Learner driver in skyline doing 205km/h?!?!

[Sciby]

It doesnt matter what restrictions you place on young drivers, whether it be power or curfew or whatever. There will still be some of us that do stupid things and get ourselves hurt. What young drivers need is proper driver education and training. Its an attitude and overconfidence thing, and its never the cars' fault either.

I am an L plater and i drive a turbo'd car. So what? Does that automatically mean im going to go out and drive my car at unsuitable speeds? Once again, it seems everyone has lunged at the stereotypical throat of young drivers...

And once again, we have L platers feeling that we're just dismissing them because they're young and/or inexperienced drivers. That's not entirely the case. I think it's safe to say that all older people (say 25 and older) have been inexperienced drivers at one time (some still are) who felt they were invincible and did stupid stuff (some still do). I know I did. But now I know better and I realise how stupid and dangerous some of my antics were.

The reason behind the 'L/P platers with no turbo/big engine' comment/suggestion is to remove the temptation that a younger driver has. They're finally on the road, they've got the freedom to go wherever they want and do what they want, so it's tempting to have some fun at the same time. I did it, and I'm sure my kids will do it. (Not in my farkin' car though. )

When I was younger (17-22 or so), if I had the power under my right foot, I'd use it... I wouldn't say I'm a total nutter, but I still did stuff that I thought I was 100% capable of, that the car may not have been... granted, not all young people are stupid, they're not all hoons, etc, but how do you differentiate between the sensible and the stupid, in a fair and reasonable manner to ensure the safety of others on the roads whilst letting them drive whatever they want? I'm not sure it can be done... something has to give.

Unfortunately, Obakemono, while I think you're right and better training is needed, training by itself can't stop someone from wanting to do stupid stuff. They can just do the right thing through the training and testing, and leave two black tracks on the road out of the testing centre.

However, if you legally remove their ability to drive higher powered cars, it may remove some of the temptation. Sure, they'll still speed, but they won't be able to accelerate hard, to the point where they may either scare themselves or get the car into a situation that they may not be able to handle and rescue the situation. It would also reduce their ability to drag either cars, thus reducing another possible problem.

A couple of years ago, NSW transport released figures that indicated that an 18 year old male on a 600cc motorbike had a 2% chance of living through a year. This percentage, of course, increased dramatically as the capacity went down, hence the 250cc maximum capacity. They can still enjoy riding bikes, they can still speed, etc, but the lack of huge acceleration removes that extra element that can get an inexperienced into deep poop.

It all does beg the question though: why do L/P Platers need powerful cars?

That's an actual question, not a challenge. Please, give answers from both sides of the fence.

I can understand if some are tradies and need a ute with some pulling power, but would they need a V8? A V6, imho, would do the job.

Aside from work concerns, I can't think of a single valid reason beyond the 'I have a fast car' aspect, and believe me, I've tried thinking of good valid reasons, I haven't just generalised or assumed anything here.

So why do I have a fast car? Because I wanted one. I have no other reason to have one. It's not like I need to get to work faster. However, I've been driving for over ten years, so I feel I'm an experienced enough driver to safely and responsibly drive a Skyline (or similar). Even with this in mind, I've given myself a few 'Woah' moments, and I recently lost my licence (although that was due to highway driving mostly, not because of having a powerful engine).

Anyway, opinions? Agree, disagree... it's an old subject, and most of these threads fall into just bickering... it'd be good to see solid debate and good suggestions, not just 'Farkin' young idiots!' or 'Farkin' older c0ckheads!' comments.

[SKY031]

I've been driving for over ten years, so I feel I'm an experienced enough driver to safely and responsibly drive a Skyline (or similar).  

....... I recently lost my licence (although that was due to highway driving mostly, not because of having a powerful engine).

A "safe and responsible" driver wouldn't lose their licence

[Sciby]

A "safe and responsible" driver wouldn't lose their licence

Touche.

However, as I stated, it was for accumulation of points on highway driving: 110, 120kph cruising, in 100 zones. Nothing, I feel, that was horribly unsafe or irresponsible. If I was passing at 160 or 170, then I'd just shut my damn mouth.

This also underlines my point about training not being the only solution... I can be safe and responsible and have 10 years of experience, but it all means jack if I actively decide that I want to have some fun and leave my tires around the place in the form of melted rubber. If I didn't have a turbo, it would be much harder to be stupid.

[NFAA32]

every k over is a killer Sciby...

also, there is no such thing as safe speeding...

i think its ammusing that people say such things as .. such and such doing 150, thats ridiculous, i only coast on 120 on a 100 road.. well.. thats 20kms over.. so in turn, some people could say, if its safe for them to do 120, i can do 20kms over, which is 140, so that has to be safe..

and it becomes a bad circle...

edit - reminder that this post was made in good fun

[Sciby]

What?? How dare you!!

*ahem*

Hey, I fully admit that I shouldn't have sped... and as a result, I got caught, I rode my bike for 6 months, and now I'm very good... I still enjoy my car and the power, etc, but I'm far, far, far more aware of what speed I'm doing and where I am, etc.

