Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

Mr_Shiftright

Unless you're too poor to pay. Hospitals HAVE to take you and treat you. So when the ER room screws that "rebel" motorcyclist's head back on his body, it's possible we're all going to foot the bill.

nyccarguy

I got a speeding ticket by camera in the mail last week.  36 mph in a 25 mph zone.  Camera automatically snaps your pic if you are traveling 11 miles per hour over the posted limit or more.  $50 fine.  No points.  I’m pretty sure the City of New York DOT takes AMEX.

fintail

And that's what it is all about. No doubt there's an underfunded pension in need of rescue.

nyccarguy said:

I got a speeding ticket by camera in the mail last week.  36 mph in a 25 mph zone.  Camera automatically snaps your pic if you are traveling 11 miles per hour over the posted limit or more.  $50 fine.  No points.  I’m pretty sure the City of New York DOT takes AMEX.

roadburner

henryn said:

On the subject of seat belts, I am not a big proponent of mandatory use of seat belts.

Yes, they save lives. Yes, I’m using mine. Yes, they should be mandatory for kids. But if an adult wants to risk his life by not wearing a seat belt, I’m not really in favor of making that behavior illegal. With apologies to the motorcycle enthusiasts here, riding a motorcycle is inherently much more dangerous than driving a car without wearing a seat belt. Are you going to make it illegal to ride a motorcycle?

I think seat belt and helmet laws-along with pedestrian safety standards for vehicles-are an unwarranted and inadvisable interference with the law of natural selection.

fintail

Just get fixed up and declare bankruptcy via medical bills. Only developed place in the world where such a thought is even remotely possible (yet another HDI failure).

stickguy said:

well, we have no gubbermint sponsored health care, so they will be on their own.

andres3

dino001 said:

andres3 said:

Just read the story and the study in the link I provided. I don't argue anything without the data and facts to back it up. I'm an Owl on the DISC personality/temperament survey. My only personal statistics are from out-camping left lane campers in my younger days. A revealing real-world experiment that was.

The result does not surprise me. It's not about driving "too fast". It's about driving like a moron - cutting people off, distracted, not paying attention, lane encroachment, etc. Either through recklessness (I'm more important than you), or lack of focus (I can't be bothered, I have to look at this text message), or lack of skill (what's does this lever do?). Combine that with high speed, over or under the limit and you get death of the innocent as often as the guilty. Speed limits are aimed to reduce catastrophic nature of accidents that occur from those other primary reasons. Driving too slow is a real problem, but number of such people is (by my completely unscientific observation) much smaller than driving too fast (or whatever you call it). If we ALL drove slower, accidents would have been less deadly (even if they might be more frequent in some circumstances). I'm not advocating for that all, as there is a practical limit and proper risk-to-reward aspect of allowing higher speeds, but it's a fact.

If the frequency of collisions goes up (rate up), and people are still dying, it would be possible deaths would not go down.

For example, a reduced speed might lower the fatality per collision rate, but if collisions rise too high it could more than offset that rate decrease. The problem with speed limits is they are not that effective at controlling driving/travel speeds.

My opinion is simple, we know other cultures get better results than our USA experiment on driving, why not model the better systems?

fintail

Motorcycles already have more stringent licensing standards than cars, at least in first world states. Riding a bicycle or walking along a road is more dangerous than driving without a seatbelt too, outlaw those? Smoking and eating 2 Big Macs a day is also more dangerous than driving without a seatbelt, outlaw those?

Another idea, get in a crash without being belted, have your insurance rates go crazy for awhile.

henryn said:

On the subject of seat belts, I am not a big proponent of mandatory use of seat belts.

Yes, they save lives. Yes, I’m using mine. Yes, they should be mandatory for kids. But if an adult wants to risk his life by not wearing a seat belt, I’m not really in favor of making that behavior illegal. With apologies to the motorcycle enthusiasts here, riding a motorcycle is inherently much more dangerous than driving a car without wearing a seat belt. Are you going to make it illegal to ride a motorcycle?

andres3

fintail said:

Motorcycles already have more stringent licensing standards than cars, at least in first world states. Riding a bicycle or walking along a road is more dangerous than driving without a seatbelt too, outlaw those? Smoking and eating 2 Big Macs a day is also more dangerous than driving without a seatbelt, outlaw those?

