Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

wrath_of_grunge t1_j1y3v7f wrote

Reply to comment by Madhavaz in Noah Galle, Parents, Sued Again After Crash Leaves Six Dead in Delray Beach by Spawnacus

yes, but even a 90's Honda Accord could've got up to 120mph.

it's a bit silly what wealthy people will splash out for their kids, but if you change the kind of car he was in, the outcome would've been about the same.

57

NomadFire t1_j1ycrsx wrote

> it's a bit silly what wealthy people

Hulk Hogan's son crashed a Supra when he was about 17. Causing both him and his friend to be air lifted to the hospital. His friend will live the rest of his life in a nursing home because of it.

82

My_G_Alt t1_j2029fa wrote

That kid is a colossal piece of shit.

18

Tehni t1_j1ylx84 wrote

And hundreds of non celebrity kids die doing the same thing. Unless you have a statistic that says kids with expensive cars are more likely to cause deadly crashes, your comment is kinda useless

−19

NomadFire t1_j1yn13v wrote

> Unless you have a statistic that says kids with expensive cars are more likely to cause deadly crashes,

Where do I make this claim? The crash I mentioned wasn't even deadly.

22

TheShishkabob t1_j1z0bsy wrote

The person that started this comment chain said that buying a BMW for a 17 year old was "gross negligence". Don't just ignore the context of a comment before you chip in yourself.

8

shabby47 t1_j1z4dog wrote

To be fair he said buying the kid a BMW M5 is gross negligence. Would this have happened in a base model 3 series? Who knows? But putting such a powerful machine in the hands of a crazy teenager can lead to potentially worse outcomes.

13

TheShishkabob t1_j1z8b1c wrote

How the fuck is buying any specific car "gross negligence" here? Would you have races down the street without a care if you had a more expensive vehicle as a teenager? I only ask because I sure as fuck wouldn't have.

−21

phantaxtic t1_j1z8th8 wrote

Because the M5 is an extremely powerful vehicle. It accelerates very quickly and can hit top speeds easily. The point is that giving a kid with no driving experience a race car is negligent

24

reflUX_cAtalyst t1_j1z6lc2 wrote

What is the point you're trying to make then...??

1

NomadFire t1_j1zer4l wrote

It was as simple as the guy I replied to said this.

> it's a bit silly what wealthy people

I was reminded of Hulk Hogan's son. So I decided to remind everyone. That was it wasn't any deeper than that. Didn't realize it would come off as me making an argument for or against anything. Just thought I would have got a lot of replies saying things like " I forgot all about that" and "that reminds me of this happening".

3

trashscal408 t1_j1zalvr wrote

Many countries have displacement restrictions for drivers licenses based on the age of the driver (particularly for motorcycles). It is an acknowledgement of the inexperience of young drivers in situations which require reflexive, tempered corrective actions. The physics of restricting engine power for young drivers is inarguably beneficial to all drivers.

9

Misery_101 t1_j1y8ssp wrote

His car was going 151Mph, the Nissan was going 39Mph There is actually a magnitude of difference from 120 to 150 in terms of energy needed.

30Mph slower, and there would have been a better chance for survival if they didn't roll.

Edit: changed horsepower to energy.

56

rounder55 t1_j1zp68r wrote

Driving like this needs to be treated more so as if you are driving a weapon. Even if you don't his anyone going 150 there should be some sort of weapons or attempted "insert crime" charge. It's every bit as dangerous as firing a gun into a random house

13

wrath_of_grunge t1_j1yagfu wrote

>Police say Noah Galle, 17 at the time, was speeding at 120 miles per hour in a BMW

did they say somewhere else he was going 151mph?

9

Misery_101 t1_j1yas3t wrote

Yes but it looks like it was in the ealier stories, I wonder why this one is trying to say it was only 120MPH. (Maybe they meant it was a 120MPH crash)

Here is an earlier story

36

[deleted] t1_j1yd0fo wrote

[deleted]

−6

wrath_of_grunge t1_j1ykoxh wrote

and my comment about being in a Honda going 120, was related to the story the OP posted.

>Police say Noah Galle, 17 at the time, was speeding at 120 miles per hour in a BMW

8

Virtchoo t1_j1yy4ij wrote

Honestly, it’s not so much about horsepower as much as the gear ratios in the transmission and what the governor is set at in the vehicle. The Honda civic SI has a governor set at 147, and a whopping 205hp engine. Sure 500 could get there a bit faster, but the civic could still do it.

This all being said, there’s really no reason anybody should really need to travel at anywhere near 120 anyway. 147 and 151? Insanity. These are speeds that you need full protective gear and a car with roll cages. Not a stock car with a convertible top.

5

NotUniqueOrSpecial t1_j1z2x3a wrote

> There is actually a magnitude of difference

You do not need 10x the horsepower to go an extra 30 MPH.

3

bigflamingtaco t1_j1yzjl2 wrote

>There is actually a magnitude of difference from 120 to 150 in terms of horsepower needed.

An order of magnitude is not the difference here. My 250hp SHO did 144 mph runs. An order of magnitude would be a 2000hp car Vs a factory equipped Honda, not a car that can do 150mph Vs one topping out at 120, or even 100.

2

Misery_101 t1_j1z2x1r wrote

The energy required is not linear. From 50 to 100 is not double the energy, so maybe horsepower alone isn't the correct term. On the flip side of that, it means the crash is far stronger than you would expect. Honestly I'm surprised the kid lived

What is a SHO? All I am seeing is a boat.

