Jump to content


Photo

Perth drivers - again....


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#21 ResidentNeville

ResidentNeville

    Initiate

  • Quark
  • 18 posts

Posted 07 January 2018 - 03:51 PM

Bullshit.  Improved braking systems will perform better from the onset.  People don't spend $3,000 on aftermarket systems then get 28 metre 100km to zero stopping distance instead of 32 metres just because they've imagined it.

Unless they've spent some of that $3,000 on the car electronics or the tyres then they might very well have imagined it.

 

By way of explanation: Better fluid, better ventilation, bigger size, more pistons, etc. decreases the force that needs to be applied to the discs for a given amount of stopping power. The thing is, though, that under emergency situations after normal driving, today's cars aren't in need of additional force. For example, reducing the force required to lock the brakes from 5000N to 2500N by getting bigger discs doesn't do shit if the car has no trouble applying the 5000N that was needed in the first place.

 

Really, if you're going to join an argument in this place, at least try and stick to the original subject.

I'm only engaging with the following points that MS raised (as per below). I assume that's allowed.

 

Why does a car with an improved braking system cost more to insure than one with a 'factory' one? ESPECIALLY in cars where the brakes are known to be a weak point (such as Protons) "Derp, its 'Modifed!'" yes.... to reduce crashes... morons..


Edited by ResidentNeville, 07 January 2018 - 03:51 PM.


#22 Rybags

Rybags

    Immortal

  • Super Hero
  • 35,854 posts

Posted 07 January 2018 - 03:56 PM

The presence of certain safety improvements doesn't necessarily help the overall accident statistics.  If the car handles better and has better brakes, that's just a green light for plenty of people to drive faster which results in more accidents.

So the overall statistics can reflect against these things.  Tyres are probably the best example.  Go too much wider than the factory specs and regardless of legality or safety the insurance companies want to sting you more.



#23 merlin13

merlin13

    Guru

  • Atomican
  • 8,440 posts

Posted 07 January 2018 - 06:25 PM

NOW look what you've gone and started, 'chris.

 

 

 

Insurance premiums don't lie - it's the young who are overrepresented in accident figures and the prices are accordingly set.

 

YES they do!

Why does a female who has written off two vehicles and had a license suspension still get cheaper insurance than a male who has a perfect history?

Why does a car with an improved braking system cost more to insure than one with a 'factory' one? ESPECIALLY in cars where the brakes are known to be a weak point (such as Protons) "Derp, its 'Modifed!'" yes.... to reduce crashes... morons..

They just play the market.

 

Also, young figures are HEAVILY skewed by NEW drivers, as opposed to young, just as a matter of causality.

Of COURSE the new drivers are going to be the ones who crash more often.

There just happens to be more 16yo's getting a licence "today" than 50yo's.

 

Perhaps you don't drive often, or perhaps it's a state by state thing, but in QLD, 'young' drivers are so nervous and weary of police being around, that (hooning aside) you never see a P plater being 'lazy'.

You just dont.

Minimum 5 seconds indication, obvious head checks, correct lane placement. Hell, since the fines went to the sky for using a phone you basically don't even see them risking their beloved facebook anymore.

 

But one quick trip down the road, and you see people in my fathers age bracket (around 60) actually TALKING on their phone. They often indicate MID merge (not before), tons constantly tap the cats eyes, I rarely see a proper shoulder check.

 

You notice this shit when you ride, because one 'lazy' car decision and your bike is on the ground.

I'm careful around red P platers, because as I said, statistically, they're NEW and likely to make an error.

But Green P's? They've been driving for a few years now, and I'm yet to be cut off by one on the bike (or in the car).

 

 

The same can't be said for mums in soccer vans, Tradies in utes, or CEO's in Jags.

But perhaps Brisbane is just different.

 

 

Ummm, mebbe females who write off multiple cars etc aren't as prolific in the insurance world as young male hoons who write cars off and/or carry cancelled licenses?

As one of my lecturers often said, "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics, M'boy"...

 

And Yup, the instant you write "modified brakes" on the paperwork of course the insurance company is going to bite you in the arse for premiums - large Red Flag to any insurance company that "Hmmm - This Bloke Juuuuuust Might Be Setting His Vehicle Up For Hooning, So What Else Has Been Fiddled With?".