Another idea, get in a crash without being belted, have your insurance rates go crazy for awhile.

henryn said:

On the subject of seat belts, I am not a big proponent of mandatory use of seat belts.

Yes, they save lives. Yes, I’m using mine. Yes, they should be mandatory for kids. But if an adult wants to risk his life by not wearing a seat belt, I’m not really in favor of making that behavior illegal. With apologies to the motorcycle enthusiasts here, riding a motorcycle is inherently much more dangerous than driving a car without wearing a seat belt. Are you going to make it illegal to ride a motorcycle?

To be fair, you are unlikely to take out other innocent victims with your Big Macs. I can see scenarios where accidents are deadly or not deadly to the driver not wearing a seat belt, but result in someone else, another innocent victim being involved, injured, or killed because of a minor accident that caused unbolted driver to lose control because they were not buckled up. The Prius knocked my hands off the wheel excuse.

2nd hand smoke was shown to hurt other people, and got smoking nearly banned; at least in CA.

I suppose that you could argue 2 Big Macs a day increase the likelyhood of a medical emergency WHILE YOUR DRIVING a 3,000+ pound vehicle

andres3

nyccarguy said:

I got a speeding ticket by camera in the mail last week.  36 mph in a 25 mph zone.  Camera automatically snaps your pic if you are traveling 11 miles per hour over the posted limit or more.  $50 fine.  No points.  I’m pretty sure the City of New York DOT takes AMEX.

I'm sure being more than 10 over, 36 was quite reckless, and this was the ultimate best use of taxpayer resources to punish scofflaws like yourself for behaving anti-socially.

LOL!

How does NY get around the "innocent until proven" guilty standard, and do they have sufficient evidence you were the driver? I think I heard they passed a law that says the vehicle owner is responsible for other human's infractions. Next up, gun owners will be responsible for other people using their weapons to rob a bank, or worse.

andres3

dino001 said:

henryn said:

imidazol97 said:

All the hypotheticals about the virtues of fast, aggressive driving made me recall that most accidents are caused by fast drivers wanting to get somewhere faster and disrupting the smooth flow of traffic causing accidents.

I would restate that as "many accidents are caused by drivers not moving with the normal flow". Too fast or too slow are equally dangerous.

I hate it when I'm moving with the normal flow at 65 mph, and some idiot comes blasting by, weaving in and out of traffic, going 20 mph faster than anyone else. And it is every bit as bad, and dangerous, when you get some idiot driving with his emergency blinkers doing 30 mph in the right hand lane.

If there is something wrong with your car, and you can't keep up with traffic, STAY OFF THE FREEWAY!!!

I'd give this slow guy a pass if his target was the next exit. It's safer for him (and rest of us, too) to limp for a few miles and get off at a controlled access point (if he can) than stop altogether at a random location. On the other hand, the "immortal", who makes no mistakes, driving and weaving at 20 mph higher, convinced that normal rules of traffic and laws of physics don't apply to him, is the one that is more dangerous, as he/she will do it for miles and miles with no intention to let up.

Just a question, have you ever seen someone weave through multiple lanes of freeway with no letting up with no other cars around? And if so,any that were not drunk?

I think the answer shows what we all know, that weaving is a reaction to a cause. We just don't want to acknowledge the real cause sometimes. It's easier to blame the effect than the cause.

I personally, blame the cause, and it's traffic impeders.

stickguy

camera tickets? They get around the rules by not calling it a moving violaion. Rather, it is just an infraction, like a parking ticket. Not assigned to an operator. Basically the car gets the ticket. That is why no points assigned. Or trials involved.

I am sure roadburner can explain the legal technicalities involved.

henryn

andres3 said:

dino001 said:

henryn said:

imidazol97 said:

All the hypotheticals about the virtues of fast, aggressive driving made me recall that most accidents are caused by fast drivers wanting to get somewhere faster and disrupting the smooth flow of traffic causing accidents.

