• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why a dash camera can pay for itself in one incident

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jimzz said:
The G1W is the current bang for the buck model. There is also a mount that attaches it to the rear view mirror so its more hidden.

Some people here have one.

http://dashcamtalk.com/g1w/


I have a older camera myself but keeping my eye on what's out there for my other car when I get done re-wiring it.
Click to expand...

Didn't see how these are powered. Do you have to take it in the house to recharge it every few days? I assume it can be charged via cig lighter in a pinch too?
 
Mark R said:
That's what the scammers want you to see.

Now look more closely.

Car 2 is following very close behind Car 1 but in the same lane.
Car 1 pulls onto the off ramp without slowing down.
Car 2 slams on the brakes and comes to a complete stop, even though car 1 has now disappeared and is no longer in front.

Note that car 1 does NOT cut off car 2 - they were in the same lane to start with.

The maneuver is staged so that it looks like car 1 cut off car 2 while turning off from the middle lane.
Click to expand...

yup, car 1 is in on it.
 
ElFenix said:
yup, car 1 is in on it.
Click to expand...

Not sure the video is proof of a setup, though. I think they may have found out it was a setup later. I see nothing in the video that would exonerate the camera car, without more information than is in the video. At best, it's a bad example, imo.

Not sure it makes much difference why the car stopped. It stopped. You can't plow into it.

I certainly shouldn't slam on my brakes on I-40 at 75mph, but if I do, are you allowed to just plow into me and claim I shouldn't have stopped?

You are supposed to be far enough back that if the car in front comes to a dead stop, you can too, without hitting it, right?
 
LTC8K6 said:
Not sure the video is proof of a setup, though. I think they may have found out it was a setup later. I see nothing in the video that would exonerate the camera car, without more information than is in the video. At best, it's a bad example, imo.

Not sure it makes much difference why the car stopped. It stopped. You can't plow into it.

I certainly shouldn't slam on my brakes on I-40 at 75mph, but if I do, are you allowed to just plow into me and claim I shouldn't have stopped?

You are supposed to be far enough back that if the car in front comes to a dead stop, you can too, without hitting it, right?
Click to expand...

From what I can tell it looks as if car 2 is following car 1 really close so that at the last moment it looks like car 1 cuts off car 2 to get to the exit ramp. While car 2 hits the breaks then you see the reverse lights come on. So it looks like car 2 backs up to make sure they are hit by the person following them.

However, truth be told, the driver of the vehicle with the cam should have been stopping the moment you saw that shit up ahead happening. Only someone swerving into your lane inches in front of your car while hitting the brakes is about the only thing that is completely unavoidable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top