Inconsiderate Drivers (share your stories, etc.)

snakeweasel

I agree with you on that. On the Interstate you appear more removed from the scenery that it sometimes looses a lot of the grandure. If I have the time I will opt for a 2 lane road over the interstate any day.

I have a friend who lives in downstate IL and if I have the time either going there or coming back I will take the two laner since there is some magnificent roads and views you won't see from the interstate.

I even one time drove from Nashville, TN to Chicago never touching a interstate. It was a very pleasant drive.

210delray

I also agree. On our cross-country trip when we picked up our son and car in L.A., our goal was to stay off the interstates (this was last December). Absolutely breathtaking scenery, and we could pull over just about anywhere there was a wide spot on the shoulder to take it all in. Traffic out west was essentially non-existent.

We used the interstates only at night in the eastern states.

xrunner2

When I was young, I made it a special point to understand the dynamics of passing (especially on 2 lane roads). I think with the dumbing down of the driving experience, learning this is a hit or miss proposition. Plus if it is done incorrectly and/or not kept in practice; it DRAMATICALLY can be hazardous to life and limb

2-lane rural driving can be especially hazardous to those drivers who grew up in city/suburban areas and whose main driving experience has been the roads therein along with interstates. They are probably not even tuned in to be scanning and watchful at crests, side roads, crossroads, curves, farmyards, etc. besides just monitoring oncoming traffic on rural 2-lanes. Passing safely in a short "passing zone" on 2-lanes can be quite a challenge and especially so in an underpowered car. Recall a car magazine once talked about this when they test drove a Honda Insight.

Unfortunately, through the years have read stories from time-to-time in newspaper of teen driver from some suburb going off-road and getting killed on some rural 2-lane and usually reported to be going way to fast. Obviously, they did not learn driving dynamics for a 2-lane by driving interstates.

gee35coupe

Teaches you the art of the rev-matched, well timed 2 gear downshift. Ahhh memories.

user777

there are some awesome roads in the NE during autumn with the foliage at max. somewhat more south, the blueridge parkway can also be quite wonderful to drive.

always have to be on the lookout for deer.

i've been forced off the road by people attempting passes without adequate knowlege of their vehicles and without adequate understanding of road conditions (like passing when comming to a crest or the start of an incline, or curve).

210delray

Yes, the Blue Ridge Parkway (northern end) and Skyline Drive are both quite close to me and are spectacular all times of the year, but especially in the fall.

Skyline Drive has only a 35 mph limit (as well it should being part of a national park and not a high-speed cut-through). There are some marked passing zones.

The BRP has a 45-mph speed limit, again appropriate to the nature of the road, with generally more passing zones.

On the Skyline Drive a couple of winters back, some total idiot in a Chrysler minivan passed my wife on a blind right hand curve. I guess it being winter with little traffic, this idiot must have figured the odds were in his/her favor that no oncoming traffic would be approaching, and it was his/her lucky day.

xwesx

I almost hate to laugh at this post, but it was a great one! Bummer to miss the exit, of course, but well-illustrated.

xwesx

Yeah, I can imagine a GPS-based speedometer being integrated w/in 10 years. Part of the problem, though, is that it would have to be a combination system with mechanical and GPS input to insure integrity. I wonder if that would add to the cost or if the GPS would just act to adjust the calibration on the fly.

I doubt there are many cable-to-the-gauge speedo's still out there, so there must be electronic translation in there somewhere even if a mechanical gear is driving the measurement. That GPS correction would be extremely useful if changing tire sizes because the little gear is set in the transmission based on OEM size tires, and the transmission turns with the rotations of the tires.

xwesx

Amazing! That was some great driving and, perhaps, some incredible luck, there! I bet that got the racer's heart pumping. Haha.

xwesx

Maybe, but I would hate to see the scratches on that old beauty!

fintail

Today's winner was a guy in a truck full of dirt. He was in the left lane of a 40mph suburban road, and he was going maybe 30 tops. I came up behind him going the limit on the nose, and as traffic was light I didn't even have to get close before I passed. As the noses of our vehicles got to the same point, he sped up....the jerk wound his rig up to about 45 before I just gave my gas a little tap and shot past (gotta love that AMG torque). After that, he slowed back down...big surprise.

About those scratches...would an Accent even give a scratch to a vehicle made of metal?

carlisimo

"If I recall from articles in news at various times, most dangerous drivers are 16 to mid-20's."

