His personal details don't help either:

emoskunt
S2 licensed



Racername: emoslut.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: withyour.GF
Posts: 18

Just an all-around idiot, methinks.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

You cannot really feel when your tires leave the ground. Although you can feel it when the tires hit the ground after being airborne. I have never had any of the tires leave the ground. I've gone over a crest on a 25mph limit road at 60mph, and I could feel the loss of traction. But I doubt I was airborne at all, there wasn't as much weight on the tires. And I went over a slight dip on a 35mph road going about 85mph earlier today, and I almost went sideways. But if I were to crash because of that, and be paralyzed for the rest of my life, then I wouldn't blame anyone but myself. EDIT: What they need on some roads is a sign like this:

Yeah - all four tires DID leave the ground. It was fairly obvious when we came back down - as you stated. My dad was pretty pissed, cause he'd had his Audi for not more than a month and we heard the front and rear bumpers scrape the gravel - such a pleasant sound.

Quote from ajp71 :

Your may as well demand your local supermarket to install tire walls and gravel traps with paramedics on standby in case you suddenly decide to drive 4 times faster than you should be.

Lol. It's funny you should use that as an example. A minivan crashed into the front entrance of our local supermarket about a month ago. They rebuilt it and added those solid pylon... things... in front to keep the next car from doing the same thing (though I wouldn't call that making it safer for the driver...)

You're right though. When I originally posted this I wasn't thinking about the speeds really. It's true that even a hardly noticeable bump can really be exaggerated at 4x the speed in a low slung sports car with a really stiff suspension. I am still curious though to see the bump that caused the accident.

Last edited by Stang70Fastback, Mon, 3 Mar 2008 02:23.

Quote from March Hare :

Must have been one hell of a dip.

How do you know it was completely airborne... assuming that you mean all four wheels being of the ground.

Trust me, you know when all four tires leave the ground, lol. And yes, it was a hell of a dip. It was at the end of a 1-lane bridge - the road literally dropped down at a 30 degree angle a few feet - out of nowhere.

Quote from ajp71 :

I know it's not a speed bump but it obviously doesn't upset cars traveling around the speed limit. You wouldn't drive down a street with speed bumps at 120mph, if you did you'd destroy your car and likely kill yourself in the process, in the same sense you shouldn't drive at 120mph in a 30.

There's a local dual carriageway near my house (limit 70mph) that has a bend over a crest with a slight bump in the road on it, at 70mph its hardly noticeable, at 90mph it will unsettle a car badly and if you tried to drive over it at a 110mph you would end up in the armco, what possible grounds are there for why the crest should be leveled (at great cost)? The solution is simple, drive close to the speed limit on a road you don't know, if we don't want to have speed cameras ensuring people drive at a sensible speed we have to rely on common sense and it doesn't take much common sense to work out that driving at 4 times the legal limit is likely to be dangerous. Had that car been traveling at 30mph it probably wouldn't even have reached those concrete posts and if it did it would have hit them with 16 times less energy.

I'm not at all saying he wasn't traveling way too fast, but I'd just like to know what kind of a bump it was that sent that car flying... and I'm only wondering why it wasn't fixed because it was not the first time there'd been an accident there because of it. There can be races for YEARS at a major racetrack, but then if ONE person slams into the guardrail coming out of a turn, they fix the problem to avoid it happening again years down the road. It's a lot less expensive to fix a small bump in the road then to level an entire hill. I see where you're coming from, and I agree entirely - but I'd just like to know whether a well-maintained road would have kept this from happening. God only knows here in the USA, bad roads are the cause of way to many crashes.

Last edited by Stang70Fastback, Sun, 2 Mar 2008 22:50.

Quote from ajp71 :

What planet are you on? Would you go over a speed bump at 60mph on a bike or 120mph in a car?

It wasn't a speed bump from what I understand. My dad got his Audi completely airborne at night once when he went over a dip in a road he'd never driven on... and he was going just 30 mph. It happens.

