First 2010 Camaro Totalled. Rear ended
05-14-2009, 02:40 AM
#21
The OP and owner of that car is a lying POS (not the OP on this thread.)... trying to blame fault on some one who is innocent.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...=21714&page=11 about half way down.
The guy hit a poll of some sort, with several explanations of why its a poll, and not a car that rear ended him.
New cars should require a driving test prior to purchase...
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...=21714&page=11 about half way down.
The guy hit a poll of some sort, with several explanations of why its a poll, and not a car that rear ended him.
New cars should require a driving test prior to purchase...
05-21-2009, 01:58 PM
#28
TECH Regular
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Bellville, Texas
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anybody have a picture of the "Explorer"? The "Explorer" would have had to clip the driver's side rear in order to keep that back bumper in such good shape. I don't know about everyone else, but I'm pretty sure that bumper and license plate would have been crumpled just a "tad" bit more than that, if hit full on by an Explorer.
05-26-2009, 03:20 AM
#30
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makes mine worth more. 
On topic; but how then do you account for the extensive driver side quarter damage that set off the side impact airbags? Remember, those only go off in a SIDE impact. T-bone at an intersection that sends a car off wildly into a pole?
That, and I personally don't know of ANYONE who could send the *** end of a car around, driving in a straight direction, regardless of wheelspin or speed, into a pole at this speed on straight roads without having another force act upon it. Loss of control at high speeds hits either side of the car, NOT THE REAR. I wouldn't doubt if the driver was obeying the 45 mph speed limit, there's not enough damage to constitute that there was more speed involved.
BTW, did anyone notice the line of poles next to the trailer park that the car was wrecked at? Or the marks from the rear tire that indicated it had rolled away from them immediately after the collision?
The driver may consider being "clipped" in the rear quarter as being "rear ended", but thats all in the context of who's actually involved in the accident.
Until you see a police report, then there's nothing to base this on. It's wrecked, who cares, there will be many more black SS's built.
On topic; but how then do you account for the extensive driver side quarter damage that set off the side impact airbags? Remember, those only go off in a SIDE impact. T-bone at an intersection that sends a car off wildly into a pole?
That, and I personally don't know of ANYONE who could send the *** end of a car around, driving in a straight direction, regardless of wheelspin or speed, into a pole at this speed on straight roads without having another force act upon it. Loss of control at high speeds hits either side of the car, NOT THE REAR. I wouldn't doubt if the driver was obeying the 45 mph speed limit, there's not enough damage to constitute that there was more speed involved.
BTW, did anyone notice the line of poles next to the trailer park that the car was wrecked at? Or the marks from the rear tire that indicated it had rolled away from them immediately after the collision?
The driver may consider being "clipped" in the rear quarter as being "rear ended", but thats all in the context of who's actually involved in the accident.
Until you see a police report, then there's nothing to base this on. It's wrecked, who cares, there will be many more black SS's built.
Last edited by ReedBooth; 05-26-2009 at 03:38 AM.
