[Pferdestarke]

Originally Posted by Rehaan

Can't even really blame the Civic driver at all - he was reversing pretty responsibly and looking back as well.

Yes indeed! He was doing it very diligently but the child walked into the path abruptly (pretty hard for him to see her coming).

The one who gets the blame here is kid's parents for leaving her unattended while playing.

Yet, I bet most of the folks would try to fault the civic guy for no mistake of his!

Originally Posted by binand

I rarely reverse unsupervised especially in residential areas; to the extent of asking a passerby or a guard to keep an eye on the rear if I'm alone.

Highly recommended! I do even check for any animals resting beneath before getting into the car, particularly in summers. Can't value less for a life even if it belongs to an animal!

[DRIV3R]

Originally Posted by Pferdestarke

Yet, I bet most of the folks would try to fault the civic guy for no mistake of his!

He could have stopped after the rear wheel ran over the girl, though! There was and there always will be a jolt when the wheels run over objects/humans/animals. That would have meant lesser damage to the kid, since the front of the car is heavier, with the engine, transmission and the driver.

[Pferdestarke]

Originally Posted by DRIV3R

He could have stopped after the rear wheel ran over the girl, though! There was and there always will be a jolt when the wheels run over objects/humans/animals. That would have meant lesser damage to the kid, since the front of the car is heavier, with the engine, transmission and the driver.

But there's a very high probability that he had mistaken the jolt for a bump or a rock.

Honestly, how often do we get down and check the surroundings for a simple joggle?

P.S: I am not saying that the civic guy is absolutely right neither do I intend to argue with you on this. Just sharing my opinion! Have a nice day sir!

[centaur]

Originally Posted by DRIV3R

He could have stopped after the rear wheel ran over the girl, though! There was and there always will be a jolt when the wheels run over objects/humans/animals. That would have meant lesser damage to the kid, since the front of the car is heavier, with the engine, transmission and the driver.

If you see the clip carefully, he just went over a bump/speed breaker before he hit the kid at around 0.32 secs in the video. You can see the bonnet of the civic bob. Probably that masked the effect of going over the kid

[pixantz]

Originally Posted by DRIV3R

He could have stopped after the rear wheel ran over the girl, though!

One could think that, but generally nobody would stop unless there is a scream or shout of some sort. Otherwise who would in their wildest dreams have expected it to be a kid??

You don't have kids coming under your wheel every other day, do you? It's an extremely rare incident so one would not think that. You will logically think speed bump or rock or some such similar object. Just saying....

[Santoshbhat]

Originally Posted by Rehaan

Man that's gut-wrenching!

Just shows how dangerous blind spots are. Can't even really blame the Civic driver at all - he was reversing pretty responsibly and looking back as well.

Residential areas like these in Bangalore with independent bungalows with gates facing the road are particularly dangerous. While reversing I prefer watching the ORVM's alternatively rather than turning my head back or looking at the IRVM. This practice in conjunction with the good parking sensors has proved very effective for me. The parking sensors on VAG cars in particular with their incremental frequency of beeps are so accurate that one can virtually back up into a tight spot without even looking back.

Once you get used to these aids, hopping into a car without the aids can prove quite dangerous as your brain is subconsciously relying on audio inputs for any obstruction.

[aveemashfaq]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I don't know how, but my mum got in the habit of braking with both feet. But she was way into her 80s by then. She should have known better, because I know she used to know better.

Whatever you practice, for refinement and experiment in the long run, in the short term, just stand on the brake. Let the abs do its work, that is what it is there for.

What car did your mother drive? Those cars with non boosted brakes do require a heavy foot to bring the car to a halt. I drive a 660kg Maruti 800 with non-boosted brake and I have to push hard to do an emergency brake. I tried non boosted brakes in 1095 kg Getz and I had to put my entire 100 kgs on the brakes to normally stop it. No wonder your mother used both legs on the brakes.

Am I the only one with the notion that ABS has a detrimental effect when on roads with loose gravel/less friction?

I always prefer the old fashion brake pressure application where I apply just enough force less than screeching by instinct and look left and right for a way out.

Originally Posted by Pferdestarke

But there's a very high probability that he had mistaken the jolt for a bump or a rock.

