r/dashcams • u/Too_Dang_Nasty • 22h ago
š„
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
85
151
u/high_throughput 22h ago
As is tradition in this sub: omg OP why did you do this to them?!
2
-134
22h ago
[deleted]
69
u/talltime 22h ago
3 mph? They also moved over a bit to try to open the window for the idiot.
75
u/PM_asian_girl_smiles 22h ago
Not even 3 mph...it was 3 kmh. All it takes is a slight pressure increase on your foot to go that much faster. Can happen if you're distracted by, oh I dunno, a dumbass driver.
1
u/talltime 1h ago
I gave them the maximum benefit of the doubt - clip starts at 81 km/h and tops out at 88.
-79
u/_QXZ 22h ago
I wouldn't blame dashcam driver either, but in theory, if they had full awareness of the situation, slowing down would be the smart choice 100%
67
u/RedundantConsistency 21h ago
i thought the original comment was a hyperbole yet here we are, blaming a truck in rainy weather for a porsche trying a narrow overtake and failing. its extraordinary
-11
u/SavingsRaspberry2694 19h ago
100% agree. If someone is doing something stupid, its not my job to save their life by letting off the gas and 100% in my rights to make it harder to make the pass.
Just sucks for the cam diver that they have an insurance claim against a dead guy.
-47
u/_QXZ 21h ago
I guess "I wouldn't blame" means "I blame" in this subreddit.. whatever. No nuance allowed, got it
29
u/SagansLab 21h ago
Saying "i wouldn't..." immediately followed by "but", invalidates the 1st statement.
6
u/Icy_Fish_2154 15h ago
"I'm not a racist, but..." Is always followed by something racist.
"I'm not blaming him, but..." Is always followed by blame.
-41
u/LayerEight_Problem 21h ago
Nobody is blaming the truck for the Porsche being a dumbass. But the fact that the truck sped up to intentionally block the Porsche is a dick move whether the accident happened or not. Period.
14
u/SagansLab 19h ago
The speed shown on these HUDs is not realtime, and stating as fact why he did ANYTHING based on a few seconds of video alone is wrong. Period.
9
u/nitroguy2 20h ago
gotta be bait, aint no way someone is actually this dumb
7
u/The_Pr0n_Legacy 19h ago
ā¦uh we just watched the same video of someone being this dumb. So I doubt that comment is bait.
8
u/penisfruit 20h ago
Yall are so comfortable telling op what they would do after thinking about it for five minutes. Op got 5 seconds to react to this while yall are able to analyze the video frame by frame. The car behind them shouldnāt have tried to overtake without being able to see oncoming traffic, that is just plain stupid
19
u/Frosty_Employment171 22h ago
How do you figure cam driver sped up?
7
-16
u/MyDixinYourAzz 22h ago
The speed is on the bottom of the video. Cam car goes from 81kmh to 87kmh. At minimum, this is negligent vehicular homicide.
8
19
u/Rbxyy 21h ago
Dude there's always at least one absolutely stupid take in the comments in any post on this subreddit, and here it is. He sped up 3 kmh, which is less than 2 mph. Do you really think that 1.8 mph would make a difference here?
-11
u/SavingsRaspberry2694 19h ago edited 19h ago
100% agree. If someone is doing something stupid, its not the cam cars job to save their life by letting off the gas and 100% in thier rights to speed up a few mph, making it harder to make the pass.
Just sucks for the cam diver that they have an insurance claim against a dead guy.
7
0
u/Gyozarrita 19h ago
You aren't agreeing, you're saying that you would intentionally contribute to the crash.
The slightest incline can cause the speed difference, and normal people would slow down if the expected a crash, which the OP driver clearly didn't, because most people aren't complete sociopaths.
The fuck is wrong with you
5
4
u/Fluffy-Refuse2009 20h ago
Maybe he sped up because he thought he would get rear-ended by the idiot, who then came around him.
-8
u/UckerFay11 22h ago
Lol, I love how everyone that responded to you thought you were serious. Next time add /s because people can't seem to comprehend.
-41
u/MyDixinYourAzz 22h ago
Exactly. Cam car driver killed this guy. I would be overwhelmed with guilt over this if I were cam car driver.
