... (accident in the FD)
Sorry to hear....i worked my *** off all summer to buy a mint VR6 Corrado... and then after a month of owning it, it was written off in a car accident which was caused my a major flaw in the road. Just be glad you have your life man..... treat it as a learnign experiance....even if it wasnt your fault dont assume being a perfect driver, just learn as much as you can from it. Its just a car, im not sure what insurance is like down in the states, but just get rid of the car because it wont ever be the same. Fight as hard as you can to get a good settlement from your insurance company and take it easy it could have being a LOTTT worst.
I think that's going to be the general consensus you're going to get from everyone. I don't think it would in anyway be worth the repairs. That car got worked! Glad nothing serious happened to you though.
Originally Posted by FD3S-K
Sorry to hear...maybe karma about the 99 spec taillights?....hmm...hope your car recovers quick..
??? i dont get it.. ok but besides that WHY DONT YOU HAVE FULL COVERAGE ON AN FD!!!
Sorry to hear that you were hurt, and the car wrecked. Definitely your fault for following to close. I hope you have enough insurance to cover his damage, and whatever injuries he claims (and he will claim injuries). I hate tailgaters!!!
I agree with all of the above, the only circumstance that i would put only liability on a car is if i didn't care about it at all and it was also not worth much of anything. Even my 1988 CRX has full coverage I have it on ALL of my cars. I can understand a cheap pos with liability (like my friend's 87 Fiero 2m4) but not an FD...
But yeah, good to year you are ok, I also know how much that damn airbag **** can hurt... I'd be totally devistated if that happened to my FD too... Just looking at the pics hurts...
BTW wtf did you hit??
But yeah, good to year you are ok, I also know how much that damn airbag **** can hurt... I'd be totally devistated if that happened to my FD too... Just looking at the pics hurts...
BTW wtf did you hit??
Last edited by Bob_760; Oct 28, 2006 at 03:15 PM.
Rufio, I'm very sorry to hear this
My STRONG advice is do NOT drive the FD until you can afford full coverage for it. Seriously. It's simply not worth the risk. I hope ALL heed to this.
As for the parts, if there's anything I can do to help ya out getting her back together, plz lemme know. Heck, I could prob drop off some of the parts myself
Not true
You just said it yourself. If the party in the rear is maintaining a safe distance, and the driver in front acts in an unsafe manner by which he causes an accident, the driver in the front CAN be at fault. Ask me how I know
I SLAMMED into the rear of a car at a good 55mph a few years back, and was found NOT GUILTY. The driver of the car I rear-ended (and then some lol) was found GUILTY, based on SEVERAL things I was able to prove. And consequently, my insurance had me down for a "Not at fault accident," and the other insurance company had to pay for the repairs to my car.
Having said that, lets not assume that this is the general or the rule. This is by far the rare case scenario. I just wanted to clarify it so ppl don't think there's no way at all to be found not guilty if you're in the rear.
In prob 99% of the situations, however (as I'm sure Adam C can chime in and testify to), it is the driver in the rear who is at fault, b/c they are guilty of - or failed to prove - that they provided adequate distance between themselves and the vehicle in front of them. In the Commonwealth of VA, we have what's called the "2-second" rule. There is no set distance; regardless of what speed you are doing, you must allow for enough distance to be able to count 2 full seconds (one onethousand, two onethousand) between you and the vehicle directly in front of you as you both pass by the same landmark. At highway speeds (75 mph), that's about 220 feet, which is over half the length of a football field! LOL
I HATE SLOW LEFT LANE DRIVERS!
The world would be a better place if all in the left lane learned how to YIELD TO FASTER TRAFFIC DAMNIT! 