9

finalremix t1_j1z4oyn wrote

It's a Ford Taurus SHO, most likely. "Super High Output". It's a Taurus with 300+ HP, for some reason.

6

GaleTheThird t1_j1za55r wrote

> It's a Taurus with 300+ HP, for some reason.

People like powerful cars and Ford already had the TT V6

4

Thaaaaaaa t1_j1z9uoc wrote

Why the fuck would someone want that in a Taurus? Dragrace to waffle house after church?

3

atonementfish t1_j20ag8q wrote

Sleeper, plus it was more airdynamic than anything they had at the time. Honestly it was pretty sick. The Buick regal GS turbo is a similar vehicle people seem to enjoy, I guess old guy wanted a fast car his wife wanted something to go-to church in.

5

Thaaaaaaa t1_j20ossm wrote

TIL they still made a Regal line. I guess I didn't know much about the Taurus, my only experience with it was getting chewed out for smoking in my best friend's dad's Taurus a million years ago, always saw it as a sensible family car/to work and back-er. That SHO looks pretty badass honestly. And apparently my state police had some Taurus cruisers. Who knew.

2

urkish t1_j1z4hp2 wrote

(1/2)mv^2

So, 120 to 150 would be less than a 2x difference (144 vs 225).

1

Misery_101 t1_j1z50cu wrote

That doesn't account for drag and friction. I'll admit the literal "order of magnitude" is hyperbole, but it's over 2x energy to go the 30mph more in this case.

The acceleration is greater as well on a crash

1

Fermats_Last_Account t1_j1yzmgw wrote

Trust me. Nobody feels cool accelerating or racing in an Accord. Lmao

It’s the reason why you don’t suddenly seen Handas racing as many times as Mustangs or Camaros.

Having a BMW will automatically turn you into a douchebag.

9

BigPretender t1_j1z4d2l wrote

>BMW will automatically turn you into a douchebag.

It's like the old joke. What's the difference between a porcupine and a BMW? The porcupine has the pricks on the outside.

14

Miffers t1_j1zqge1 wrote

I had a BMW once and I felt like a douchebag. It’s amazing.

2

GaleTheThird t1_j1zac8x wrote

>Trust me. Nobody feels cool accelerating or racing in an Accord. Lmao

There's plenty of Honda fans out there who like racing their Accords

4

atonementfish t1_j20au52 wrote

Some are turbo charged it's just fancier type r.

1

similar_observation t1_j217ru2 wrote

CTR seems to have been turned into a luxury model. The 2.0T accord is just a cheaper version.

OTOH, when we talk Integras, they've always been upscaled civics.

0

similar_observation t1_j217l39 wrote

Honda attracts that weird culture. I don't know any other Japanese car brand that has a quirky mod-enthusiast fan base trying to squeeze 1 HP out of economy cars like squeezing the last bit of toothpaste from a tube. The quirkyness gets less and less goofy as the value of the car goes up.

0

Dubalicious t1_j20b8f7 wrote

16 year old me definitely felt cool racing my 4-door Honda accord but… somehow that probably supports your claim more than it disproves it 😆

1

HazelNightengale t1_j1zmjwy wrote

Kinetic energy is quadratic with respect to speed. And a BMW M5 has more mass. The impact of the two is very different- the BMW hitting with almost twice as much kinetic energy at 150 than an Accord at 120. If you actually were able to get the Accord to go that fast, that is.

Would it have made a difference to the people he crashed into? Don't know. But an idiot in an Accord and a jackass in an M5 are nowhere close to each other in terms of force. On a busier road the M5 might have caused more pileup.

3

thatsbs t1_j20azzd wrote

Energy = mass * velocity^2

Velocity is clearly the most important variable. Speed literally kills. This is why head on collisions are so deadly (you add the velocity of both vehicles), why flecks of paint in space striking the space station leaves significant damage.

6

My_G_Alt t1_j202h23 wrote

Look at the time it takes to get to that speed as well as the weight of a 90s accord and a new M5…

1

Aldervale t1_j1y4qie wrote

Eh, I'd be perfectly fine with imprisoning wealthy people who splash out for their kids. It's just one of those behaviors, like kicking a puppy, that screams "I'm a garbage person and society as a whole would be better off without me!".

−17

wrath_of_grunge t1_j1y5h17 wrote

i'm not sure about other states, but in my state there is a financial responsibility law. until a person is 21, their parents are responsible for any accidents they get into.

2

Mentally_Displaced t1_j1yc35w wrote

What state is that?

4

gophergun t1_j1yd8qk wrote

The only state with any degree of parental responsibility at 21 is Mississippi, and that's only for vandalism.

2

Mentally_Displaced t1_j1yfc2v wrote

I just don’t see how that could hold up in court, being responsible for another legal adult without any power of attorney, etc in place. But whatever, Mississippi, you do you.

3

enderxzebulun t1_j1yvva5 wrote

>I just don’t see how that could hold up in court, being responsible for another legal adult without any power of attorney, etc in place. But whatever, Mississippi, you do you.

Why wouldn't it hold up in court? It's a law.

Power of attorney doesn't make someone culpable for another's actions.

−1

Mentally_Displaced t1_j1z6wsi wrote

I’m not a lawyer. Power of attorney probably isn’t the correct thing here. I just don’t understand the rationale or legal basis of a law that says one or more adults are responsible for the actions of another adult until the third adult reaches some arbitrary milestone.

1

Dubalicious t1_j20d8hs wrote

A person is not legally an adult in Mississippi until the age of 21.

And idk how that’s any different/less arbitrary than the number being 18.

1