Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

henryn

Interesting article, @stever. I expect the police and insurance companies aren't anxious to talk about new techniques for breaking into and stealing cars. However, I don't think that story applies to my case. My F150 does not have "auto unlock, push button start". You have to press a button on the remote to unlock the door, and use a key to start.

Now this Explorer that I have as a rental car does have push button start. You walk up to it and pull the door handle twice and the door then opens. Which seems a little funny to me, and makes me suspicion that I'm not doing this the right way.

stever

There's a whole raft of laptop and black box break-in devices discussed out there on the net. Some are code grabbers, others seem to be rolling code generators, while others simply connect to your OBDII after a slim jim kind of break-in. I bet the crooks in your case got an "order" for a hood and light assembly in your color and went cruising until they spotted yours. Seems like it'd make more sense to just steal the whole thing and take it somewhere out of the way to strip. Maybe they would have needed an actual key and didn't want to flatbed it somewhere.

js06gv

henryn said:

Interesting article, @stever. I expect the police and insurance companies aren't anxious to talk about new techniques for breaking into and stealing cars. However, I don't think that story applies to my case. My F150 does not have "auto unlock, push button start". You have to press a button on the remote to unlock the door, and use a key to start.

Now this Explorer that I have as a rental car does have push button start. You walk up to it and pull the door handle twice and the door then opens. Which seems a little funny to me, and makes me suspicion that I'm not doing this the right way.

If like my Mustang, try just touching the inside of the door handle (like you're about to open it) until you feel a click, then pull on the door handle.

andres3

https://youtu.be/fOelONV_unQ

Any of you in NY familiar with this location where a new Focus RS and its driver failed to negotiate a turn? Pretty funny stuff.

qbrozen

oh yeah, that's a great place to try drifting for the first time.

andres3

On another note, a touching and very well written story on how Distracted Driving can ruin and take away lives, and how our justice system is barbaric, fining the negligent murdering driver less than 1/2 what the State wants to take away from my bank account for accidentally missing a yellow light by a second or less (a violation that really poses no hazard to anyone as traffic lights have a 1 second "dead" spot in their timing.

https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/mothers-killer-fined-250-203424859.html

Thought I'd add this for those interested; the impact statement that led to a $250 fine:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/giana-mucci/distracted-driving-victim-impact-statement/10153688564496033?pnref=story.unseen-section

explorerx4

@henryn,
If the card with the keypad code is still in your owner's manual, someone could have copied it.
At least they didn't take your wheels, too.

roadburner

andres3 said:

https://youtu.be/fOelONV_unQ

Any of you in NY familiar with this location where a new Focus RS and its driver failed to negotiate a turn? Pretty funny stuff.

That should buff right out. But in any case, it's proof of evolution in action...

nyccarguy

I'm sure he was complaining about how high his insurance rates were BEFORE this act of stupidity. I would LOVE for his insurance company to get a hold of this video!

fezo

Indeed. I'm pretty familiar with the area.

If we really want to get serious about population control all you have to do is remove warning labels from everything. That'll really empty things out.

henryn

explorerx4 said:

@henryn,
If the card with the keypad code is still in your owner's manual, someone could have copied it.
At least they didn't take your wheels, too.

A possibility I had not considered. I had my oil changed about 2 weeks ago at QuickLane. Hmmm...

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

Snake, good luck with the Florida place. Wow, and pickleball.....try not to get addicted. I know people buy early in Florida, and get the place paid down so they can eventually go or stay there.

This last year, rental rates really increased, so if you own you won't get hi as much compared to renting.

Nothing is guaranteed but that money you are setting aside isn't a total expense. You can sell one day and get money back, and there is a possibility prices could increase.

Not to sure pickleball appeals to me. I am not worried about selling it as it will be our retirement home. That means that the kids have to worry about selling it.

snakeweasel

Mr_Shiftright said:

Yeah, kids grew up then dreaming of going to outer space.

But alas, Nixon pretty much gutted NASA's budget and their ambitious "post-moon" plans for space stations with 100 inhabitants. I think we could have done it. But now all our Germans are dead.