I've read articles showing that drivers past a certain age - 75 years and up I think - do get into more accidents per mile than teens do. But they put on fewer miles than their teen counterparts. (Cartalk.com had an article, but I can't find it there anymore.) According to the article, drivers get better until they plateau late in their adult life, then get a little worse, finally becoming worse than teens in the last age categories.

carlisimo

Great lane discipline between the SF Bay Area and Las Vegas. The only drivers not following the "slower traffic keep right" signs appeared once we were almost back in the Bay Area.

It wasn't all great drivers in between though. I was on a 55mph highway and a red C-class followed by an Echo pulled onto it not far ahead of me (I'm a terrible judge of distances... maybe 500ft?). The C-class wasn't in any hurry to accelerate! I braked real hard from 55 to 20 (saw the ABS light flash a bit) and I still would've rear ended the Echo if it hadn't moved into the empty oncoming lane.

Vegas driving was uneventful. Lots of cars getting stuck in the middle of intersections when the light turned red... a few trucks and domestics deciding it'd be cool to rev their engines at each other while waiting in a traffic jam... nothing to get in the way of a good time!

mark156

I see you are wanting to sell the '05 Camry.... just curious, why not sell the '04 and have a newer one?

It wouldn't be because of the headlight problem you talked about when you drove to LA a while back with the rear-end dragging the ground blinding everyone from here to Tim- buck-tu! :P Just kidding!

By the way, you have a very descriptive synopsis of your car history.. interesting to read. My grandfather was a Chevy man (mechanic) and he had a '55 black two door version. When I was 4, I kinda remember getting our 1962 Dodge Dart wagon... what a tank that car was.

Happy Motoring,
mark156

ruking1

Keep Right Except to Pass!! Slower Traffic Keep Right!!

On July 4, I was on the way back on I 15 W from Las Vegas, NV heading toward Los Angeles, heading to hook up to the Ventura Highway. (San Bernadino, CA area for those that know the area or are interested) At 90 mph in one of the two right lanes (still wanted to get my 48 mpg ), I was being passed by almost EVERYBODY except for fully loaded tractor trailer trucks !!! Lane discipline works!!

210delray

Just testing the waters, so to speak. My wife has been smitten by the Prius, esp. since our son in NYC just bought one. Then there's the $3150 tax credit. I'd sell the newer Camry just to narrow the price gap between Camry and Prius. BTW, the one we drove from L.A. was the older one!

In my gut, I don't think the economics make sense, unless oil/gasoline prices really shoot out of sight.

Thanks for the compliments -- I find it frustrating when I click on a poster's profile, and I get...nothing!

We ran into a Chevy graveyard of sorts on the trip -- looked like an old repair shop, but the grounds were littered with the sad remains of old Chevys, mostly from the 50s and 60s, but there was a rusted hulk so old that it had wooden wheel spokes! This was in Loa, Utah, on State Route 24, something we would have never seen if we took I-70.

210delray

You were going 90 and being passed by almost everyone?

This is sheer madness! What are the lemmings going to do when we run out of fuel?

I guess my wife and I made a very wise decision to stay off I-95 on our recent trip to Charleston, SC. Most of the alternative roads we used were 4-lane anyway, and many were expressways.

snakeweasel

The SL on the road was 45 and no one for almost a mile ahead and two idiots are driving 35 MPH neck and neck so the tons of traffic behind them couldn't get around. :confuse:

Finally this rolling road block breaks up and low and behold the same exact situation occurs just a little further down the road. :sick:

snakeweasel

You were going 90 and being passed by almost everyone?

I have been on the Tri-State (I-294 bypass around Chicago) north of the airport doing about 90 being passed by most people. You are right it is sheer madness.

ruking1

..." You were going 90 and being passed by almost everyone?

This is sheer madness! What are the lemmings going to do when we run out of fuel? "...

Actually it was quite relaxing! I was in cruise control even. I guess this is probably as close as it gets to autobahn like driving here in the USA.

Actually later on in the day and up the road a piece (highway 101 n) was when I saw the best exhibition of speed. It appeared to be app 115-125 mph. However, IT had a whole bank of lit up emergency lights in the rear window, sort of a black and white model, as it motored by me!!

Some miles ahead he was pulled over the side of the road servicing a "customer"

xrunner2

I have been on the Tri-State (I-294 bypass around Chicago) north of the airport doing about 90 being passed by most people. You are right it is sheer madness.

Wonder if massive amounts of camera enforcement would solve this? Read that Chicago Mayor Daley has been putting in cameras for "Crime" monitoring in certain parts of Chicago. Don't a number of European countries have extensive camera speed enforcement?

snakeweasel

While King Richard II is putting out cameras for crime (when he isn't blinding them to hide his crimes) the Peoples Republic of Chicago does not patrol the Interstates that is the job of the State Police. Plus the section of highway I was referring to doesn't go through Chicago.