The times I *was* caught speeding though, I was comfortable, in control of the car and since I've done muchos highway driving for my job in the past, experienced enough (in my opinion) to travel at that speed on the highway.

The law, however, disagreed.

[NFAA32]

but thats my point haha

the law is there, and you feel comfortable at whatever speed in your car when your in control...

what if the girl caught at 200kms. thought she was in control etc..

[Sciby]

There's a world of difference between 20kph over the limit and 105 though... and I'm 11 years older, with 10+ years of driving experience.

Which situation is less likely to end in tears?

[bendertiger]

I just lost my cousin in a road accident, and, well, give us this chicks address, get 50 cars all lined up out the front and we will rape her for 48 hours non-stop, sounds like a good punishment

[Sciby]

Sorry to hear about your cousin, bendertiger... the suggested punishment may be a little... unh... socially complex, although apparently the japanese practice of bukkake is from when an adulterous woman in a village was punished by the men of the village by ejaculating on her, but they weren't allowed to touch her.

I think it was akin to "You want another man and his semen? Have all the semen in the world!!"

[bendertiger]

I'd take her out to a test track first to prove whether she can drive, but at that speed, if she can't drift, take her out the back and rape her, or don't give her her licence back for 10 years and make her spend 2 years at least with bubba.

[Goon]

I just lost my cousin in a road accident, and, well, give us this chicks address, get 50 cars all lined up out the front and we will **** *** for 48 hours non-stop, sounds like a good punishment

sorry to hear about your cousin... however, i would pefer if you can edit your post, as this girl, however stupid, she might be a skyline enthusist and read this thread. although she didnt comply with the law and stepped on a few toes doesnt mean that you can say stuff like that mate. i know a girl who was r**ed and its not a funny issue.

Quote has been edited

[Laurence]

I just lost my cousin in a road accident, and, well, give us this chicks address, get 50 cars all lined up out the front and we will **** *** for 48 hours non-stop, sounds like a good punishment

That is the most fscked thing I have ever read on this forum.

(Quote has been edited)

[Obakemono]

Okay, for arguments sake, what would you rather have your L plater sister/brother/daughter/son etc driving? A Subaru WRX or a Datsun 120Y? Which would be safer? give reasons.

[Sciby]

Obakemono: Well, let's assume that both are in good running order, that the brakes are good, good tires, no rust and in general road worthy and road certified condition.

Personally, I would give the L plater the 120Y, for these reasons:

- If they have an accident, it'll be cheaper to repair.

- Cheaper to buy, cheaper to replace.

- Running costs will be cheaper (no premium fuel required and less likelyhood of a right-foot-induced fuel leak. ), no need for $50 of high grade oil every 5k.

- the 120y is a much more technologically simplier car, so more opportunity for them to learn how to service and repair it. (although it wouldn't be harder for them to learn how to service a car on the wrx, but would be much more difficult for them to wet their feet, metaphorically speaking, on repairing a Rex.)

- The 120 would be light enough for them to have some fun, but not that much power that they can't get themselves into horrible, unrecoverable situations, unless they're doing something really silly at speed. I don't consider the AWD of the WRX to be as all-situation-saving as some Rex owners would have you believe. I know several ex-wrx owners that would state otherwise.

- The 120 would be a better learning car, as it is RWD and relatively low-powered, if they got a bit of oversteer on a corner, it wouldn't be at a quickly-achieved high speed, so therefore it would be less likely to bite them bad. They'd be able to find the limits of the car and respect them. A WRX with AWD, while it would help them in certain situations, would bite back hard when limits are achieved. Let's face it, most young people (especially we guys) will push the limits of a car, especially such a sports car icon as a WRX. Take it too hard and fast around a corner on a drizzly night because they believe the AWD will save them every time and they're off into the trees. I've seen the results of that, and it was a 23 year old, not just a L/P plater.

- Unfortunately, I'm not qualified to comment on the accident-worthiness of each vehicle. I'd give points to the 120y for being of oldschool steel construction, but points to the WRX for superior body design.

On a side note, if it was my son, a small part of me would want him to have the WRX so he could at least pick up car-obsessed girls, but being my son, I know he'd have a bit of a deathwish at first, and I'd rather have him alive and a virgin than sexed up and dead.

Right... now, reasons for giving me the WRX...

[Guest jimmyd17]

It doesnt matter what restrictions you place on young drivers, whether it be power or curfew or whatever. There will still be some of us that do stupid things and get ourselves hurt. What young drivers need is proper driver education and training. Its an attitude and overconfidence thing, and its never the cars' fault either.