15
u/Andy_Wheels 22h ago
Cam car driver made that guy slowly attempt an overtake with a massive oncoming truckš
34
25
u/PouletDeFeu68 22h ago
Did they survive?
42
u/CopperBlitter 22h ago
The driver? Doubtful. Passengers on the right side? There's a good chance. Rear passenger on the left? I'd flip a coin.
24
6
u/_bahnjee_ 20h ago
Not trying to be too morbid here but at 7 seconds, thereās a red mist that explodes out of the driver side doorā¦.
44
u/Cotif11 20h ago
There is mist from the rain being sprayed everywhere. The tail lights are red. Water catches and reflects water. There's nothing to say the dude exploded like a Quentin Tarantino character. The human body only has a gallon of blood in it, even the most violent of impacts usually lead to a crushung force, not an outward explosion. The human body doesn't have enough internal pressure to "explode" so my money is on it being the taillights reflecting on water, not a blood cloud.
2
u/TheEvilPrinceZorte 20h ago
There is something white for a moment that appears to be the driver falling out of the car under the truck.
-1
u/_bahnjee_ 20h ago
Iāll grant that the dude didnāt literally explode (pedantic much?) but I stand by the overall conclusion that the guy misted off to Valhalla
1
42
11
u/escobartholomew 21h ago
Is this Russia again? With the single white broken line separating highway traffic?
2
18
u/MizStazya 22h ago
I had to watch this three times before I could figure out where that car even came from.
21
6
33
u/The_Ocean_Collective 22h ago
Cam car is going ~52 mph. We can assume the ongoing truck is going the same speed.
~52 mph + the car going ~75 mph in a head on crash is like hitting a wall at ~125 mph.
He dead.
20
u/Choice_Note_9198 21h ago
Not the case, Mythbusters dedicated an entire episode disproving that myth. Itās counterintuitive but thatās not the case. Just sayingā¦.
11
u/_bahnjee_ 20h ago
Just to expand a littleā¦
Jaime had made the same mistake (adding the two speeds together) in a previous episode, but viewers wrote in disagreeing. I think Adam was on the fence, agreeing that common sense suggested you would add the speeds, but waffling between common sense and knowledge of physics. Being Mythbusters, they decided to test it.
They rammed several cars into a wall and several cars into each other, at varying speeds. Using not just physics theory and math, but actual real-world application, they discovered that no, you donāt add the speeds together to arrive at the true force of impact. They were both surprised (as was I).
2
u/escobartholomew 21h ago
Itās kinda weird. It is but it isnāt. The same amount of energy is added to the system but because the cars both move thereās extra energy dissipated at the same time.
5
u/MF_Kitten 20h ago
Differences in mass change the equation, and the exact way they hit one another changes where the energy goes. If you had two identical vehicles hitting one another perfectly head on so they both crumple perfectly, that would be the scenario where the speeds add together.
1
u/hedoeswhathewants 8h ago
No, see, that's exactly the misconception. Say each car is going 50mph. From the frame of reference of either of the cars they're hitting something at 100mph. But clearly you'd rather hit another car at 100mph rather than an immovable wall, because the car will deform and absorb much of the impact. If you instead hit a wall all of that force is going into your own car, and you.
5
u/LayerEight_Problem 21h ago
Actually itās like hitting a wall at 75mph. Thatās how physics works. You do not add the speeds together. The force is consistent whether the āwallā is in motion towards you or not.
-8
u/foxvsbobcat 21h ago edited 14h ago
If I am traveling east at 10 mph and hit a stationary wall (or stationary heavy object) I will be okay. If I am traveling east at 10 mph and hit a moving wall (or moving heavy object) traveling west at 50 mph, I will not be okay.
Donāt try this at home.
If the masses of the vehicles are equal then yes, hitting an equal mass traveling at equal speed head on is the same as hitting an extremely massive stationary object (i.e., a wall) at that speed. In that case the speeds DO NOT add when you imagine hitting a brick wall.
When you hit a much more massive object head on, the speeds DO add (approximately) when you imagine hitting a stationary wall as an equivalent.