I my tablet has that same graphics chip (X3100) and my Core 2 Duo is 2.0 Ghz. LFS runs smoothly at full settings at 1400x1050 resolution, believe it or not... but only on the not-as-detailed courses - and the framerate drops a bit when you get near places like the pits. If you turn some of the settings down, I'd think you should be alright though.

Last edited by Stang70Fastback, Mon, 3 Mar 2008 06:03.

Quote from Glenn67 :

LOL that is such a dumb comment so by your reasoning every residential road should be upgraded to an international raceway standard because we can't expect young people to stick to the speed limit ROFL scary thing is I don't think your alone in the way you think

It's not necessarily that dumb of a comment. If that Ferrari went flying while going 4 times the speed limit, it's possible that it will launch a motorcycle just as easily when he's going only twice the limit. And on a motorcycle that's easy to do...

Just because the speed limit on a road is 25 mph, doesn't mean that the road shouldn't be relatively safe to drive on at 35... in fact - it would be ridiculously stupid if it was designed that way.

Still though, if anything - if you're going to do that with your Ferrari, at the very least do it on a road you're familiar with - or drive the road once a bit slower to make sure there aren't any "bumps."

Ok, I may as well say this here. What we really need, is LESS smoke on grass. Nothing more realistic than a giant cloud of green smoke after a burnout on the grass

The fact that he is still even alive after that kind of an accident is nothing short of amazing. Ferrari should use that in their ads. "Our cars are so safe, even if they completely disintegrate, there is a chance you will still be alive."

Quote from andybarsblade :

i bought a evga 780i board so i could sli and now it seems like a waste of time as the new nvidia cards are coming out soon which have dual gpu's anyway, so im going to wait for those

The problem with SLi and Crossfire, is that it's useless for people who buy it with the intention to add another card "down the road." By the time that happens, you can get a different card for the same price that would be just as fast as two of the same cards. It's only really useful for people who buy the two latest and greatest cards right from the start.
Don't get me wrong though, I will always get a mobo that supports either one or the other just in case - but I doubt I'll ever use it.

Quote from AndroidXP :

I don't understand why this thread sparks so much discussion and rage. It's completely pointless.

STFU NOOB!!!

Juuuust kiddinggggg

Quote from Jakg :

You didn't read my post, did you? I meant °C

I know - which is why I added that bit at the end about how even if you DID mean C it's irrelevant. I was just getting annoyed at him nitpicking at all these tiny errors in people's posts...

Quote from Woz :

I take it you mean 180F (87C) as it is not possible to boil water to 180C.

Woz, you're doing it again. I think 90% of the people here realized he meant Farenheight - and what does it matter for the other 10%? The point was that it was VERY hot. That's all that matters. Stop nitpicking - you're just being a smartass...

And you know what - maybe it WAS Celsius - in which case you've just made things complicated for no reason. If it doesn't matter - don't bother arguing it.

Quote from tristancliffe :

I work on the principle that if a car can't up an icy hill without fancy electronic trickery then the conditions are too bad for driving regardless of electronics. And if the driver can't manage without electronics, then the conditions are too bad for him/her.

You are absolutely correct, and NOONE recommends driving in adverse weather conditions if at all possible, but there are many instances when the unexpected occurs - and that's when traction/stability control comes in handy.

Last edited by Stang70Fastback, Fri, 29 Feb 2008 21:22.

Quote from Ian.H :

Then I suggest you say what you mean. I doubt many here are mind readers



Regards,

Ian

I think most people understood way back before you started this quibble, but yeah - I'll try to be super, EXTRA clear next time

Quote from Murray Peterson :

It's amusing to watch someone use TC on an autocross course. Amazingly slow times are the only result, even when the course is almost completely ice. I would happily race against someone that depended on TC.

I feel fairly confident that my Subaru (with no traction control of any sort) would completely destroy my dad's almost-new Audi (with traction control on) in a race on snow. His car just really refuses to move on ice. It's NICE when you don't feel like fighting for traction in wintry conditions - it really is - but it can get a bit annoying when you want to just GO! He doesn't use that 'ESP off' button nearly as much as I would

Quote from Ian.H :

Huh!? Read what you posted above... here, I'll help you, as you clearly have comprehension difficulties:



All 3 of the 'includes' you mention here are European cars, not American cars... the mind boggles.

