Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

There was an accident involving a R33 GTST at 2am Friday night on Chetwyn Rd,Merrylands. There was four people in the car including a three year old boy and his mother. The boy and his mother survived, sadly the driver and front seat passenger did not.

The accident was the next street down from my home address. I noticed it after leaving home this morning. The car has left a straight section of road, hit a tree with enough force to throw the engine into the park.

The people live 100mtr's up the road and I see them all the time and the car all the time.

There is no doubt they were speeding but there are some factors to consider and take on board. Firstly he has been driving around with the emergency spare on the drivers rear corner for the last 3 weeks. I mentioned he should change it asap as there is a real danger of it blowing out. Another factor is too hard suspension and 20 inch wheels which may have lifted the passengers front wheel causing loss of control.

I believe this is what happened, losing complete control and carrering into a tree.

People have been using this road for increasingly over the last few years to lay some power down. Only a week ago I knew something was going to happen sooner than later and it has. The thing is I expected it to be a few people with high powered V8's which have been ruteenly waking everyone up lately. Mabey a person being ran over or a crash, which has happened in the area numerous times resulting in death.

Chetwyn rd really needs a camera there to slow people down before the inevitable happens which now has.

If you want to go quick, go somewhere where there is an exit plan not high density suburbs. Track days, supersprints,N.T., etc or you may pay the price of life and your family and friends will suffer till their time comes.

This guy was my neighbour. I saw him a few times a week driving past and stopped and chatted regulary. This includes the other people in the car. He only had the car a 2 months I think and that was it.

I send my condolences and sympathy to all their family and friends for their loss.

Steve

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/110099-fatality-involving-r33-skyline/
Share on other sites

THIS crash highlights the very clear warning given on SPACE SAVER spare wheels.

These are basically a very narrow treaded TEMPORARY-USE-ONLY spare tyre and rim combination, purely designed to save 'space' in a vehicle. They bear a clear YELLOW WARNING label.

They wear down quickly and are certainly not designed for high speeds. By design parameter, they are speed limited to 80km/h as a temporary maximum, and of course are NOT meant for HANDLING.

It is particularly vital to ensure this type of spare is FULLY inflated to the maximum stated on the sidewall.

In this crash, the driver was overtaking and then lost control. Speed is a factor in particular owing the nature of the manoeuvre.

Responsibility rests with the driver, don't make blindingly obvious mistakes.

Edited by Keepleft

Just saw this car on 10 news, what a mess broke in 3 bits, mother and child very lucky to survive and highlights the inherent danger these cars pose to the novice owner.

Spacer saver wasnt mentioned in the clip but you could see it on the wreckage and my first thought was No wonder with that on.

I just saw this on the news and the first thing I noticed and pointed out was that the car had a space saver on..

As NXTIME said, nothing we say here can change what happens, but the question has to be asked, why was doing this at 2am in the morning with a 3 year old kid in the car?

Condolances to the family and friends of those who died.

Another thing about space savers is they are front only on cars with LSDs.

Anyway condolances to the family.

And this is not the sort of thing the skyline community needs, we attract too much attention already :mad:

can't believe it

I saw this car Friday night

i dropped a mate home at fairfield. came back through liverpool on hume highway, turned right into governmor macquarie drive (near big peter warren car yard d/ship with replica harbour bridge)

as i drove past warwick farm race course, i noticed a r33 sitting on the left of the road. marone/dark red. space saver on rear right, and massive chrome rim at front. couple of em were outside the car talking or something. woulda been between 10-11:30pm.

gotta be the same car. unbelievable.

can't believe it

I saw this car Friday night

i dropped a mate home at fairfield. came back through liverpool on hume highway, turned right into governmor macquarie drive (near big peter warren car yard d/ship with replica harbour bridge)

as i drove past warwick farm race course, i noticed a r33 sitting on the left of the road. marone/dark red. space saver on rear right, and massive chrome rim at front. couple of em were outside the car talking or something. woulda been between 10-11:30pm.

gotta be the same car. unbelievable.

dang.. You musta been one of the few to seem the car in its whole?

When I saw pics of the space saver on the news I was like hmmm thats not good. Though the news didnt mention anything about it, rather they put the emphasis on speed. As Duncan said once again putting skylines on the "nono" list :mad:.