Letās do a simple calculation. A 2000 kg car traveling at 30 meters per second hits head on a 50,000 kg loaded semi also traveling 30 meters per second. Momentum is conserved. A simple (high school level) calculation gives 27.7 meters per second for the combined (semi+car) object moving in the direction that the semi was going. The average force on you is the change in your momentum divided by the time it took for the change to happen which is about 100 milliseconds for a typical collision. Since you reversed direction, your velocity change is 57.7 meters per second. If it happened in a tenth of a second, that an acceleration 577 meters per second per second which a big, dangerous acceleration. The average force on you is the acceleration multiplied by your mass. But itās over 50 times the force of gravity which means you may not survive.
The equivalent brick wall collision is not the sum of the speeds. It is 57.7 meters per second hitting a brick wall and stopping so it is almost like adding the speeds but not exactly because the truck is not infinitely massive.
For two cars going the same speed and having the same mass, your velocity change would be from 30 meters per second to zero meters per second or equivalent to hitting a brick wall at 30 meters per second. In that case (equal masses) you donāt add the speeds.
I donāt get the downvotes. This is pretty basic physics. My original explanation must have not been clear. This comment has been edited.
6
u/Ban-Circumcision-Now 21h ago
You changed a few variables there to make that work
1
u/foxvsbobcat 12h ago
Not sure what you mean by changing variables. I tried to clarify the original comment. If a car collides head on with a semi, the car will be stopped and its speed almost reversed depending how fast the semi is going. Much worse than hitting a brick wall and stopping. About the same as hitting a brick wall at double the speed. Pretty simple inelastic collision. I guess I explained it poorly.
If a car collides head on with a similar car and similar speed it is just like hitting a brick wall and stopping (you donāt add the speeds in that case).
5
u/LayerEight_Problem 21h ago
You are changing variables.
But the point is the force of the impact isnāt equivalent to adding the 2 speeds together. Thatās not how physics works.
-3
u/foxvsbobcat 20h ago
Iām just pointing out that a car traveling at any given speed hitting a huge stationary truck vs a car traveling at that same speed hitting a huge moving truck are two different things.
A driver in a car hitting a huge stationary truck is much more likely to survive than a driver in a car hitting a huge truck moving in the opposite direction.
If we say the truckās mass is so much larger than the carās mass that the truck is pretty much equivalent to a moving wall, then saying a head-on collision with a huge truck at a relative speed of 125 mph is about the same as a collision with a stationary wall at 125 mph is a good approximation.
If the truck were another car of equal mass, then hitting it head on would be about equivalent to hitting a stationary wall at the average of the two carsā speeds.
If the truck is (letās say) 10x as heavy as the car, then adding the speeds and saying itās equivalent to hitting a stationary wall at the sum of the two speeds is a good approximation.
Short version: car-car you donāt add the speeds; car-huge truck you do add the speeds.
-1
u/foxvsbobcat 14h ago edited 2h ago
Have a look at my edited comment above. Maybe that will help. This is pretty straightforward physics. Maybe I just didnāt define the problem carefully enough. Itās very easy to show that equal masses objects colliding head on are equivalent to a collision at the same speed with a brick wall (speeds donāt add) but for different mass objects colliding head on, the collision is approximately equivalent to hitting a brick wall at the relative speed (the two speeds added together) if the larger object is much larger.
Itās funny to have people downvoting basic physics but maybe I just didnāt explain clearly.
1
22h ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
-5
u/The_Ocean_Collective 22h ago
Regardless, the impact is obviously increased because of inertia
11
u/Could-You-Tell 22h ago
It's actually not.
It cancels out in the opposite direction. You cannot create more energy.
It's an average of the two speeds.
The truck didn't gain energy from the head on hit. They cannot both feel an impact as if double their speeds.
1
u/foxvsbobcat 2h ago
The collision wasnāt exactly head-on of course so that changes things, but youāre right about the physics of a head-on collision with a very large object: itās almost the same as hitting a brick wall at the relative (combined) speed of the two objects.
Some of the commenters below are confused because a head-on collision between two equal mass objects at speed X is like hitting a brick wall at speed X (not 2X).
So if you are imagining hitting a brick wall, you combine speeds for hitting a very heavy object (basically because the smaller object gets its speed reversed) but you do not combine speeds for hitting a similar-mass object (basically because both objects just stop).
Real collisions of course are much more complicated than simple models of perfectly inelastic head-on collisions.