Rests, your honour, case, etc etc.



Regards,

Ian

What I meant was cars SOLD in America. Those same cars sold in the UK might not have those systems, but all cars SOLD in America.

Quote from Ian.H :

I guess you failed to realise that an E30 is a model of BMW, of which, as I stated already, I don't have TC anywhere near the damn thing.. and very grateful for that.. ironically, neither did my previous car.. a Mercedes 300TE.. so please, look up the definition of 'ALL'.. I think you'll find you haven't grasped the concept of the word.. much like people's confusion with 'want' and 'need'.



Regards,

Ian

I think you failed to realize that we had already come to the decision that I was talking about AMERICAN cars and not EUROPEAN cars. Please read the whole thread if you're going to jump in and start calling people out.

Quote from Ian.H :

Considering how bad most US manufactured cars are at handling, is it any wonder many of them come with TC as standard!?

No TC on my 325i E30.... thankfully


Auto WRXs!? hah... that's just comical!



Regards,

Ian

It's not just American cars though... they ALL have it (this INCLUDES Audis, BMWs, Mercedes, etc...) My dad's last two AWD Audis have both had traction control.

Quote from Woz :

I have to ask, what has driving in the snow on roads got to do with racing.

That was in response to tristan's post.

Quote from Woz :

I think you are overstating that TC is present on MOST cars a huge amount. If you look at spec sheets for various manufacturers you will find that VERY few come with TC and most of those will be optional extras.

Just noticed you are from the US, the place that let a moron take McD to court when she burnt herself by putting a hot coffee cup between her legs. So car makers might fit more TC to minimse the risk of court cases (Not a US bash, apart from your legal sytem that is )

I just looked up major cars sold by major manufacturers in the US, and EVERY car I looked up is listed below (so I didn't omit any just because they DIDN'T have traction control.)

• As a Subaru owner, I know all Subaru models have VDC as either standard or optional.
  
• Ford Tarus has AdvanceTrak
  
• Chevrolet Malibu, Saturn Aura have StabiliTrak
  
• Toyota Camry has "Vehicle Stability Control (VSC) with Traction Control (TRAC)"
  
• Honda Civic has a traction control system (dunno what it's called)
  
• Infinitis have VDC and TCM
  
• Dodge Avenger has ESP

The fact of the matter is most cars DO have it. Maybe it's not the same for you overseas - but over here, it is very common. Those aren't even the high-end cars or sports cars. Those are common, everyday family sedans.

Quote from Woz :

And this is why it has no place in LFS, a game of driving skill not throwing a car into a corner and letting TC take care of the problem

No, the argument was that it should be AVAILABLE in cars in LFS if it would be in real life. You can always turn it off - and you could even implement a system that does not allow use of traction control in races if you didn't want to - which I would fully support, as I am against use of TC in a race as well. The point is that LFS gives cars the features they'd have in real life, be it a roll-cage, ABS, adjustable downforce, OR TRACTION CONTROL. I would never use it - but the argument here is that it should be available.

Quote from Rubenz81 :

This game is really fun! Like playng again with lego!
Very nice time killer!

Here, a pretty simple tank!

Fun!

I still have my old Antec P180b case sitting in the basement. Awesome case.

Quote from wien :

RAID is not an alternative to backup. I feel your pain though.

Well - it is practically as good, if you properly maintain it.

Is there an uncensored version anywhere?
Or at least a high-quality version?

Last edited by Stang70Fastback, Wed, 27 Feb 2008 01:10.

Quote from Shotglass :

hm has anybody else got problems with the text rendering? its very blurry on my machine

Works fine here. It IS a little fuzzy though, but I think that's normal.

Curious.

ANY XKCD comic is the best comic in the world. You guys should know that...