The state does put the speed cameras in construction zones, so I can't see why not in problem roads.

redmaxx

AZ is the first state to put cameras on the highway. Sad if you ask me. They "caught" one guy going 147 MPH in a 65. Police took the pictures, looked him up and arrested him. His defense was that his Sonata doesn't even go 147 MPH. There should be real people patrolling and deciding when something is being done wrong, not a camera that basically gives license to 10 MPH over. Some situations, 15-20 MPH over wouldn't be bad and others, 5 MPH over would. If there ever were a case when speeding tickets were for revenue generation, this is it.

snakeweasel

Links don't work, they just take you to the site map.

redmaxx

Yep, saw that and edited my post.

ruking1

In addition to be sad, very dangerous!! I have a "your speed is": sign very close to the house. I have gone by at ZERO mpg, (which of course is impossible) and I have gone by at 15 mph (speedo) when it indicated 45 mph. Of course I could have gotten tickets in either "real world" case, 1 for parking illegally in the middle of a 2 lane street, and going 45 mph when I was actually going 15 mpg in a 25 mph zone. An "enforcing officer" probably would not have cared in either case as it is two situations that can enhance revenue. Yes I could have my day in court but it would be whether a administrative law judge and or jury if I was so luck to get one would believe me or not. If I chose to hire an attorney it probably would cost on the order of 1,000 dollars. This of course would be no guarantee on how the case would be adjudicated.

snakeweasel

They "caught" one guy going 147 MPH in a 65. Police took the pictures, looked him up and arrested him. His defense was that his Sonata doesn't even go 147 MPH.

Yes I remember that, there was some chatter about that on the Sonata forum. Top speed for a Sonata is supposively 137 MPH but not all cars off the same assembly line are exactly the same, some will be faster and some will be slower. Plus there was some speculation that that section of road was going downhill. Unless others were getting high rates of speed I don't think it was a flaw in the system.

Some situations, 15-20 MPH over wouldn't be bad and others, 5 MPH over would.

Actually 1 over is speeding and is illegal.

redmaxx

Actually 1 over is speeding and is illegal.

Not in AZ. We have a "reasonable and prudent law" that allows for up to 20 MPH over or 85 MPH, whichever is less. Also, there are times when even the limit isn't safe (really heavy rain or dust storm), but the camera will let people go at 75 MPH anyway. Also, I've driven that section of freeway, and there isn't enough downhill to get to 147 from 137, not counting the fact that the car couldn't have made it up the last hill at 137 MPH.

As for the variances on assembly lines, that probably wouldn't be a factor. Don't all new cars get their speed governed by the engine management unit programming? I had two Malibus whose top speed was 108 MPH. Engine cut out at that speed, even though there was plenty of RPM left.

snakeweasel

Not in AZ. We have a "reasonable and prudent law" that allows for up to 20 MPH over or 85 MPH,

Then why have a speed limit at all?

redmaxx

It allows for driver discretion, but also establishes a speed at which police could pull people over for going too slow. We have a law for that, but I've never seen it happen. This way, you don't have grandma going 45 on a road that is perfectly safe for 65-75 traffic. So they post 65 MPH, allow traffic to go 65-75 and (could) pull someone over for going 45.

Thinking about it, these cameras really enforce the (fallacious) thinking that "speed kills". After all, the cameras won't ticket someone going 45 in the 65, which is at least as dangerous, yet you could get someone going 76 MPH, but gets a ticket. Doesn't make sense.

snakeweasel

Just remember its not fallacious if its true. But we have been over that.

redmaxx

I haven't.

It isn't true, the argument is logically flawed. Saying speed kills gives the impression that going faster than a certain speed will automatically kill you. The argument is a lot more complex than that. It depends on the situation, road condition, traffic, etc. To say "speed kills" is a WAY over simplification.

snakeweasel

Please don't say an argument is flawed and then give a flawed argument. But it is a fact that the faster you go the greater your risk of a fatal accident. Because of that the argument is not flawed. Saying something kills only means it has the ability to kill not that it is an absolute. More speed has more ability to kill.

redmaxx

Yes, all other things being equal, the faster you go, the greater the risk of a fatal accident. But, if you say all of what you just said instead of "speed kills", it is harder to get people worked up against higher speeds. Because, in the real world, going faster does not necessarily mean that you are at a greater risk of being killed. 70 MPH one day might be safer than 55 MPH the next.

My point being, the camera enforces the absolute "speed kills" argument. Else, why set it at 75 MPH and not 80 MPH or (like our law says) 85 MPH? No, there is something special about 75 MPH.

gogogodzilla

That's right, speed kills.