~Ramy
My STRONG advice is do NOT drive the FD until you can afford full coverage for it. Seriously. It's simply not worth the risk. I hope ALL heed to this.As for the parts, if there's anything I can do to help ya out getting her back together, plz lemme know. Heck, I could prob drop off some of the parts myself

Originally Posted by bajaman
Case closed if they go to court. HE was at fault, end of story. In rear-end cases, it is always, always, ALWAYS the fault of the following car....doesn't matter if the dude in front of you brake-checked the hell out of you and you plow into him. The following car has the responsibility to maintain a safe distance.
You just said it yourself. If the party in the rear is maintaining a safe distance, and the driver in front acts in an unsafe manner by which he causes an accident, the driver in the front CAN be at fault. Ask me how I know
I SLAMMED into the rear of a car at a good 55mph a few years back, and was found NOT GUILTY. The driver of the car I rear-ended (and then some lol) was found GUILTY, based on SEVERAL things I was able to prove. And consequently, my insurance had me down for a "Not at fault accident," and the other insurance company had to pay for the repairs to my car.Having said that, lets not assume that this is the general or the rule. This is by far the rare case scenario. I just wanted to clarify it so ppl don't think there's no way at all to be found not guilty if you're in the rear.
In prob 99% of the situations, however (as I'm sure Adam C can chime in and testify to), it is the driver in the rear who is at fault, b/c they are guilty of - or failed to prove - that they provided adequate distance between themselves and the vehicle in front of them. In the Commonwealth of VA, we have what's called the "2-second" rule. There is no set distance; regardless of what speed you are doing, you must allow for enough distance to be able to count 2 full seconds (one onethousand, two onethousand) between you and the vehicle directly in front of you as you both pass by the same landmark. At highway speeds (75 mph), that's about 220 feet, which is over half the length of a football field! LOL
Originally Posted by adam c
I hate tailgaters!!!
The world would be a better place if all in the left lane learned how to YIELD TO FASTER TRAFFIC DAMNIT! 
~Ramy
Last edited by FDNewbie; Oct 28, 2006 at 04:03 PM.
I'm sorry, but that accident damage does NOT look like no "we were going 50 mph and he cut me off and I hit him". It looks like a speed differential of more than 30-40 mph to me.... and it looks totalled. I'm sure Jeff or someone more knowledgable could make a better assessment but that front right is seriously smashed.
Originally Posted by FDNewbie
Rufio, I'm very sorry to hear this
My STRONG advice is do NOT drive the FD until you can afford full coverage for it. Seriously. It's simply not worth the risk. I hope ALL heed to this.
I HATE SLOW LEFT LANE DRIVERS!
The world would be a better place if all in the left lane learned how to YIELD TO FASTER TRAFFIC DAMNIT! 
~Ramy
My STRONG advice is do NOT drive the FD until you can afford full coverage for it. Seriously. It's simply not worth the risk. I hope ALL heed to this.I HATE SLOW LEFT LANE DRIVERS!
The world would be a better place if all in the left lane learned how to YIELD TO FASTER TRAFFIC DAMNIT! 
~Ramy
HAHHA, i also hate slow left lane drivers, quite frankly i think they should make the drive test harder, and require everyone to take some sort of semi-PROFESSIONAL driving school, try living in LA, worst... in a city where theres full of old asian people that drive slow as hell and think they can do whatever they want, makes me sad to be an asian person
silentblu, now with KBB in the $18K mark easy, that's a LOT more than Ruffio will be getting paid ($0). That make enough of a difference to ya?
Plus, I've routinely seen cars at the bodyshop get totaled and appraised for about $27K, and insurance paid that amount in full. Not bad...
And I'm 100% w/ you re: driving requirements; in fact, I think the STANDARD driver's ed should include a CONSIDERABLE segment on advanced driving techniques. A Lexus that parallel parks? IMO, IF YOU CAN'T PARAELLEL PARK, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS DRIVING. Really. I find it perplexing that the govt. will put you in charge of a several ton vehicle that you can cause EXTENSIVE damage to (to both person and property), w/ such ****-poor minimum standards for driving ability.