Honestly, how often do we get down and check the surroundings for a simple joggle?

P.S: I am not saying that the civic guy is absolutely right neither do I intend to argue with you on this. Just sharing my opinion! Have a nice day sir!

Originally Posted by pixantz

One could think that, but generally nobody would stop unless there is a scream or shout of some sort. Otherwise who would in their wildest dreams have expected it to be a kid??

You don't have kids coming under your wheel every other day, do you? It's an extremely rare incident so one would not think that. You will logically think speed bump or rock or some such similar object. Just saying....

The rearward visibility of any car except Maruti 800, Zen and Omni is really appalling. I wonder why there is no EU legislation for this. After experiencing rear visibility in my Maruti, I scold all the modern cars for their appalling rearward visibility.

Both our cars were parked in the street and when they started the drain work in our street, the road was littered with construction materials and we had to back out our cars from the street. I took the Maruti 800, slotted in reverse and looked back, saw obstacles, navigated well. Then I sat in Getz, looked back and surprise, there are no obstacles I can see. I had to ask my brother to come out and give me directions. Any obstacle less than the height of the chest of men is invisible in any modern car. In my old maruti 800, I look back and I can see the road at a distance from 1 car length behind me. And if you stand close to the car, any obstacle less than the height of men's knees is invisible.

[hserus]

Originally Posted by aveemashfaq

Any obstacle less than the height of the chest of men is invisible in any modern car. In my old maruti 800, I look back and I can see the road at a distance from 1 car length behind me. And if you stand close to the car, any obstacle less than the height of men's kness is invisible.

That is where fitting reverse sensors and a reverse camera come in very handy.

Some years back I once reversed right onto a stray dog that was practically a family pet and lived outside our house.

Even the cheap made in china reverse parking sensor I had then didn't work for that and I was driving a ritz so very high seat, couldn't see the guy sleeping in front - and he usually moved away very quickly once he heard a car engine, that day he might have been slow or sleepy, sad to say.

Went off and bought a much better sensor right after that, and soon after, got a reverse camera.

[aveemashfaq]

Originally Posted by hserus

That is where fitting reverse sensors and a reverse camera come in very handy.

My impression on reversing sensors is not so good. I took the zoomcar ecosport to a field and whenever I engaged reverse, the system was beeping off to glory because there were those small bushes that came in from time to time. And in the city, it could not tell me how far I was from the big sewer opening on the side of the road. It was my common sense and visual inspection that helped me. Of course, in all fairness, a parking sensor cannot transmit the information about ditches but when it cannot warn the driver about things behind, I think it has failed in it's duty.

Parking cameras are much better in that respect because you can see the things behind you. I would advocate parking cameras. Last time I came across them, the quality of those things was not good but at least you could make out if there was an obstacle or not. And that alone helps immensely. But I have a doubt. What if your parking camera has eaten the dust and mud from monsoon. How will it fare then?

You have to sit in a maruti 800 and reverse it to know the difference in the visibility. Getz is still OK. Honda city and Ecosport were very poor in that matter.

[binand]

Originally Posted by aveemashfaq

The rearward visibility of any car expect maruti 800,zen and omni is really appaling.

Originally Posted by hserus

That is where fitting reverse sensors and a reverse camera come in very handy.

You could also try my "trick" - just go behind the car before entering it and observe the general conditions of the route you need to take in reverse.

[VinodDevil81]

Originally Posted by FORTified

Consider this fact : The Bumper might need replacement multiple times, with each hard hit and hence it is multiples of 5K - using your numbers.
The Bullbar might cost double the bumper but might survive 8-10 hits.
On small cars, having a rear bull bar may not be all that bad. Its not going to hurt people and only going to save the occupants from hard rear entries

Your argument that the bull-bar may survive 10 hits may be true.
Infact, these bull bars may never get damaged at all in a collision and that itself is the problem in monocoque cars.

The bull-bar, irrespective of whether at front or rear, just transfers the collision impact to the chassis where it is bolted, thereby deforming and permanently damaging the chassis, which could otherwise have been protected to a great extent by the bumper that absorbs the impact by crumpling itself.

The bar may be intact with no damage after a collision.
It takes minimal impact by transferring the entire force to the chassis underneath.
But then, what is being protected there?
The bull-bar is just protecting itself.That's all!