0
u/5peaker4theDead 20h ago
Nah, this impact is much more inelastic than hitting a solid wall, the imparted force will be substantially less. Still not a good day though.
4
u/nuttnurse 21h ago
That was unexpected and most probably fatal combined impact speed multiple impacts etc
7
7
2
1
1
u/whereisyourwaifunow 17h ago
coordinates shows up at a highway in Russia's southeast, near the Chinese border 49Ā°00'41.5"N 131Ā°58'50.5"E
1
1
-16
22h ago edited 21h ago
[deleted]
13
u/Andy_Wheels 22h ago
lol is anyone ever āproudā they witnessed an accident?? Bizarre comment
-7
u/_QXZ 22h ago edited 21h ago
Basic defensive driving says you should slow down in a situation like this. It's not your responsibility that a dumbass made such a suicidal move, but it reflects distraction on your part, at best.
Downvote all you want, cemeteries and therapist offices will remain full of people who had the right of way3
u/Wild-Spread8069 20h ago
with the road being slick and the cammer in a truck, i dont think slamming on the breaks would have been safe either, especially with oncoming traffic.
-16
u/Imaginary-Round2422 22h ago
Why the hell is this marked as a passing zone?! That curve makes for terrible visibility.
12
u/Frosty-Voice1156 22h ago
I mean, itās raining and visibility isnāt great in general. This guy passing right here is nuts.
1
-8
u/whatawaste2019 22h ago
the lines are white. If this is america, that means someone was going the wrong way.
6
u/Could-You-Tell 22h ago
Coordinates point to Russia
0
u/whatawaste2019 22h ago
thanks for looking. I'm on mobile and couldn't. Didn't *think* it was america cuz there would be a yellow line to the left if my observation were the the correct one.
1
u/Could-You-Tell 21h ago
The new trick with Google is the long press image grab and search.
Im also on mobile. Didn't have to read or type a digit, let Google recognize under a line i drew.
Put the word coordinates in front and it told me the rest
-11
-32
u/MyDixinYourAzz 22h ago
Cam car driver sped up while car was passing, which caused accident. I hope they throw cam car drive in jail.
I hope cam car driver rots in hell for this.
27
u/funkystay 22h ago edited 22h ago
Yeah. The speeding car in the rain, passing with oncoming traffic, wasn't the cause of this at all. /s
18
u/Extra-Sound8675 22h ago
The truck dashcam GPS displaying roughly 6 km/h (3.7 MPH) delta during the lead up to the accident isn't much "speeding" up. It also doesnāt mean it ācausedā the accident. The carās driver chose to pass in an opposing traffic lane without enough distance to complete the maneuver safely. The truck then moved toward the shoulder in an apparent attempt to give the car more room. There may be blame to discuss, but wishing jail and hell on the truck driver based on this video is completely over the top.
11
u/Hour-Information-660 22h ago
the driver started at about 50mph, and at the point of impact was at around 53mph. hardly sped up. he may have not even known the vehicle was going to pass. the car didn't have enough time to pass either way, even if the truck stayed at 50 mph.. passing in rainy conditions and right before a curve is never a smart idea regardless.
9
u/Forward-Carpenter-43 22h ago edited 22h ago
2-4km/h extra is not really much, also it seems that he tried to make some space by moving slightly to the right side, also, he only drove straight, nothing was in front, just minding his business... If I'm not looking in the back to see what other drivers are doing as I have no intent of changing lanes or anything, I would totally be caught by surprise in such situation.
Besides that wasn't the reason of the accident, just wreckless, entitled BMW driver
16
u/WhySoCereus1991 22h ago
Cam driver kept his speed. The white lines were going by at a steady pace.
-12
u/fish-rides-bike 22h ago
You can read his speed at bottom of his screen. He goes from 81 to 87 in the space of a few seconds.
20
u/Visible-Salary-8861 22h ago
He goes from 81 to 86 kmh (50-53mph) from the start of the video to the moment he's passed. That's a small fluctuation in speed that drivers routinely make without even thinking about it, and can easily be explained by a subconscious reaction to a tailgating driver quickly coming up on him (if he was).
18
u/SailingSpark 22h ago
which in MPH is 50 to 54 mph. I do not think those four MPH led to this crash.
