Road rage Camaro causes accident with 2 trucks

flank

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
836
Location
California
Country
United States
Dash Cam
VIOFO A119S
That's pretty nasty.
RWD and soft shoulder never go together.
I had the older generation Camaro's (couple of them). It's fun but the RWD is only good on dry hard surfaces.
 
"The Camaro loses control in the gravel and hits the pickup, which then hits the 18-wheeler."

The article says the Camaro lost control. To me, it looked like he hit the pickup truck on purpose. So did he lose control or was it pay back?
 
"The Camaro loses control in the gravel and hits the pickup, which then hits the 18-wheeler."

The article says the Camaro lost control. To me, it looked like he hit the pickup truck on purpose. So did he lose control or was it pay back?
I'm pretty sure the intent was just to pass the pickup but he gunned the gas and at the same time, tried to come back to the lane.
Bad combination.
I don't think he'd intentionally damage his car just to pay back. Plus I didn't see too much road rage as the pickup didn't do anything
Camaro driver was just impatient and as soon as he saw some space on the shoulder, he went for it.
Thankfully, the semi didn't flip.
 
Seemed to me that the pickup was the actual cause of that by deliberately not completing the pass on the truck in order to hold up the Camaro, if the Pickup driver had any sense then he would have got out of the way of the Camaro before passing the trucks. The camera car was also following stupidly close given that an accident looked likely, especially when talking on the phone as well!
 
Seemed to me that the pickup was the actual cause of that by deliberately not completing the pass on the truck in order to hold up the Camaro, if the Pickup driver had any sense then he would have got out of the way of the Camaro before passing the trucks. The camera car was also following stupidly close given that an accident looked likely, especially when talking on the phone as well!

Yes, pickup driver is an A$hole. He should have changed lane in front of the semi and let the Camaro pass. People can be in a hurry for variety of reasons.
Stupid, arrogant.
I hate those kinds of drivers who slow down to prevent others overtaking or those who speed up when they see another passing you.

But that doesn't demand risk of an accident that can cause multiple deaths.
 
A pooload of WTF there :rolleyes:

I have to admit i tend to speed up a little as some speeadfreak get closer from behind, not that i want to keep him from overtaking, but its somthing i have noticed reviewing footage from the dashcam.
But i have stopped keeping up with them to dokument how fast they go, last time i did that i hit 130 km/h on a 80 km/h highway at night, and that wasent enuff to keep up with the overtaking taxi.
 
pickup driver was trying to get back at the camaro since the camaro tried to run him off the road at the beginning of the video. yes, camaro lost traction in the dirt/shoulder and as result came across the front of the truck, pushing him into the big rig. probably nobody hurt, just bent metal.

cam car was tailgating quite a bit just before the call came in - between him and the pickup, they had the camaro boxed into less than the length of the big rig. dangerously close even at half that speed.

at first i was kinda rooting for the truck, preventing the camaro from sideswiping him like that, but then he was just being a dick, holding up traffic. i think that may be why the cam car ended up tailgating - he was trying to encourage the truck to speed up too.
 
I think they're both idiots. The Camaro did start the chain of events but the pickup driver decided dish his own form of punishment. Big rig driver could have saved his own bacon by slowing down and avoided these 2 from the start. The pickup driver was using the big rig to box in the Camaro.
 
That pick-up driver sure showed him! :rolleyes: Much assholery to go around in this example.
 
Seemed to me that the pickup was the actual cause of that by deliberately not completing the pass on the truck in order to hold up the Camaro, if the Pickup driver had any sense then he would have got out of the way of the Camaro before passing the trucks. The camera car was also following stupidly close given that an accident looked likely, especially when talking on the phone as well!
I'm pretty sure the phone was a hands free Bluetooth. When the call comes in the radio mutes, when the driver hangs up the radio volume resumes. I don't think he turns the radio up to get out of the car.
As to the rest of your post, how dare you interject common sense. :)
 
I'm pretty sure the phone was a hands free Bluetooth. When the call comes in the radio mutes, when the driver hangs up the radio volume resumes. I don't think he turns the radio up to get out of the car.
As to the rest of your post, how dare you interject common sense. :)
If that were true why didn't we hear the other side of the conversation?
 
I'm pretty sure the phone was a hands free Bluetooth. When the call comes in the radio mutes, when the driver hangs up the radio volume resumes. I don't think he turns the radio up to get out of the car.
As to the rest of your post, how dare you interject common sense. :)
I don't care if it was a Bluetooth phone, even the top Formula 1 drivers while following 1 second behind another vehicle are quite often heard saying on their radios "Don't speak to me in the corners" along with a bit of colourful language, because phone calls are distracting and do cause accidents, Bluetooth or not. If you have to receive a phone call then a gap to the car in front of 1 second or even two seconds is stupid, especially when an accident looks likely. At least the guy on the other end had more sense and ended the conversation when he understood the situation.
 
Minimum rule of following is one car length per 10mph so at 60mph, it's only 6 car lengths ~ 14 x 6 = 84 feet.
That's the minimum when you are alert.
However, minimum stopping distance on average is around 120 feet from 60mph to 0.

So rule of car length is not enough.
It only works when there are crashes, collisions that drag along but if there is sudden crashes and stops, it won't be enough time to completely stop before the location of crash.

Minimum stopping distance should be the gap when following another car.
 
we do it in seconds, how many seconds behind the car in front according to speed and conditions
Same concept of keeping the distance between cars but I find it more stressful on the second rule.
You have to think of road/land markings and guess seconds.
Looking at the car ahead and gauzing the gap is easier for me.
 
I just drive to the conditions, I don't drop back just because the phone rings, or a passenger speaks, or I'm getting team orders as I'm racing round corners in Monaco during the grand prix or whatever the case may be, I don't think it's that big a task, you want a challenge, drive in China ;)
 
We're taught the two second rule. look for the vehicle passing any marking - signpost, pothole, change in road colour & then say "only a fool breaks the two-second rule". You can also add "rain on the floor give it two seconds more"
 
We're taught the two second rule. look for the vehicle passing any marking - signpost, pothole, change in road colour & then say "only a fool breaks the two-second rule". You can also add "rain on the floor give it two seconds more"

going by those rhymes it sounds like they start teaching this in kindergarten :)
 
Back
Top