I would restate that as "many accidents are caused by drivers not moving with the normal flow". Too fast or too slow are equally dangerous.

I hate it when I'm moving with the normal flow at 65 mph, and some idiot comes blasting by, weaving in and out of traffic, going 20 mph faster than anyone else. And it is every bit as bad, and dangerous, when you get some idiot driving with his emergency blinkers doing 30 mph in the right hand lane.

If there is something wrong with your car, and you can't keep up with traffic, STAY OFF THE FREEWAY!!!

I'd give this slow guy a pass if his target was the next exit. It's safer for him (and rest of us, too) to limp for a few miles and get off at a controlled access point (if he can) than stop altogether at a random location. On the other hand, the "immortal", who makes no mistakes, driving and weaving at 20 mph higher, convinced that normal rules of traffic and laws of physics don't apply to him, is the one that is more dangerous, as he/she will do it for miles and miles with no intention to let up.

Just a question, have you ever seen someone weave through multiple lanes of freeway with no letting up with no other cars around? And if so,any that were not drunk?

I think the answer shows what we all know, that weaving is a reaction to a cause. We just don't want to acknowledge the real cause sometimes. It's easier to blame the effect than the cause.

I personally, blame the cause, and it's traffic impeders.

Man, you don't give up, do you? I am going to stop at this point, your last arguments make no sense, and I will not try to refute arguments which make no sense, so carry on, you have the floor to yourself.

qbrozen

Well, it finally happened, I have been taken in by the Gecko. My insurance renewal through AAA came in at $3000 this go round for our 3 vehicles (Dodge not included). I appreciate the fact that they proactively reached out to me to say they would shop it around and see if they could do better from another provider, but they came back and said no dice. Progressive and Geiko both hit me at $2k. I decided to trust in some online polls and went with the green guy. Fingers crossed.

stickguy

I have AAA now. We were only at about 2,400 with 3 cars, and 3 drivers. and when I briefly had a 4th car, so more cars than drivers, that one was only a few $100/year extra.

When I dropped the Jetta, I asked what it should be when I also drop the kid off, and was told about $1,300. Will know next month when I get the renewal (policy resets 9/1). Though even that will not be accurate since will still have 3 drivers.

I do plan to call around a few places to see if can do better.

jmonroe

henryn said:

andres3 said:

dino001 said:

henryn said:

imidazol97 said:

All the hypotheticals about the virtues of fast, aggressive driving made me recall that most accidents are caused by fast drivers wanting to get somewhere faster and disrupting the smooth flow of traffic causing accidents.

I would restate that as "many accidents are caused by drivers not moving with the normal flow". Too fast or too slow are equally dangerous.

I hate it when I'm moving with the normal flow at 65 mph, and some idiot comes blasting by, weaving in and out of traffic, going 20 mph faster than anyone else. And it is every bit as bad, and dangerous, when you get some idiot driving with his emergency blinkers doing 30 mph in the right hand lane.

If there is something wrong with your car, and you can't keep up with traffic, STAY OFF THE FREEWAY!!!

I'd give this slow guy a pass if his target was the next exit. It's safer for him (and rest of us, too) to limp for a few miles and get off at a controlled access point (if he can) than stop altogether at a random location. On the other hand, the "immortal", who makes no mistakes, driving and weaving at 20 mph higher, convinced that normal rules of traffic and laws of physics don't apply to him, is the one that is more dangerous, as he/she will do it for miles and miles with no intention to let up.

Just a question, have you ever seen someone weave through multiple lanes of freeway with no letting up with no other cars around? And if so,any that were not drunk?

I think the answer shows what we all know, that weaving is a reaction to a cause. We just don't want to acknowledge the real cause sometimes. It's easier to blame the effect than the cause.

I personally, blame the cause, and it's traffic impeders.

Man, you don't give up, do you? I am going to stop at this point, your last arguments make no sense, and I will not try to refute arguments which make no sense, so carry on, you have the floor to yourself.

