To Hit or Not?

sambo7 · 30-10-2006, 04:02 PM

Driving home on the Calder last night i decided to take a shortcut to get to Bulla. So i took the Diggers Reset exit and went over bridge and continued along a back road that was not very well lit.

Sitting on 100km/h and out of the blue i see a kangaroo hopping straight at me (drivers side) and i reckon it was about 2 metres or less from the front bumper. Natural instinct told me to swerve and that is exactly what i did. Never been in that situation before but it was pretty scary!

Once i swerved and missed the kangaroo (still doing around 100+) i went onto the gravel on the side of the road and the car went sideways and kept going sideways down the road until i was able to grab it and pull it back in a straight line.

The other scary thing was my girlfriend said i had almost wrapped the car around the poll when i swerved (which i didn't even see).

Question is when in a situation where you are most likley going to hit a kangaroo are you better off to just hit it or try to avoid it?

Most ppl say to hit it but i believe hitting a kangaroo in my EL could almost do as much damage as hitting a pole.

Any advice would be great!

mcflux · 30-10-2006, 04:14 PM

Hitting wildlife head-on is better than hitting a pole/tree side-on. Also, swerving to avoid wildlife/pets may result in colliding with oncoming traffic or bystanders.

This isn't really an E-Series thread...

ssb2005 · 30-10-2006, 04:25 PM

swerving and going off the rod is uncool. hitting the roo would have been better for your health than the pole / tree. the roo would still mess the car up good tho

kyro_02 · 30-10-2006, 04:28 PM

suppose to be illegal to swerve around 'danger' but perfectly legal to brake and brace yourself!.. lol.. probaby cause you will end up hitting on coming traffic (like when you went sideways)...

i'd definately swerve to miss possible danger, and done it plenty of times, like planks of wood, tyres, and a truck bumper...

Kryton · 30-10-2006, 04:29 PM

i think there is a law about this kind of thing.
something along the lines of just keep driving and hit wildlife instead of creating a hazard for other motorists.
eg: you brake hard to avoid hitting an animal and the car behind you smashes into you, you are at fault in this instance regardless of how close the car is to you previously.
you could be charged with neglegent driving and possibly more if people die in the other car.

i know it sucks to hit animals but sometimes its just better off.

ssb2005 · 30-10-2006, 04:31 PM

if there was no one coming the other way its fine to swerve if you can maintain control of the vehicle IMHO

sphell · 30-10-2006, 04:34 PM

Hit them!.....that'll learn 'em.

BLSTIC · 30-10-2006, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davway

i think there is a law about this kind of thing.
something along the lines of just keep driving and hit wildlife instead of creating a hazard for other motorists.
eg: you brake hard to avoid hitting an animal and the car behind you smashes into you, you are at fault in this instance regardless of how close the car is to you previously.
you could be charged with neglegent driving and possibly more if people die in the other car.

i know it sucks to hit animals but sometimes its just better off.

ok, so you are driving down the road with a tailgater, and randomly hit the brakes. Although caused purely by yourself, the tailgater is at fault (fair enough, he was dangerously close). But insert said kangaroo as your reason to stop (not just the need for some fresh duco at the rear), and when he hits you, it becomes your fault? Makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Especially with the only other options (hitting it at 100, swerving left into a power pole, or right into oncoming traffic) involving DEFINATE risk of life and limb...

not having a stab at you, just whoever made up that law/rumour....

sambo7 · 30-10-2006, 04:41 PM

Good advice!!

Yeah there was no traffic oncoming but i did have a commodore probably 3 car lengths behind me who were totally confused as they didn't see the kangaroo lol all they saw was a silver el sideways down the road.

Yeah ive also swerved once before when there was a dead kangaroo on the road, then again i should of driven over it too.

deff will know what to do next time! i agree with trying to brake as hard as possible without causing a massive smash with the car behind me.

ssb2005 · 30-10-2006, 04:42 PM

its not your fault if the poor commodore cant stop as hard

needaXYGT · 30-10-2006, 04:53 PM

if you can see your self swerving onto gravel then i wouldnt do it unless your a pro rally driver. if it were me, i wait and see who wins the collision contest, but..... any wildlife creature will **** up your front end. i hit a fox once and it smashed the front bumper, lost the black inserts that sit in the air intake and the black flap that is behind the bumper came loose and draged along the ground, we had to keep it up with a rope. this was in a AU
but there can be worse, my dad hit a roo in his XF once. it planted the radiator up against the engine, stuffed the bonnet and every thing else. it wasnt drivable until after the repair shop.

DEVL-XR · 30-10-2006, 04:53 PM

laws aside its a hard question to answer. i know your meant to hit wildlife in these circumstances but i guess if your able to lightly swerve to avoid it then do that but not so much that you end up on the gravel. but when you have to think quickly like that its not always that easy. best bet is to drive a bit slower around dusk when kangaroos are most likely to be hopping around and also keep your eyes peeled all over the road including right beside you, just dont forget to watch the road ahead of you too!

sambo7 · 30-10-2006, 04:57 PM

Agree with Braden as this was a road that i wasn't familiar with and it was also pitch black so should of really been going a lot slower. The Commodore (VT) behind me at the start for about (20mins) was tailgating and i slowed down at one point to about 60 km/h so could of easily passed me.

Kryton · 30-10-2006, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLSTIC

ok, so you are driving down the road with a tailgater, and randomly hit the brakes. Although caused purely by yourself, the tailgater is at fault (fair enough, he was dangerously close). But insert said kangaroo as your reason to stop (not just the need for some fresh duco at the rear), and when he hits you, it becomes your fault? Makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Especially with the only other options (hitting it at 100, swerving left into a power pole, or right into oncoming traffic) involving DEFINATE risk of life and limb...

not having a stab at you, just whoever made up that law/rumour....

not having a stab either but.......
change the "tailgater" to a fully laden B Double truck.....do you think the law is stupid now?

kyro_02 · 30-10-2006, 05:12 PM

i think if vehicle behind you cannot stop in time when you brake... he is obviously traveling too close... when i went to qld and came back down... the trucks are either overtaking you or tailgating you... i think i'd rather swerve then brake if a truck was behind me..

Bax · 30-10-2006, 05:15 PM

Hit the roo, no doubt in my mind that I'd hit it.

The roads a road, if you hit a roo your hitting a 100kg moveable object- not a possibly wooden/ concrete pole thats buried into the ground and isn't going to move in a hurry. What has more flex?

The only thing that can go wrong - in terms of injuries with the roo, is if it comes through the windscreen.. I'd say that'd be really unlucky if it came through.

However, if you go off the road, you've got poles, trees, gravel, ditches, other cars, people, other animals, posts, fences.

Easy choice

BlueXr8 · 30-10-2006, 06:43 PM

if you got full comp insurance then speed up and hit the sucker that is if its insured for a decent amont ie my car good depoist on a BF XR8 MK11