Blog

Moin, I did an intensive training at the ADAC on the weekend. Was really great, I learned a lot. I think that should become a part of the driving training, like e.g. in Austria. You should not let anyone on the road anymore, who does not know how to behave, when the car under or oversteers and how it behaves when evading and braking on different road surfaces. After all, it is proven that the accident figures of the training participants It is statistically much less than that of the non-participant; what do you think of it?

Hello. Small question of me who is to blame or whether a partial debt is to be charged. I stand at a crossing with 3 lanes, of which 1 turn left, 2 straight ahead. I stand on the right straight ahead and on the left next to me is a van (Fiat Ducato or similar). It is red. As green I give gas and see just in the corner of the eye left a pedestrian running behind the van at red over the pedestrian light, 1 second later and he would have been on my track. If I had caught him, it would be a bad picture to illustrate. – BILD – The red line should be my line of vision.

In the meantime it is standard and has been prescribed for new cars since 1998, but the way there was very entangled. It began with some vehicle holders in the early 80’s starting to install the common 3rd brake lamp in their vehicles in the USA, or trying to get self-imported US cars with 3rd brake lamp registered here. There it was always called “the’ is’ vabootn”, and the 3rd brake lamp had to be not only clamped for the US cars for registration in D, but it was also called “the’ is’ vabootn”, and the 3rd brake lamp had to be clamped for registration in D. completely removed and the spreader was allowed by a light-impermeable blank panel (how is that actually, disconnecting would have been quite sufficient ?!?) Then someone managed to get additional brake lights on the way of a dispute by several instances. But not in the form in which something else was done everywhere in the world and worked perfectly. But only in pairs left/right on the hat rack. a few years later the lawyers said “what cares about our stupid gossip from yesterday”… and they banned additional brake lights again, already installed had to be dismantled again (again only disconnecting was not enough). Again a few years later, additional brake lights were allowed again in the course of EU legal harmonisations. But not the several years before hard-won special German solution (in pairs), but only the variant with the third luminaire central, which was originally not even allowed here. The dismantled “Rentnerfunzeln” thus did not return to the hat rack, but into the ton. And shortly afterwards the 3rd brake lamp became mandatory. Precisely in the form in which their “pierients” in the early 80s they wanted to have on their vehicle. There is only one question: WHY NOT GLEICH SO??? Well, in D-Land may yes s owieso never be anything as it has proven to be elsewhere in the world. DFÜ pioneers certainly know about singing another song, keyword modem post approval.

Hi! I heard an accident/insurance story the other day, which I can’t quite understand: The course was quite clear: Vehicle A parked in a light left-hand corner on a roadside parking strip. Vehicle B came at far too high a speed (30 allowed, estimate of the expert due to the damage was about 80) intoxicated, flew out of the curve as a result of freezing ice and hit vehicle A exactly in the middle (B-pillar). Total damage! Now, however, the liability refuses The only cause of the accident (i.e. B) was to pay the full damage. Reason: Although vehicle A was parked in a permitted place, it was parked there against the direction of travel (which is not allowed). I could still understand that if B had caught the parked car “frontal”, because most of the time a collision in the rear area causes less damage (there is more to the front). Abewr in the present case, where the parked car is quite exactly in the middle of the car. It was not only for the accident course (which only B has to be responsible for) but also for the amount of damage that it had to do.

Hello everyone, just a short question as a security fanatic I would like to equip my old sweetheart (Golf 1) with a fire extinguisher. That’s why I looked at the common car fire extinguishers (1/2 Kg extinguisher) times. But if I see these small “spray cans” (a 2 Kg extinguisher has a function time of only 7 seconds!!) then I’m not really sure if you can get a gasoline fire or the like with it. That’s why I’m thinking, a reasonable 6 Kg powder solution. Therefore, the question, possibly especially to the fire brigade and rescue officers here in the forum… is I right with the assumption that a car extinguisher does not bring more than “a drop on the hot stone”, or is a 6 kg extinguisher in the car perhaps completely exaggerated in reality? What do you mean? Thank you and many greetings Lars _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Gaseous fire paranoia suffers