throwaway0a5e

It's absolutely mind boggling that this is downvoted? Are pods and bugs really that popular? Do people like slow subways and traffic filled freeways? Unless you benefit from reduced competition high cost of distance is bad for you.

Pretty much every post-conviction thing court mandates people pay for is a blatant cash grab from people nobody will stand up for. Interlocks are no different.

> Not really sure what you're arguing for here. Are you for drunk driving or excessive speed driving or both?

Your strawman is naked. You should dress him in some plausible deniability.

There's nothing in the comment you are replying to to suggest in the slightest way that he is in favor of those things. Just because he's against the flavor of Skynet(TM) you want doesn't mean he's in favor of whatever random "bad thing" you want to paint him as in favor of.

Even if they hadn't strategically picked that model of old car for maximum crunch factor anyone without a seat belt may as well be on a motorcycle.

Edit: Deleted the rest of the comment, It is not worthwhile to have a nuanced discussion about the merits of the various safety improvements with this community.

>No one I've talked to is actually interested in the step-sibling fetish,

I derive much enjoyment of the lewd but not pornographic memes and other humor it generates as a byproduct of being widespread.

So I guess that supports your theory that nobody actually wants that in their porn.

Exactly once, in order to make it look like one of the TVs on our display wall, that was very much connected to a computer, was in fact connected to an old DVD player.

You won't break anything without some big sticky tires to transmit that power to the ground and that (but for braking) is exactly my point.

> If you're going to make blanket assertions that safety tests are invalid and/or that the engineers designing cars don't know what they're doing, some references are probably called for.

Can you please cite where I stated, or hell, I'll settle for strongly implied, "the safety tests are invalid" or that "the engineers designing cars don't know what they're doing".

The person I am replying to made a trite low effort comment. I, without calling them out like they deserved, explained that the situation is more nuanced and their opinion is slightly off mark. You then replied with another trite low effort comment straw-manning me. FFS this is ridiculous.

The kind of people who get rims repaired rather than just buying new (no doubt based on some hand-wavy BS about safety from someone who makes a margin on the rims they sell) don't buy new rims.

If the CV joint can handle peeling out it can handle brake torque. The link between tire and ground is basically always the weak point.

Crumple zones perform a very specific function in the sequence of airbag deployment (letting the sensors crash and bags deploy before the cabin starts decelerating). The speed window at which they will appreciably reduce the deceleration in the cabin is well below the speeds at which a seat-belted occupant of an airbag equipped vehicle has to worry about serious injury. Crumple zones are undeserving of the worship they get. If you want to worship something worship side curtain airbags. They save a lot more life and injury than crumple zones. Pre-tensioners are also another feature that I'd rather have than a crumple zone. As a general rule, features that directly keep the occupants from hitting things are far more beneficial to outcomes than stuff that acts upon the whole vehicle.

Secondly, it is perfectly possible to design cars that do not need tons of invasive repairs from minor fender benders. Revise bumper and front/rear cosmetic design to allow for effective bumpers (see also: the 1980s) and tune crumple zones to need higher forces to deform them so you don't have to potentially replace a whole car over a 10-15mph collision. The tradeoff here is that the speed range at which crumple zones do much would move up which is good for real world performance bad for scoring that perfect five stars in a low speed lab test that actually helps sell cars.

The kind of person who doesn't understand that trailer tires have some pretty substantial tradeoffs in car use is not going to be loading their classic van heavily enough and then driving it fast enough to have issues with some random car tires that don't match the OEM weight rating.

It's the wide tire contact patch and not the big rims that are causing most of the problems you describe. This is typically papered over with tons of steering assist and geometry that favors minimal feedback in order to alleviate the propensity of wide tires to be greatly impacted by changes in road shape. This steering solution feels numb and disconnected from the road which is a common complaint with modern cars. The wide tires that are at the root of the problem are a key element of modern car performance so they're not going anywhere.

Additionally, if you move the wheel surface far enough from the center of the tire you can get more room for wheel bearing and axle shaft hardware without increasing the size of the wheel bolt circle and bore though this isn't a big consideration in a lot of applications as there is ample space either way.