I don't think it would be feasible to have a space station with 100 inhabitants. It's incredibly expensive to put something in space so putting the infrastructure and supplies to house 100 people would be prohibitive cost wise. It currently costs over $100 million to sent something up to the international space station and they don't have nearly 100 people.

snakeweasel

qbrozen said:

fintail said:

I must be one of the youngsters here. My earliest vivid TV memory is the hoopla around the 1984 Olympics, I was 7. I also have vague memories of seeing reports the KAL tragedy. From then on, I remember most significant events, I think. I remember Challenger clearly.

I only have a few years on you, fin. I also remember Challenger. I was home that day. Can't remember if school was canceled or I was playing hooky. Anyway, my mom was upstairs in the shower and I was down on the couch watching the launch. When it happened, I leaned forward, staring in disbelief. I got off the couch and sat on the coffee table close to the TV as they reshowed it, and I cried.

I witnessed a tragedy in person when I was little, but I'm having a helluva time finding any info about it online, so I'm not sure how old I was. It was an airshow at the Lakehurst Naval Base where either a plane malfunctioned or clipped another, the pilot ejected, but his chute didn't open and he fell to his death. I remember it clearly, and not everyone knew what happened because it was far in the distance over the trees, but I remember seeing something fall from the plane and slowly realizing what had happened as everyone was asked to leave. I tried to tell my parents what I saw, but they didn't want to believe me until we heard about it later.

I didn't know about it until the next day, it happened while I was at work and on the way home I listened to a tape and when I got home I turned on something that didn't have news. My mom was vacationing in Florida that day and was close enough that they saw the explosion off on the horizon.

oldfarmer50

graphicguy said:

@henryn....that's nuts!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would say it's druggies that did that, but it was too meticulous for any stoned person(s) to do. That was a professional job. And, I bet they're quite practiced at it. Plus, who would be looking for thieves fencing hoods light bezels and ¼ panels? Pretty stealth.

You guys have put up with me railing against Cadillacs. But, if you get one that runs/works the way they're supposed to, they really are great cars.

Locking....I walk away from the car with Fob in my pocket. Once out of range, the car locks itself.

Inching up to 24 MPG in mixed driving as I approach 10K miles. So, all-in-all, I'm pleased.

I say professional job as well. That's why I suggested he drive around to all the local body shops to see which one is currently repairing a Ford truck. Somebody is trying to max his profit.

As to gas milage the 'Stang @ 6k mikes is getting about 24 as well. Better than the wife's PT Cruiser.

oldfarmer50

andres3 said:

https://youtu.be/fOelONV_unQ

Any of you in NY familiar with this location where a new Focus RS and its driver failed to negotiate a turn? Pretty funny stuff.

Yeah, about 50 miles north of NYC. Edge of the Catskills. Lots of hills and twistys. Looks like a drifters club. Sucks to be that guy.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

the IIHS is hilariously biased; they actually publish this drivel:

What are radar detectors?
Radar detectors are radio receivers tuned to the frequency range used by police radar guns. Radar detectors are bought and sold for the sole purpose of helping speeders avoid speeding tickets.

As a radar detector owner I can categorically state they are 100% wrong. The detector is an informational device giving a driver greater information about his surroundings (that could and do impact the driving around them), thereby increasing my own personal safety levels.

For example, I will often hear radar (that can't be seen) with the detector, which alerts me to the fact that cars may bunch up and brake in front of me for no other reason than there is a cop ahead. I'm given an early warning system. It is simply another tool and gauge to better inform the driver about their surroundings; a definite safety device.

Some drivers choose to be informed, educated, and welcome devices that give them additional information. Others like the IIHS, prefer drivers remain ignorant, and just stick their heads in the sand, and pay for the speeding ticket.

BULL

For those that believe the "speed kills" myth, I can see them saying the same thing. Going fast in those minds will get you killed a lot faster than anything else going on in the world; statistics or the Autobahn be damned.

For those that have studied the issue, we know that the only thing speed kills is your pocketbook!

https://youtu.be/2BKdbxX1pDw

I may not be oldfarmer but I know Toro Poopoo when I see it.

For those that believe the "speed has no effect on accidents" myth I have heard that bull before. It's always a load of crap to keep them from admitting that the only reason they got a radar detector is to avoid speed tickets. Having the radar detector gives you nothing that you claimed and what you claimed is achieved by other means that a good driver should know.

As for studying the issue did you actually study the issue or did you just looked for whatever supported your position?

It is nothing more that a crock of bull.