Ponder this - If pretty well everyone else's normal factory brakes seem to do the job (at least in most cases) then why would you need to modify them? Can't the vehicle be driven such that standard brakes/tyres/suspension et al do the job properly in the first place? And what the hell did the previous generations who are now Old Farts (holds his own hand up...) do with their "standard" vehicle parts that apparently managed to get them to the now problematic driving ages without slaughtering innocent bystanders and other road users? 

 

And honestly not trying to start a flame war here Bwhahahahahahahaha - just exactly what part of BrizVegas do you tootle around in, where you reckon the P-platers are perfect little angels behind the wheel and the Old Farts are all the problematic drivers?

Being an ex-rider myself (from Every-Man-For-Himself-Behind-The-Wheel Land, aka Sydney no less) I can most confidently assure you it's regularly noted that the newly plastic-plated aren't anywhere near as idyllic as you've indicated.

Or at least in in any/all suburbs up here that I amble around in.


Edited by merlin13, 07 January 2018 - 06:33 PM.

Anything not nailed down is mine, and anything I can prise up is not nailed down...

#24 Master_Scythe

Master_Scythe

    Titan

  • Hero
  • 20,571 posts
  • Location:QLD

Posted 08 January 2018 - 09:40 AM

 

Ummm, mebbe females who write off multiple cars etc aren't as prolific in the insurance world as young male hoons who write cars off and/or carry cancelled licenses?

As one of my lecturers often said, "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics, M'boy"...

 

Possibly, but I suppose that's why Shannons gets so much business. They're the only one who takes personal driving history into account.

No accidents in the last 15 years, and then one this year? No big deal.

Everyone else, quadrupled my premium for my first ever accident (not even kidding); and im well out of that "25yo or under" age bracket!

 

And Yup, the instant you write "modified brakes" on the paperwork of course the insurance company is going to bite you in the arse for premiums - large Red Flag to any insurance company that "Hmmm - This Bloke Juuuuuust Might Be Setting His Vehicle Up For Hooning, So What Else Has Been Fiddled With?".

 

Honestly, (not trying to sound rude) but how much time to do you spend with the hoons of your area? I unwillingly spend a LOT.

I don't drive with them at all, but they meet at the same truck-service-station as us "Restore Old Car" guys do.

We're often all spannering the same car because, for example, one of their gearboxes fell out (not joking, 3 bellhousing bolts only, all crossthreaded.... speedbump and CRUNCH)

I honestly don't think I've ever seen a single hoon with upgraded brakes, not once.

 

I've seen PLENTY of cars WITH upgraded brakes, but I then see them out at Queensland Raceway on Test'N'Tune nights every time, or at Dragway Roll Racing.

If that's their logic, Insurance Idiocy proven.

Hoons rarely modify the safety equipment.

They're normally part-time track cars, a place where their insurance doesn't cover them anyway, so no bother\risk to the company.

 

 

Ponder this - If pretty well everyone else's normal factory brakes seem to do the job (at least in most cases) then why would you need to modify them?

Since we're talking modified cars here;

Because Most cars normal factory brakes AREN'T good enough for the main straight. You'll overheat your brakes on the first corner and plough into a wall at the next.

 

And before you suggest this isn't common, "Mum and Pop" aren't the ones fitting custom brakes.

 

Can't the vehicle be driven such that standard brakes/tyres/suspension et al do the job properly in the first place? And what the hell did the previous generations who are now Old Farts (holds his own hand up...) do with their "standard" vehicle parts that apparently managed to get them to the now problematic driving ages without slaughtering innocent bystanders and other road users?

Not safely no. Especially at Lakeside with the "suicide wall" at the end of one of the smaller straights.

 

I don't know. But I think 'older cars' were (generally, not always) slower in stock form.

Not only this, but when you DO see a..., I dunno, Dodge Charger doing an 11 second pass, you quickly notice how woeful the brakes of that era REALLY are.

 

And honestly not trying to start a flame war here Bwhahahahahahahaha - just exactly what part of BrizVegas do you tootle around in, where you reckon the P-platers are perfect little angels behind the wheel and the Old Farts are all the problematic drivers?

 

City, and about 20km each direction of it. I do just shy of 1000km a week. Partly for work, but mostly with car groups going on a drive to somewhere.

