|
|
|
|
|
|
BMW Garage | BMW Meets | Register | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum
>
Need help finding out the 60 to 0 stopping length for an e90 328 isedan
|
|
12-08-2012, 12:46 AM | #1 |
New Member
3
Rep 12
Posts |
Need help finding out the 60 to 0 stopping length for an e90 328 isedan
I was involved in an accident and I am trying to prove with facts that I was travelling with a safe cushion in between myself and the car in front of me and was unable to avoid the collision due to the car in front of me being cut off.
I need to know the 60 to 0 length. Any anyful information would greatly help. Thanks, Juan |
12-08-2012, 01:10 AM | #3 |
Captain
46
Rep 967
Posts |
Inside Line says 126 ft on the 225 all seasons, if you have bigger/better tires I would expect it to be substantially shorter.
__________________
| PROcede Rev3 | Vishnu Meth | DCI | BMW Perf. Exhaust | AR Coated/Catless | CP-E FMIC | Quaife | |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 06:15 AM | #5 |
General
16870
Rep 18,554
Posts |
Road & Track and Motor Trend post braking distance from 60 - 0 MPH for their tests, so I recommend checking those two sources. Car & Driver posts braking distances from 70 - 0 MPH, and the 325i back in 2006 it was 161 feet, but that was a sport package model.
Now that said, and I'm not sure what you are trying to prove, but braking distance is a very subjective thing and depends on a lot of factors, such as tire age and condition, tire type, brake system condition, available grip on/of the road surface, weather, and driver reaction time, etc. The data you seek is data from instrumented tests, performed by professional test drivers, one new cars, in a controlled environment (that removes driver reaction time from the measurement), which has no relation to real world braking performance. Meaning that if you are trying to prove that you were a safe distance (more than 126 feet - to use the distance quoted earlier) behind a car, both traveling at 60 MPH and used your brakes to their maximum effectiveness you probably would have taken far longer that 126 feet to stop to avoid the accident. Good luck. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 10:17 AM | #7 |
Audaces fortuna juvat
9
Rep 543
Posts |
A few things to consider - which really, the police analyst should do:
1) POPP - Point of Possible Perception: at what point could the driver have perceived that something was occurring 2) PRT - Perception/Reaction Time: Accepted value for Humans is 1.5seconds ( 0.75s to see it followed by 0.75s to react to it) 3) Skid marks: Were there any? ABS leaves shadow marks that are faint and disappear fast (depending on temperature). So, were measurements taken by the Police Dept? Was a Police Analyst there? How much damage was sustained? Who said you were following too closely? As was asked previously: What is your tire tread like? Was it raining? Were the roads wet? |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 10:40 AM | #8 |
Lieutenant
31
Rep 393
Posts |
In short, talk to a lawyer before you decide if you want to fight it. They'll know the right questions to ask.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 11:27 AM | #9 |
Private First Class
9
Rep 173
Posts |
Dunno man.. It's hard to defend when you've rear-ended someone. The onus is on the person following to maintain a safe distance and when you rear-end someone, you're usually at fault for tailgating. Hope you can defend your case, but it's gonna be tough. Let us know how it plays out.. Good luck!
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 11:58 AM | #11 |
Colonel
124
Rep 2,554
Posts |
not as much as driver reaction
you rear ended someone.... how is that NOT your fault? trying to argue that it's safe to follow closer than 3 seconds on the basis that your BMW brakes better than the car in front of you will not fly in court if the car in front of you got cut off (you didn't get cut off) and so you hit them, you did not have enough space in front of you. when deciding on cushion space, you are trying to determine if you can avoid hitting the car in front of you, if they panic brake spontaneously. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 12:42 PM | #13 |
Lieutenant
52
Rep 471
Posts |
You rear ended someone because you were following to close........doesn't matter if you are third party to someone else's action. If you were travelling with a safe cushion in between yourself and the car in front you this thread would not exist.
-Kevin |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 12:46 PM | #14 | |
New Member
3
Rep 12
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 01:22 PM | #15 |
Where'd my VTEC go?
