GD's new "plane on a treadmill." It's shaping up that way. Even after empirical evidence, some people still believed the plane could not take off. Even after a simple chart, some people still believed the Monty Hall problem was 50/50. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:48:34 PM EDT
[#26]
Smile, because I am in a 1973 Gran Torino with all new brakes and tires. Miss iPhone Instagram is about to lose all her teeth.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:53:17 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is what I was saying in the 3rd or 4th post. No way is keeping your foot on the brake going to impart less force into your body. It just doesn't make sense. It doesn’t matter either way- upon impact the car is going to scoot forward removing your foot from the brake pedal anyway so it makes literally no difference |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:53:21 PM EDT
[#28]
Whip out your cell phone and speed dial Morgan, Morgan, Morgan, Morgan and Morgan.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 1:58:52 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Let's do another thought experiment. Your car has the option of being welded, bolted, and concreted to the road where you sit. The car beside you is freewheeling. There is an egg on the dash, just laying there in each car. Both cars are struck by the same force, from behind. Which egg moves further back in each car? It's a trick question. The egg doesn't move and neither does the driver. The car is pushed into them. Which car will be driven forward the furthest and fastest? I’m lost. Let me ask a simple question. Are the signs in NM/TX intended to prevent injuries to the occupants of the stopped car or not? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:03:50 PM EDT
[#30]
My buddy jumped a train track at 50mph in a late 80’s MR2. Pitched a little sideways in the air and we hit a guard rail head on at full speed.
I braced myself. The guard rail was literally at my left side inside the car after it tore through the dash and windshield. If I hadn’t braced my arms against the roof for the jump it would have taken my left arm for certain. The floor of the car literally caved in all around my feet to the point I could only pull one leg out at a time. My feet hurt a tiny bit but I wouldn’t believe it if I saw it in a movie. A lady who witnessed it pulled up crying because she was sure we were both dead. It’s a one off, but if I hadn’t braced myself in that exact scenario I very likely would have died. For rear ended, I would think relaxed and head back would be the best bet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:04:08 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You only move forward after your car impacts you. Brakes lengthen the amount of time it takes your car to accelerate into you, after being struck. No brakes means it accelerates more quickly. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Guys it's the force of acceleration that hurts your body. Foot hard on brake pedal will lessen that acceleration forward. Yes, the cars will sustain more damage this way from not giving to the force. The punching bag analogy is backwards. You aren't the one punching. You are a mass inside the bag. The heavier more unmovable bag will keep concussive force from being applied to you. Anyway there's probably no time to react. Head against the headrest will help you from being smacked. ETA: beat bad When that car hits, the force is applied to your car and you will accelerate HARD regardless. However resisting the motion will reduce the distance that the energy is expended in, making the acceleration more intense. Allowing the vehicle to accelerate slightly more slowly by not locking the brakes, you have increased the distance that the energy is expended in, and transferred significantly more energy to the vehicle in front of you. Either way you are going to get accelerated hard. Brakes tend to shorten the duration and sharpen the blow. Rolling will lengthen the duration and soften the blow. You only move forward after your car impacts you. Brakes lengthen the amount of time it takes your car to accelerate into you, after being struck. No brakes means it accelerates more quickly. This process unfolds pretty quickly, but here it is: As the car starts to fold up, energy is already transmitted through the entire vehicle and the vehicle is in motion. Once the vehicle is in motion, only friction will act against it. The vehicle will continue to accelerate, brakes or no, until the energy has been shared equally between the other car and your car. If you have more friction, the motion of your vehicle will be reduced DURING the collision, which means more acceleration is spread across fewer inches of travel. This peaks acceleration at at higher value. If you don't use brakes, the motion of your vehicle will increase more, and during the collision, will travel many more inches until it hits something in front of you or you manually bring the vehicle to a stop. This spreads the acceleration out more, making it peak at a lower value. Most people who argue your side are ignoring the momentary acceleration of the inital bending of the metal and plastic. This is vastly more powerful than the friction of the tires, and contributes more to the "BANG" of the impact, and the subsequent bodily injuries. However the top speed of the vehicle immediately after the impact is not the peak acceleration indicator. Remember, acceleration is a RATE, not a speed. Accelerating from 0-10 mph in .02 seconds is 50% worse than accelerating from 0-10 mph in .03 seconds. Letting the wheels spin freely, lengthens the time of impact therefore softening the impact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:06:24 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m lost. Let me ask a simple question. Are the signs in NM/TX intended to prevent injuries to the occupants of the stopped car or not? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Let's do another thought experiment. Your car has the option of being welded, bolted, and concreted to the road where you sit. The car beside you is freewheeling. There is an egg on the dash, just laying there in each car. Both cars are struck by the same force, from behind. Which egg moves further back in each car? It's a trick question. The egg doesn't move and neither does the driver. The car is pushed into them. Which car will be driven forward the furthest and fastest? I’m lost. Let me ask a simple question. Are the signs in NM/TX intended to prevent injuries to the occupants of the stopped car or not? Never saw them. Are you claiming the government is competent, wise, uses studies in a factual and legitimate way and would post signs for your individual well being? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:06:40 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That wasn't the case with two people I know who got pushed into other vehicles. The car that hit them was liable for all damage. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: When your car gets pushed into the car in front of you from the impact, YOU will be liable for the damage. Ask me how I know. That wasn't the case with two people I know who got pushed into other vehicles. The car that hit them was liable for all damage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:07:47 PM EDT
[#34]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:10:31 PM EDT
[#35]
Step 1) finish mcchicken sammy
Step 2) Step execute PIT manuever on vehicle in front of you Step 3) land a perfect tuck and roll out of the window Step 4) get up, brush dust off of tuxedo and walk away not looking back at the devastation. (This is important) |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:10:41 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Let's do another thought experiment. Your car has the option of being welded, bolted, and concreted to the road where you sit. The car beside you is freewheeling. There is an egg on the dash, just laying there in each car. Both cars are struck by the same force, from behind. Which egg moves further back in each car? It's a trick question. The egg doesn't move and neither does the driver. The car is pushed into them. Which car will be driven forward the furthest and fastest? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I don't *know* the answer but I assume the brick with wheels is going to read lower Gs. For folks familiar with areas prone to sandstorms, the road signs clearly state - pull off roadway, release brakes. To my mind, that is because in the event of being struck from behind by another vehicle, less energy will be exerted upon the passengers of the stopped vehicle if the brakes are released. Let's do another thought experiment. Your car has the option of being welded, bolted, and concreted to the road where you sit. The car beside you is freewheeling. There is an egg on the dash, just laying there in each car. Both cars are struck by the same force, from behind. Which egg moves further back in each car? It's a trick question. The egg doesn't move and neither does the driver. The car is pushed into them. Which car will be driven forward the furthest and fastest? Let's assume for the purposes of discussion that ANY car struck from behind fast enough will move (no magic bolts, pylons, concrete), and that the masses of the cars are similar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:11:07 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Foot off the brake so your car can move with the impact, thus reducing sudden acceleration on you. Hands crossed on chest. Head/ torso leaned back snugly into your seat to reduce snap on your head. *** Not a physicist
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:12:42 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not really. You start to move forward as soon as the impact begins and things start to bend. This process unfolds pretty quickly, but here it is: As the car starts to fold up, energy is already transmitted through the entire vehicle and the vehicle is in motion. Once the vehicle is in motion, only friction will act against it. The vehicle will continue to accelerate, brakes or no, until the energy has been shared equally between the other car and your car. If you have more friction, the motion of your vehicle will be reduced DURING the collision, which means more acceleration is spread across fewer inches of travel. This peaks acceleration at at higher value. If you don't use brakes, the motion of your vehicle will increase more, and during the collision, will travel many more inches until it hits something in front of you or you manually bring the vehicle to a stop. This spreads the acceleration out more, making it peak at a lower value. Most people who argue your side are ignoring the momentary acceleration of the inital bending of the metal and plastic. This is vastly more powerful than the friction of the tires, and contributes more to the "BANG" of the impact, and the subsequent bodily injuries. However the top speed of the vehicle immediately after the impact is not the peak acceleration indicator. Remember, acceleration is a RATE, not a speed. Accelerating from 0-10 mph in .02 seconds is 50% worse than accelerating from 0-10 mph in .03 seconds. Letting the wheels spin freely, lengthens the time of impact therefore softening the impact. So all the high-end vehicles that let off the brakes just before you get hit are right. Because they have engineers that design that stuff, not GD quarterbacks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:16:32 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Pop that bitch in reverse and floor it. Years ago, when the pizza place I was working for made us all go to a defensive driving course, this is exactly what they said to do. Wasn't a big fan of the idea then and I don't know if I like it any better now, but that's what they told us to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:16:47 