Damn, another one bites the dust with this poster on this subject. Pretty soon there won't be anymore room at the inn.

jmonroe

roadburner

stickguy said:

camera tickets? They get around the rules by not calling it a moving violaion. Rather, it is just an infraction, like a parking ticket. Not assigned to an operator. Basically the car gets the ticket. That is why no points assigned. Or trials involved.

I am sure roadburner can explain the legal technicalities involved.

Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is revenue collection.

In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.

When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.

My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).

And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.

cdnpinhead

houdini1 said:

. . . most drivers will continue to believe that they rank in the top 5%. . .

Just like Lake Woebegon -- all the children are above average.

28firefighter

roadburner said:

camera tickets? They get around the rules by not calling it a moving violaion. Rather, it is just an infraction, like a parking ticket. Not assigned to an operator. Basically the car gets the ticket. That is why no points assigned. Or trials involved. I am sure roadburner can explain the legal technicalities involved.

Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is revenue collection. In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict. When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal. My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded). And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. At a minimum.

I wish I could have clerked for you when I was in school. 

cdnpinhead

This interminable back-and-forth regarding driving over the speed limit and/or hogging the left lane makes it quite apparent that most of the people on here live in crowded metro areas and get little or no opportunity to drive on uncrowded rural roads. Go west, young (or otherwise) man, but not too far -- the Pacific states suck close to the coast, but not so much a bit East.

Either way, my policy (FWIW) is to go with the flow of traffic, even if it's 15 mph over the limit or five below -- to do otherwise is more trouble than it's worth, in my world. All the lanes are full -- calm down and listen to your audio system.

When there is no other traffic visible, go for it. Set the cruise control at 105 (some of the new ones don't even allow this) and drive for a half hour (in rural [yeah, I know is there anything else] New Mexico) on a Sunday morning.

Even in Germany, in metro areas the traffic fills all lanes. It's necessary to get away from the cities and/or daytime traffic for the lane discipline that we all enjoy over there to take effect.

andres3

I was counting lanes on the I15 South on my drive home, and often it is rotating between 6 and 5 lanes wide. It is very hard to fill 5 or 6 lanes of traffic! You can almost always act like a running back on the football field.

I'm pretty chill. Once in a while I'll flash my lights (rarely these days), but often I'll just blow by on the right; watching carfefully for would-be unsafe lane changers.

tjc78

cdnpinhead said:

This interminable back-and-forth regarding driving over the speed limit and/or hogging the left lane makes it quite apparent that most of the people on here live in crowded metro areas and get little or no opportunity to drive on uncrowded rural roads. Go west, young (or otherwise) man, but not too far -- the Pacific states suck close to the coast, but not so much a bit East. Either way, my policy (FWIW) is to go with the flow of traffic, even if it's 15 mph over the limit or five below -- to do otherwise is more trouble than it's worth, in my world. All the lanes are full -- calm down and listen to your audio system. When there is no other traffic visible, go for it. Set the cruise control at 105 (some of the new ones don't even allow this) and drive for a half hour (in rural [yeah, I know is there anything else] New Mexico) on a Sunday morning. Even in Germany, in metro areas the traffic fills all lanes. It's necessary to get away from the cities and/or daytime traffic for the lane discipline that we all enjoy over there to take effect.

I was in Idaho earlier this year traveling I-15.  80 MPH limits. Parked the cruise on 89 and barely had to touch the pedals for miles at a time.  Quite a difference from NJ

I posted a pic in the rental cars thread.  

driver100

I would guess that all those supposedly great drivers in America, the top 5% would last less than one hour driving a London taxi. There are narrow lanes, narrow roads, bicycles to contend with, traffic coming from all angles, people walking out onto the road, motorcycles going beside or between cars, I don't know how these guys do it every day. Same with busses.

I can't cut and paste but if someone can find a video it is a scary experience.

qbrozen

stickguy said:

I have AAA now. We were only at about 2,400 with 3 cars, and 3 drivers. and when I briefly had a 4th car, so more cars than drivers, that one was only a few $100/year extra. When I dropped the Jetta, I asked what it should be when I also drop the kid off, and was told about $1,300. Will know next month when I get the renewal (policy resets 9/1). Though even that will not be accurate since will still have 3 drivers. I do plan to call around a few places to see if can do better.

