Slim Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Starting this in another thread out of respect, but regarding cars like the imprezza wrx: "I’m not sure they are inherently more dangerous than other cars, they are a bit faster than a lot of cars and the way they deliver power is different from non-turbo cars; but they are only as dangerous as any other car. There is no reason that we should be making any assumptions in this case. It is a very sad situation for all concerned and wild speculation can only be seen as pointless." If they're only as dangerous as any other car, why is my car insurance group 3 and a wrx insurance group 18? Why does anyone need a car that does 0-60 in 6 seconds on the road? Why should I have to face that risk of a car like that, that an insurance company has decided is almost certainly going to crash at some point, coming the other way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryMcCann Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 I don't believe they should be banned. However, with the more powerful cars I would accept that people should be better trained (advanced driving qualification?) before being allowed to drive them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 25, 2009 Author Share Posted January 25, 2009 I don't believe they should be banned. However, with the more powerful cars I would accept that people should be better trained (advanced driving qualification?) before being allowed to drive them. That's a good suggestion, I like it. After all, you need a separate license for other more dangerous vehicles like HGV's. Perhaps a rise on the age limit beyond 16ltr engines too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wideload Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 16 ltr? what are you driving a tank? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Do they have a skid pan for public/private use over here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 25, 2009 Author Share Posted January 25, 2009 16 ltr? what are you driving a tank? Heh, ooops, 1.6l. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wideload Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 i think they've got the brake testing strip behind the test center for HGV's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 If they're only as dangerous as any other car, why is my car insurance group 3 and a wrx insurance group 18? Why does anyone need a car that does 0-60 in 6 seconds on the road? Why should I have to face that risk of a car like that, that an insurance company has decided is almost certainly going to crash at some point, coming the other way? Isn't part of the insurance grouping determined from theft and value. Subaru's and Evo's are very popular to steal in the UK along with a lot of performance cars. I do think though that someone can be just as dangerous in a 1.1 Saxo - a death is a death. But I agree some extra licensing, maybe an advanced drivers course would be a good idea. BTW I have had a 300bhp WRX and I loved that car, but running costs and practicality took over in my life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 25, 2009 Author Share Posted January 25, 2009 Isn't part of the insurance grouping determined from theft and value. Subaru's and Evo's are very popular to steal in the UK along with a lot of performance cars. Probably forms part of the calculation, but a same price Audi a4 is group 11 compared to the group 18 wrx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Intereting issue. When they are new cars like the Imprezza are bought by drivers who, in the main, know how to drive high powered vehicles. But what happens, say, in 10 years time when they are on the market for the 3rd time? We have no MOT or equivalent check on vehicle safety. There is a good chance that at that stage some inexperienced (and usually youngish) person who has seen these cars on their video games buys one cheaply. This is not meant as anti-young but I would guess that this is the primary market for old high-powered modified saloon cars. So potentially it ends up with a car that hasn't been safety tested and that is getting long in the tooth passing into inexperienced hands. I recall General Motors Holden producing a 5 litre version of a very average saloon called the Torana. A number of years later they became killing machines in the wrong hands - again mostly of people in their 20s and the people they hit. What can be done? Firstly insurance is one dampener on ownership. Secondly we probably should have some form of vehicle testing. Thirdly maybe there should be a requirement for anyone wishing to have a high-performance car to undertake additional training? And yes I do agree that an incompetent driver in a 1 litre car can be just as dangerous - so if the boys in blue spot incompetent driving of any kind maybe there should be a requirement for the driver to undertake retraining and a new driving test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Theft does form a part of the calculation, which is why insurance companies ask for your postcode and if you have a garage. But the biggest part of your premium is based on your age and driving history. That's why it's near enough impossible for an 18 year old to get even third party insurance on high group classifications. Actuarial reports show that these cars usually end up as write offs. But it could be argued that it's the type of people who want to drive these cars that are the problem, rather than the cars themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silentbob Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Nothing is going to work if it is not policed, I have complained time and time again about idiots using the Marine Drive / Old Castletown Road block as a race track on a Fri/Sat night, yet nothing, it took an accident one evening to pry the Police out of Douglas, first cop on scene got a right earful from the locals about this sort of thing. As stated on the other thread, people buy these cars for other reasons than to use their outright power, fitment of accessories, level of trim, comfort etc etc the list goes on. There are plenty of Subarus and Mitsubishi Evos being driven on our roads daily at quite acceptable speeds by people who have no interest in being a rally star. As always it is the miniroty that highlight the issues of road safety time and time again, it is time to target that minority and hit them hard; make examples to the community that this sort of anti social and potentially lethal behaviour will not be tolerated. None of the above is pointed at yesterday's tragic events, as the facts are not in on the conditions, speed or other factors involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Imprezas and Evos are actually safer in many ways - all sorts of clever devices deliver the power to the wheels with most traction etc. They have ABS, traction, stability and torque biasing coming out of their power bulges. However, I'm in total agreement about advanced training. A newly qualified private pilot can fly a simple aeroplance in good weather - to get more complex or into multi-engines, or to fly in poor weather or darkness requires extra training, testing and licensing. Get caught cheating and the CAA will ground you. The basic driving licence should allow people a car of up to (say) 1000cc or 50bhp. The DoT and police would probably say it's unweildy and impossible to enforce - but I don't see why. In fact, if they see a high performance car being driven enthusiastically, they'll know the driver has been trained to an advanced level - and if they're pulled and found NOT to have the required vehicle rating, they get a ban and bumped back down to starter level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD4ELI Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 However, I'm in total agreement about advanced training. Especially for young males - I've always maintained that the young male of our species should not be allowed to drive anything more powerful than a lawnmower. Myself I would only allow cars with A or B class emissions (would mean the end of jags I'm afraid). 1.1 litre and / or 40 mph max. Who needs a fast car on the Island? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 I would still go for both advanced training and for safety checks on older cars. I agree that high performance cars have better active safety but it is important that they are well maintained and the person at the wheel knows how to use the performance. I have never felt safer in a car than when riding with a rally driver at speed - but how many people posess that level of skill? Maybe this is the answer for the Island...the Aixim 400 Super Luxe - good for 40mph (60 for the brave) and up to 110 mpg - and Stu you can drive one on a motor bike licence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.