And another bad T accident wednesday

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2010: And another bad T accident wednesday
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 01:32 am:

A friend and his wife were driving to dinner in their '12 T TOURING after registering and signing in on a Horseless Carriage Club tour today that starts thursday.
They were in the right lane going 45MPH when suddenly they were hit from behind by a BIG RIG DOING ABOUT 70.
They went off the road and through a fence into a field at a high rate of speed.
The car is totaled, but they were not hurt.............yet.
I have a feeling they're gonna be hurtin tomorrow (thursday)!
I don't know any more details. They were both taken to the local hospital but the driver assured me both he and his wife are okay. They said the truck driver told them they were going real slow?!
Guess he didn't see that big touring car with the top up in broad daylight.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ivan Warrington on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 07:24 am:

I have noticed recently that the big rigs are increasingly being driven by very unprofessional and incompetent drivers. Anybody can get a CDL these days. There are many professional and courteous drivers out there, but they seem to be increasingly in the minority. I travel from Dallas to Austin once a week and the problem is getting worse, they pull out in front of you, tailgate, and the worst of the worst, the truck doing 64 trying to pass the truck doing 65.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Richard E. Henza on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 08:07 am:

Aron;

1) This seams to be a Problem all over, these 6 week Tractor Trailer Schools teach, drive over everbody, I know I had a Cousing in a 17 T got drove over 2 years ago.

Excellent thing they were doing 45 mph, cause if under that in N.Y.S you are Liable 100%, is no t doing 45 Mph.
Know comes the Slow Moving: Honestly with out one in N.Y.S, You have no leg to stand on.

Be thankful they were not seroiusely hurt.

In Pa. in 2010, they 100% require Seat Bealts in Antique Cars.

Richard Henza Historical Vechicals Association
Vechical Sign


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack Jeffrey Cole on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 08:33 am:

Well,being hit in the back end by a big rig is something I can say,Been there done that.Just not in a T.
I am glad they are alive and can heal up.
I just hope the truckers insurance lawyers will be fair in settleing with them on the car and the exspenses incured by the truck driver.Trust me when I say,fairness is not prevalent in that industry.They will be lucky if they get enough to repair-replace the car.And that wont take to long to get,the medical,3 years or better.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Kriegel on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 08:48 am:

Please if the insurance company does not give you a better than new car AND 250,000 dollars hire the best private insurance adjustor and lawyer combination Let them do the work for 25 percent of recovery. It has saved me a ton of time and money


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jim Patrick - (2) '26's - Bartow, FL on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 09:48 am:

Things have sure changed since 1912. back then all of the roads were unpaved and the fastest thing to contend with was either another automobile, incapable of going faster than you, a galloping horse and rider, or horse and buggy.

I'm very happy that the unfortunate couple were unhurt, but if they were driving on an Interstate highway going 45mph (in that 1912 Touring, they were probably doing more like 35), the truck driver and his lawyer may have a case that the T was traveling at an unlawfully slow speed, without the proper slow moving warning signs.

It behooves all of us to keep in mind that, if we must drive on the highways along with modern fast moving traffic that it is imperative and our responsibility that we use as many warning devices as possible (flashing lights, signs, etc.) to warn fast moving traffic coming from behind, of our presence. A vehicle going so slow comes up awfully fast on a truck driver going 70 or 80, especially with the driver sitting so high above the road focused on the road way up ahead. Just saying. Jim Patrick


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By James A. Golden on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 10:18 am:

The exact opposite situation happened in Maryland yesterday afternoon, just outside the Washington Beltway on US 50 East. A semi-truck driver had his low air warning come on, so he pulled to the shoulder and stopped. A car driving on the shoulder at around 60 mph hit the truck in the rear. The driver almost got the car all the way under the truck and died instantly. Whether that was an accident or a suicide will remain a question difficult to answer.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gary Tillstrom on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 10:33 am:

Ditto on Davids advice. I had an accident 7 years ago and they showed right away that they didn't intend to be fair. I went and got an attourney right away to level the playing field. In TN it is 33% but that is still better than you'll get going it alone.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By DAREL J. LEIPOLD on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 10:55 am:

In Minnesota last week, a flat bed semi carrying hundreds of bee hives was stopped for road construction. Behind that semi were two automobiles. A second semi failed to stop and crushed both autos, killing both drivers. Fire men had to done protective suits and spray water on the crushed autos (to ward off the bees) to remove the bodies.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By John Berch on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 10:56 am:

Cars and trucks do come up very fast. I've posted these pictures before but for anyone interested, I bought a battery powered LED flashing light from NAPA, it's magnetic an can be installed anywhere. I only cruise around 25 mph so I put on the removable SMV sign. Not very attractive, I'll admit but may save a life. Hopfully I spend a lot of time watching my rear view mirror. I know It's not possible for some people but I always pick a little used road to drive on. After all, when I drive my old truck, I'm not on a mission or going any where in particular. I was taught years ago not to play in the highway.



Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Norman T. Kling on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 11:09 am:

In California the maximum speed limit for big trucks is 55 MPH. It is rare to see one going under 70 unless it is going up a steep grade. They usually driven second lane from the right so they won't be slowed down by merging traffic or slow vehicles. Here we don't drive the T's on major highways if we can possibly avoid it.
Norm


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack Jeffrey Cole on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 11:11 am:

In NC lawyers portion is 35% unless your lawyer stretches it to go past 3 years,so he can get 38%.To crawl with the snakes,you have to hire 1.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By James A. Golden on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 11:16 am:

Those triangle signs are only allowed on farm vehicles and construction vehicles in some states and they will get you a ticket too. Check your state laws before using one.

The same thing is true of flashing red lights. They are only allowed and legit in some states.

A West Virginia T driver was hit on I-70 in Maryland a few years ago and seriously injured, along with his wife, even though he had a flashing white strobe lght on the back of his T.

Driving a T on any four lane highway with a speed limit above 45 mph is very dangerous and should be avoided at all times.

Anyone riding in a Model T that is hit from the rear has to have some damage to their body.

It would be a great comfort to know those two people are still feeling OK today.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Richard Gould on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 11:26 am:

David's advice is excellent. But there is a lot of malpractice out there, I know. To understate the problem, I mean the client gets much less than the full attention and efforts of the lawyer. Seems like workers comp plantiffs attorneys have the worst reputation. I had a girlfriend work as an attorney for a local big name workers comp firm and the stories she would tell made me shake my head in disgust. Hopefully you know a good lawyer or can find one. There are excellent ones out there too. I have seen representation so artful and convincing it brought a tear to my eye. Its just the bad get all the attention.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dan Hatch on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 11:27 am:

I put the triangle sign on the back of all of my T's that I drive. I do not care if it is only for Tractors or not. Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6. Thanks, Dan


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By John Berch on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 11:52 am:

As James points out check your state laws.

"Iowa law requires all vehicles traveling
on public roads at speeds less than
30 miles per hour to display an SMV
emblem on the rear of the vehicle."

I'm actually required to have one at the speeds I drive my TT.
Displaying one does not become illegal until beyond 35 mph. Between 30 and 35 are optional.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack Jeffrey Cole on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 12:21 pm:

Richard you mentioned seat belt requirements in antique cars.Please folkes,dont take it I am trying to start a crapy mess here.
I cant help but think they are opening themselves up to a huge can of worms the tax payers would be paying them to fish with for many years.Who would be the engineer to design proper installations for each antique car?Are they leaveing it to the owner?Is he trained in car design and can sign off on the plan he has come up with that it will not fail and save lives?Cars with seatbelts were designed for them with crush zones and such and the bodys reinforced at attachment points.We have discussed here many times and folkes all aggree,being bolted to a piece of 90 year old wood,probably aint much good.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Henry Petrino on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 01:20 pm:

I'm certainly no expert in this, but I believe that a large part of the problem with the big rigs is the economics of it. I'd be willing to bet that predominatley the properly operated big rigs are driven by salaried employees. The others, I believe, are predominately operated by "independent" operators who are paid by the mile.

Don't get me wrong. I truly believe in a "free and level" economic playing field for all ligitimate commerce. However, this is a good example of the right philosophy gone wrong!

Just my opinion.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By John Berch on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 01:45 pm:

Most truck drivers are very professional and the best drivers on the planet. Some push themselves to the point of exhaustion. My 93 year old Uncle drove a truck all of his working career. He started In a Ford TT at 14. Through the years, He had a lot of close call stories to tell. One of my favorite sayings is "You never go to sleep while driving....You just wake up". I wouldn't drive my modern car or truck at 40 mph on the Interstate and I certainly wouldn't drive an 85 year old one either, at least with out a large arrow board on a very large truck bringing up the rear.

Aaron, sorry about the thread drift and I'm happy to hear your friends are OK.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Neil Kaminar on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 02:03 pm:

I have the triangular sign on the back of my 15 touring car here in North Carolina. It is attached with magnets so it is easily removed. I don't know if it is legal, but think that it helps.

Neil


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Wayne Sheldon on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 02:21 pm:

In Califunny, there is no minimum speed limit on any highway in the state. BUT, ANY highway patrolman can pull you over and tell you to get off or declare you to be a hazard and write you a ticket for that, for any reason he wants to. I knew someone that was written a ticket for going too slow, 45 in a 35 zone, on a winding, narrow, two lane road at night in the rain. The Highway patrolman was in a hurry. No one else was on the road. He contested the ticket in court and lost. The patrolman had been doing about 70, he knew the road and it was late at night, rounded a curve and almost wrecked in his surprise to almost run into someone. He was angry.
And people wonder why I call it "Califunny".
Most of the Highway Patrolmen I have talked to are wonderful people. They even tell me they will look the other way when I drive my cars that have either no headlamps or gas headlamps in the "Daylight Safety Zone" which requires you to have your headlamps turned on. (Provided I am not driving slow enough to be a serious hazard.)
W2


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By James A. Golden on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 02:29 pm:

The car may have been part of this HCCA tour group:

The May 26-29, 2010 Old California / Blossom / Bay Area Tour in Soledad CA.