It was about a 25% increase this year. No idea why. I carry very high limits and $100 comprehensive deductible, but that typically doesn't make THAT big a difference. Oh well.

oldfarmer50

fintail said:

And that's what it is all about. No doubt there's an underfunded pension in need of rescue.

nyccarguy said:

I got a speeding ticket by camera in the mail last week.  36 mph in a 25 mph zone.  Camera automatically snaps your pic if you are traveling 11 miles per hour over the posted limit or more.  $50 fine.  No points.  I’m pretty sure the City of New York DOT takes AMEX.

Not if he was in NY state at the time. All they do here if there is a shortfall is to tax his business a bit more.

PF_Flyer

Got back in the car at the store the other day just as a vehicle parked in front of me, and the thought flashed in my brain... if I ever got run over, those headlights might be the last thing I see...gave me the willies!!

graphicguy

RB....I now know why the great state of Kentucky recruited you to be a justice adjudicator.

I think the proof is in the pudding. When I was 16 until I was about 30, I had amassed enough traffic violations and fender benders to keep the traffic courts awash in Benjamins.

I think I single handedly kept one particular repair shop in business and probably sent the owner on a cruise at least once per year. If it weren’t for a family lawyer, I may have had spent time incarcerated.

However, as these things go, the older and more experienced I got, the fewer infractions (and accidents) I had. I have not had a ticket, nor an accident charged to me in 25 years.

Kinda proud of that. But, I don’t think I’ve slowed down any. Probably much better at paying attention and missing other cars on the road. I now know where the speed traps are (and yes, even the ones tracked by air). I now know when the local constanbulary is out in fore, and where. I can now recognize, and keep my distance from, driving idiots.

The last encounter I had was a few years ago where some old dude was doing 15MPH in a 40 MPH zone. I flashed him a couple of times, which caused him to slow down to 10 MPH. I tried to pass him on the left, legally, which caused him to drift to the left to keep me from passing. Finally, I actually passed him illegally on the right as he was clearly stupid, on drugs or drunk. Unfortunately, there was a local cop a few cars behind who observed the whole thing. He lit up both of us.

Long and short of it, the guy was on drugs (middle of the day) and pretty obstinate with the cop. He was cuffed. I was allowed to go my merry way with a stern warning.

If you know where you’re going, if traffic warrants it, if you’re familar with the roads, then I flaunt the speed limit quite often, and usually well in excess of what’s customary. I’m always aware of the possibility of police trying to add to the locale’s coffers, so am cautious around areas that look like perfect places for police to hide, and to markings on the road where someone above could clock me.

What I think is extremely dangerous are cops who hide at night, with their lights off, pulled ver on a berm or a median. They can’t be seen, are trying to hide (assuming on purpose so they can’t be discovered until the last minute) in order to catch scofflaws. This is a very dangerous and unnecessary practice.

My other pet peeve, DUI check points. I don’t drink and drive, period. I think the check points are a terrible waste of money for very little ROI. If someone is stupid enough to get caught drunk at a check point, it shouldn’t be too difficult to nail them without the checkpoint. And, the habitual offenders, the ones the cops already know about, are easy enough to find.

Take that funding, go after the much, much bigger menace.....texting and driving.

PF_Flyer

In the UK...

New road signs can detect mobile phones are being used in vehicles



Around here, the people using their phones probably wouldn't notice the warning sign because they're glued to their phone

nyccarguy

@cdnpinhead

Well said!

"Either way, my policy (FWIW) is to go with the flow of traffic, even if it's 15 mph over the limit or five below -- to do otherwise is more trouble than it's worth, in my world. All the lanes are full -- calm down and listen to your audio system."

fintail

I think the typical American driver would be eaten alive driving anywhere in Europe, simply due to road width and right of way/uncontrolled intersections. Autobahn etiquette would also rustle some jimmies amongst the LLC set.

driver100 said:

I would guess that all those supposedly great drivers in America, the top 5% would last less than one hour driving a London taxi. There are narrow lanes, narrow roads, bicycles to contend with, traffic coming from all angles, people walking out onto the road, motorcycles going beside or between cars, I don't know how these guys do it every day. Same with busses.