The main reason one buys a radar detector is to avoid only "radar" speeding tickets. It is certainly not the only reason.

It won't help you if you get paced from behind, or in a case of mistaken identity (misidentified fast car). It won't help if you are clocked by land or air. It merely is a safety notification device alerting a driver to information they can't possibly know otherwise. I've driven a lot recently with both a radar detector and without it. If anything, the detector makes me slow down more often as I don't know whether the cop left their radar on and is already pre-occupied writing some other poor soul a ticket, or if they have their radar gun pointed in my direction a mile ahead (or if they are on the other side of the freeway with no access to my side). If slow is safe then the detector is making me a safer driver via that method.

Your claim that there are other means to achieve the benefits I've mentioned is the BULL here. Something tells me you've never driven around with a high quality radar detector. They've advanced massively in just the last 5-8 or so years, so one from 1985 doesn't count. The top of the line models are little geniuses; with built-in real-time GPS based networking to tattletale on the speed trap locations similar to the way CB radios were used by truckers in the past, or flashing lights often used from oncoming traffic to warn of a speed trap ahead; only many more time efficiently and effectively. Even when a radar isn't used I can warn other motorists with pinpoint accuracy of the LEO's current position. Another safety benefit; not being pulled over! Pulling over on the side of a freeway or high-speed highway is high-risk. As I've said, I believe more harm than good is done by pulling over speeders (increased traffic and disruption to flow).

Unlike the IIHS and NHTSA that form their opinion prior to studying or researching the issue, then pay for studies that will help promote their viewpoint, and then alter or rig the data and skew the statistical numbers when the results don't favor their viewpoint, I formed my opinion only AFTER studying the issue.

You start your post backtracking on what you said that I replied to, you spent most of your post simply confirming that what I said was correct. Outside of avoiding speed traps there is no legitimate reason to own a radar detector. That it makes you aware that traffic might (read might) slow down a head of you when you hear the detector go off is simply nonsense. Traffic could slow down for all manners of things, objects in the road, pot holes, officers without speed radar sitting on the side of the road, a pretty girl walking down the street, any type of activity, I have even seen it due to someone trying to get away from two ducks having marital relations. You prepare for traffic suddenly slowing down by following at a proper distance, keeping a reasonable speed and keeping aware of whats happening on the road as far down as you can. If you are doing those you are being safe and don't need a radar detector to be safe, if you need the radar detector to be safer then you're not driving safe.

As for an officer having someone pulled over making it less safe there is a great solution to that, don't speed.

As for you forming an opinion AFTER studying the issue, I seriously doubt that. Did you look at all the facts on the issue? If you did you wouldn't have made some of the laughable comments that you have. I used to have the same train of thought that you have, then to support what I was saying I studied all aspects of the issue and found that I was really fooling myself. You know what really did it for me? It was after the eliminated the 55MPH limit. When that happened all the arguments that the "speed demons" like use used to discredit the supporters of the 55 MPH now could be used to discredit the "speed demons".

I deal with people like you all the time, you give discredited "facts", restate others arguments to try to discredit them and go on personal attacks on those that disagree with you simply because you cannot address the argument.

I am done with you.

snakeweasel

henryn said:

I walked out of the house this morning, ready to leave for work. The 2013 Passat TDI and the 2015 F150 were sitting parked side by side in the driveway, as usual. As I was about to get into the Passat, I snapped that something was wrong. Something was very wrong.

Between 9:30 p.m. last evening, and 8:30 a.m. this morning, someone stole the hood and the driver’s side front light assembly from my truck.

The truck was locked, but somehow they unlocked it, with no visible signs of damage anywhere. They took the hood, and the bolts that hold it on, neatly. No scratches, no damage to the fenders. They unplugged all 3 of the wiring harnesses which went to the light assembly. Which isn’t that easy to do, would have been much easier to cut the wires.

I found no bolts, no screws, no washers, no nothing. Not laying on the ground, or on the truck. This looked like a very neat, professional job, done by a good auto repair technician.

I called the police, and got a report number. Called the insurance company, got a claims number. Drove the truck over to the Ford dealer’s collision center and left it. Went to Enterprise and picked up a rental (2016 Explorer Limited, more on that later). And I was at work by noon.

Just another day in the ‘hood.

