Jackass in a 997 GT3

[Lobo1186]

Originally Posted by mdex

Doing it on the street is inexcusable... you may be willing to die on the street, but the others who are on the roads didn't sign up for that.

If you want to go fast, take it to the track.

IDK if you have ever driven in the midwest and southwest USA, but many roads are deserted for hundreds of miles at a time....

if you can manage to get on an open road with no-one for miles... i would say its pretty excusable.

[jotoole]

CAR and DRIVER, Nov. 1966. Ford Cobra, 427, 0 mph to 100 mph to 0 mph, 14.5 sec.
Of course, my Boxster can't do that. Point is, I can get my 2000 base to 127 mph and back to 65 mph in seconds flat. Have not tried to find top end, but this car had plenty left. Road raging rice rocket was right on my ass, so I got away from him and got right back to posted speed limit. Lo and behold, about .5 mile ahead an Ohio State Trooper was standing in the highway, point to ricer, signaling him to pull over.

Had my top down, looked up and saw the state police airplane right overhead.

This car can go very fast then back down to reasonable speed again in VERY short time.

[Frodo]

I kinda go along with the last posted sentiments, when conditions clearly allow. When I drive at what would be considered excessive speed (say 30+ over the posted speed limit), I am constantly thinking of two things:

(1) If something surprises me at speed, is there room to move out of the way? An extra lane to move into (with no other vehicles to contend with)? The ability to safely "move out of the way" dwindles quickly the faster I'm traveling. Obvious to all, no doubt, but it's still something I'm actively thinking about. The wild card here, of course, is animals, a deer, or a dog. Those can be really tough to handle at speed because they are also moving and, more importantly, they're notoriously unpredictable.

(2) If anything bad happens here, it will be assessed to be TOTALLY my fault, regardless of whether it actually was. Example: If there's a side road that intersects with the one I'm on, someone stops, then pulls out in front of me, and I smack into them, odds are extremely good I'm going to be the one "liable" in all senses of the term. This is true even if the third party who pulled out should reasonably have yielded to oncoming traffic. ("Failure to yield" probably ain't gonna help you if you were doing 90 in a 60.) Problem is, they are not even thinking about the fact that some approaching vehicle might be going that much faster than the posted limit. You have to assume that they will probably be thinking that you're traveling no faster than the posted speed. Soooo, the existence of ANY side roads is a red flag for me and I'm almost certainly gonna slow down when I see one. (This is where familiarity with the road you're on is helpful.)

[Overdrive]

Avoiding the to-be-reckless-or-not-to-be-reckless debate that could go on for another 50 thread pages, and getting back to some of the original content: it really is unfortunate what happened, both to see the destruction of an amazing machine and even more the loss of two lives. Let's not forget that what we read and see in the news on this matter is mostly speculation, and it was even noted in some of these speculations that autopsy results won't be available for over a month. We don't know what factors led to the accident, and there's no guarantee that the investigation(s) will be 100% right. Regardless, it's really a shame.

And I will say that while I'm not a huge fan of the franchise and some of its cast, I could not even jokingly say that anyone else from the show should have been in that car with him and suffered the same fate, and it was really a shame to see that comment made on here. Whether it's a celebrity of sorts or someone local who you may or may not have known, I really feel it's never a good thing to hear about the death of another. And I'm not trying to sway anyone or tell them they're wrong, I'm just giving my opinion.

Let's all be safe out there, and I don't mean drive like grandpa when I say that. I just mean be safe. Have your fun and enjoy your life, because you could be 74, or a week past 34 like Ryan Dunn, there's no set age or scenario for the end of your life.

Now where's that Porsche key...?

[jotoole]

Driver's Ed 101

[achsengewicht]

The latest news point to that the jackass had about double the legal alcohol content in his blood. I say good riddance.

[husker boxster]

.195 blood alcohol + 130mph = lethal combination

It's fortunate that no one else was taken out by this fool. As far as the passenger, he entrusted his life to Dunn when he got in the passenger seat and let an obviously drunk person drive. Unfortunate, but he had a choice.

Madmods, could you explain what you mean in your stmt about blaming Porsche? I don't know if you're kidding or serious. I hope you were saying that tongue-in-cheek.

[schnellman]

I believe it was in the early 80's when Porsche stopped exporting Turbo 911's to the U.S. They said Americans (Californians in particular) were law suit crazy and they figured it was only a matter of time before some jury of loonies granted a loser, or his family, a billion dollar settlement against a manufacturer.

[mikstew]

Someone said driving is a privilege. It is not so. It is a right. And in many cases it is a requirement for work or otherwise.

Societies of the past chose to situate themselves sufficiently far from each other such that a means of rapid transportation is required in order to satisfy the demands of exchanging goods or services. From then one we have built our communities and cities, and countries to accommodate vehicular transport. We have built everything FOR cars, not the other way around.

We don't make new cars to "fit" new roads (with the exception of ecnonobox city cars, but they aren't really cars in my books), we build highways to accommodate faster travel and more volume.