I can't cut and paste but if someone can find a video it is a scary experience.

fintail

The PNW is great for driving once out of the Seattle/Portland metro or east of the mountains. Kind of makes sense, but I always look forward to little road trips to those places. LLCs are rare, and if encountered, easy to pass on the right. Most enforcers are relatively lenient and don't bat an eye unless one is 10 or more over.

tjc78 said:

I was in Idaho earlier this year traveling I-15.  80 MPH limits. Parked the cruise on 89 and barely had to touch the pedals for miles at a time.  Quite a difference from NJ

I posted a pic in the rental cars thread.  

fintail

You could drop the burger while driving, swerve, and hit something. Same with a cig - but I suppose that's more along the lines of distracted driving, which is virtually ignored while we hunt down the speed bogeyman.

I don't know about banned smoking - if there's any group that acts like persecuted victims, there you go.

Regarding camera tickets, indeed revenue, and crony "capitalism" - many instances of camera operators being in cahoots with untouchable officials. In an oligocracy, these people have nothing to fear.

andres3 said:

To be fair, you are unlikely to take out other innocent victims with your Big Macs. I can see scenarios where accidents are deadly or not deadly to the driver not wearing a seat belt, but result in someone else, another innocent victim being involved, injured, or killed because of a minor accident that caused unbolted driver to lose control because they were not buckled up. The Prius knocked my hands off the wheel excuse.

2nd hand smoke was shown to hurt other people, and got smoking nearly banned; at least in CA.

I suppose that you could argue 2 Big Macs a day increase the likelyhood of a medical emergency WHILE YOUR DRIVING a 3,000+ pound vehicle

suydam

Driving in the rural Midwest is it’s own adventure. Two lane highways, and you never know what might be over the next hill or around the curve — Amish buggies and huge farm equipment vehicles are common. Not to mention the occasional stray bull on the road, as happened to my daughter one night! It’s not a good idea to be in a hurry!

imidazol97

roadburner said:

(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).

Maybe Roadburner can speak to the techniques used by the redlight/speed camera companies to get local authorities to use their products to "make the public safe." A few years back Columbus had some of its officials investigated for accepting "favors" from those honest, law-loving companies (from other countries).

Our local example of a deteriorated government in Dayton went back to putting officers out with a speed gun camera to issue tickets without stopping those terrible desperados going 8 over the limit. That's instead of pursuing and stopping the cars, where they might find the all too common no driver license, no insurance valid, drunk or under influence of other drugs, warrants for the driver and/or passengers, no valid license plate on the car, usw.

Dayton also turned back on their money-making red light cameras in certain locations after the Supreme Court had reversed some requirements making it next to impossible for locals to use these moneymakers.

Also City of Dayton declared they couldn't have their officers spending time making traffic stops. It wasn't safe. I don't find a link but it was within the last 6 months or so.

dino001

andres3 said:

Just a question, have you ever seen someone weave through multiple lanes of freeway with no letting up with no other cars around? And if so,any that were not drunk?

I think the answer shows what we all know, that weaving is a reaction to a cause. We just don't want to acknowledge the real cause sometimes. It's easier to blame the effect than the cause.

I personally, blame the cause, and it's traffic impeders.

