Subaru STi deadly accident, driven by teens - CLOSED

[robinlsb]

Nice anecdotal evidence but no one stated that teenagers in high HP cars WILL get hurt, it's a matter of likelihood. I'm surprised that there aren't better statistics on that.

 

 

 

I'm wrong but you essentially agreed with my question?

 

 

http://www.smartmotorist.com/traffic-and-safety-guideline/what-causes-car-accidents.html

 

Excessive speed/?////????

 

How many cars out there can go no faster than 70 MPH???????

 

If fact, hitting a stationary object (tree) at 50 MPH in a street car is not survivable, even with air bags and seat belts.

 

Sure, you can get you kid a nice 4 banger slow Forester, with all the air bags and great seat belts. But if that gives you solace, you are sadly mistaken.

 

He or she can be just as easily killed, maimed or be a vegetable for life, because they never experienced loss of control, or were trained what to do if a car skids, even at 40 MPH.

 

So how many of you parents out there think that their teen driver will never exceed the speed limit, never get pissed off and duel with another driver or go too fast through a corner and be as lucky you?

 

Well, do you feel lucky??

[bdisco]

Back in the day instead of calling "shotgun" when jumping in the car with a bunch of friends we would say "I got death seat."

 

http://matchbin-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/public/sites/232/assets/0331_RHS_Program1.jpg

[fj1200]

Sure, you can get you kid a nice 4 banger slow Forester, with all the air bags and great seat belts. But if that gives you solace, you are sadly mistaken.

 

It gives me solace that this:

Five young men were killed early Saturday at Greystone Airport in Florida when the carthey were traveling in, a BMW M5 saloon, crashed in a high speed accident after being driven on the actual airport strip. Behind the wheel was 18-year-old Joshua D. Ammirato and riding along in the car was four of his friends who were returning from a party.

 

According to local news source Ocala, the car skidded at the end of the runway, turned sideways and then sailed up an embankment before crashing into a tree and bursting into flames. The car, which was registered to Ammirato’s father, broke into two pieces after hitting the tree. Details are still being released but it’s thought alcohol was involved and the speed at which the car would have been traveling is still being determined.

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1025417_five-youths-killed-in-bmw-m5-crash

 

won't happen. And then we'll work on the learning to drive part.

[fishbone]

My parents wouldn't let me have a sedan as my first car, had to be a SUV.

What a great idea, arm an inexperienced driver with a weapon of mass murder

I get the idea, size = safer

Just sayin'

[twisty]

we had access to a small airport as teenagers, and we used it as a drag strip many times. we also had cars and gear to do it right, as well as parents that took the time to help us as well as teach us about driving fast. my best friend in HS dad had a 48 anglia with about 650 HP in the garage. that was a fun car to tramp around in.

 

looked damn near exactly like this

 

http://image.streetrodderweb.com/f/22204004+w750+st0/0907sr_22_z+1948_ford_anglia+2009_goodguys_nashville_top_100.jpg

[fishbone]

Blame the parents all you want. They were wrong to trust their son, but they didn't kill his friends by giving him the keys to an STi. The blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the kid driving.

What you are saying is true, to an extent, but you know what, somehow, for some reason, I still won't hand my son the keys to a muscle car instead of doing so and trying to quiet that voice in my head screaming ALERT, FAIL! by telling myself "well he can kill himself just as well in a n/a slow-ass 4-cylinder".

Stats don't lie. Teens in powerful cars cause more crashes, die more often.

Hence the insurance rates on a WRX are much higher than a Corvette. Because the Corvette is much less likely to be driven by a teen.

And WRX-es get wrecked left and right. By teens.

[TheOneDoubleN]

we had access to a small airport as teenagers, and we used it as a drag strip many times. we also had cars and gear to do it right, as well as parents that took the time to help us as well as teach us about driving fast. my best friend in HS dad had a 48 anglia with about 650 HP in the garage. that was a fun car to tramp around in.

 

looked damn near exactly like this

 

http://image.streetrodderweb.com/f/22204004+w750+st0/0907sr_22_z+1948_ford_anglia+2009_goodguys_nashville_top_100.jpg

 

*Drool*

 

But how's it handle?

[fishbone]

Well, it's fast as a bullet, so it must also stop and turn like one.

[TheOneDoubleN]

What was that stupid ass movie with Angelina Jolie where they pretended they could fire a gun and curve the bullet as it left the barrel? God that was dumb, did anyone actually see it?

[laff79]

^wrong thread, chief

[twisty]

*Drool*

 

But how's it handle?

 

that sucker turned on a dime, as long as you werent going very fast and had no throttle on at all. we used to turn the wheel at a stop, floor it and let the back end pass the front end. effective 90 deg turns, hehe. it actually handled fairly well on the road, the whole underside was upgraded, new and custom built. his dad built his own framing, firewall and fuel cell as well as a full custom hidden cage and interior. it was more like driving a tall mercedes than an old 1/4 mile slammer.