Wow such a specific attack just to take the hood and light assembly. Seems too specific and I wonder why they didn't take the whole truck because there are more parts to be had.

snakeweasel

houdini1 said:

I remember no ac, no indoor plumbing, no electricity...and being happy as clams !! Very good history.

You most likely were very happy. BTW I found a picture of you guys back then.



Ducking and running.

snakeweasel

henryn said:

I remember, a few decades back, a tool called a "slim jim". You slid it in between the window and the door frame, and it would allow you to unlock the door.

I once locked my keys in my car and tried to use a slim jim, it didn't work to well.

snakeweasel

stever said:

When we did that in the van a summer or two ago, the locksmith put an inflatable slim jim gizmo in the top of the door frame, pumped it up a little and that pulled the frame away enough to get the "coat hanger" to reach the button on the door.

That finally made me ziptie one of the valet keys underneath the van like I usually do.

When I first got my car I got to it only to realize that I locked the keys inside with the windows up. I called the dealership to ask which window would be the cheapest to break to get in. The salesman told me that that wasn't necessary and that he could be there in a few minutes with a spare key. I told him I didn't have time for that as it already started raining and I had to get the top up.

snakeweasel

houdini1 said:

Snake, that sounds like a good plan. All the luck !

Thanks, the wife is going down next month with her sisters to check out the place and see the grandkids.

berri

Some years ago we were moving our kid to the Chicago area. Amidst the chaos, somehow the keys to the Ford U-Haul truck got locked in the cabin. A locksmith came and spent quite a bit of time getting into it. He said it was the hardest vehicle he had ever broken into. Who'd have thought

snakeweasel

jmonroe said:

@oldfarmer50, can you verify the extent of what I post below?

Has anyone seen the national news where there is an almost epidemic of drivers not stopping for school buses when they stop to unload students. The segment I saw on local CBS and national news last night showed two students being hit by pickup trucks as they crossed the street after getting off the school bus. Fortunately neither boy was seriously hurt which is amazing especially given the speed of the pickup that hit the second boy. As a result of this epidemic more and more states are going to install cameras to get the license number of the offending vehicles and issue tickets. The report said that this not stopping for a school bus happens many many thousands of times a year across the country.

All of the southern states other than Florida have authorized and/or have installed the cameras. There are a handful of other states across the country that are doing this but the South is very unified about this.

Now listen to this one, there are people who want to fight this because they say it is nothing more than a money grab by the school districts. After what we have been exposed to about speeding tickets here for about a month, I'm not surprised.

jmonroe

I am not surprised either, now when will we hear that the cameras violate people constitutional rights?

snakeweasel

oldfarmer50 said:

snakeweasel said:

Well some news on the motorcycle front. Was at an event last Saturday and came across a good deal, an anniversary edition Harley Sportster with 500 miles (yes just 500 miles) for about $5K. OK this is a great deal as I would have to work hard to get this bike in a condition where I can't get my money back even 10 years down the road. Only problem is that I would have to get it here from Florida, an easy solution. So I start to get ready to get information on transporting it and planning on contacting the credit union for the loan.

On Sunday a wrench gets thrown into the gears. Now me and my wife are the youngest of our parents kids and we both have 55 in our rear view mirrors. My wifes sisters will be retiring over the years starting now and most of them have decided on Florida and found a nice active 55 and older gated community that is still under construction. Since many of my sister in laws are planning on getting homes there and that it is 40 minutes from our kids the wife wants us to also get a home there. Now there is an added bonus that it's about an hour from my sister, an aunt and an uncle of mine. The place has a lot of activities including pickelball.

So the wife wants to get a house there for us to retire to in 10-12 years. I think it's a good idea so we found a model we like, 1,100 square feet, two bedrooms, two baths. Yeah it's a lot smaller than what we have but it is just the two of us. So I ran the figure and while it will be tight it is totally doable, but means no bike for the foreseeable future. We talked to a mortgage broker yesterday who says that it would be tight to get the figures right for a second home but thinks it can be worked out.

If this goes through we will have two mortgages, a place in Florida for vacations and when we retire we sell our main home and take the proceeds and pay off that Florida home.

As it is related to a previous discussion the mortgage broker pulled our credit rating and asked if our car payment was for a lease. He was happy that it wasn't. See as a regular car payment it disappears in a couple of months and we have no more car payment and a car, if it were a lease it disappears in a couple of months but so does the car and we would either buy the car or get a new one making our payments continue. The reason it was good that it wasn't a lease is that the numbers wouldn't work out if we were going to continue with a car payment, we would have to much in payments to meet the guidelines for a second home mortgage. Once that car payment drops we could make it work. Wish us luck.