Hosted by - Central California & Santa Clara Regions in conjunction with the Bay Area, Modesto and Santa Cruz Regions.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Timothy J Williams on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 02:48 pm:

somebody better give fair warning that there will be about 25 T speedsters driving around the south bay area on June 13th.

Tim

So glad nobody was hurt in the touring car.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bob McDonald on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 02:51 pm:

Gentelman
I drove big rigs after retireing,and I believe that you can blame the bad driver(big rigs)mostly on our government creating N.A.F.T.A - Canadian and mexican drivers need not obay our laws and can drive any where in the US they like. But there some bad American ones also.

Bob mc.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Norman T. Kling on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 03:06 pm:

My advice concerning a lawyer would be That you should be checked out by a doctor just in case it turns out to be something worse than a whiplash or bruises. That way you will have a record to prove it actually happened in the accident.

If the insurance company gives you a reasonable offer for the repair or replacement of the car, take it. The cost of lawyers other than insurance company lawyers will most likely not be worth it. They have a way of dragging things out to their own benefit. You would most likely get more from the insurance company than you would after deducting the cost of a personal lawyer. Only use a lawyer if the insurance company tries to get off the hook or wants to settle for a small amount. It should be the truck company or their insurance company who pays and your company would just take the bill if it is proven to be your fault.
Norm


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Roger Byrne on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 03:15 pm:

Those of us with antique vehicles are concerned when laws change that have an effect on how we can use our vehicles. Richard Henza has posted on this forum and a couple others, several comments about certain laws that effect antique cars. Many of the things he has stated, I don't know anything about and I won't address them. However, when it comes to the seat belt issue in Pennsylvania, his statement that ALL antique cars (Brass era included) must have seat belts, I will challenge those comments. Having check with all published reports available on the Pennsylvania seat belt law, I find nothing that changes the previous interpretation. That states the requirement for seat belts applies to "motor vehicles manufactured AFTER July 1, 1966". I have also contacted an underwriter for the largest antique car insurance company to see if they knew anything about this change. His reply was that they had no knowledge of that law change but would investigate it. After several days, he got back to me with this reply:

" I spoke with a PA police officer last night, as well as checked the SEMA SAN website, both support that there was no change in the law, so only vehicles manufactured after July 1, 1966 need to be equipped with a seat belt system."

Richard has also stated on other boards, that people have been arrested and fined??? If this is true, the only way I can see this happening is if the cars involved were modified street rods which come under a different portion of the law. I have read nothing about this in either of the national Model T magazines or the HCCA publication. I'm sure there are plenty of Model T guys in Pennsylvania that can tell us if this is true or not. There are enough legitimate things to be concerned about in our hobby's future without getting upset about things that have no basis in fact.

If I'm all wet about this, would someone else (other than Richard) please fill us in.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kent Greenhalgh on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 03:20 pm:

I would not even think of driving my 16 T on the freeway. You miss too much by not driving the back roads.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By mike husted on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 03:32 pm:

With 35 years of accident free 3 1/2 million miles it is not hard to understand what went wrong. They do not teach speed and distance in driver ed, you either have it or you don't and it is seen every day weather you drive a car or truck. At 65 miles an hour your on top of another vehicle before you know it, you have to pay attention every second for that other vehicle. That is one of the problems with driving old cars on the highway. Every year vehicles run into the back of horse drawn buggies, you have got to pay attention to what is going on in back of you as well as the front and sides. Give the trucking industry climate it only get worse. I hope the people are ok, they were lucky


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dick Lodge - St Louis MO on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 03:41 pm:

I find it interesting that this thread is spending so much time on whether or not to drive a T on a highway, or on an Interstate. I re-read Aaron's original post. He doesn't use the word "highway" anywhere. All he said was, "They were in the right lane going 45MPH when suddenly they were hit from behind by a BIG RIG DOING ABOUT 70." It could have been a four-lane urban boulevard with a 45 or 50 mph speed limit. Perhaps Aaron can get some more details and fill in some of the blanks.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bob Coiro on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 03:41 pm:

Many were the times I followed a big rig up a long hill at frustratingly low speeds. Okay, they're heavy, they can't help it, I understand that. They turn on their flashers and the rest of us in modern cars simply have to deal with it and share the road. Well, pardon the pun, but I think that road should be a two-way street. Yes, America's needs move by truck, but antique cars, with their historical significance and simple smile value, also have something to offer the public and they're rare enough not to be an ever present nuisance. Then there's the statistical fact that antique cars are driven by some of the most responsible and conscientious people on the road. Guess I just feel that law enforcement should make legitimate, discretionary allowances for that.

Bob


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack Jeffrey Cole on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 03:45 pm:

I can appreciate some companys controlling the speeds of their trucks on the highway.May not help a thing but it makes me feel safer being on the road with them.Trust me,when I see the "renilthgierF" In my rearview,it makes me shiver a bit to this day.
1 or 3 bad drivers make them look bad.We dont notice the millions of miles the others drive without any problems.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jerry VanOoteghem on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 04:13 pm:

I think the real issue is that, at a glance, antique cars simply do not register in people's minds. They have become so unlike anything else on the road that they don't click in people's subconscious minds and they get almost ignored.