Close mate drives HR trucks, and was commenting the same thing just this weekend.

 

Being an ex-rider myself (from Every-Man-For-Himself-Behind-The-Wheel Land, aka Sydney no less) I can most confidently assure you it's regularly noted that the newly plastic-plated aren't anywhere near as idyllic as you've indicated.

Or at least in in any/all suburbs up here that I amble around in.

I guess Brisbane is just lucky.

We have really well behaved P platers overall.

 

As I said, the 'red P' first year is terrifying.

But I'd rather ride near 10 green P's than a single White Patrol with a My Family Sticker on it.


Wherever you go in life, watch out for Scythe, the tackling IT support guy.

"I don't care what race you are, not one f*cking bit, if you want to be seen as a good people, you go in there and you f*ck up the people who (unofficially) represent you in a negative light!"


#25 Master_Scythe

Master_Scythe

    Titan

  • Hero
  • 20,571 posts
  • Location:QLD

Posted 08 January 2018 - 10:08 AM

 

Bullshit.  Improved braking systems will perform better from the onset.  People don't spend $3,000 on aftermarket systems then get 28 metre 100km to zero stopping distance instead of 32 metres just because they've imagined it.

Unless they've spent some of that $3,000 on the car electronics or the tyres then they might very well have imagined it.

 

By way of explanation: Better fluid, better ventilation, bigger size, more pistons, etc. decreases the force that needs to be applied to the discs for a given amount of stopping power. The thing is, though, that under emergency situations after normal driving, today's cars aren't in need of additional force. For example, reducing the force required to lock the brakes from 5000N to 2500N by getting bigger discs doesn't do shit if the car has no trouble applying the 5000N that was needed in the first place.

 


 

 

Just so you know, It's actually impossible to get an aftermarket ABS system complianced.

It's also illegal to tamper with the ABS system itself.

So Throw that $3000 at 'electronics' all you want, unless your car CAME with ABS brakes, it's not going to do diddly squat.

 

What larger brakes allows is more Human Error (for lack of a better term) in braking.

 

If you have tiny disks with a 'pin point' contact patch, the foot travel\pedal feel from "heavy braking" to "fully locked up" can be VERY small.

Large brakes only need feather touches, nowhere near a 'solid clamp' to apply the same resistance on the rotating assembly.

 

Not only that, but small brakes fade faster due to heat. And on QLD roads, if you get a 40*C day, and happen to be on the M1, where you can do 5~6 100kmph down to 20kmph hour speed changes within a 30 second period, well lets just say my mothers base model Peugeot starts to feel rather squishy and worrysome, where as any of my cars will do that all day.

I've managed to boil the brake fluid ONCE, when I wasn't using my gears coming down a mountain; but even then, the larger disks continued to work perfectly well for street driving.

 

By your logic, a 100MM rotor with Ceramic pads should be absolutely fine to stop a semi trailer, because I know for a fact they will lock up juuuuust fine.

The ceramic will dig in, the metal will bind, and you're stopped. But good luck using anywhere between "no brakes" and "fully locked"

 

 

IRL test you can do;

Spin a bicycle tire, now stop it with your body.

I guarantee you'll have a smoother, and less dangerous (but just as quick) stop, if I let you slow it by clamping ti with your palms, rather than by jamming your pointer finger only against the tire.

Also, I bet I could put my arm weight into my palm and have the tire stop, smoothly, where as if I was to ask you to do the same with your pointer finger only, to stop just as quickly, you'll have to jam it in, risking damaging your finger, and likely "Jolting" their tire to a stop.


Edited by Master_Scythe, 08 January 2018 - 10:15 AM.

Wherever you go in life, watch out for Scythe, the tackling IT support guy.

"I don't care what race you are, not one f*cking bit, if you want to be seen as a good people, you go in there and you f*ck up the people who (unofficially) represent you in a negative light!"


#26 Rybags

Rybags

    Immortal

  • Super Hero
  • 35,854 posts

Posted 08 January 2018 - 11:25 AM


Close mate drives HR trucks, and was commenting the same thing just this weekend.

 

So, you know someone who's part of 2 demographics who are grossly overrepresented in road accidents and has the same opinion as you on P-platers vs older drivers and expect us to believe his word as well?

