Porsche Carrera GT Crash Settled for $4.5m

[trev0006 0]

Carrera GT Crash Settled for $4.5m

The lawsuit was recently settled for a reported total of approximately $4.5 million. The contributions to the settlement were about 49% from the estate of the driver, 41% from the track owners and the event organizers, 8% from Porsche, and 2% from the driver of the Ferrari that was claimed to have triggered the crash.

more details:

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/content/carrera

Original story:

http://www.knbc.com/news/4562562/detail.html

[Andrew 30]

What a ridiculous case -

Sad that people died.

But

He notes that during its development, the CGT had exhibited a tendency to oversteer during high lateral acceleration. Porsche made some adjustments, but did not fully correct the problem, which explained why the mechanic who drove Keaton’s car reported “handling problems.”

I read "tendency to oversteer" as just pure badassness.

They go on to say it should be ilegal to sell high performance cars without electronic aids.

[Mike 1]

I really hate to see organisers of things like that held accountable as eventually noone will want to do it, its already pretty bad as it is.

That said the design of the track was just asking for trouble, law suit is probably fair enough based on that.

[jpp 0]

I really hate to see organisers of things like that held accountable as eventually noone will want to do it, its already pretty bad as it is.

These guys are the 4th & 5th people to die at the track within its 10 years of operation. To me, that's excessive with 1 death every 2 years on average. Since pre-cautions could of be taken but weren't, I think they have been fairly fined (But remember, they dollar figures are high, but would be pocket change to them, and we are talking about a widowed lady).

[CamB 48]

These guys are the 4th & 5th people to die at the track within its 10 years of operation. To me, that's excessive with 1 death every 2 years on average. Since pre-cautions could of be taken but weren't, I think they have been fairly fined (But remember, they dollar figures are high, but would be pocket change to them, and we are talking about a widowed lady).

50% of what she got came from (presumably) another widowed lady (the estate of the driver).

The concrete walls scare me a little (as in a few tyres wouldn't have gone amiss, but then again they probably don't do much), but I agree that you pays your money and you takes your chances. He buckled himself in as a passenger in a car that can go that fast - he must have been prepared to deal with the potential consequences which apparently DO include death.

Edited October 24, 2007 by CamB

[jpp 0]

50% of what she got came from (presumably) another widowed lady (the estate of the driver).

The concrete walls scare me a little (as in a few tyres wouldn't have gone amiss, but then again they probably don't do much), but I agree that you pays your money and you takes your chances. He buckled himself in as a passenger in a car that can go that fast - he must have been prepared to deal with the potential consequences which apparently DO include death.

Yes, but the 2nd widowed lady would [presumably] have more finances than the 1st widow who took them to court, so who is really losing out?

Yes death is a major cost of motorsport, but the passenger was [apparently, and we will never know], unaware of the oversteer issue factory to the Porsche, so the 1st widow did have a case. Surely if you could take a stab at $4.5mil you'd go for it?

[my_e36 43]

Only in America. Shifting blames, pointing fingers, shugging shoulders.

At the end of the day, only $$$ matters.

Edited October 24, 2007 by my_e36

[cainchapman 0]

The breakdown of costs seems about fair to me. The majority of the fault is due to the dick in the Porsche not being able to drive. A poorly designed track should be improved. The end of the straight at Taupo is a disaster waiting to happen. The Armco stops dead and you are more than able to slam into the end of it if you cock up the left hander and then can't use the drag-strip as run-off. Unlikely, I know. But it'll happen someday.

I agree with Andrew on the oversteer comments. I guess they'll never sell a Koenigsegg over there. I guess the difference between an American sports car (corvette or viper) and a Porsche (or equivalent euro) is that they get taily over 5mph and not at a walking pace.

[Driftit 1973]

To me it seems there was no intentions of getting Justice. It was all for the money. I doub the lady who won would be seaking changes to the track to avoid a re-accurance.

[hybrid 1040]

this is american 80's justice at its best ... or we call it south park justice.

Something happened .. we need someone too blame.

[bravo 34]

Only in America.

Really?

Look around, read a local nz paper and get back to me. Its just the same, only the numbers are smaller.

OK it's not so bad, but seriously, frivolous litigation, finger pointing and blame shifting is rife here as anywhere.

Edited October 24, 2007 by bravo

[my_e36 43]

Really?

Look around, read a local nz paper and get back to me. Its just the same, only the numbers are smaller.

OK it's not so bad, but seriously, frivolous litigation, finger pointing and blame shifting is rife here as anywhere.

Agreed that it happens everywhere. My main point being, and someone else here also pointed out, that they are in it for the money. Personally, I don't see an intention of them asking for a track layout review.

[Gus 5]

MOTORSPORT CAN BE DANGEROUS

i think someone missed the sign at the gate

its part of the package...you take a risk and lose = dead and its your own fault

just more nanny state crap where people cant look after themselves.

edit: actually reading the article, the lawsuit itself aint that bad in principle, just the numbers. this ladies husband (and probably main financial source) was killed by some dickhead driving..seems fair to get damages. $4.5mill is a lot but depending on what her husband did for a living, a realistic figure.

the PSM stuff is just sh*t however

edit again: maybe companies selling cars like that should have a anti-retard selling policy..really wouldnt be that hard to implement...driver needs XX training hours or a racing license. money cant buy skill. there so many tools who cant drive over here too, driving fast/expensive cars knowing they are going to own themselves/others. a car is a dangerous toy in the hands of the wrong people

Edited October 24, 2007 by The Gus

[Guest Rick James]

CGT's are pretty feisty at the limit. Rorhl lost control of one at the 'ring at 200mph, and I hear he's a pretty good driver.

[Andrew 30]

CGT's are pretty feisty at the limit. Rorhl lost control of one at the 'ring at 200mph, and I hear he's a pretty good driver.

Even so - that is the risk you take when you buy one.

It should be that simple.

[CamB 48]

Yes, but the 2nd widowed lady would [presumably] have more finances than the 1st widow who took them to court, so who is really losing out?

Yes death is a major cost of motorsport, but the passenger was [apparently, and we will never know], unaware of the oversteer issue factory to the Porsche, so the 1st widow did have a case. Surely if you could take a stab at $4.5mil you'd go for it?

I wouldn't count on either of them having more money than the other - and I'd say they both have "enough". Anyways, I'm more worried that you think its a legitimate case because of the "oversteer issue factory to the Porsche".

The laws of physics make it difficult to design a car capable of swerving "safely" at 130mph. It's not an oversteer issue - the car is very fast and people have to be sensible and/or realistic if they're gonna drive it that fast. Personally I find it obvious that at high speed, the margin for error is small.