[BAC5.2]

It gives me solace that this:

 

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1025417_five-youths-killed-in-bmw-m5-crash

 

won't happen. And then we'll work on the learning to drive part.

 

You are delusional.

 

Compared to an M5, an STI is a civic (compared to an STI). Clearly it is still possible to split one of those in half. So what won't happen, exactly? The only thing the M5 could have possibly contributed to the accident was the ability to hit the speed necessary to launch the car through the air. And that speed wasn't yet determined. And when it is, I'll bet it's a speed well within the realm of achievement of many cars on the road.

 

What car do you suggest for a new driver?

 

Anything that's not a clapped out shitbox is easily capable of clearing 100mph on a runway, or otherwise driven in a manner that will kill most occupants in a collision. There isn't a vehicle on the road whose limits cannot be exceeded. And it makes no difference whether you are in a Corolla, an STI, or an M5 when you fly off the road and slam into a tree. Dead is dead. Whether or not you get airborne is immaterial.

 

I lost a good friend when his 2.5 RS got split in half by a snow plow. The difference between a 2.5RS and any other N/A Subaru is negligible.

 

Physics is physics. You can lie to yourself all you want.

 

Would I give my kid a new STI, or allow them to drive my M5? Nope. But I'm not going to kid myself by thinking that they are any safer in a Forester or Corolla.

[fj1200]

You are delusional.

 

Compared to an M5, an STI is a civic (compared to an STI). Clearly it is still possible to split one of those in half. So what won't happen, exactly? The only thing the M5 could have possibly contributed to the accident was the ability to hit the speed necessary to launch the car through the air. And that speed wasn't yet determined. And when it is, I'll bet it's a speed well within the realm of achievement of many cars on the road.

 

It's been determined:

They noted that the BMW was traveling at 120 mph when it hit the trees at the end of the 7,550 foot runway. Their conclusion was that Ammirato was traveling well in excess of that speed before he hit the brakes and left 219 feet of skid marks on the runway and grass before going airborne 166 feet to impact with the stand of trees. A car traveling 155 mph will travel the length of football field in almost the blink of an eye and even at 120 mph, it took less that two seconds from the time Ammirato hit the brakes until the car hit the tree.

http://wreckvhavoc.blogspot.com/2008/06/pieces-uncovered-pieces-in-place.html

 

Do you honestly think that they would have been attempting that run if they didn't have access to an M5? Would he have been on a forum inquiring, "The problem is when I'm going pedal to the metal pushing 140 and upshifting, there tends to be thud noise with the gear change," and “I am beginner when it comes to high performance cars as I am only 18” if he had been joyriding in his parent's Forester?

 

What car do you suggest for a new driver?

 

Anything that's not a clapped out shitbox is easily capable of clearing 100mph on a runway, or otherwise driven in a manner that will kill most occupants in a collision. There isn't a vehicle on the road whose limits cannot be exceeded. And it makes no difference whether you are in a Corolla, an STI, or an M5 when you fly off the road and slam into a tree. Dead is dead. Whether or not you get airborne is immaterial.

 

I'm delusional because I think that less horsepower adds less risk to the actions of young and inexperienced drivers yet you think that your two examples of apparent accidents are comparable to two examples of blatant reckless driving?

 

I lost a good friend when his 2.5 RS got split in half by a snow plow. The difference between a 2.5RS and any other N/A Subaru is negligible.

 

Physics is physics. You can lie to yourself all you want.

 

Would I give my kid a new STI, or allow them to drive my M5? Nope. But I'm not going to kid myself by thinking that they are any safer in a Forester or Corolla.

 

OK, things we agree on; 1. Physics is a B', and 2. Kids will do stupid things. However, you apparently think that adding horsepower has no effect on the actions of young drivers and that they are just likely to die when making a mistake at 120 as when making that mistake at 70.

[fishbone]

I'm going to give my kid a car that, should he choose to drag race on the street, from one stoplight to the next within the span of the typical block he will have it pedal to the metal and still doing about 35mph Not a v8 that will launch him in the next light pole on the other side of the intersection.

We're mixing up philosophical points of view (determinism?) with real world stats.

Dumb teens will continue to off themselves regardless of what car they drive, but statistically speaking power = higher likelyhood of bad stuff going down.

You're full of hormones with something to prove and got the tool at your disposal to do so. 9 times out of 10 you'll do it. We've all been there.

[twisty]

OK, things we agree on; 1. Physics is a B', and 2. Kids will do stupid things. However, you apparently think that adding horsepower has no effect on the actions of young drivers and that they are just likely to die when making a mistake at 120 as when making that mistake at 70.