479
Rep 6,067
Posts |
This. Doesn't matter what instrumented tests in a controlled environment show. If you rear ended someone, then you weren't following at a safe distance. There is no arguing about it. Doesn't matter what the circumstances were or what caused the car in front of you to abruptly slow down or stop. A safe distance means you should have been able to stop without hitting them no matter what.
__________________
AW/Terra | ZSP | ZPP | ZCW | iDrive | CA
Mods: BC BR coilovers | Blacklines | M-tech rear | dual exhaust | M3 steering wheel | BMW SSK | ZHP shift knob | High-kick CF spoiler | NBT Retrofit M3 front control arms | M3 rear guide rods | Manzo rear toe and camber links | Monroe rear shock mounts | Varrstoen ES1 19x9.5+20 Front, 19x11+25 rear |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 01:24 PM | #16 | ||
New Member
3
Rep 12
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
She was dead stopped on the freeway. Had the car been braking even in a panic I believe I could have avoided it. But she had dangerously merged in to our lane which was going anywhere from 50-60 mph going less than 10mph. And to top it off she didn't just merge she got the guy off. No measurements or pictures were taken by the CHP officer. Even though though he was asked to do so. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 01:26 PM | #17 |
New Member
3
Rep 12
Posts |
People seem to think tht I was tailgating. That's not the case. If it were I'm obviously at fault. This would be like trying to stop before you hit a brick wall with 3 seconds to do so. And within those 3 seconds you have to react and wait for it to come in view.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 01:34 PM | #18 |
Captain
37
Rep 701
Posts |
Yeah you have a case to fight if the lady cut off someone and was going at dangerously low speeds on a highway (10mph). The people above figured you were tailgating someone so I'm not sure about their advice.
Lawyer up? |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 01:39 PM | #19 |
Where'd my VTEC go?
479
Rep 6,067
Posts |
You didn't explain the situation very well in your original post. It sounds like multiple people are at fault here, and I'm no so sure you're completely free of fault either.
If other lanes are on dead stop and you're going 50-60mph (im assuming you were in the HOV lane), you're going to need much more than a 3 second cushion with the car in front of you to account for exactly this type of situation. Sorry to say, but it kind of is common sense defensive driving. The 3 second rule is a general guideline for ideal conditions, not an absolute rule.
__________________
AW/Terra | ZSP | ZPP | ZCW | iDrive | CA
Mods: BC BR coilovers | Blacklines | M-tech rear | dual exhaust | M3 steering wheel | BMW SSK | ZHP shift knob | High-kick CF spoiler | NBT Retrofit M3 front control arms | M3 rear guide rods | Manzo rear toe and camber links | Monroe rear shock mounts | Varrstoen ES1 19x9.5+20 Front, 19x11+25 rear |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 01:41 PM | #20 |
Captain
663
Rep 740
Posts |
Question: if the car in front went around the obstacle, why didn't you? If you were actually 3 seconds back, then you had 3 seconds to take the same evasive action as the car in front. No matter how you try to explain it, the facts say you weren't at a safe following distance. To argue otherwise given the results is absurd.
Live, learn, and be thankful that you or your passenger weren't hurt. Last edited by dmatre; 12-08-2012 at 01:49 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 01:47 PM | #21 | |
New Member
3
Rep 12
Posts |
Quote:
To answer the above. I wasnt going in the HOV lane. Traffic was flowing in all lanes. We have no idea why she just cut in going so slow. It was pretty ideal driving conditions. I'll probably end up getting a lawyer involved. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2012, 01:55 PM | #22 | |
Audaces fortuna juvat
9
Rep 543
Posts |
Quote:
One can be following at a "deemed" safe distance but driver distraction comes into play as well. For example, you're following at the "suggested" 3 second rule and are driving in traffic. In order to drive consciously, you're checking traffic all around you in an attempt to anticipate driver behaviour. If you're checking to your right and a vehicle cuts in on your left, you have lost valuable time attempting to avoid a collision. I can not see how one can say that it is automatically the following vehicle's fault and the reason why the vehicle being rear ended stopped is non-consequential? You can not just do an emergency stop in flowing traffic... can you epxlain to me how that makes sense? OP: I would tend to agree that it is likely in your best interest to retain counsel, or at the very least consult. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Bookmarks |
Tags |
brakes, e90, help out quick |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|