It is not impossible to imagine a world in which cars did not form the basis for the layout of our communities, with something like trains or bikes in their place. Look at Hong Kong and all their bikes/motorcycles, for example.

So since driving is a requirement for most people, it is not logical, nor reasonable to argue that we need to drive gingerly at all times, utterly devoid of any spirit or amusement, when in fact we are the ones being forced to buy cars (on our coin, of course) to be able to work and contribute to our society by generating tax revenue and GDP.

If society wants me to work, to buy a car produced by society, to work for society, I think I reserve the right to use that vehicle how I see fit. And in the case of owning a luxury sports car, I deem fit use to mean speeding where appropriate.

[Lil bastard]

Originally Posted by mikstew

Someone said driving is a privilege. It is not so. It is a right.

Don't think you're gonna find a lot of support on this one.

Cheers!

[zilla]

Originally Posted by Jaxonalden

It's a shame that Jackass star Ryan Dunn died while "piloting" his '07 997 GT3. What really bothers me is that he was only going a reported 110mph. By the looks of the car I would have guessed he was going faster. I'm sure the producers of Jackass are kicking themselves for not being able to record the crash.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/celebrity.news.gossip/06/22/ryan.dunn.drunk/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

"Police: 'Jackass' star Ryan Dunn was drunk and driving over 132 mph"

[Lobo1186]

I do not see why people love to say that "driving is a privilege, not a right." It really does not matter either way. Abuse either and you can lose it. It is not as if it were an actual right it couldn't be revoked. Look at your second amendment, the right to bear arms, there are situations and places that you lose that right, but you don't hear anyone saying the second amendment is a privilege not a right.

Regardless, if the conditions permit (abandoned area of highway or roadway) and you can safely go 150+ mph then it is all within the spirit of the law to speed. The law is there to keep people safe. If there is no-one around no matter how fast you go "people" are safe.

the only remaining argument would be whether you are safe driving that fast and while in the past it would have been a non issue, nowadays the government likes to regulate everything case in point, the seat belt law...

[smshirk]

Originally Posted by mdex

I stand by my inexcusable comment.

No one here is an angel, all of us have to some extent broken Traffic laws. The question here is the order of magnitude. 150 miles an hour on public roads leaves no margin of error. Any innocent bystander who you may have accidentally overlooked, and we all make mistakes, should not have to suffer for your ego boosting play.

Even if you're willing to die doing something stupid as driving double the posted limit in a straight line, and have no regard for the friends and family may leave behind, gives some thought to the time and cost to have the police and emergency workers scrape you off the pavement.

Far too often people forget that driving is a privilege, one we take it far too lightly here in North America. We forget to be courteous drivers, we don't think or plan for emergencies, and we do nothing to ensure that our skills behind the wheel are more than barely adequate.

In my opinion driving a Porsche doesn't entitle us to use the roads as a personal playground. Rather as someone who obviously values driving as more than a basic chore to get from A to B we should be held to a higher standard. We should set the tone on the roads. We should as a group be more aware, more skilled, and more courteous than those around us. We love driving, and be it on a race track, or driving to the corner store should we not display skills well above the norm.

Just my thoughts.....

People drive these cars 140MPH+ every day in Europe in heavy traffic, without being bashed publicly. Just because we live in the proverbial nanny state doesn't mean anyone who makes an informed decision as to blowing the soot out of our cars on an open road is acting irresponsibly. AS to degree, you're breaking the law if you're doing 66 in a 65. If you are being safe there is no difference in the 66 or the 146. The only difference in us and our German counter parts is the speed laws.

[stateofidleness]

Yea, but in Europe, there are other cars doing 140 around you
If you're the lone ranger on the highway doing 140 in traffic, you'll look like a dick (true story).

I'm all for "driving it as the dr. intended" when the conditions are right, and so far, everyone that has made that argument has preceded it with "when there's no one else around"... basically saying... "if the highway is in the same state as an empty racetrack then.. " well of course! go for it!

...anddddd driving is definitely a privilege.

http://www.duiattorney.com/dui-basics/privilege-to-drive (first sentence)

Can we reinstate the 'inexcusable' statement? Drunk driving is not cool!

[zilla]

Originally Posted by smshirk

If you are being safe there is no difference in the 66 or the 146.

Reaction time, being safe or not, is drastically different.

[kpm]

Has there been any indication whether he went straight off or backed it into the guardrail.

The pictures of the skid marks I've seen looked really narrow for the size of tires normally on a GT3. If he tried to make that ramp and it swapped ends, the wing probably took over and the car started to fly. Even then the greatest driver in the world could not of saved it.

TMZ has pictures of the hulk...

tmz.com

[zilla]

Those TMZ pictures. Wow. There's nothing left of the car at all.

[xcbxer]

Here's a piece Mr. Dunn wrote in 2009, claiming "I’m an amateur driver in the Sports Car Club of America series (SCCA)."

http://www.dailylocal.com/articles/2011/06/21/news/doc4e00e416ce506230685918.txt?viewmode=default