 

most of my friends had fast cars and trucks. i had a datsun 210 hatchback that was quick, but like civic quick. i still tried to race it, i still did roundabouts at top speed and i still tried to drift my way around town like in the cop movies and shows. some kids will do stupid shit (like i did) regardless of what kind of car you give them. more HP is tempting to any kid, regardless of what you teach them. if they have a bit of spirited driving practice under their belt they are more likely to use that HP when they get the chance, moreover than a kid that has never driven an actual fast car. kid=horse, HP=carrot. dont dangle that carrot, that horse is less likely to run.

 

I'm going to give my kid a car that, should he choose to drag race on the street, from one stoplight to the next within the span of the typical block he will have it pedal to the metal and still doing about 35mph Not a v8 that will launch him in the next light pole on the other side of the intersection.

We're mixing up philosophical points of view (determinism?) with real world stats.

Dumb teens will continue to off themselves regardless of what car they drive, but statistically speaking power = higher likelyhood of bad stuff going down.

You're full of hormones with something to prove and got the tool at your disposal to do so. 9 times out of 10 you'll do it. We've all been there.

[BAC5.2]

It's been determined:

 

http://wreckvhavoc.blogspot.com/2008/06/pieces-uncovered-pieces-in-place.html

 

Do you honestly think that they would have been attempting that run if they didn't have access to an M5? Would he have been on a forum inquiring, "The problem is when I'm going pedal to the metal pushing 140 and upshifting, there tends to be thud noise with the gear change," and “I am beginner when it comes to high performance cars as I am only 18” if he had been joyriding in his parent's Forester?

 

Bragging about it? Probably not. Attempt to see what the car will top out at on an open runway? Probably.

 

All the car contributed to the accident was the ability to achieve the speed, and damn near anything can go close enough to 120 to kill you when you shunt it.

 

Are you more likely to hoon around in a 500hp M5 than a 150hp Forester? I'd say you are just as likely, regardless of the car.

 

I'm delusional because I think that less horsepower adds less risk to the actions of young and inexperienced drivers yet you think that your two examples of apparent accidents are comparable to two examples of blatant reckless driving?

 

You are delusional because you think less horsepower means that your kids won't get into deadly accidents. You can definitely top 100mph in an N/A Impreza. 100mph in an Impreza is just as deadly as 100mph in an M5, and just because something has less horsepower does NOT change the ability of a driver to recklessly pilot the vehicle.

 

However, you apparently think that adding horsepower has no effect on the actions of young drivers and that they are just likely to die when making a mistake at 120 as when making that mistake at 70.

 

That's correct. A kid who drives recklessly in something with 300hp is very likely going to drive recklessly in something with 140hp. It's not the car at fault. A kid is just as likely to die making a mistake at 120mph whether they are in their Dad's M5, or their own Camry. Just because a car makes less power does NOT mean it will be driven slower. In some circumstances the lower power car may not be able to achieve the same speeds as a higher power car, but the danger that exists in those situations is not likely speed related.

 

It is ignorant and short sighted to assume that horsepower = speed. I can drive an M5 70mph just as easily as I can drive a Camry at that speed. The M5 is no more dangerous than the Camry (and in many ways, it's actually safer).

 

A car is a tool. Nothing more. Blaming a high HP car for killing the occupants is the same as blaming big spoons for making people fat. Those people are going to be fat regardless of the spoon size.

[famaya26]

My dad broke 135mph in my old 91 Accord the day he bought it. It was going down I10 from Fontana Ca, to Los Angeles. There was no traffic, was at that speed for about 1-2 minutes. A lower HP car doesn't. mean it can't kill someone.

 

It's because some people have no clue on what the limits of their car are. Also some parents don't actually want to teach their kids how to safely operate a vehicle

[robinlsb]

I inherited a 64 Porsche in 1965 But before that I drove a 62 VW, right into the ground, racing around orchards my family owned in NH. I also drove clunkers and raced against other kids on old logger roads(the best was a 1938 Ford pickup) ,

 

By the time I got into the Porsche, I KNEW my limits, a car's limits and what to do in any situation,

 

Until you can cast a car sideways at 100 mph plus, you should not drive over 40:lol:

[laff79]

this thread...

 

 

needs swift death soon

[hmmrdwn]

Bragging about it? Probably not. Attempt to see what the car will top out at on an open runway? Probably.

 

All the car contributed to the accident was the ability to achieve the speed, and damn near anything can go close enough to 120 to kill you when you shunt it.

 

Are you more likely to hoon around in a 500hp M5 than a 150hp Forester? I'd say you are just as likely, regardless of the car.