Your wife gets a house and you can't have a lousy used bike? That sounds unfair to me.

Well we both get the house, I would be OK in foregoing the bike for the retirement home.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

Thought you all might get a kick out of this guy ruining his brand new high priced Ferrari!

Now was the cause driver incompetence and unbroken-in brand new tires (driver-error again), or speeding, LOL.

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/11/05/watch-man-crashes-1m-ferrari-right-after-leaving-dealership/?utm_source=zergnet.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_764719

I wouldn't think that the tires were the cause. I would suspect it to be a combination of inexperience and a desire to push the vehicle (read excessive speed or the desire for it). S/he seemed to be doing OK with the car until s/he punched it.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/truckers-warn-speed-caps-will-cause-crashes-jam-highways/2016/09/15/90e79460-7b61-11e6-8064-c1ddc8a724bb_story.html#comments

I'd trust professional drivers (Truckers) far more with driving rules and regulations than I would ignorant stupid overpaid government bureaucrats to set transportation and traffic policy.

I read the article and it only mentioned "more than 150 truckers" meaning barley over 150, and those truckers were independent truckers. There was no mention about anyone representing the trucker industry or organized groups of truckers. Just a few independent truckers. Note that the suggested speeds that the so called governors would limit trucks to are typical speeds that the vast majority of truckers now drive.

the most telling part of this article is the comment "Truckers also want to travel as far as they can in the hours they’re allowed to drive under federal rules." makes it apparent that this isn't about safety but that these truckers want to make more money by driving faster.

fordfool

andres3 said:

https://youtu.be/fOelONV_unQ

Any of you in NY familiar with this location where a new Focus RS and its driver failed to negotiate a turn? Pretty funny stuff.

Yes, it’s a 5 mph hairpin turn on Rts. 44 & 55 between Rt. 52 and New Paltz, NY coming down from the Catskills towards the Hudson in Ulster County. I go through that switchback in my Focus with better results when going back to Poughkeepsie, NY. The driver took the curve going uphill; better than trying it downhill!

houdini1

snakeweasel said:

houdini1 said:

I remember no ac, no indoor plumbing, no electricity...and being happy as clams !! Very good history.

You most likely were very happy. BTW I found a picture of you guys back then.



Ducking and running.

No, that was our rich neighbors !

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

graphicguy said:

@henryn....that's nuts!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would say it's druggies that did that, but it was too meticulous for any stoned person(s) to do. That was a professional job. And, I bet they're quite practiced at it. Plus, who would be looking for thieves fencing hoods light bezels and ¼ panels? Pretty stealth.

You guys have put up with me railing against Cadillacs. But, if you get one that runs/works the way they're supposed to, they really are great cars.

Locking....I walk away from the car with Fob in my pocket. Once out of range, the car locks itself.

Inching up to 24 MPG in mixed driving as I approach 10K miles. So, all-in-all, I'm pleased.

Sounds like the solution for Cadillac is to do the following:

Copy Car Max's policy of 5-day returns for any reason, extend it to 500 days, and allow as many transfers as required until you find one that works well enough.

Chrysler couldn't do this because pretty much all of their cars are lemons. I've inspected other Neon's other than my own in the past, so I know I didn't get a bad one.

I have had three Chrysler in my life, the current one has almost 111K miles and not one of them have been a lemon.

snakeweasel

qbrozen said:

oh yeah, that's a great place to try drifting for the first time.

Not a place to drift at all, nobody should be drifting there.

snakeweasel

fezo said:

Indeed. I'm pretty familiar with the area.

If we really want to get serious about population control all you have to do is remove warning labels from everything. That'll really empty things out.

I have a hairdryer that states "do not use in the shower". But my favorite was a bag of peanuts I saw once that stated "May contain peanuts". I don't know what worries me more, that you have to be warned that a bag of peanuts contains peanuts or that the term "may contain" implies that that bag of peanuts might not have peanuts.

qbrozen

snakeweasel said:

oh yeah, that's a great place to try drifting for the first time.

Not a place to drift at all, nobody should be drifting there.