RIP the two who died :no:

dang.. You musta been one of the few to seem the car in its whole?

When I saw pics of the space saver on the news I was like hmmm thats not good. Though the news didnt mention anything about it, rather they put the emphasis on speed. As Duncan said once again putting skylines on the "nono" list :mad:.

RIP the two who died :no:

yeh was gonna pull over cause saw the space saver but then saw two of em outside so thought they'd be right

Firstly he has been driving around with the emergency spare on the drivers rear corner for the last 3 weeks.

Thats the first thing I noticed when I saw the photo in todays paper.

Whats the rules fotr them, something like 80kmh max for 50km?

looks like fashion killed him..

bought 20 inch rims.. couldn't afford the tyres when one one blew (as seems to be the case with most kids with super 5000" bling bling rims on).. drove around on the space saver a bit too long.. paid the consequence.

I mean obviously it was probably not the main trigger for the accident (or was it?) but it can't have helped when trying to pull the car back in under control.

Thats tough situation gtstcruiser67.. knowing somebody a bit more personally its always different in these situations. Its a personality to the face.

The best I ever saw was a new model merc driving along the M1 at 110km/hr with a space saver on. Female <ethnicicity here> driver. Had to change lanes as I just didn't feel safe driving anywhere near her car.

:(

Thats the first thing I noticed when I saw the photo in todays paper.

Whats the rules for them, something like 80kmh max for 50km?

See post two. They are speed limited to 80km/h. Range is not specified, but they do wear down fast. Typically pressure is to set around 65PSI.

Bl4cK32 wrote: "I had to go down a 90 stretch with it on, but i sat around 85. By the end of it you could smell the tyre wasnt coping with it, even for the short time i was doing 85".

Because your were exceeding the tyres maximum designed speed. It tells you 80km/h, but that is not for a sustained period of driving. It is literally designed to get you home or to a garage at low speeds, hence the loud wording TEMPORARY. It is vital that its tyre pressure is set to the maximum stated on the sidewall, typically 60PSI.

Predator wrote: "The best I ever saw was a new model merc driving along the M1 at 110km/hr with a space saver on. Female <ethnicicity here> driver. Had to change lanes as I just didn't feel safe driving anywhere near her car".

You have perhaps highlighted a need for a specific 'exceed speed limit - space saver wheel' fine. This may eventuate yet following the coronial and would supplement existing penalties. I'd be looking at $500.

I will ensure the NSW Road Users' Handbook makes clear mention of them, 'the limitations'.

Edited by Keepleft
Bl4cK32 wrote: "I had to go down a 90 stretch with it on, but i sat around 85. By the end of it you could smell the tyre wasnt coping with it, even for the short time i was doing 85".

Because your were exceeding the tyres maximum designed speed. It tells you 80km/h, but that is not for a sustained period of driving. It is literally designed to get you home or to a garage at low speeds, hence the loud wording TEMPORARY. It's is vital its tyre pressure is set to the maximum stated on the sidewall, typically 60PSI.

No need for bold writing dude.

i know the max speed rating of the space savers. For the record I wasnt doing 80+ for extended periods 80 (give or minus 5kmh) for only a 200 metre stretch.

I was using the tyre to get me home. I know what its used for, but thanks for the informative lecture....

I was just stating that using the damn tyre at its max. speed rating it wasnt going to hold up for long. I changed the tyre the next morning before i used the car again.

Edited by Bl4cK32

No need for bold writing dude.

Yup, don't mind me. I use bold sometimes to visually seperate my text from that I've otherwise quoted, or to highlight a persons name et al, so certainly take no offence whatsoever.

You can see on reading here why many folk can come undone with these, I am particularly thinking the example given in thread where a 'woman was at some 110km/h' on one, THIS is where I have an issue, and the speed/s involved in the crash which initiating this thread whilst using one - accepting that the crash will have other contributing factors as well.

Might just be an appropriate story for one of the motor TV shows, folk must appreciate the limitations of space saver wheels, it would be a safe bet most do not. ONE of my concerns is that space saver wheels will be under-inflated, I would not be surprised to see 'scary' low pressure readings ranging 22PSI - 35PSi because in part of the 'tyre placard sticker' effect. They must be inflated to the reading given on the sidewall, typically 60PSI.

Edited by Keepleft

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...