At a split second glance we interpret a pedestrian, a stroller, a child, a modern car, etc. but, something as foriegn and unusual as an antique car needs a bit longer to process, if it ever does, and sometimes, the additional second or two spells disaster.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dave Hjortnaes, Men Falls,WI on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 04:15 pm:

Wisconsin statutes state that the Slow Moving Sign can only be used on vehicles that normally travel at less than 25mph. I think the important distinction is the word 'normally', or at least that is how it is worded. So that would mean I could speed up to 40 as long as I normally travel less than 25.

Better not put any of that Tiger in the tank.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Sosnoski on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 04:43 pm:

Regarding the seat belt law in PA. From other forums Richard Henza has posted on he refers to HR67. This bill in PA does address seat belt usage and it does mention antique cars. The first part refers to carrying children in a car seat, however it only applies where there is a seat belt originally installed.

Any person who is operating a passenger car, Class I truck, Class II truck, classic motor vehicle, antique motor vehicle or motor home and who transports a child four years of age or older but under eight years of age anywhere in the
motor vehicle, including the cargo area, shall fasten such child securely in a fastened safety seat belt system and in an appropriately fitting child booster seat, as defined in subsection (d). This paragraph shall apply to all persons
while they are operators of motor vehicles where a seating position is available which is equipped with a seat safety belt or other means to secure the systems or where the seating position was originally equipped with seat safety belts.

It also applies to the driver and front seat passengers, but there is the standard exception for vehicles manufactured before July 1, 1966.


See the complete text here:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=PDF&sess Yr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=0067&pn=0067

It's down at the very bottom of the document.

Dave S.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bill Harris on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 05:12 pm:

Here's the California law regarding minimum speed limits:
22400. (a) No person shall drive upon a highway at such a slow
speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of
traffic unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation,
because of a grade, or in compliance with law.
No person shall bring a vehicle to a complete stop upon a highway
so as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of
traffic unless the stop is necessary for safe operation or in
compliance with law.
(b) Whenever the Department of Transportation determines on the
basis of an engineering and traffic survey that slow speeds on any
part of a state highway consistently impede the normal and reasonable
movement of traffic, the department may determine and declare a
minimum speed limit below which no person shall drive a vehicle,
except when necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law,
when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected along the
part of the highway for which a minimum speed limit is established.
Subdivision (b) of this section shall apply only to vehicles
subject to registration.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Steve Jelf on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 08:34 pm:

My mom got a ticket for driving under 45 mph on the Harbor Freeway. As Subdivision (b) warns, there can be specific minimum limits on some roads.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack Jeffrey Cole on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 09:50 pm:

I do know South Carolina has a minimum on the interstate of 45.
Motorcycles have suffered the not being seen problem for a long time but lately more are on the road than used to be.So folkes are learning to look for them.
Distractions from actually driveing can lead to alot of the problems.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jim Weir on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 10:51 pm:

Dick; 101 is a N-S 4 lane divided Highway in that area and the speed limit is either 65 or 70 there. All trucks and pass cars towing have a max speed limit of 55 MPH on any road in california. The hiway starts in San Diego runs thru L A, Santa Barbara and at Pismo beach leaves the coast. Runs up the Salinas valley to San Jose and San Francisco and then up to Oregon. It is a major hiway.

Sincerely

Jim Weir


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dick Lodge - St Louis MO on Thursday, May 27, 2010 - 11:03 pm:

Jim, what am I missing? I just re-read Aaron's opening post for the umpteenth time and don't see any mention of 101 or any other highway. How do we know he was on 101?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 12:04 am:

Sorrry guys, I can't read all of the posts.
They were NOT on an INTERSTATE! They were NOT on a freeway.
They were on 101 south of Salinas almost into Greenfield after the freeway ran out.
They had no seatbelts.
They broke the seatback when they were hit.
As they went through the fence it ripped off the windshield, bent the steering wheel and ripped off the top. whew!
I saw the car today.
I'm quite sure the cylinder head and waterpump are okay!
It had a luggage rack on the back with a leather suitcase full of things including a grease gun, a suction gun and some other metal containers.
I'me sure that all help absorbe some of the shock as that seems to be the point of impact.. The sitcase was shreaded.
The car was very original including the radiator, which was split open. It does have a new Warford.
I'll send pictures to anyone who would like to post them for me.
The car was insured with Hagerty.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 12:24 am:

Witnesses said the trucker just ran straight into them. There was not a problem of traffic shifting lanes.
The touring had no front doors. They were damn lucky they didn't get thrown out.
They are both in the limping stage today.
They were both taken to a hospital strapped to gurnies in ambulances after the accident yesterday.
They were checked and released. No broken bones but the lady had some nasty scrapes on her legs.
The driver hauled the car back to Oakland today and he is now limping but not hurting too much.
They put the car on a pile of pallets and had a forklift set it all on the trailer.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Stan Howe on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 12:40 am:

All trucks and towing vehicles -- whether pulling a little bitty trailer behind a motorcycle or a big rig with a 48 foot reefer behind it are limited to 55 mph on any California highway. (Ask me how I found this out.) If they were going 45 the truck should have only been running ten mph faster then they were. The guy should lose his CDL license and be sent back to Pakistan or wherever all these new drivers are coming from and the insurance company should take care of their loss and injuries.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 01:04 am:

Esimates as high as 75 MPH were heard on this one.
The driver of the T told me today that after impact his car went 175 yards. That includes going through a fence and traveling along side the ditch in a field without a left rear wheel and the two front wheels laying flat and no rim or tire on the rt. rear.
It was digging into the mud a good share of the way.
I'll send pictures by email to anyone who would like to post them for me.
There was one report that the car went end-over end, but I think that witness was mistaken.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jim Weir on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 05:16 am:

Dick; Read my post "T accident". This was posted several hours before this post and I'm sure these are the same accidents.

Sincerely

Jim Weir


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jim Patrick - (2) '26's - Bartow, FL on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 08:01 am:

A big rig travelling 75mph is travelling 110 feet per second. If the driver's reaction time from the time he sees the Model T to the time he hits the brake is 3 seconds, he has already travelled the length of a football field. Add to that, the time it takes the brakes to engage and the heavy truck to skid to a slow enough speed to avoid rearending the Model T and you can conclude that the semi driver didn't have much time at all to avoid a rearend collision, even if he saw the Model T up ahead. The hazards are compounded on wet roads or at night, or in fog with the one dim rear light of the Model T, so it is best just to stay off of the highways in your Model T's.

Model T's are very rare and as nice as it is to see one out and about, most drivers don't realize just how slow they are going and are not expecting them, especially if they are distracted, which is almost always the case. If you cannot heed this advice then please take all the precautions posible to protect you, your loved ones and your Model T because no one else is going to do it and you cannot know what kind drivers, you will encounter... especially with all of the dangerous distractions built into the cars, these days, that take the attention of the driver from the road. Distractions, such as, dialing or talking on the cellphone, texting, adjusting the radio, looking through a stack of CD's, watching the GPS direction finder, applying makeup, reading the morning paper, eating breakfast, or even watching movies, are all a recipe for disaster for the Model T driver who is determined to assert his right to drive wherever he wants on whatever highway he chooses. Above all, use your common sense and be careful. Jim Patrick


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Seth Harbuck - Shreveport, LA on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 08:21 am:

I wonder if the accident would have been avoided if the car had been fitted with LED safety lights.

Legal or not, as Dan Hatch stated above, "Better to by tried by 12 than carried by 6."


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dick Lodge - St Louis MO on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 08:39 am:

Jim, I did read your post. It speaks of two T's caravanning and one driving into a ditch and flipping over. I didn't see anything to link the two accidents.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ricks - Surf City on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 08:46 am:

Hate to challenge your math, Mr. Patrick, but your calculation seems to assume the T is stopped. The 75 vs 45 mph speed difference is 44 fps, or 130 feet in 3 seconds.

It's very rare to see a big rig doing over 65 anywhere in Calif, especially that section of 101. Fuel tankers and other hazmat rigs will be ticketed for driving 56 mph, and the fine is over $1500, I've been told.

Regardless, the bigrig driver was impaired, either mentally or by distraction, for this accident to happen. If he was a professional driver, he will have to find a different career. If he was one of the thousands of farmworkers in the area, he is probably back in Mexico already.

rdr


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By tyrone thomas on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 08:52 am:

Earier many were talking about the legal use of the SMV sign. Jim brings up a good point regarding peoples perception of the speed of a vehicle especially when approaching from behind.
Though we all relate the SMV sign to typicaly AG equipment or the Omish in their buggys, the SMV sign is a nationally reconized traffic warning device and i believe would give attention to up coming traffic at a great distance. At the very least, IF traffic coming up from the rear does see the sign it at least SHOULD convey a warning of caution.
Personally I would rather pay a fine then a hospital bill or worse if the sign helps even a little bit. Then if recieving fines in states for the illigal use of the sign, the law needs to be twicked to include antigue cars and these cars can have certain restrictions upon what roads they can travel.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ricks - Surf City on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:16 am:

If you don't see a whole friggin' car in broad daylight, how are you going to see a little triangle? It would help at night, however.