Nobody should be doing it on a open public road, of course

Mr_Shiftright

snakeweasel said:

fezo said:

Indeed. I'm pretty familiar with the area.

If we really want to get serious about population control all you have to do is remove warning labels from everything. That'll really empty things out.

I have a hairdryer that states "do not use in the shower". But my favorite was a bag of peanuts I saw once that stated "May contain peanuts". I don't know what worries me more, that you have to be warned that a bag of peanuts contains peanuts or that the term "may contain" implies that that bag of peanuts might not have peanuts.

I like the label on Drano----"Do not swallow".

snakeweasel

qbrozen said:

snakeweasel said:

qbrozen said:

oh yeah, that's a great place to try drifting for the first time.

Not a place to drift at all, nobody should be drifting there.

Nobody should be doing it on a open public road, of course

No people shouldn't be doing that on an open road, nor should they be doing it on a closed paved course. Drifting should only be done on dirt tracks.

oldfarmer50

snakeweasel said:

qbrozen said:

snakeweasel said:

qbrozen said:

oh yeah, that's a great place to try drifting for the first time.

Not a place to drift at all, nobody should be drifting there.

Nobody should be doing it on a open public road, of course

No people shouldn't be doing that on an open road, nor should they be doing it on a closed paved course. Drifting should only be done on dirt tracks.

Or in empty parking lots after the first inch of snow.

qbrozen

snakeweasel said:

snakeweasel said:

oh yeah, that's a great place to try drifting for the first time.

Not a place to drift at all, nobody should be drifting there.

Nobody should be doing it on a open public road, of course

No people shouldn't be doing that on an open road, nor should they be doing it on a closed paved course. Drifting should only be done on dirt tracks.

Well, I disagree there. On a closed paved track is just plain fun.

driver100

henryn Sorry to hear about your f-150, that is so weird. I have heard of guys that go out and steal parts custom orders - probably get them for a body shop.

It would be interesting to know what your Ford dealer thinks happened.

imidazol97

driver100 said:

henryn Sorry to hear about your f-150, that is so weird. I have heard of guys that go out and steal parts custom orders - probably get them for a body shop.

It would be interesting to know what your Ford dealer thinks happened.

I'd put up a bet this isn't the first case the local Ford dealers (and other brands) have had to get replacements for.
I suspect it's a community pattern.

Odd the police department doesn't even want to investigate what appears to be a nonstandard theft.

driver100

All the trucks I saw in Switzerland, Germany, and Austria had flat front ends. Probably makes them not as powerful, and I would think gives better vision.


They all had bars under the trailer so cars can't go under. Trucks always stay to the right, except to pass. Truck drivers really do seem much better there.
Their hours must be closely monitored too. Many service areas could have 50 to 70 trucks pulled over, mostly in the evening and at night. One morning our bus driver had to start 2 hours later because we got back 2 hours later than expected, so he needed the required hours off before driving again.

(a) 13 hours of driving time in the day; or

(b) 14 hours of on-duty time in the day.

Mandatory off-duty time
7 (1) Unless a driver has taken at least 8 consecutive hours of off-duty time before driving again, a carrier must not request, require or allow the driver to drive and the driver must not drive again after the driver has accumulated: (a) 13 hours of driving time or (b) 14 hours of on-duty time.

There are a lot of rules and regulations for trucks and their drivers.

driver100

imidazol97 said:

driver100 said:

henryn Sorry to hear about your f-150, that is so weird. I have heard of guys that go out and steal parts custom orders - probably get them for a body shop.

It would be interesting to know what your Ford dealer thinks happened.

I'd put up a bet this isn't the first case the local Ford dealers (and other brands) have had to get replacements for.
I suspect it's a community pattern.

Odd the police department doesn't even want to investigate what appears to be a nonstandard theft.

If there isn't much of a trail the police won't bother. They won't spend their time trying to close the theft ring down unless they have some clues.

ab348

driver100 said:

They all had bars under the trailer so cars can't go under.

I think those are actually intended to protect cyclists. The bicycle activists here are pressing for them after a couple of inattentive cyclists were killed.

stever

I thought they are mostly for cars, unless I'm thinking of the barriers in the rear. For bikes and pedestrians, you'd think they'd require a sloped hood.

snakeweasel

qbrozen said:

snakeweasel said:

qbrozen said:

snakeweasel said:

qbrozen said:

oh yeah, that's a great place to try drifting for the first time.

