https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/video-game-develope...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_296
(shared for context around vehicle power and dynamics likely leading or contributing to the event)
What does that have to do with inflation denial is a mystery.
Always funny to see HN commenters treat "most luxury SUVs" as an equivalent class to "family SUVs" while making fun of “out of touch journalists” supposedly equating dissimilar vehicle classes.
Just one such example (1983):
https://www.nytimes.com/1983/06/10/business/corporate-triump...
> CORPORATE TRIUMPH, THEN DEATH IN A FERRARI
> The young president of a successful new computer company died Wednesday afternoon in a car crash in California's Silicon Valley, hours after his company had sold its stock to the public for the first time and he had become a multimillionaire.
A Ferrari 296GTB sprints from 0-100mph in 4.7s. The 1983 Lamborghini Countach I had a wall poster of as a kid, took 12.1s (and a relatively leisurely 5.4s to get to 60mph). The Ferrari is pulling well over 1G longitudinally during this time, enough to induce tunnel vision in some people and warp your perception of speed and distance.
Compare someone accelerating at full throttle through that tunnel in the Countach versus the 296. The 296 would reach 2-3x the speed the Lambo did by the time they reach the curve where he crashed. Human brains can't process and react to surprises 3x as fast as they could in 1983. Even if they could, at 2x the speed your braking distance increases 4x. No amount of traction control or electronic nannies can make up for this. Nor can the electronics bypass the laws of physics - I think for many they provide a false sense of security.
And while there have been huge improvements in passive safety too, they are tested at speeds like 40mph, not the 90mph+ it is estimated Vince's car was going. This is why Teslas have the highest crash safety ratings there is, while also have the highest rate of fatal accidents.
Not to take away from the tragedy that is Vince's death. I enjoyed many hours playing MoH and CoD as a youth and this is extremely sad news. But as a car enthusiast, I am using this as a sober reminder of how quickly things can go wrong at speed.
The main problem with traction control etc is that they are ridiculously capable… until they aren’t. Minor things will cause you to lose it in a 1983 supercar that a modern car will just quietly fix. But nothing will save you if you floor it in the wrong place. Even a Miata without TC can have problems.
(I dailied a McLaren for a while, and at some point turned TC fully off on a track and promptly spun it at maybe 40 mph)
Having owned a few Miatas I can attest that they spin if you're not careful on slippery surfaces. :) TC/DSC is a lifesafer particularly when driving at normal speeds.
Driving my NA (pre-TC) was a pleasure in part because it had so little grip and so little power, that it would let go progressively and at low enough speeds that I could always catch it and not risk a serious crash. Between the squealing of tires and the immense body roll, I always knew how much grip I had left to play with. I now drive a 911, and stability control stays on permanently because I'm not confident I'd always catch it if I accidentally give it too much power (or lift off too quickly) in a turn.
The only equation that really matters here is KE=.5mv^2
The difference in danger between two arbitrary speeds is not linear. It is quadratic.
https://www.thedrive.com/news/37353/driver-turns-off-tractio...
A habit of speeding is created from a lack of consideration, it's an ignorant and dumb thing to do.
Working from home has forced me to be more deliberate with my free time and how I get away. I tend to choose exercise and am rarely in rush to where I'm going anymore.
One can only redirect the behaviour.