Yes and yes. Many young gods in cars that were somewhat spec'd up, usually with wings and flares. Immortal, superior, absolutely unconcerned about safety of their own and others. Then I saw even more of those who would weave back and forth with "some" consideration in a fairly crowded place (I mean all three lanes loaded with cars going 60-70 mph, sometimes more with majority of drivers observing reasonable distances between each other considering the speed. Those were usually "normal" cars, driven by a bit larger group of driver gods of different age and gender, also convinced that the world would come to absolute end if they had to drive like the rest of us. A gap between two cars going 70 mph meant for them it's something they had a license to go into without any consideration of other peoples' comfort, sense of safety, or simple courtesy. Priority for their time, superiority of their skills and inferiority of everybody else's was written in the Bible and Constitution. There are times, unfortunately, when your posts give me (perhaps mistaken) impression that you are a member of that club, or perhaps even a founder of a local chapter. I can be wrong, though...

ab348

Just putting this out there for the hosts/mods:

https://open.vanillaforums.com/addon/ignore-plugin

oldfarmer50

qbrozen said:

stickguy said:

I have AAA now. We were only at about 2,400 with 3 cars, and 3 drivers. and when I briefly had a 4th car, so more cars than drivers, that one was only a few $100/year extra.

When I dropped the Jetta, I asked what it should be when I also drop the kid off, and was told about $1,300. Will know next month when I get the renewal (policy resets 9/1). Though even that will not be accurate since will still have 3 drivers.

I do plan to call around a few places to see if can do better.

It was about a 25% increase this year. No idea why. I carry very high limits and $100 comprehensive deductible, but that typically doesn't make THAT big a difference. Oh well.

Insurance has gone crazy in recent years. Rate for my Ford has gone up 40% since I bought it even though the exposure for a total loss goes down as the car depreciates. Must be paying for all those rebuilt titles down south.

stickguy

Those cell phone sniffers make no sense. Because passengers are allowed to be on he phone, and how can they distinguish? Plus hands free, navigating, etc.

stickguy

IM too old at this point for the stress of having to be hyper alert looking for cops hiding just so I can go a few MPH faster. Much more relaxing to stay in the safe window on the highway (5-9 over, depending on situation) and let the fly boys find the smokies. Then concentrate on the idiots on the road instead.

graphicguy

@imidazol97 ...a rural area not far from me is going bankrupt because the courts ruled red light cameras were unconstitutional. The town is called New Miami which is about 15 miles from me. It's a small town....about 2,000 population. The revenues they derived from the red light cameras totaled about $3M. It had been operating for a few years.

As a result, millions of dollars from the red light camera need to be refunded to whomever paid the fines. That amount would set the area into bankruptcy since they increased spending significantly in anticipation of the red light camera windfall. Guess they didn't save up for that eventuality .

Last I heard, given the red light manufacturer shared in the profits, the town was trying to tie them in to share the refund burden since they also shared the profits. The manufacturer told the city they could not afford to share the burden without going bankrupt themselves.

The court ruling has most of the areas around me backing off of red light cameras.

stickguy

We had some near me in jersey but they were taken out a few years ago. I think Philly though keeps adding them.

henryn

graphicguy said:

The last encounter I had was a few years ago where some old dude was doing 15MPH in a 40 MPH zone. I flashed him a couple of times, which caused him to slow down to 10 MPH. I tried to pass him on the left, legally, which caused him to drift to the left to keep me from passing. Finally, I actually passed him illegally on the right as he was clearly stupid, on drugs or drunk. Unfortunately, there was a local cop a few cars behind who observed the whole thing. He lit up both of us.

Long and short of it, the guy was on drugs (middle of the day) and pretty obstinate with the cop. He was cuffed. I was allowed to go my merry way with a stern warning.

About 20 years ago, I was sitting in a line of traffic, waiting on a red light. The car behind me bumped into me, and stayed in contact. A very slight bump, no damage, but a little weird. I got out of my car, checked for damage, of which there was none as our bumpers did line up. I walked back to speak to the driver. He was unresponsive, would not acknowledge me. Staring straight ahead, not moving. But his face was pale, and sweaty.

By this time the light had changed, people were honking their horns, and I was really unsure what to do. I couldn’t just drive off, my car was the only thing holding his car in place. I wasn’t sure whether we needed an ambulance or a LEO or both. Fortunately, a police car came along and I was able to flag him down. He opened the door, put the car in park, turned off the ignition, and called for an ambulance. I never did find out whether the guy was sick or drugged, but he was completely unresponsive through all of this. Eyes open, but unresponsive. Definitely a weird experience.

roadburner

graphicguy said:

@imidazol97 ...a rural area not far from me is going bankrupt because the courts ruled red light cameras were unconstitutional. The town is called New Miami which is about 15 miles from me. It's a small town....about 2,000 population. The revenues they derived from the red light cameras totaled about $3M. It had been operating for a few years.