Not a place to drift at all, nobody should be drifting there.

Nobody should be doing it on a open public road, of course

No people shouldn't be doing that on an open road, nor should they be doing it on a closed paved course. Drifting should only be done on dirt tracks.

Well, I disagree there. On a closed paved track is just plain fun.

On a closed paved track it might be fun but it slows you down through the curve.

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

All the trucks I saw in Switzerland, Germany, and Austria had flat front ends. Probably makes them not as powerful, and I would think gives better vision.


They all had bars under the trailer so cars can't go under. Trucks always stay to the right, except to pass. Truck drivers really do seem much better there.
Their hours must be closely monitored too. Many service areas could have 50 to 70 trucks pulled over, mostly in the evening and at night. One morning our bus driver had to start 2 hours later because we got back 2 hours later than expected, so he needed the required hours off before driving again.

(a) 13 hours of driving time in the day; or

(b) 14 hours of on-duty time in the day.

Mandatory off-duty time
7 (1) Unless a driver has taken at least 8 consecutive hours of off-duty time before driving again, a carrier must not request, require or allow the driver to drive and the driver must not drive again after the driver has accumulated: (a) 13 hours of driving time or (b) 14 hours of on-duty time.

There are a lot of rules and regulations for trucks and their drivers.

Trucks here also have those barriers and they are also restricted to the hours they drive. Federal regulations limit driving to a 14 hours of on duty time with no more than 11 hours driving in the 14 hour on duty time. Afterwards they are required to off duty for 10 hours.

snakeweasel

ab348 said:

driver100 said:

They all had bars under the trailer so cars can't go under.

I think those are actually intended to protect cyclists. The bicycle activists here are pressing for them after a couple of inattentive cyclists were killed.

Really? there is a problem with bicyclists running into the rear end of trucks? You have to be totally unaware, and maybe even blind, to run into the back of a truck fast enough on a bicycle to kill yourself. And even then I don't think that bar would do much good as you would just fly over the handlebars.

The bar is to keep cars from running under the trailer.

snakeweasel

OK it almost happened again. yesterday going home I get to the same intersection, approach and stop at the stop sign in the left lane with my left turn signal on. As I approach I notice that the on coming lanes already has a car stopped waiting for cross traffic to clear. So once cross traffic clears we both proceed forward with me yielding the right of way and I wait till we pass each other to start my left turn behind him.

Well behind him was some idiot that must believe that traffic laws must not be applicable to him comes up behind him and doesn't even slow down for the stop sign. As I start my turn I notice that the guy doesn't stop for the stop sign and follows the first guy right trough the intersection. I was able to stop and not get into an accident but what is wrong with people? :@

hoofster

any idea if plug in hybrids, i.e. X5 40e, will be eligible for green hov sticker in CA?

ab348

snakeweasel said:

Really? there is a problem with bicyclists running into the rear end of trucks? You have to be totally unaware, and maybe even blind, to run into the back of a truck fast enough on a bicycle to kill yourself. And even then I don't think that bar would do much good as you would just fly over the handlebars.

The bar is to keep cars from running under the trailer.

No, talking about the things on the sides of the trailer between the axles.

The issue is in city traffic big trucks (even larger box & dump trucks, not just semis) make turns and if there is a cyclist beside them out of view of the driver, they can be knocked over between the axles and run over accidentally. The side guards are supposed to help prevent that, although there are different views:

https://www.thestar.com/autos/2016/02/27/truck-side-guards-may-not-be-safer-for-cyclists.html

Here the cycling lobby has the ear of our ultra politically-correct municipal government so they are wanting them to spend a few millions fitting these things to the municipal truck fleet, the same way they have convinced them to spend millions on bike lanes that are virtually unused.

driver100

stever said:

I thought they are mostly for cars, unless I'm thinking of the barriers in the rear. For bikes and pedestrians, you'd think they'd require a sloped hood.

The bars under the truck are so that say a truck is across the lanes on a road, a car won't come along, not see the truck at all since most don't have lights or reflective tape, and slide right under the trailer....sometimes decapitating people. I know of people who had that happen, it was dark, and they hit a trailer of a truck that was backing into a drive, when it was right on the road. They weren't decapitated but they suffered serious injuries for the rest of their lives.