 

Stat-slap time.  Look at this document:  https://bitre.gov.au...ia_2016_rev.pdf

 

"Deaths by age group" on page 10.  OK, so it's not necessarily drivers but still gives a good representation.  And don't try giving us this crap that younger people "live in their cars".

Notice that the 17-25 age group has almost the same numbers as the 26-39 and 40-64 age groups, despite those groups encompassing a much greater range of ages and in fact if you interpolated it into raw numbers the 17-25 age group is in fact a distinct minority given the decline in birth rate and aging population.

 

Yet, raw accident numbers see them overrepresented, probably by a factor of 3 or more, in accident figures.

 

And you wonder and bitch about why your premiums are higher and you get hassled by the cops?



#27 Nich...

Nich...

    Professional Tart

  • Mod
  • 43,403 posts
  • Location:Mexico

Posted 08 January 2018 - 11:26 AM

where you can do 5~6 100kmph down to 20kmph hour speed changes within a 30 second period

That seems like one of those situations where someone asks why you keep going back up to 100 if you have to keep dropping to 20 so often.
"I think it is a sad reflection on our civilization that while we can and do measure the temperature in the atmosphere of Venus we do not know what goes on inside our soufflés" -- Nicholas Kurti

#28 Master_Scythe

Master_Scythe

    Titan

  • Hero
  • 20,571 posts
  • Location:QLD

Posted 08 January 2018 - 11:29 AM

 


Close mate drives HR trucks, and was commenting the same thing just this weekend.

 

So, you know someone who's part of 2 demographics who are grossly overrepresented in road accidents and has the same opinion as you on P-platers vs older drivers and expect us to believe his word as well?

 

Stat-slap time.  Look at this document:  https://bitre.gov.au...ia_2016_rev.pdf

 

"Deaths by age group" on page 10.  OK, so it's not necessarily drivers but still gives a good representation.  And don't try giving us this crap that younger people "live in their cars".

Notice that the 17-25 age group has almost the same numbers as the 26-39 and 40-64 age groups, despite those groups encompassing a much greater range of ages and in fact if you interpolated it into raw numbers the 17-25 age group is in fact a distinct minority given the decline in birth rate and aging population.

 

Yet, raw accident numbers see them overrepresented, probably by a factor of 3 or more, in accident figures.

 

And you wonder and bitch about why your premiums are higher and you get hassled by the cops?

 

 

I dont get hassled. lol.

 

And I still maintain that those numbers are skewed because more people in the age group of 17~25 are 'new' drivers, than people int he 40~64 age group.

 

We need a much smaller sample size, say 10x 64yo drivers who passed their test today, vs 10x 25yo drivers who passed their test today;

Put them through the Reflex tests, hazard tests, and emergency correction (defensive driving) tests.

 

Its OK, we dont have to share the same opinion, but I have mine based on my life experience, and you have yours.

 

Just as one other anecdote;

Lets just say, there's a reason if you ever see a BMW use their indicator people declare "Holy hell, a Beamer just indicated, buy a lotto ticket!"; its not generally a young hoon car :P


Wherever you go in life, watch out for Scythe, the tackling IT support guy.

"I don't care what race you are, not one f*cking bit, if you want to be seen as a good people, you go in there and you f*ck up the people who (unofficially) represent you in a negative light!"


#29 Nich...

Nich...

    Professional Tart

  • Mod
  • 43,403 posts
  • Location:Mexico

Posted 08 January 2018 - 11:35 AM

Smaller sample sizes produce better results since when? :p
"I think it is a sad reflection on our civilization that while we can and do measure the temperature in the atmosphere of Venus we do not know what goes on inside our soufflés" -- Nicholas Kurti

#30 Master_Scythe

Master_Scythe

    Titan

  • Hero
  • 20,571 posts
  • Location:QLD

Posted 08 January 2018 - 11:38 AM

 

where you can do 5~6 100kmph down to 20kmph hour speed changes within a 30 second period

That seems like one of those situations where someone asks why you keep going back up to 100 if you have to keep dropping to 20 so often.

 

No argument there, go for gold.

https://www.tmr.qld....t-us/Contact-us

 

For me? usually a combination of the fact that Roadworks are 40kmph, on a 110 zone, even when no one is there, and there's no warning till you get close.