Ya see, if the speed limit is 65 MPH and you decide to go 65.001 MPH, your car will magically explode in a thermonuclear explosion and kill you.

Didn't you know that? It's true because speed kills.

See, case closed, move along now.

:P

imidazol97

Speed kills means that going at a higher speed is more likely to result in a fatal event than going at a lower speed for the same event to have occurred. That means same type of accident, same day, two different speeds.

redmaxx

Yes, I understand that, but I'm referring to the way the camera is set up. Why doesn't it issue tickets for people going 45 in the 65? Why don't we hear "lack of speed kills"?

snakeweasel

Gee contradicted yourself in one paragraph.

My point being, the camera enforces the absolute "speed kills" argument

No it doesn't, it enforces the speed limit.

I looked up the code for speed limits for Arizona, while they seem to be confusing I don't think they mean what you say they do.

loncray

The energy released in an accident in which the vehicle or vehicles are traveling faster is increased. HOWEVER - high speed itself does not increase the likelihood of accident nearly as much as other factors - among them, a differential in speed. Put another way, two cars traveling 80 mph in the same lane are much less likely to have an accident - fatal or otherwise - as one car traveling 40 mph and another traveling 20 mph in the same lane.

redmaxx

No it doesn't, it enforces the speed limit.

If it enforces the speed limit the way you think it does, why doesn't it ticket at 66 MPH? I'm not seeing the contradiction you suggest...

redmaxx

The energy released in an accident in which the vehicle or vehicles are traveling faster is increased. HOWEVER - high speed itself does not increase the likelihood of accident nearly as much as other factors - among them, a differential in speed. Put another way, two cars traveling 80 mph in the same lane are much less likely to have an accident - fatal or otherwise - as one car traveling 40 mph and another traveling 20 mph in the same lane.

Thank you! That was my original point, "speed kills" is a glib statement that doesn't really show the true danger, which are speed differentials. Someone going 45 MPH on this highway won't get a ticket from the cameras, but someone going 76 MPH would. The guy going 76 MPH might just be keeping up with traffic going 75 MPH and his foot got just a little bit lazy.

snakeweasel

If it enforces the speed limit the way you think it does, why doesn't it ticket at 66 MPH?

Same reason a police officer will not pull you over for doing 66 MPH.

xwesx

No, that is bogus. An officer has discretion, a camera does not. The limit set on the cameras, while arbitrary, does allow for 10 mph driver "error" above the posted SL. That seems reasonable to me (though the use of a ticketing camera does not). Arbitrary, but reasonable. :sick:

snakeweasel

No it is not bogus the person(s) who sets up the camera has the discretion same as the officer. In both cases the descrestion is there (if it is actually there) and it is excersized if allowed.

xwesx

No, it is not. Discretion is situational. Cameras cannot account for that and therefore have no discretion. Sure, the person who set it up has discretion to choose that arbitrary speed, but that does not translate to discretion on down the line...

snakeweasel

You can argue that its not all day long it won't change the facts. Since the camera is set up to give a leeway of 10 MPH discretion is given, otherwise going anything over the 65MPH would be ticketed (thats no discretion). No different than the police officer who doesn't write tickets for anyone doing under the speed the camera is set for.

FWIW discretion doesn't have to be situational.

xwesx

Oh, it does not? I would ask for an example, but it would be situational. :P

The leeway is not discretion. It is arbitrary. It is saying that cruising at 75 is just as fine as cruising at 65 (the posted SL), but if the radar reads 76, suddenly it is wrong. It is no different than if the shutter was tied to 65, except that there are black on white signs posted all over the road saying "SPEED 65" or something to that effect. Ergo, no discretion.

An officer, on the other hand, might have seen that a person was performing a passing maneuver, avoiding an obstacle, etc., and therefore would have discretion in determining the merit of a citation. Worse yet, the camera could even undermine an officer's authority if said officer were to ticket a motorist traveling at, say, 69-70 if the officer felt it were warranted. Were that same road monitored by these wonderful cameras, the motorist could argue the stop (hopefully with futility, but it provides the avenue).

snakeweasel

You know its no different than a police officer who won't pull someone over for doing 75 but will for doing 76. I will try to keep this from turning into a Monty Python skit by saying the simple fact that leeway is given means discretion is used. Plain and simple isn't it?

xwesx

You know its no different than a police officer who won't pull someone over for doing 75 but will for doing 76.

That is absolutely true - I am not arguing that. The more simple the mind, the more it would seem to be plain and simple.

snakeweasel

That is absolutely true

Then why are you arguing that point?

You know if we keep this up we can make this the top topic of the day. :P