As a result, millions of dollars from the red light camera need to be refunded to whomever paid the fines. That amount would set the area into bankruptcy since they increased spending significantly in anticipation of the red light camera windfall. Guess they didn't save up for that eventuality .

Last I heard, given the red light manufacturer shared in the profits, the town was trying to tie them in to share the refund burden since they also shared the profits. The manufacturer told the city they could not afford to share the burden without going bankrupt themselves.

The court ruling has most of the areas around me backing off of red light cameras.

Since those cameras are all profit driven, one trick the companies used was to shorten the duration of the yellow light to nab more victims. Cities saw speed and red-light cameras as a license to print money and now many are paying a well-deserved penalty for their greed.

stickguy

Some years back, my boss was snagged in I295 for passing on the right (maybe speed too). A stretch where it is at least 4 lanes wide. Came up on a rolling roadblock of cars pacing in the left 3 lanes right at (I think) the SL. so he went to the right lane to get around.

Turns out they were all troopers running a sting operation of sorts, causing a traffic hazard. Not rhe safest move it would not appear. But he got pulled over and ticketed.

pensfan83

Some quick thoughts on my rental vehicle this week while the Acura gets fixed. Enterprise gave me a FWD 2017 Chevy Equinox and it definitely doesn't have me running to the Chevy dealer with my checkbook. The steering is numb and overboosted, the 4 cylinder feels overtaxed, and I can't seem to find a very comfortable driving position. Handling is also middling at best, even for a car based CUV (IMO). 33K hard miles may also have something to do with it as the car is fairly beat up on the sight with scratches, small dents, and scuffs on the wheels. The controls are immediately recognizable as GM (it looks like a friends older Terrain) but they are relatively straightforward and all fall easily within my reach. Also a lot of hard plastics as well on the surfaces that you see/touch the most.

I have to assume this is the base model, which was still fairly well equipped with all power equipment, satellite radio, heated cloth seats, etc and that the higher trims with the 6 cylinder and presumably more luxurious touches may change my opinion.

suydam

Isn’t the 2018 Equinox quite different?

pensfan83

I have no idea, not really familiar with GM at all.

EDIT: Looked real quick, seems like they revamped it substantially. It looks like a smaller Traverse and that looks like a smaller Tahoe.

stickguy

they just did a full redesign, so might have been for 2018. sounds right since the 19s are about due out.

new one got quite favorable reviews I think. the old style, definitely long in the tooth.

driver100

PF_Flyer said:

Got back in the car at the store the other day just as a vehicle parked in front of me, and the thought flashed in my brain... if I ever got run over, those headlights might be the last thing I see...gave me the willies!!

I would have thought I was being attacked by a giant albino preying mantis time with giant mandables.

driver100

We are staying a block from Harrods, a Ferrari dealer a few blocks away, a McClaren dealer the other way. Both are small stores with 2 cars in a beautiful showroom.

ab348

Decided to upgrade my ancient iPhone5. I like the small form factor so went with a new sealed box iPhone SE from Amazon which seemed a good value. More accurately, fulfilled by Amazon from a 3rd party vendor. It was listed as factory unlocked. It arrived today, sealed and new as advertised, but that was about all. I should have had my first clue when the thing was DOA out of the box due to a dead battery. Plugged it in and the battery was totally flat but began to charge and eventually it turned on.

Started the setup and it asked me for a SIM. Odd since everything I read said that you didn't need a SIM. No problem, I popped it out of my old phone and inserted it in the new one. No dice - it says it is not compatible and that I need to go to my carrier to have them unlock the damn phone (I added the "damn" part)!

Contacted the vendor thru Amazon so we shall see. Tempted just to send it back but maybe they have something to offer. Grrr.