SUV Goes Over Guardrail, Almost Crashes Into Creek

January 22, 2022

The driver of a KIA Sorrento traveled about 150 feet along a guardrail Friday afternoon, narrowly avoiding a crash into North Escambia creek.

The vehicle was discovered on a guardrail, one tire hanging over a culvert above Canoe Creek on Highway 168, just west of Pine Barren Road in Bratt.

There was no one around the vehicle when first responders arrived, but the uninjured driver returned a short time later. The crash was reported by a passerby just after 4 p.m., but the vehicle had been there long enough to be cold.

The adult female driver was apparently headed westbound on Highway 168 when she cross the center line, ran off the roadway and collided with the guardrail.

The Florida Highway Patrol is investigating.

For additional photos, click here.

NorthEscambia.com photos, click to enlarge.

Comments

20 Responses to “SUV Goes Over Guardrail, Almost Crashes Into Creek”

  1. David on January 24th, 2022 11:18 am

    @Yard dog
    Buy a cat.
    These guardrails are not 31 inchs installed!

    I am an expert…and you are 100%wrong.
    Currently, guardrails are installed at a standard height of 31 inches. This standard was set back when there were many more sedans on the road, which ride lower and have a lower center of gravity than the crossovers and SUVs that are slowly but surely replacing them. The study recommends raising guardrails to a height of 36 inches to contain taller vehicles and prevent them from rolling over.

    The study also demonstrates just how big a difference a small change in height can make for smaller cars.

  2. Yard dog on January 24th, 2022 9:18 am

    All of the guard rail experts on her complaining that the guard rail is to low. Looks like it did its job to me. Had it been taller the car may have bounced off of it and into the path of oncoming traffic. Ill take this outcome any day and feel very fortunate.

  3. DJ on January 23rd, 2022 10:49 am

    Those guardrails clearly are not tall enough! County needs to replace with some that might actually assist.

  4. DJC on January 23rd, 2022 10:29 am

    Dang, yall roasting me!

  5. Swampfox on January 23rd, 2022 9:29 am

    @ Willis

    Over the bridge !
    Imagine the original pensacola bay bridge… only 2 lanes of maybe 11 feet wide. Wanna go 75 mph with no railing ? People have more gumption if they think something/someone’s protecting/providing for them !

  6. Willis on January 22nd, 2022 9:14 pm

    @swampfox, do you mean down the road or off the bridge ?
    Nothing helps distracted drivers.

  7. Swampfox on January 22nd, 2022 7:09 pm

    If all bridges had no guard rails how fast would the average driver go ?

  8. No Mechanic Needed on January 22nd, 2022 4:28 pm

    Not a mechanic, but I’m guessing the oil is going to be pretty low. There can’t be an oil pan anymore.

  9. Carl on January 22nd, 2022 4:16 pm

    It appears that guard rail is way too low to be called a bumper.
    Not an expert but the bumper needs to be at least 24 inchs at the bottom of the guardrail

    The post showing holding the guardrail is nothing more than a stake.

    That whole guardrail installation is in question for safety…its guarding no one being that low.
    But..just my opinion and glad the person is ok.

  10. AB on January 22nd, 2022 12:59 pm

    What would lead you to believe that this was a female driver?
    :)

    @DJC It plainly states in the story, that it was an adult female…

  11. Green rocket on January 22nd, 2022 12:50 pm

    Her sex was in the article.

  12. name on January 22nd, 2022 11:40 am

    @ DJC because it says adult female driver in the article

  13. Hmmm on January 22nd, 2022 10:28 am

    @DJC:

    Ummm, maybe because the article says “adult female driver”

  14. fisherman on January 22nd, 2022 9:59 am

    @ DJ
    The 4th paragraph stated

    The adult female driver was apparently headed westbound on Highway 168 when she cross the center line, ran off the roadway and collided with the guardrail.

  15. I read well. on January 22nd, 2022 9:59 am

    @DJC

    I would assume that it was the part of the article that says “The adult female driver” I have been wrong before but I got a pretty good hunch on this one.

  16. Duh huh on January 22nd, 2022 9:36 am

    @DJC, maybe, just MAYBE it as the sentence that mentioned “the adult female driver”? Not to overstate the blatantly obvious……..just sayin’

  17. A reader on January 22nd, 2022 9:22 am

    @DJC the story states adult female driver

  18. Bama89 on January 22nd, 2022 8:58 am

    @DJC
    The story states “The adult female driver…..”

  19. DJC on January 22nd, 2022 8:42 am

    @ Harry J:
    What would lead you to believe that this was a female driver?
    :)

  20. Harry J on January 22nd, 2022 7:47 am

    She had to run home and change her underwear after that