You're absolutely right Obakemono. What needs to happen is to make proper advanced driver training a compulsary component of passing your licence test. At the end of the day, the bottom line is SAFETY. I don't think tougher penalties is going to have a significant enough impact on safety to be justified. When you start bringing in tougher penalties, unfortunately it also has conciquences on people that aren't doing stupid things and its just unfair. Bringing in laws to ban L platers from driving powerful cars, that also ruins it for sensible L platers trying to gain valuable experience on the roads. The reason neither tougher penalties or power restrictions will make things SAFER is because the minority of people that do excessively stupid and dangerous things don't seem to give much regard to the law in the first place. In a way i think it's possible (not always the case) for tougher penalties/restrictions to make it just as likely, if not more likely for some people who give no regard for the laws and what they are there for, to stupid and dangerous things. The reason for this is simply, some people find it a buzz and fun to be rebellious and stupid and try to get away with things. The bottom line here is, people are always going to do stupid things whether tougher penalties are brought in or not. People are also going to do stupid things whether they know how to handle a vehicle properly or not. You don't need to know how to handle a vehicle well to put your foot down and drive at high speeds. At least if people had to do compulsary advanced driver training, the risks would decrease of having accidents at such high speeds. The current system is rediculous. Anyone can get a licence, the driving test is rediulously easy. Most people get driving lessons before going for their licence, and all the instructors do is teach them the bare basics of how to operate a car, then teach them how to pass the driving test. I think the view the government has, is - if young drivers learn how to drive properly (as in advanced driver training) then they will drive faster. But this is where they are wrong. If young drivers learn the characteristics of handling a car properly, they will also learn how easy it is to get into trouble and grasp a more realistic concept of how dangerous high speeds can be.

Anyway, for the people that say tougher penalties are the go, have a think about it.. its just not logical. Sure, granted that it may deter a proportion of people that may otherwise do stupid things, but the effect it would have on sensible people would probably even outweigh the stupid people. The more power you give the cops with penalties, the more power they have to use them whether they are being truthful or not.. remember, there are good cops and bad ones just like in anything in life, there are good and bad people. It is much much more logical to enforce compulsary driver training to make the roads SAFER, because after all this is the issue here.

just my 4 cents worth.

Apologies if i have repeated myself and for such a long post.

cheers,

James

[riggaP]

Okay, for arguments sake, what would you rather have your L plater sister/brother/daughter/son etc driving? A Subaru WRX or a Datsun 120Y? Which would be safer? give reasons.

On L plates you can give em a Ferrari 550 Marenello. As long as there is a fully licenced driver supervising (preferrably the owner).

If we're talking P plates I'd go the 120Y. I doubt it has a top speed quicker than 120km/h and a 1/4 mile time of less than 30 sec. If you compare that to a WRX, which is capable of 200+ and a 1/4 of 14.x, I know what I'd be giving to my loved one.

I base my choice on the fact that know what P platers are like, having previously been one of them.

Dont worry. One day you'll look back, understand and agree

What needs to happen is to make proper advanced driver training a compulsary component of passing your licence test. At the end of the day, the bottom line is SAFETY.

How is that going to enforce safe driving? How is that going to stop people being di(kheads?

Anyway, for the people that say tougher penalties are the go, have a think about it.. its just not logical. Sure, granted that it may deter a proportion of people that may otherwise do stupid things, but the effect it would have on sensible people would probably even outweigh the stupid people.

If sensible people are acting sensibly, how does a tougher penalty on a stupid person affect them?

[Merli]

Okay, for arguments sake, what would you rather have your L plater sister/brother/daughter/son etc driving? A Subaru WRX or a Datsun 120Y? Which would be safer? give reasons.

Why are you using such stupid extremes? Is that the only way you can convince yourself that you need to drive a powerful car?

In what possible situation can you forsee where the two car choices would be a $40,000 WRX and a $600 120Y?!?! :uhh: :uhh:

[Sciby]

A situation where you buy 40 120y's, tape them together and make a SUPADATSUN!

(Edit: Sorry, I'm at my second job now (supervisor at a research lab, yay, not), so I can't give long replies to any of the above. However, I do have time to give quick silly comments. )

[Merli]

If we're talking P plates I'd go the 120Y. I doubt it has a top speed quicker than 120km/h and a 1/4 mile time of less than 30 sec. If you compare that to a WRX, which is capable of 200+ and a 1/4 of 14.x, I know what I'd be giving to my loved one

It's not that easy.

A 120Y is a horribly unsafe car, and as you know, L and P-platers can get themselves into a world of trouble in ANY car. I wouldn't want my kids having an accident in a 120Y :uhh:

But as I said, that's an utterly stupid comparison, and no-one would EVER have to make that choice.

Lets compare two similarly priced cars, or equal year of manufacture. Lets say... A Honda Accord and a Subaru WRX. Which one would you rather your kid drive?

[Sciby]

I'll go one step further and say that I'd rather my kids drive *anything* that is safe and not powerful, rather than a WRX. They can buy a WRX when they've driven for 5 years and can handle it. Even then, I'd worry.

Perhaps another good comparsion is what newborn P-platers would be able to afford to buy... around the $10k mark I would suggest... you could get a 5L Commodore/maybe a 32 GTS-T, VS a decent lazer or even a fairly late model second hand Excel. I don't know of any 'cool' and safe cars worth $10k, but I'm sure they're out there. Maybe an NA 32 or 33, 180sx/silvia, etc...

Regardless of what car they get, I still think a capacity or a power/weight restriction *with* compulsory advanced driver training would increase safety, decrease needless 'Look at me!' deaths (ie, show off tricks that go wrong) and increase respect for young drivers because they're essentially forced to be responsible.