What about the damage that has been caused to the chassis which is not visible from outside?

Imagine the plight of the chassis, after those 8-10 hits you have mentioned.

Since the bull-bar & the bumper are undamaged, everything else is assumed to be undamaged and the chassis may never get inspected even after those 10 hits.

Now think about it. which is more costly?
The car's chassis or the useless bull-bar?

Sorry to say this, but I completely disagree with you.

On body-on-frame cars/SUVs, the bull-bars may serve some purpose and may not be harmful as such, but on small monocoque cars, they are suicidal, irrespective of front or rear fitment.

This is what I mentioned in my previous post about the false sense of security that bull-bars provide to small car owners, and from your post I understand that unfortunately you are also a victim of that mindset.

So, I think we have already discussed these things in the previous posts.
For the time being, let us get back to this thread's original topic.

There is already a dedicated thread about the safety issues of bull-bars on small cars.
Please go through that.
And if needed, let us continue this discussion there.

[itwasntme]

Originally Posted by Santoshbhat

Residential areas like these in Bangalore with independent bungalows with gates facing the road are particularly dangerous.

Agree. I stay in a gated villa community which has the added 'menace' of unchaperoned 5+ year-olds wandering around. They are too frisky and independent to be 100% managed by their nanny, and remarkably curious about everything.

I have stopped backing out and instead, back into my garage only after getting down and unloading (everyone and everything) while idling on the road. THEN I inspect all sides of the car and carefully back in to my private garage.

I have 2 boys so have my heart in my mouth at such times. Accidents can happen anytime and anywhere.

[sudev]

On bull bars.... The mounting goes directly onto chassis which transmits forces directly. That is one reason.

A much bigger reason for not having bull bars is that it also delays trigger time of air bag sensors.

In speed impact each fraction of second is crucial and a delay of few micro seconds in deployment of airbags reduces their utility.

You need to read about airbags, whiplash, how sudden de-acceleration implodes body organs.

Avoiding few scratches and small dents on bumper is not worth missing crucial protection designed into airbag and body construction.

[arighna.dutta]

Originally Posted by itwasntme

Agree. I stay in a gated villa community which has the added 'menace' of unchaperoned 5+ year-olds wandering around. They are too frisky and independent to be 100% managed by their nanny, and remarkably curious about everything.

I have stopped backing out and instead, back into my garage only after getting down and unloading (everyone and everything) while idling on the road. THEN I inspect all sides of the car and carefully back in to my private garage.

I have 2 boys so have my heart in my mouth at such times. Accidents can happen anytime and anywhere.

I follow the same, though things might be little worse for me as it is a gated "non-villa" community and the number of <5 years kids are little high who are prone to randomly dart towards objects. I start looking out for them as soon as I creep into the community driveway. Generally, before reversing back to my parking slot I would have plotted all the variables around (yeam not bragging, most of us might be doing it ) and if the variables are too high, I just get down to ensure things are safe for others and me :-) . Better than to be sorry later on.

For the above posted incident, definitely it is a bad luck and might be we cannot fault the Civic guy completely, however, I feel he should have been more aware of the surroundings, he should have taken a note of the kid playing around even before reversing and that there is every possibility for the kid to stray. After all, more than "who is responsible" and "who is at fault", it is about a life; neither it would be a good feeling to run over someone.
And as they say, driving might be fun but even bigger a responsibility. At the end of the day, it must be an awesome feeling to have that people around you, inside and outside the car are ultra safe just because they are having one of the safest driver in you who may responsible for whatever.

[Blur]

My brother's Ciaz has the reverse sensors-camera combo. I believe that works best. As rightly pointed out by some, the sensors could beep to kingdom come even if it's a roadside bush near the bumper, but the camera will show you exactly what it is.

Add the ORVMs to this, pointed just behind the rear wheel of your car, and you can avoid any ditches that might be lurking out there. Know this from personal experience. Was backing up near one recently. A guy could see I was, but didn't make any move to warn me. In the end I managed on my own!

Also it's a good habit to manually inspect all sides of your car before moving out of a spot you had parked at a while ago. Umpteen times have found brilliant biker dudes parked within inches of my rear bumper, who would naturally be invisible from inside the car.