Atlantic highway in Norway

[theman53]

I learned some stuff watching this. They drive on the same sides of the road as we do in the USA. Also, I am not into pretty stuff, but this was freaking cool. I loved watching it. It was a video that poped up on my home page.
http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/atlanterhavsveien-road-in-norway/20cg7smm?q=viral+time-lapse&rel=msn&from=en-us_msnhphero&form=MSNhro&overlaytype=multimediaviewer&name=hpvideo13&csid=ux-en-us&initialmoduleindex=1

[burn_your_money]

cool post

[Grey_Smoke]

That, would be wild drive!

[lovinthedeez]

imagine getting one of those sprays in the middle of the night.  love how the guardrails are minimal.  makes you think about being a retarded driver(not that I'm one of them)...

cool vid, thanks

[R.O.R-2.0]

you mean that the drivers in europe arent 99% retarded like the drivers in north america?

i thought it was a REQUIREMENT to be 3/4 retarded, before you could get a drivers license issued.. sure seems that way on the west coast anyways..

i, personally have avoid probably almost 100 wrecks this year, that I WAS NOT ANY OF THE CAUSE.. i was just avoiding them.

then that stupid lady hit that Semi right by my house. dumb *** didnt even use her brakes. not a single skid mark the width of a camry. she just drove RIGHT INTO THE FRONT OF THE SEMI.

WTF is up with all the retarded drivers? how does the NTHS, or whoever controls that crap, how do they not realise that drivers are 1000% worse than they were 20 years ago? drivers should have to pass a much more strict drivers test, and they should HAVE TO TAKE a drivers education class as well.. the DMVs seem to be handing out drivers licenses to anyone who can prove they have a name, social security number, and money to pay the fees.. seems like the DMV just doesnt give a F***...

people take driving too lightly.. they act like its no big deal to be driving a 4000# missile @ 70mph...

if you wreck a RABBIT (A FUGGIN RABBIT!!!) into something solid @ 70mph, there is something like 17.2 million pounds of force exerted by the car, to the object.. rabbits are only 1600#s, but exert over 17 million #s of force when crashed into a stationary object. im assuming there is EXPONENTIALLY GREATER force when you run into another car, also traveling 70 mph..

in the last couple years, i have REALLY TAMED MY DRIVING STYLE.. mostly to do with the fact that there are 900% more retarded drivers on the roads now days..

[Grey_Smoke]

im assuming there is EXPONENTIALLY GREATER force when you run into another car, also traveling 70 mph...

I agree with all of what you said. 
But two cars hitting each other at 70mph is the same force as one car hitting a wall at 70mph.  Here is where the mythbusters do it.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8E5dUnLmh4

[R.O.R-2.0]

im assuming there is EXPONENTIALLY GREATER force when you run into another car, also traveling 70 mph...

I agree with all of what you said. 
But two cars hitting each other at 70mph is the same force as one car hitting a wall at 70mph.  Here is where the mythbusters do it.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8E5dUnLmh4

im sorry, but if you hit a brick wall that is not moving, it is LESS force than if you hit ANOTHER car, going the same 70mph..

when you hit a semi at highway speeds, its basically like hitting a brick wall that is going 70mph, but in the opposite direction..

there is less force when you hit something stationary, than if you hit something going the OPPOSITE direction..

(im just thinking of the wreck that happened recently, the one i posted pics of, that was like the toyota camry hit a brick wall coming down the road 55mph at the camry)

that camry would have been WAY LESS TRASHED if it hit a tree, or a wall, or anything besides the loaded semi coming down the hill...

[burn_your_money]

Because both cars were the same weight, they received equal damage. There is more force with 2 cars hitting, twice as much actually. It's just spread out over 2 cars. If one was a Civic and one was a F250, most of the damage would show up on the Civic and it would have been better for the civic to hit the brick wall. The F250 did better by hitting the Civic and not the brick wall.

At least that's how it makes sense in my brain.

[lovinthedeez]

the difference is in how the energy of the crash is absorbed.  through crumple zones and the destruction of the car in general along with how each of these cars rears went up at the end shows it.  A car will absorb the energy faster than any immoveable object like a tree or a wall. 

[theman53]

I don't know how it would "feel" but I am sure the forces are about the same. I forget which law of motion it is but it is the every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Since the cars will both be traveling at the same 70 mph they would transfer energy into one another. Each going 70 is 140mph, but you won't realize the 140 since they transfer engergy to eachother. Since a wall isn't moving more than 1/8", probably springing back, and you only have 70 mph of force to transfer back instead of 140 between the two cars, I would think it would be real similar results and force.
I would guess the biggest deal would be the impact surface area of the cars vs the surface area of the wall. As the cars crumple they probably still dont contact eachother as much as the wall to nose does. As the wall car hits and keeps crushing, there is 100% coverage of the front of the car.

Think of those toys that they have the balls. One smacks into it and transfers most of its energy into the next one and so on until the end and the last one flies up. Comes back and repeats. Same transfer concept only in the same direction. Or throw 2 basketballs at eachother same speed and they will come right back to each person at roughly the same speed, then at the same distance and speed throw one basketball into the wall and it will come back at roughly the same speed/velocity however technical you want to get. It is the same concept...it doesn't seem correct but it is.