That trucker obviously would have hit whatever was in front of him.

www.maps.google.com shows some alternates to 101 between Soledad and Greenfield. They are single lane each way, and presumably more risky for a slow car than the 101. Look at the satellite view.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack Jeffrey Cole on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:19 am:

Stan if that truck driver was treated as well as the 1 that hit me,he werent even drug tested.A requirement of any cdl driver involved in a accident.
sad thing is these newer rigs,have such quite exhaust systems you dont hear them comeing till the crash.That was the case in my wreck anyhow.Noone heard anything except CERASH!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ricks - Surf City on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:30 am:

These pix of a 1912T were taken at 07:30, certainly no worse conditions than on 101 going southeast in late afternoon. What's so tough about seeing this car?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Rob on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:33 am:

Bob McDonald, I can assure you that NAFTA in no way negates your local traffic laws. We Canadians are absolutely required to obey your laws when we are in whatever jusdiction we are visiting or passing through. My uncle and many of my friends did and still do long haul into the US, and they assure me that having a Canadian passport does not mean you can drive like a maniac out of country!!!!!!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:59 am:

It was not a farm truck, or a mexican trucker.
It was a pro in an 18 wheeler.
RD has offered to post pics later this afternoon. I should be home by 6PM to forward them to him.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Stan Howe on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 11:28 am:

Rob, I-15, which is the main north/south corridor Interstate for transportation in the western US and Canada runs about a block from my house. Truckers from Alberta are a problem as are tourists from Alberta. They know good and well that the highway patrol can't do much to them. They get stopped, they get a ticket, they pay it or throw it away and head off down the road. The points that would go on your license here and cost you thousands of dollars in additional insurance fees or the loss of your CDL do not have any effect on their Alberta license. Come out here and drive this road this time of year and you'll find that most of the Canadian trucks are running 10 to 25 MPH over the speed limit. Likewise, Albertan tourists routinely run 85-100 MPH once they get to Montana because they know it will just be a fine to pay if they get stopped but won't affect their license in Alberta.

The other side of that is that the BC drivers all tend to drive about 45 -- not the truckers, the ones with the big motorhomes. A lot of tourists in general can't read. There is a sign where you start up the gulch that says, "Warning to Motorhomes and large vehicles...." Every once in awhile the cops have to go help some guy get his motorhome out of one of the little narrow streets up in the historic part of town. funny.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Tim Voss on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 11:47 am:

I just hope the trucker didn't brake his cellphone.

Tim


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jim Kelsey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 11:48 am:

I would like to piggy-back on what Jerry stated:

"I think the real issue is that, at a glance, antique cars simply do not register in people's minds. They have become so unlike anything else on the road that they don't click in people's subconscious minds and they get almost ignored."

That is so true. Most People today that I encouter have absolutely no concept nor appreciation for pre-muscle car era automobiles. It seems to be all related to speed and creature comforts. They kinda appreciate cars from the 1950's and late 1940's, but not earlier. They have no understanding as to how they operate and can't figure out why someone would want to own a rig that "slow" and "antiquated." They also can't understand why I won't hot-rod my car. It seems if they weren't brought up to appreciate the antique cars, it's very hard to convince them that the hobby is worthwhile.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By R.M.Head on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 12:02 pm:

Canada has maximum and minimum posted limits. If you cannot maintain 60 kph (36 mph)on a 100-110 kph road, stick to the secondaries, where the maximum posted limits are 50-80 kph.

Seatbelts required on 1967 and up cars. Turn signals required where they were original equipment for that car/YOM.

Cars with antique plates must drive on secondary roads only.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Rob on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 12:15 pm:

You are right Stan, however, and correct me if I'm wrong, an unpaid fine will result in a bench warrant. You get pulled over again, and you are SOL. While it may vary from state to state, I believe an unpaid fine will get you arrested on the spot if a bench warrant has been issued. Never had any issues with American Law enforcement, so I dont know it for a fact, but thats what I have been told. And I think I would die laughing at watching a guy try to move a big motorhome in a narrow street! The Albertans drive like that here in Nova Scotia as well!!!
Bob, I believe the antique plates sticking to secondaries is a provincial thing. Here in Nova Scotia, they can travel on any road they wish, however must maintain a minimum speed. Fine for a 58 Impala, not so easy for a T!!!!
But to reiterate what the post was originally about, Watch out when you are driving your T, Lord knows not everyone is watching out for you


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Harold Schwendeman on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 12:27 pm:

Stan - We see the same thing here on I-5 thru' the Seattle/Tacoma area. Many Canadian truckers drive those big rigs much too fast. I never knew the reason for it until your explanation. I guess it's all about $$$, right? Getting over the road with a load, getting it delivered and getting back on the road with the next load is apparently worth more than the risk of a fine. I've seen Canadian semi's driving in excess of 80mph with no more than one car-length space between the truck and the car ahead of him. CRAZY!!! (Some of those truckers don't really care what lane their in either!)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dick Lodge - St Louis MO on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 12:27 pm:

There doesn't have to be an antique car involved. This accident happened a couple of years ago in suburban St. Louis.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/laworder/story/2B16398AEE518A2 C862577070057861D?OpenDocument


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Wayne Sheldon on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 02:03 pm:

So many idiots, so few antique autos. Too many things to comment upon.
I have been fortunate to have never been at the scene of a serious crash involving an antique auto. I know too many people that have not been so lucky. One close friend has been rear-ended seriously twice. Once by a drunk, once by a distracted college student, on a secondary road.
I was with a friend in his antique when we were rear ended by a bone-brain doing about 80mph asleep at the wheel. His late model Mustang was totaled. My friends 1925 Lincoln sedan cost $350. to repair. We were not going that slow.
Peoples reaction to unusual objects is an interesting concept. I once was driving in the dead of night on a rain slick two lane highway (101 in way north Califunny), shall we say a wee bit over the speed limit. I had to swerve to miss a large black bear standing in the middle of the road. Now, I am very strict about watching the road ahead and not driving faster than I can stop in the event that an object is there. I could have stopped in the distance I had, but my brain registered the "object" as a sofa. Why? Because twice in my life I had to avoid sofas (and once a recliner, fully reclined) and I had never in all my hundreds of thousands of miles on Califunnys outer highways, about half at night, seen a bear on the road.
On that note, please, please, drive safely, W2


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David_Cockey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 03:19 pm:

"Cars with antique plates must drive on secondary roads only.