Add in idiots mass merging and the woeful M1 merge, doing your best to not encourage tailgating or dangerous overtaking, you know, driving.

 

It just creates idiots and road rage if the rest of the traffic speeds up to 80/100 and you decide "I'll wait at 20, and see if it goes back down again"....

logically you're right. IRL, it never seems to play out that way.


Smaller sample sizes produce better results since when? :p

 

Hey, if you wanna find 10'000 65yo's who have never driven before, and are getting their licence today, go for gold.

I just thought it'd be a hard thing to do.

Because, as i said, my opinion is that more young people are NEW than are OLD;

and the statistic isn't so much AGE (which they like to use) but EXPERIENCE.

 

How ever many 65yo's that you can find that are just passing their test, I'll happily expand the sample size, go nuts!


Wherever you go in life, watch out for Scythe, the tackling IT support guy.

"I don't care what race you are, not one f*cking bit, if you want to be seen as a good people, you go in there and you f*ck up the people who (unofficially) represent you in a negative light!"


#31 Rybags

Rybags

    Immortal

  • Super Hero
  • 35,854 posts

Posted 08 January 2018 - 11:45 AM

Another demographic can be brand.  I might have already posted it but generally the ignorant pricks who don't indicate will usually be in a total shitbox or a $120K BMW or Audi.


I don't know what you're getting at - of course more young people will be new drivers.

 

The entire point being made is that inexperience and their attitude means they have more accidents.  Fark.



#32 Master_Scythe

Master_Scythe

    Titan

  • Hero
  • 20,571 posts
  • Location:QLD

Posted 08 January 2018 - 11:59 AM

Yep. My point is that the older generation, despite stigma, seem to have a more overconfident and 'own thew road' mentality. At least in my life experience.

Even higher risk though is that they seem to get either bored or complacent.

I mean, honestly, my father and all his friends will admit "im not what i used to be" at 65.
Dad used to rally drive in his late 30s, he believes he cant do it as well now, hes sore, and just has less energy.

Sure thats not everyone, but still.

My whole point is that insurance take a sample by age, rather than experience.

This skewes the numbers because the younger age will generally have less experience.

It should ask solely "how long have you driven" not "whats your age" .

And also, that once you pass X ammount of time (whatever it takes to get confident and experienced enough), that more time in life often (not always) leads to complacency.

My point is that its not OK (in my opinion) that someone whos made 2 claims, and been deemed unsafe to drive at least once, is a "better driver" than a male with perfect history.

Sounds like their sample is skewed by something to me!

Wherever you go in life, watch out for Scythe, the tackling IT support guy.

"I don't care what race you are, not one f*cking bit, if you want to be seen as a good people, you go in there and you f*ck up the people who (unofficially) represent you in a negative light!"


#33 Nich...

Nich...

    Professional Tart

  • Mod
  • 43,403 posts
  • Location:Mexico

Posted 08 January 2018 - 12:08 PM

If they start changing how they do insurance pools and focus on you more as an individual for premium pricing, can we look forward to that happening for healthcare, too?
"I think it is a sad reflection on our civilization that while we can and do measure the temperature in the atmosphere of Venus we do not know what goes on inside our soufflés" -- Nicholas Kurti

#34 Rybags

Rybags

    Immortal

  • Super Hero
  • 35,854 posts

Posted 08 January 2018 - 12:22 PM


My whole point is that insurance take a sample by age, rather than experience.

 

*Groan.

 

Young = less experienced.  In almost all cases.  The people who don't get licenced until they're 30+ are a very small minority.

 

Really, for the most part they have the insurance premium calculations right - except of course the ridiculous margins and discrepencies among companies to the point where an identical policy might be 50% more from some insurers.



#35 Jeruselem

Jeruselem

    Guru

  • Atomican
  • 15,012 posts
  • Location:Not Trump-Land

Posted 08 January 2018 - 12:38 PM

Insurers are a bunch of scammers who will do anything to avoid payouts and are law onto themselves anyway.


“We’re not going to stop the wheel. I’m going to break the wheel.” - Daenerys Targaryen

 

"We have some of the most beautiful hookers in the world" - Putin to Trump


#36 ResidentNeville

ResidentNeville

    Initiate

  • Quark
  • 18 posts

Posted 08 January 2018 - 01:18 PM

 

Ponder this - If pretty well everyone else's normal factory brakes seem to do the job (at least in most cases) then why would you need to modify them?

Since we're talking modified cars here;

Because Most cars normal factory brakes AREN'T good enough for the main straight. You'll overheat your brakes on the first corner and plough into a wall at the next.

I couldn't agree more. Upgraded brakes are for track use, not emergency stops to reduce crashes.

 

 

What larger brakes allows is more Human Error (for lack of a better term) in braking.

 

If you have tiny disks with a 'pin point' contact patch, the foot travel\pedal feel from "heavy braking" to "fully locked up" can be VERY small.

Large brakes only need feather touches, nowhere near a 'solid clamp' to apply the same resistance on the rotating assembly.

The reduced force required doesn't mean bupkis under emergency brake conditions. The time taken for your foot to apply 300 newtons instead of 400 newtons is immaterial when compared to the around 1 second initial reaction time.

 

I know that people want to claim that improved brakes improve emergency stops and reduce crashes, but in general that's simply not the case. 

 

 

It should ask solely "how long have you driven" not "whats your age" .

And also, that once you pass X ammount of time (whatever it takes to get confident and experienced enough), that more time in life often (not always) leads to complacency.

My point is that its not OK (in my opinion) that someone whos made 2 claims, and been deemed unsafe to drive at least once, is a "better driver" than a male with perfect history.

Sounds like their sample is skewed by something to me!

It's not a skewed sample, it's just the rating factors chosen by insurance companies, with implicit allowance for other factors.

 

Choosing the rating factors is a lot more complex than just "driving experience is a better factor!" Because driving experience is something that can easily be lied about, and there's no way to verify it.

 

Insurers aren't out there bumbling their way through life. They employ a lot of people with the sole purpose of estimating risks and coming up with rating factors. When there are ways for insurers to identify safer drivers, they take them. It's in their best interest to offer safer drivers lower premiums, so that they get more business. That's true of the insurance industry in general, they need to work out the appropriate premium, because if their premium for a given risk is too high they will lose that person's business to someone's who's a bit lower.

 

 

My point is that its not OK (in my opinion) that someone whos made 2 claims, and been deemed unsafe to drive at least once, is a "better driver" than a male with perfect history.

They're not saying she's a better driver. They're saying that using the risk estimation techniques, mathematical models, and their business profile, they expect the female driver to be less costly to insure.



#37 Master_Scythe

Master_Scythe

    Titan

  • Hero
  • 20,571 posts
  • Location:QLD

Posted 08 January 2018 - 01:58 PM

 

My point is that its not OK (in my opinion) that someone whos made 2 claims, and been deemed unsafe to drive at least once, is a "better driver" than a male with perfect history.

They're not saying she's a better driver. They're saying that using the risk estimation techniques, mathematical models, and their business profile, they expect the female driver to be less costly to insure.

 

 

oh, no argument. I'm just saying thats flawed.

 

 

they expect the female driver to be less costly to insure.

Even once that is PROVEN to be incorrect (in that persons case)

 

 

 

The reduced force required doesn't mean bupkis under emergency brake conditions. The time taken for your foot to apply 300 newtons instead of 400 newtons is immaterial when compared to the around 1 second initial reaction time.

 

I know that people want to claim that improved brakes improve emergency stops and reduce crashes, but in general that's simply not the case.

 

It's not about how much effort you have to exert, it's about how much leeway there is between heavy braking, and the pad\metal 'digging' into each other and locking.

I've done 3 defensive driving courses and have clocked up a fair amount of track time.

 

A small rotor and pad, is much harder to UN-lock, and then reapply without RE-locking the brakes.

 

In an emergency stop when you JUMP on the brakes, you feel the car lock up, and quickly butterfly the brakes off till you find the balance point.

This is INFINITELY harder with small brakes.

Its a basic road skill anyone whos done defensive driving practice will instinctively do; so it's not like it's an odd thing to need to balance.

 

Even between cars that have good brakes, you try, say a WRX with 2 pot brakes, versus an STI with Brembo 4pot.

There's only a 1.5mm rotor diameter difference, but diving a corner (which is an identical skill to emergency braking) is DRASTICALLY harder with the 2pots, because they lock up.

Both are considered good brakes, but the brembos larger pad area just means you can get more force before it just BITES.

 

Slap a tub of water, and then poke it.

You can put a LOT more force into the surface before you sink your hand then poking it.

Ditto pads edge into metal (just on a much more microscopic scale)


Edited by Master_Scythe, 08 January 2018 - 02:05 PM.

Wherever you go in life, watch out for Scythe, the tackling IT support guy.

"I don't care what race you are, not one f*cking bit, if you want to be seen as a good people, you go in there and you f*ck up the people who (unofficially) represent you in a negative light!"


#38 ResidentNeville

ResidentNeville

    Initiate

  • Quark
  • 18 posts

Posted 08 January 2018 - 02:29 PM

They're not saying she's a better driver. They're saying that using the risk estimation techniques, mathematical models, and their business profile, they expect the female driver to be less costly to insure.

Even once that is PROVEN to be incorrect (in that persons case)

 

It hasn't proven to be incorrect. They've used historical details with their risk estimation techniques, mathematical models, and their business profile, to determine that they expect the female driver to be less costly to insure.

 

 

 

I've done 3 defensive driving courses and have clocked up a fair amount of track time.

 

A small rotor and pad, is much harder to UN-lock, and then reapply without RE-locking the brakes.

 

In an emergency stop when you JUMP on the brakes, you feel the car lock up, and quickly butterfly the brakes off till you find the balance point.

This is INFINITELY harder with small brakes.

Its a basic road skill anyone whos done defensive driving practice will instinctively do; so it's not like it's an odd thing to need to balance.

 

Even between cars that have good brakes, you try, say a WRX with 2 pot brakes, versus an STI with Brembo 4pot.

There's only a 1.5mm rotor diameter difference, but diving a corner (which is an identical skill to emergency braking) is DRASTICALLY harder with the 2pots, because they lock up.

 

You really need to stop referencing track time, and corners, and butterflying brakes etc. All of that is irrelevant to emergency stopping to reduce crashes. 

 

 

Both are considered good brakes, but the brembos larger pad area just means you can get more force before it just BITES.

No. You just broke physics. The actual determinator for when it 'just BITES' is the traction between the tyre and the surface. The wheels of the car will lock if a certain amount of torque - lets say 1000Nm - is placed on the brakes, regardless of whether that 1000Nm is being applied via old drums or nice brembos.



#39 @~thehung

@~thehung

    Guru

  • Hero
  • 8,791 posts

Posted 08 January 2018 - 02:37 PM

Why does a female who has written off two vehicles and had a license suspension still get cheaper insurance than a male who has a perfect history?


probably because the male is still statistically more likely to be at fault in a more costly accident?

i really dont know, but counter-intuitive conclusions are definitely possible in the long actuarial game when massive accumulations of data are known. which is not to dismiss them chasing whatever the market lets them get away with either...

in any case, quantitative measures arent necessarily ideal for making qualitative arguments, especially where semantic confusion abound.

the question of "Which age group is more dangerous?" is loaded with personal definitions. just like the old chestnut of who are the "better" or "safer" drivers, males or females. the insurance companies tell us its the women.  the instinct of many men, though, is to read these words as synonyms for "skill".  furthermore, i'd wager that most males in their heart of hearts would believe that if a large random pool of females battled a large random pool of males in an Ultimate Safest Driver Showdown, the males would dominate.  but all that would still obscure the tangential question of temperament in the real world.  i know that when i was growing up, i definitely proclaimed boys "better" at riding bicycles — i mean, we all had the skinned knees and elbows to prove it. 

 

from my experience, older drivers are definitely more annoying :)


Edited by @~thehung, 08 January 2018 - 02:40 PM.

no pung intended

#40 chrisg

chrisg

    Immortal

  • Super Hero
  • 35,033 posts
  • Location:Perth

Posted 08 January 2018 - 02:52 PM

:)

I'm pretty certain the brakes on my Pug 307 are unmodified although I did not buy it new but the first time I needed to brake for an amber it literally scared me - awesome stopping power.

Others who have driven her have said the same thing.

I've never modified brakes, just change the pads as needed, not much else in a car I haven't "improved" however :)

Cheers
"Specialisation is for Insects" RAH




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users