There's a reason the Germans have no speed limit on the Autobahn but still have fewer accidents and fatalities than we do. They have rules of the road that are followed (such as YIELD TO FASTER TRAFFIC), and it takes almost $3,000 US to get your license, including a driving exam that MANDATORILY includes driving in incliment weather - not just rain, but also snow.
~Ramy
Plus, I've routinely seen cars at the bodyshop get totaled and appraised for about $27K, and insurance paid that amount in full. Not bad...And I'm 100% w/ you re: driving requirements; in fact, I think the STANDARD driver's ed should include a CONSIDERABLE segment on advanced driving techniques. A Lexus that parallel parks? IMO, IF YOU CAN'T PARAELLEL PARK, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS DRIVING. Really. I find it perplexing that the govt. will put you in charge of a several ton vehicle that you can cause EXTENSIVE damage to (to both person and property), w/ such ****-poor minimum standards for driving ability.
There's a reason the Germans have no speed limit on the Autobahn but still have fewer accidents and fatalities than we do. They have rules of the road that are followed (such as YIELD TO FASTER TRAFFIC), and it takes almost $3,000 US to get your license, including a driving exam that MANDATORILY includes driving in incliment weather - not just rain, but also snow.
~Ramy
Originally Posted by rynberg
I'm sorry, but that accident damage does NOT look like no "we were going 50 mph and he cut me off and I hit him". It looks like a speed differential of more than 30-40 mph to me.... and it looks totalled. I'm sure Jeff or someone more knowledgable could make a better assessment but that front right is seriously smashed.
Where did you read that at all? Are you reading the same thread?
Originally Posted by Rufio
the person who was about 10 feet in front of me slams on the brakes because they almost miss a turn, so without much time i hit the brakes, but instead of stopping i just see my self sliding right towards them at probally aobut 50 MPH
Two possiblities:
1. You were sliding because you had crap tires on(you fault)
2. You were not sliding, you just ram into the car, because you were to close to be able to react(you fault).
our cars out brake most cars on the road, so the driver is to blame.
the multi-car accidents on the highway that always happen during rush hour are caused by stupid impatient people that tailgate.
1. You were sliding because you had crap tires on(you fault)
2. You were not sliding, you just ram into the car, because you were to close to be able to react(you fault).
our cars out brake most cars on the road, so the driver is to blame.
the multi-car accidents on the highway that always happen during rush hour are caused by stupid impatient people that tailgate.
Originally Posted by FDNewbie
.......... Ask me how I know
I SLAMMED into the rear of a car at a good 55mph a few years back, and was found NOT GUILTY. The driver of the car I rear-ended (and then some lol) was found GUILTY, based on SEVERAL things I was able to prove. And consequently, my insurance had me down for a "Not at fault accident," and the other insurance company had to pay for the repairs to my car.In prob 99% of the situations, however (as I'm sure Adam C can chime in and testify to), it is the driver in the rear who is at fault, b/c they are guilty of - or failed to prove - that they provided adequate distance between themselves and the vehicle in front of them....
The only "non fault" scenario I can think of would be if a car swerved in front of you and slammed on the brakes. This is done frequently by scammers trying to get away with insurance fraud. Scammers will load up a car full of people, and then swerve in front of a car that looks like it should have high insurance limits (like a new caddy). Then they go the their chiropractor (also in on the scam), and rack up high treatment bills. It's tough to prove these types of scams.
Anyway, for the most part, you are at fault if you rear end someone.
Try and save it man. I did the same to my FD but luckily one of my best friends owns a shop so he's pulling and labor for free. I hit kind of like your hit but only on one side and only the side I hit was torqued. I still need a radiator support though.
It's easy to pass judgement when you're not on trial... As long as you learn from this experience I'll have no criticism for you.
Don't go cheap on tires, they're very important. I myself never skimp on my rubber(s)
Don't go cheap on tires, they're very important. I myself never skimp on my rubber(s)
Last edited by BlueRex; Oct 28, 2006 at 11:18 PM.


