Well... maybe not disagree...but make a point based
on three recent 'eye-witness' accounts of accidents
In all three accidents, the massive SUV ended up
upside down or on it's side as they
rolled up and over the rear corners of the cars they rear ended.
One in particular.... almost in slow motion... I watched (while
filling my tank at a gas station) an Expedition rear end
a small Honda. The Ex rolled over on its side onto the
grass of the gas station property. The driver was hanging
upside down still strapped into the seat belt...mouth gapping open
cell phone still in hand. The rear end of the Honda ended up
with a broken tail light and a crunched rear trunk lid. They were
allowed to drive away after the accident. The Expedition
was totaled. Every window broken, one front tire/suspension
section handing off the car (broken ball joint/suspension member)
and even the front bumper torn off.
Read through my own episode of a tracker trailer using my
MGBGT as a soccer ball (three hits no less) and my LBC
was still drivable.
http://www.teglerizer.com/mgstuff/yb_description.htm
(middle of the page)
Paul Tegler
ptegler@cablespeed.com
www.teglerizer.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles & Peggy Robinson" <ccrobins@ktc.com>
To: "Chuck Renner" <crenner@dynalivery.com>
Cc: "mgs" <mgs@autox.team.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: ?High and Mighty?: On or Off-Track?
> Chuck, you've obviously missed the point. The point is that the
> taller, more massive SUV does more damage to another vehicle when it
> runs into it than a car would. The damage claim for the other vehicle
> is what's higher and that's what we're all sharing in when we pay our
> insurance premium.
>
> Cheers,
>
> CR
>
> Chuck Renner wrote:
> >
> >
> > And did anyone catch the contradiction about the insurance rates? First
he
> > says that other drivers are having to underwrite the costs of SUVs,
which
> > are
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|