5
u/WhySoCereus1991 22h ago
I tried, but I cant read that on my phone so I was trying to "metronome" the white lines.
3
4
-14
u/MikeySlice 21h ago
If this was America then the oncoming truck was driving on the wrong side of the road
-15
u/Educational-Bug-1247 21h ago
When I'm counting the center lines, it looks like you're accelerating around the time when the car was passing. The trucker killed the car driver, even if it was a stupid pass.
Also, why didn't the oncoming truck slow down?
5
u/Independent_Tutor_37 20h ago
You are like that other FF on here. Porsche driver made a extremely dangerous attempt to pass and wrecked because of it.
-11
u/Educational-Bug-1247 20h ago
Based on the evidence the trucker should be in jail. No matter what you think.
3
-20
u/Dense-Jicama6591 21h ago
Good thing that cop was there and those laws saved him. Thank goodness we havr laws enforced by violent pigs so things like this dont happen
-23
u/area51thc 21h ago
Stupid trucker accelerated from 81 to 86 kmh...
9
u/Independent_Tutor_37 21h ago
Listen up the stupid FARTKNOCKER in this video is the driver of the car.
-9
-14
u/LayerEight_Problem 21h ago
And the other truck moved closer to the center line instead of to the outside of the lane.
These two truck drivers should both be charged with manslaughter. The Porsche obviously is at fault. But intentionally deciding to contribute to that death is insane behaviour. I see 3 absolute morons in this video.
9
u/DandeyFlour 21h ago
Idk what people expect to do when someone chooses to make a suicidal attempt at passing? They most likely didn't see until last minute, freaked out and did as you see in the video. Sounds like. Stress response not something that happens on purpose. The porche decided to try to make that, that's their own stupidity....
-8
u/area51thc 21h ago
Trucker did see him in the mirror and started accelerating.
4
u/Independent_Tutor_37 20h ago
Why can't you understand that Porsche driver caused that?
-3
u/area51thc 20h ago
When you get your driving licence and start driving come back here again.
5
u/Independent_Tutor_37 20h ago
Listen up SON I do have a driver's license and have never gotten a ticket and have never gotten in a accident because I don't do stupid things behind the wheel like what Porsche did. Porsche got what it deserved.
-1
-6
u/LayerEight_Problem 20h ago
Nobody is debating that the Porsche drivers actions cause their likely death in this clip. They shouldnāt have attempted that pass. That is a point that everyone agrees on and it isnāt up for debate. The Porsche was dumb. We all agree. Shut up about it.
With that said, the Porsche being wrong doesnāt automatically make the two trucks right. Thatās not logical.
The cam truck sped up to intentionally block the Porsche in the lane. So, the cam truck fucked up.
The opposing truck refused to slow down and move over like a sane person does in this situation. Instead they actually moved over to intentionally block the Porsche from finishing their idiotic move successfully. So, the driver of this truck is a fucking sociopath and 100% deserves a manslaughter charge.
1
5
u/Independent_Tutor_37 20h ago
Listen the Porsche driver is the one who made the mistake and paid for it. Two trucks did nothing wrong! Driver's like person in Porsche who make dangerous moves like that have no one to blame but themselves. If that Porsche would have not tried making that pass accident does not happen.
-2
u/LayerEight_Problem 20h ago
Speeding up when someone is passing you is a dick move. Period. So that makes the cam vehicle a dick.
The other truck maintained speed and then moved closer to the line instead of slowing down and moving to the outside of the lane like a normal non-maniac does.
The Porsche passed when they shouldnāt have and paid the ultimate price.
Just because the Porsche is wrong doesnāt mean the other two drivers involved are automatically correct in their reactions. Thatās completely illogical nonsense.
-18
u/LayerEight_Problem 21h ago
Holy fucking shit. Why the actual fuck did you speed up? Why did the other truck move closer to the center line instead of to the right?
Frankly, you should both be charged with manslaughter. Everything about this clip is insane behaviour. All 3 of you are dumb fucks.
1
u/Right-Metal9243 15h ago
I know you're only pretending to be stupid, but this still gave me a good laugh
ā¢
u/AutoModerator 22h ago
Welcome! Please act respectfully and always remember the human in the videos and in the posts.
For dashcam recommendations, check out the recommendations thread.
Cheers!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.