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not really. You start to move forward as soon as the impact begins and things start to bend. This process unfolds pretty quickly, but here it is: As the car starts to fold up, energy is already transmitted through the entire vehicle and the vehicle is in motion. Once the vehicle is in motion, only friction will act against it. The vehicle will continue to accelerate, brakes or no, until the energy has been shared equally between the other car and your car. If you have more friction, the motion of your vehicle will be reduced DURING the collision, which means more acceleration is spread across fewer inches of travel. This peaks acceleration at at higher value. If you don't use brakes, the motion of your vehicle will increase more, and during the collision, will travel many more inches until it hits something in front of you or you manually bring the vehicle to a stop. This spreads the acceleration out more, making it peak at a lower value. Most people who argue your side are ignoring the momentary acceleration of the inital bending of the metal and plastic. This is vastly more powerful than the friction of the tires, and contributes more to the "BANG" of the impact, and the subsequent bodily injuries. However the top speed of the vehicle immediately after the impact is not the peak acceleration indicator. Remember, acceleration is a RATE, not a speed. Accelerating from 0-10 mph in .02 seconds is 50% worse than accelerating from 0-10 mph in .03 seconds. Letting the wheels spin freely, lengthens the time of impact therefore softening the impact. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Guys it's the force of acceleration that hurts your body. Foot hard on brake pedal will lessen that acceleration forward. Yes, the cars will sustain more damage this way from not giving to the force. The punching bag analogy is backwards. You aren't the one punching. You are a mass inside the bag. The heavier more unmovable bag will keep concussive force from being applied to you. Anyway there's probably no time to react. Head against the headrest will help you from being smacked. ETA: beat bad When that car hits, the force is applied to your car and you will accelerate HARD regardless. However resisting the motion will reduce the distance that the energy is expended in, making the acceleration more intense. Allowing the vehicle to accelerate slightly more slowly by not locking the brakes, you have increased the distance that the energy is expended in, and transferred significantly more energy to the vehicle in front of you. Either way you are going to get accelerated hard. Brakes tend to shorten the duration and sharpen the blow. Rolling will lengthen the duration and soften the blow. You only move forward after your car impacts you. Brakes lengthen the amount of time it takes your car to accelerate into you, after being struck. No brakes means it accelerates more quickly. This process unfolds pretty quickly, but here it is: As the car starts to fold up, energy is already transmitted through the entire vehicle and the vehicle is in motion. Once the vehicle is in motion, only friction will act against it. The vehicle will continue to accelerate, brakes or no, until the energy has been shared equally between the other car and your car. If you have more friction, the motion of your vehicle will be reduced DURING the collision, which means more acceleration is spread across fewer inches of travel. This peaks acceleration at at higher value. If you don't use brakes, the motion of your vehicle will increase more, and during the collision, will travel many more inches until it hits something in front of you or you manually bring the vehicle to a stop. This spreads the acceleration out more, making it peak at a lower value. Most people who argue your side are ignoring the momentary acceleration of the inital bending of the metal and plastic. This is vastly more powerful than the friction of the tires, and contributes more to the "BANG" of the impact, and the subsequent bodily injuries. However the top speed of the vehicle immediately after the impact is not the peak acceleration indicator. Remember, acceleration is a RATE, not a speed. Accelerating from 0-10 mph in .02 seconds is 50% worse than accelerating from 0-10 mph in .03 seconds. Letting the wheels spin freely, lengthens the time of impact therefore softening the impact. Your car will absorb more energy, I agree. It will necessarily accelerate more slowly which is the important part to the object with inertia sitting in the seat, trying to remain still. This calls for a DOE. Empirical evidence trumps all. I'm more than willing to admit if I'm wrong. But I'm willing to bet I'm right. I don't have accelerometers and the pass/fail ones aren't going to be very applicable, I don't think. I will think of a different way to measure impact to the occupant. I will allow that, with brakes applied and absent the airbag, the secondary impact of your face( with a lot of forward inertia ) with the, now, stationary windshield could play a significant factor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:19:25 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Freewheeling car will be pushed farther and faster, but is this a real world question? The car that is bolted in place, unless it is protected by some extreme bollards or something similar will get flattened because it wouldn't be able to give. Let's assume for the purposes of discussion that ANY car struck from behind fast enough will move (no magic bolts, pylons, concrete), and that the masses of the cars are similar. It is only an ad infinitum supposition. I use them often when figuring minutiae in machining. Extrapolate to extreme condition then walk back to reality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:25:30 PM EDT
[#42]
In this thread we can see who doesn't understand what an inelastic collision is, and how a force vector dissipates kinetic energy.
After the collision, you want your car to be moving forward as much as possible, as quickly as possible, dissipating as much kinetic energy as possible. Ideally, both you and the driver of the car in front of you, and the driver of the one in front of it, have your foot off the brake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:27:13 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think it's like: what would hurt more to punch, a heavy bag that hangs from a chain (taking your foot off the brake) or a heavy bag that's fixed to a wall and doesn't move (foot on the brake upon impact)? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Foot off the brake so your car can move with the impact, thus reducing sudden acceleration on you. Hands crossed on chest. Head/ torso leaned back snugly into your seat to reduce snap on your head. Not sure I’m following that. If your car can move then it’s going to accelerate faster than if it can’t, right? I think it's like: what would hurt more to punch, a heavy bag that hangs from a chain (taking your foot off the brake) or a heavy bag that's fixed to a wall and doesn't move (foot on the brake upon impact)? This is where anyone with even a high school level of Physics, is having difficulty following. Who GAF about the moron about to slam into you? They can die, for all I care. What matters is the effect on your vehicle, and its occupants. Think of it this way; boxers and NFL players train to build a bull neck, because it helps reduce movement/acceleration of the head, in return, reducing the potential acceleration and impact of the brain inside the skull. The vehicle is like your skull. You want to minimize its movement/acceleration, so less acceleration is transferred to the occupants. Allowing it to move freely, by taking your foot off the brakes, increases the amount if acceleration the occupants will experience. Other things to keep in mind: 1 - putting your head back against the headrest is good advice. It will minimize whiplash. You're depending on the cushioning in the headrest to absorb some of the force, and lessen the acceleration 2 - while your brain can withstand a remarkable amount of linear acceleration/deceleration (kudos to the Human Crash Test Dummy, Dr John Stapp, for voluntarily subjecting himself to crazy Gs, to see what humans could endure), a twisting acceleration can injure a person at much lower levels. Bear that in mind, regarding the advice to crank your wheel to one side before impact 3 - the exception for #2, is if you determine that the vehicle approaching will likely crush yours (eg. those multi vehicle pileup we've seen, where a semi comes blasting through, obliterating several vehicles. In that case, I'd do whatever was necessary to get out of its way, even if I have to ram someone ahead while turning off the road). |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:28:54 PM EDT
[#44]
Throw it in reverse and punch it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:33:15 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was rear ended in the right lane in a 45 mph zone. The car in front on me came to a complete stop in the lane and slow rolled a right turn. I stopped to avoid rear ending them. I looked up in the rear view mirror, and saw an explorer change into the right lane to pass another vehicle in the left lane. I had enough time to think, “this asshole is going to hit me,” and I reflexively braced my arms against the wheel to push myself into the seat. He hit me without slowing down and smashed the rear end of my car. I got out fine, and so did he. First thing he said when he got out of the car, “Did you see that guy stop ahead of you? It was his fault right?” My response, “Yeah, I stopped because he stopped. I’m calling the cops to report the accident.” The best part, he didn’t have any insurance or a drivers license. Hurray for illegal aliens. Driving through a city on my way home, in the rain, the Ranger in front of me started to climb the curb to his right (right hand lane of a four lane road). I was wondering what he was doing and it hit me, he was trying to miss the guy in front of him. I had a '94 Dodge Ram (no ABS) and stopping quickly wasn't it's "thing". I put the brakes on as hard as I thought I could without breaking loose and was rewarded by missing the guy in front of me with a mildly comfortable margin. Then I got smacked. Not really hard and not enough to move me appreciably. Looked in the rear-view and saw a mid-90s Thunderbird. Wondered how the hell I outbraked him but then noticed he'd gotten read-ended by an S-10. OK, that made sense. We all pulled in to the parking lot next to us and S-10 guy talked to Thunderbird guy and then came up to tell me how the Ranger was #1 at fault and I was #2. Asked him how the hell he figured that and he said because I stopped fast. I laughed and said, yeah, that's how I don't hit the guy in front of me and that's all that matters. He grumbled more about my "fault" in this and I asked him if he'd heard of assured clear distance. He snapped back that he had it. I laughed and said not if he rear-ended the Thunderbird hard enough to push him into me. He said we could see what the police say and I told him that was just fine with me. He went back and sat in the Thunderbird. Seemed like those two were getting along famously. Anyways, the police showed up about an hour later and the officer talked to me first. I gave him my version of what happened and he asked if I had any damage. My hitch receiver was maybe missing some paint, but nothing I was worried about. Told him I was OK and he said I could split. I told him S-10 guy claims I'm at fault and he laughed and said, "That's all him. Have a good night." |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:33:34 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wrong, making your car easier to move lengthens the moment of energy transfer and reduces peak impulse Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This is a game of hot potato. Whoever absorbs the most energy loses. If your car is easily moved it absorbs more of the energy which it can transfer to you. and you lose. If your car is harder to move more energy is retained by the idiot. Less can be transferred to you. You win. In neutral with foot off brake is voluntarily accepting the transfer of more energy. Imagine car hits wall. You are on opposite side. Wall moves, you get hurt. Wall doesn't move, they get hurt. Brake/no brake probably doesn't make as much difference as we think, but why take any more energy than required? Wrong. I DGAF about impulse on the VEHICLE. What matters is the Impulse force the OCCUPANTS are subjected to. The more the vehicle moves, the greater the transfer to the OCCUPANTS. The vehicle's crumple zones are what's responsible for reducing the Impulse Force on the occupants. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:44:40 PM EDT
[#47]
Having experienced this, in a silver Ford Taurus, while stopped for highway construction, and being rear ended by a 3/4 ton pickup pulling a 30' camper, going 70+ mph ...