 

 

 

You are delusional because you think less horsepower means that your kids won't get into deadly accidents. You can definitely top 100mph in an N/A Impreza. 100mph in an Impreza is just as deadly as 100mph in an M5, and just because something has less horsepower does NOT change the ability of a driver to recklessly pilot the vehicle.

 

 

 

That's correct. A kid who drives recklessly in something with 300hp is very likely going to drive recklessly in something with 140hp. It's not the car at fault. A kid is just as likely to die making a mistake at 120mph whether they are in their Dad's M5, or their own Camry. Just because a car makes less power does NOT mean it will be driven slower. In some circumstances the lower power car may not be able to achieve the same speeds as a higher power car, but the danger that exists in those situations is not likely speed related.

 

It is ignorant and short sighted to assume that horsepower = speed. I can drive an M5 70mph just as easily as I can drive a Camry at that speed. The M5 is no more dangerous than the Camry (and in many ways, it's actually safer).

 

A car is a tool. Nothing more. Blaming a high HP car for killing the occupants is the same as blaming big spoons for making people fat. Those people are going to be fat regardless of the spoon size.

 

While I agree. There is something to be said about insurance actuarial tables on young drivers and sports cars that equate to high premiums. A car is a tool and can't be blamed for the accident, but the entire insurance industry would combine the young driver, high horse power into a exorbitant insurance rating.

[fj1200]

You are delusional because you think less horsepower means that your kids won't get into deadly accidents.

 

No I don't.

 

It is ignorant and short sighted to assume that horsepower = speed.

 

Hmm, higher horsepower = higher speed potential = higher potential for catastrophic accident. Yeah, crazy.

[famaya26]

Higher HP = Speed

But it does not mean its going to cause an accident because of that. The problem is that a lot of drivers are inexperienced and don't know how to react to an emergency. Some think it's hitting the gas pedal an bamm your a pro.

[700watts]

this thread...

 

 

needs swift death soon

 

 

Agreed

[BAC5.2]

No I don't.

 

That's what you said:

 

It gives me solace that this:

 

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1025417_five-youths-killed-in-bmw-m5-crash

 

won't happen.

 

You are saying that this accident wouldn't have happened had the kid been driving a "4 banger slow Forester".

 

Hmm, higher horsepower = higher speed potential = higher potential for catastrophic accident. Yeah, crazy.

 

How much faster does an M5 go than an M3?

 

Just about a 150hp difference, and yet the same top speed.

 

So no, higher horsepower does not equal higher speed potential. And higher power does not equal a higher potential for a catestrophic accident. 70mph is 70mph whether you are in a shitbox Corolla or a Ferrari 458 Italia. And if 70mph is going to spit you off the road in either car, then it doesn't matter which one you are driving.

 

The car is the tool, just like a spoon is. Are you telling me that Kieth Martin is the fattest man in the world, because someone gave him a bigger spoon?

 

Sometimes, you need to take responsibility for your actions. In this STi wreck, it's tragic that so many people are so quick to judge the parents of the kid as being at fault or inattentive. Their only mistake was trusting their son. The kid killed his friends. Not the car. Not his parents. Just him. At the end of the day, no matter what jaded deflected blame world you think exists FJ1200, that kid has to go to sleep knowing that he killed 4 people he called his friends. He has to go to sleep knowing that he ruined the lives of their families. He has to deal with that burden. Not his car. Not his parents.

 

Your logic indicates that you don't think that accident would have happened, or think it would have been less likely to have happened, had he been driving a WRX instead of an STi.

[famaya26]

That's what you said:

 

 

 

You are saying that this accident wouldn't have happened had the kid been driving a "4 banger slow Forester".

 

 

 

How much faster does an M5 go than an M3?

 

Just about a 150hp difference, and yet the same top speed.

 

So no, higher horsepower does not equal higher speed potential. And higher power does not equal a higher potential for a catestrophic accident. 70mph is 70mph whether you are in a shitbox Corolla or a Ferrari 458 Italia. And if 70mph is going to spit you off the road in either car, then it doesn't matter which one you are driving.

 

The car is the tool, just like a spoon is. Are you telling me that Kieth Martin is the fattest man in the world, because someone gave him a bigger spoon?

 

Sometimes, you need to take responsibility for your actions. In this STi wreck, it's tragic that so many people are so quick to judge the parents of the kid as being at fault or inattentive. Their only mistake was trusting their son. The kid killed his friends. Not the car. Not his parents. Just him. At the end of the day, no matter what jaded deflected blame world you think exists FJ1200, that kid has to go to sleep knowing that he killed 4 people he called his friends. He has to go to sleep knowing that he ruined the lives of their families. He has to deal with that burden. Not his car. Not his parents.

 

Your logic indicates that you don't think that accident would have happened, or think it would have been less likely to have happened, had he been driving a WRX instead of an STi.