How Fast Was Michael Hastings Really Going?

Jack Baruth
by Jack Baruth

When this website reported on the death of Michael Hastings, your humble author’s comments regarding the odd nature of the crash wound up everywhere from the front page of the Fox News website to the Facebook pages of various relatives who didn’t notice that I was the author.

There’s now surveillance footage of the crash, which frankly looks more like the Castle Bravo test than a regular car crash. And at least one source has “calculated” an awfully low and suspicious-sounding speed of impact from that footage.

From the not-always-100%-conspiracy-theory-free Infowars comes a report that Hastings might have been going just 35mph at the time of the crash:

Analysis of the recently released surveillance footage of Hastings’ vehicle in the moments before the crash, which was carried out by SDSU professor Morteza M. Mehrabadi, Professor and Interim Chair Areas of Specialization: Mechanics of Materials, also suggests that Hastings was not speeding before his Mercedes hit a tree… By measuring the distance traveled by the car on the surveillance clip and the time that elapsed before the explosion, Professor Mehrabadi was able to calculate that the car was only traveling at a speed of 35 MPH, and not speeding as some reports claimed.

“The pre-explosion and slower speed could also explain the minimal damage to the palm tree and the facts the rear tires rested against the curb. It also provides an explanation for the location of the engine and drive train at more than 100 feet from the tree impact area,”

So the theory works like so:

Again, I have to say that I’ve seen plenty of cars crash at 100mph. I’ve crashed a car myself at 100mph, at Mid-Ohio, with a standard fuel tank in it (which seemed like a good way to save a few bucks right until I ran into the Armco) and I didn’t explode. I’m not ready to say that this was the work of whatever Star Chamber exists in this country, but it continues to look awfully odd to me.


Jack Baruth
Jack Baruth

More by Jack Baruth

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 107 comments
  • Mebgardner I test drove a 2023 2.5 Rav4 last year. I passed on it because it was a very noisy interior, and handled poorly on uneven pavement (filled potholes), which Tucson has many. Very little acoustic padding mean you talk loudly above 55 mph. The forums were also talking about how the roof leaks from not properly sealed roof rack holes, and door windows leaking into the lower door interior. I did not stick around to find out if all that was true. No talk about engine troubles though, this is new info to me.
  • Dave Holzman '08 Civic (stick) that I bought used 1/31/12 with 35k on the clock. Now at 159k.It runs as nicely as it did when I bought it. I love the feel of the car. The most expensive replacement was the AC compressor, I think, but something to do with the AC that went at 80k and cost $1300 to replace. It's had more stuff replaced than I expected, but not enough to make me want to ditch a car that I truly enjoy driving.
  • ToolGuy Let's review: I am a poor unsuccessful loser. Any car company which introduced an EV which I could afford would earn my contempt. Of course I would buy it, but I wouldn't respect them. 😉
  • ToolGuy Correct answer is the one that isn't a Honda.
  • 1995 SC Man it isn't even the weekend yet
Next