Put your head firmly against the head rest. Let your foot off the brake if you can. I have a memory of the realization he wasn't stopping, visual memory of the impact consisting of flying gray/silver, and no memory of the following hour or so, where I was apparently lucid enough during part of it to give my wife's phone number to someone else, speak to her on their cell phone, and tell her I was in a wreck, then apparently lost some measure of responsiveness and was unconscious when medics finally arrived. Woke up in the amberlamps. Foot on or off the brake can be debated, in my case I'm fairly sure it contributed to uneven forces through right leg, hip, sacrum, lower back, ending in spondylolisthesis that took good PT and months to recover from. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:51:15 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It looks like the IIHS guys that study this stuff are in the "no brakes" camp. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkeFAZf7J9EAnd THIS is an example of why you watch the video yourself, instead of trusting someone else's conclusion, because NOWHERE in this video, do they mention ANYTHING about applying or not applying the brakes. All the video shows, is that the IIHS tests different car seats and car seat designs, to see which of them do better in a 20mph rear end crash (and all the video concludes, is that better seats (unnamed) do better). In other words, a completely useless/pointless video wrt the topic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:52:22 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is where anyone with even a high school level of Physics, is having difficulty following. Who GAF about the moron about to slam into you? They can die, for all I care. What matters is the effect on your vehicle, and its occupants. Think of it this way; boxers and NFL players train to build a bull neck, because it helps reduce movement/acceleration of the head, in return, reducing the potential acceleration and impact of the brain inside the skull. The vehicle is like your skull. You want to minimize its movement/acceleration, so less acceleration is transferred to the occupants. Allowing it to move freely, by taking your foot off the brakes, increases the amount if acceleration the occupants will experience. Other things to keep in mind: 1 - putting your head back against the headrest is good advice. It will minimize whiplash. You're depending on the cushioning in the headrest to absorb some of the force, and lessen the acceleration 2 - while your brain can withstand a remarkable amount of linear acceleration/deceleration (kudos to the Human Crash Test Dummy, Dr John Stapp, for voluntarily subjecting himself to crazy Gs, to see what humans could endure), a twisting acceleration can injure a person at much lower levels. Bear that in mind, regarding the advice to crank your wheel to one side before impact 3 - the exception for #2, is if you determine that the vehicle approaching will likely crush yours (eg. those multi vehicle pileup we've seen, where a semi comes blasting through, obliterating several vehicles. In that case, I'd do whatever was necessary to get out of its way, even if I have to ram someone ahead while turning off the road). Good analogy. You are your brain. Your skull, the car. Your neck, the brakes holding the car still. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2023 2:54:03 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You only move forward after your car impacts you. Brakes lengthen the amount of time it takes your car to accelerate into you, after being struck. No brakes means it accelerates more quickly. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Guys it's the force of acceleration that hurts your body. Foot hard on brake pedal will lessen that acceleration forward. Yes, the cars will sustain more damage this way from not giving to the force. The punching bag analogy is backwards. You aren't the one punching. You are a mass inside the bag. The heavier more unmovable bag will keep concussive force from being applied to you. Anyway there's probably no time to react. Head against the headrest will help you from being smacked. ETA: beat bad When that car hits, the force is applied to your car and you will accelerate HARD regardless. However resisting the motion will reduce the distance that the energy is expended in, making the acceleration more intense. Allowing the vehicle to accelerate slightly more slowly by not locking the brakes, you have increased the distance that the energy is expended in, and transferred significantly more energy to the vehicle in front of you. Either way you are going to get accelerated hard. Brakes tend to shorten the duration and sharpen the blow. Rolling will lengthen the duration and soften the blow. You only move forward after your car impacts you. Brakes lengthen the amount of time it takes your car to accelerate into you, after being struck. No brakes means it accelerates more quickly. Figures that GD would be full of people with an inadequate understanding of physics, trying to make their (incorrect) points with their poor understanding of physics. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File