Is this every province and territory in Canada or just Ontario?

What is the source of this? Is it a direct law or implied? Does it mean a Corvette with antique tags can't be driven on non-secondary roads?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David_Cockey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 06:05 pm:

My understanding (no personal experience) is Ontario and Michigan share traffic violation information. Get a ticket in Ontario and points appear on your Michigan driving record and vice-versa.

Ontario now has a law that commercial trucks have to have a speed limiter to keep speeds at or below 100 kph.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David_Cockey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 06:06 pm:

Very, very glad to hear the folks involved were not badly injuried.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:13 pm:

I was with the folks yeasterday for a couple of hours and most of the day today.
Today I found out the guy has 13 staples in the back of his head.
He is limpng and sore all over.
His wife stayed home since wednesday night. She has plenty of scrapes and bruises. Yesterday she walked around with a walker but she'll be okay.
The car took out 5 state fence posts along the highway (State owned fence) and dragged the fence behind.
The car only went 75 yards after impact not 175 as I stated yesterday.
The truck driver was a regular white guy, no accent, 51 years old.
We will be able to get the accident report in two weeks.
I do not know what he was hauling.
The T owner was president of the Horseless Carriage Club of America a few years ago. He has a one cylinder Cad, a 4 cylinder ('13 I think) Caddilac and a big '10 Buick.
He has hauled those carsall over the west for many years. He always tows at 50 but has gone 55 in ideal conditions.
Now he has never had a complain about going to slow on a n Interstste or anyother road. So he was drivivng the T on a non-freeway road at 5 MPH slower than he tows. So what would be the proble.?
If they'd been doin 50 they'd still have been rammed.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:25 pm:

I think it was RD and maybe Stan that said the trucks in Ca. keep it at 55.
Today I went down Interstste 880 10 miles to Freemont, dropped off my youngster at her school and drove to work in oakland, another 20 miles of fast freeway traffic.
I went 58MPH all the way. I passed every truck I saw, and there were a bunch, I saw one for a long time that was doing about 56 or 57.
He had an empty cargo trailer. I was passed by a motorhome towing a small SUV and many cars, pickups and mini-vans going much faster.
THE SPEED LIMIT in the San Francisco Bay area(S.F., Oakland, San Jose) is 65.
The T accident was not in the Bay Area but over 100 miles south.
The truck speed limit (anything towing anything) is 55. Normally the car speed limit would be 70. I don't know what it is on that non-freeway bit but as I remember from a year ago it is about 65.
It seems to me anything not on a freeway is 65 or less. 70 is freeways only.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Seth Harbuck - Shreveport, LA on Friday, May 28, 2010 - 10:35 pm:

Is a regular white guy one that has plenty of fiber in his diet?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ricks - Surf City on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 12:02 am:

Here are the pix from Aaron. I could have shrunk them further, but somebody might like to do some forensics.



Accidents don't get much uglier without serious injury or worse..


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Bill Dodd on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 12:22 am:

Aaron:
Was the part of 880 that you were on today the mega-rough part that jars your teeth out? I think the state is not fixing it just as a speed deterrent.
Hiway 101 above Greenfield IS a fast piece of road and it is heavily patroled by the CHP. In the last few years there have been some NASTY wrecks there usually caused by speed and the fact that drivers don't notice vehicles turning on or off the road from side roads. The speed limit is 65 and that strip of road is NOT a limited-access road. That does not happen until Greenfield. The speed limit jumps to 70 just south of King City.
I have driven that road many times in the last 40 years and the drivers are getting stupider every year.

Bill


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Steve Jelf on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 12:47 am:

It never dawned on me that there are two Greenfields. One is on 101 between King City and Soledad, and the other is on old 99 (Union Avenue) south of Bakersfield.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By David Dewey on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 12:52 am:

Wow, it looks like the right front spindle must be bent over--but the spokes look to be intact.
Must be hickory! :-)
It's getting very scary out there.
As for today's folks not appreciating pre-40s cars, and wanting "turn key" with air conditioning, etc. Yes--there is a real loss of appreciation of anything historical with many of today's under 30 crowd.
Gee, when we were young, it was "Don't trust anyone over 35." Now it's "Don't trust anyone under 40!"
T'
David D.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 01:22 am:

tO FOUR OF US t MECHANICS AND t OWNERS IT LOOKS LIKE BOTH FRONT WHEELS ARE STILL JUST FINE.
they found the tire from the left rear but never did find the rim and felloe. It probably went into a pond nearby.
The right rear wheel also broke up but the parts all stayed with the car.
The front axle has bent forward. The radius rods are bent giving the axle about 50 degrees negative caster. The right steeing arm that comes out of the spindle broke off.
Remember, this car broke 5 fence posts off after going through the ditch.
Some guys and the owner(John Morrison) went back the next morning to look for John's glasses.
They found the bent glasses rims but never did find the wheel rim.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 01:28 am:

Notice how the steering wheel is almost ripped off by the brbed wire fence they went through after they were rear ended and the seat back broke leaving the two of them laying back as the barbed wire went over them and ripped the entire top right off!
They are damn lucky to be alive. John and Carolee Morrison.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Erik Johnson on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 01:41 am:

Did anyone take any pictures at the actual scene of the accident? Newspaper, local tv or individuals, etc.?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 01:55 am:

The Calif. Highway Patrol took lots of pictures at the scene.
Other than that nobody that I know got pictures there right after the accident.
Some of the traffic stopped and took pictures and went on.
A nice laDY stopped and went out there and asked if the couple in the car if they could hear her.
They seemed to have been knocked out untill then.
They said they could hear her and she then asked if they thought they were well enough to move because they were sitting over a big bunch of gasolene on the ground. The fuel tank had ruptured.
They both decided they were so they sat up and walked out of the car.
They asked the lady what had happened. The lady told them they had been hit by a big truck.
Untill then they had no idea what was happening to them.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 02:08 am:

The car was a Wide-Track 1912 touring.
It has repro Rockie Mountain brakes and a Layne Warford.
I personally had installed a new aluminum lower pulley (the split kind) the day before.
It also had a water pump and a 12 volt battery under the back seat.
When the nice lady told the they were sitting on top of the gasolene on th ground and dripping from the tank John said he suddenly hear the coils buzzing so the first thing he did was sit up and turn the switch off.
He runs on battery because occasionally the mag would just go dead.
Now emagine this: what if they didn't break the seat back and the car caught fire?
remember the fence?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Peter Eastwood on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 03:16 am:

A little more back ground on the car. It was formerly owned by HCCA member George Kober, George's father bought the car new, it's a very original car.
Pete eastwood


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ricks - Surf City on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 10:17 am:

Thanks for all the followup on this, Aaron.

There was nothing in the Salinas rag about the wreck. The Monterey Herald might be worth a check, but my son who lives there say his browser always gets shut down when he tries to view their site.

Maybe the "Doin' Times" (Soledad prison) would have something. . :-)

rdr


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Norman T. Kling on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 11:48 am:

That steering wheel likely saved them from having their heads cut off by the barbed wire fence. They were unlucky that they lost their car, but very very lucky they kept their lives.
Norm


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Gary London on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 01:31 pm:

George Kober... I remember George and Helen from when I was a kid. Their family imigrated from Alsfeld, Germany. Somewhere I've got pictures of a street sign in Alsfeld named 'Kober Strasse'. George was the local equivalent of 'Ron the Coilman' for all of us in the bay area back in the 60s and 70s... at least around the Berkeley area. Always replaced the capacitors, always used a HCCT. I spent a lot of time in the back of that car as a kid. I'm sure it was dark blue back then, though. Not trying to get off track, just reminising.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By richard wolf on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 02:56 pm:

I drove a truck for 36 yrs and could see the deterionation(?) of the quality of truckdriver when they started these truck driving schools where in 3 weeks you could be a truck driver. The joke was "3 weeks I couldn't spell truck driver, now I are one"
I was proud of my profession and proud to tell anyone what I did for a living,but I hesitate to tell anyone now.
When I retired, I had a 1 million mile award and was almost up for my 2 million miles.
These guys and gals now days think they own the road and it is a big joke to run someone off the road.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ricks - Surf City on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 03:12 pm:

More, thanks to Aaron:



Looks like the truck just clipped the left rear of the car..


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 04:32 pm:

Actually the right frame rail is pushed foreward about 4 inches. As it took the body with it it broke the firewall against the engine and ripped the right pan arm bolt out.
I suspect he hit pretty square on just as he tried to swerve left which swung the rear of the T to the left causing it to head for the ditch.
Both rear wheesl were shattered.
Seems that as it went across the ditch and into the fence it started going a bit left and parralled the road knocking down 5 fence posts and dragging fence with it.
They say it was 75 yards from impact to stop.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jim Patrick - (2) '26's - Bartow, FL on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 06:22 pm:

The way that steering wheel spider is bent backward, it could very well have saved their lives by taking the brunt of whatever it was that bent it so bad, instead of the driver and passenger.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Aaron Griffey on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 07:58 pm:

The steering wheel got that way from the car going through a fence. The windshild got wipe off first.
The driver and his wife were laying flat on their backs because the initial impact broke the seat back.
They were probably both knocked out. The driver has 13 staples in the back of his head where the scalp broke open.
T


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Ricks - Surf City on Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 09:02 pm:

Whiplash is real and serious. It showed up on my wife two years after an accident. They are going to suffer from it, for sure.


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.
Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration