It's about smart v. dumb. Of course the tailgating speeder is wrong to endanger you and others. That doesn't change the fact that you have been placed in danger, so accept reality and allow the jackass to pass you.
has been the rule for over a century. It began with horse drawn wagons having more difficulty starting to go up than the downhill wagons starting again to go down. The Teamsters made sure their trucks going up hill would not have to stop as it was not easy to start a heavy load going up hill either even with the "Granny" gear engaged. Today, in snow, with or without chains, the uphill vehicle has the favored position, for obvious reasons.
Again you make a good point about dropping back x amount of distance behind someone you intend to pass. The fact of the matter is that a tailgated in the critical moments, if he is say two or less car lengths behind, makes a TERRIBLE passer! Why? He cannot go instantly 20 mph faster in one or two car lengths?!!! Which means he will spend precious seconds trying to make his car "wind up" enough to pass, in the oncoming lane!!!!.
Using this principle, I don't tail gate to pass. Why? Oh Jeopardy, What is the meaning of DUMB? If a guy is in front of you and if he does not move when you are legally behind him (ie safe distance) chances are he is not going to get out of the way with you on his tail!! So at the very least one should look to pass long before you are tailgating.
Many "farm to market" roads have a wide, paved shoulder, and it is not uncommon for folks who aren't going the speed limit to move over onto these "lanes" and let people pass.
I have driven in every State but Oregon and Idaho. I have been driving for 42 years. I have seen every crappy way of driving imaginable. I have met driver's head on on divided Interstates ( No I was not the one going the wrong way). I do not tailgate and I know how to pass on 2 lane roads. It is quite simple really. Part of the problem with passing are cars stacking up behind a slow vehicle in traffic, a honey dipper, for example. They are inexperienced, incapable of making a decision, or just afraid to pass the slow vehicle. They also speed up to not let someone trying to pass pull in in front of them, So that 2-3 cars out of the 7-8 stacked up behind the honey dipper can be passed at one time. Car number 3 will race the passing vehicle to try to keep the passer from getting in front of them. I have experienced this more than once. I used to be much more confrontational. I now realize that I share the road with an unlimited number of anal pores. But, old habits are hard to break.
I am glad you brought up an example. To tell you the truth I don't know if TX has a similar 5 vehicle back up law as CA, but if I had to hazard a guess, I would say yes for they have a slew of "slow" moving equipment paying taxes to share the road. Not to mention it is a great aggie state. And did I forget BEEF!!??
It's just a courtesy. But Texas is also the only state where I've ever seen "four lane two lane" roads. Most states don't have that wide of a shoulder on two lane roads.
have laws about farm equipment and slow-moving permit vehicles (wide/heavy loads) stopping to allow traffic to pass. I think the n-cars following thing is rather the exception.
I mean, if the speed limit on a two lane road says 55 and I am going 55 and I have 7 cars behind me, will he pull me over and issue a ticket because I was causing traffic to bunch up? Will a California judge buy the excuse for my driving 80 in a 55 that I was only preventing that dangerous bunching? Wait a minute, didn't the California legal system just award a woman who smoked and ignored the warning on the cigarette pack (that has been there for her entire smoking career) that smoking causes cancer, $28 billion dollars in a tobacco lawsuit? Hey...maybe they will buy any excuse. Try it out and post your results here.
The way traffic is in California, might they just put "bunching ticket" booths at every urban interstate on ramp? ...every picture I see of LA freeways has a lot of bunched cars.
Well, every police officer has a LOT of discretion. Like today I saluted a CHP as I was going by him, at let us say at approximately the speed limit.:) He just smiled and actually saluted back. Other times I have been passed like I was standing still by CHP without his lights on.
So if I was to give a rule of thumb 5-9 over the speed limit on freeways, (sleeps ville) at 10 mph over if they have some program goals they might pull you over.
But I have to tell you during my latest trip to and through Los Angeles 80-90 in a 65 zone and you were barely keeping up with the flow. As a matter of fact, I followed a bomb squad truck for app 35 miles. As the cars moved out of its way (lights and siren on) my daughter counted 25 cars following this police vehicle (it was going 90-95)
The neatest one that I have ever witnessed was a three RED car caravan going 125-135+ and there is this perch that the CHP sometimes stakes out and I had a feeling he was there and just as this three car caravan launched by me, I was thinking there is a CHP that is going to come off this perch and sure enough he come flying out!! So I am thinking "the chase is on" (he was going I estimate 100) but NOPE he slows down after a rise and comes to a dead stop off of the number 4 lane (emergency lane) and just sits there. So go figure!!??
Just before Christmas my girlfriend was returning home via the Pennsylvania Turnpike. She came upon a State Police officer traveling in a marked police cruiser. While he varied his speed between 65-70 mph, she was reluctant to pass, as were the other cars. Needless to say, traffic soon backed up behind the police cruiser. So, when he slowed to 65 mph, she sped up to 70 mph and passed him. No sooner did she pull back into the slow lane than he turned on his flashers and pulled her over. He promptly lectured her about "never passing a police car traveling the speed limit," although he didn't give her a ticket.
While they were pulled over, traffic resumed its normal speed and was whizzing by at 75-80 mph, which is pretty typical for the Turnpike...
I stay to about 5 over. At that speed I can set cruise and ignore radar. Realistically, I'm seldom in a situation where it is necessary to cut travel time by going any faster. On long drives I plan the time needed to drive the speeds I want. On a commute, another 20 mph dosen't save me enough time to make it worth the risk.
That's not a value statement for others - just my choice of driving strategy. :-)
I think that is the beauty of our highway and freeway systems, anybody can almost set their own speeds ! The "no impediment" laws are really there so that the greater % of drivers can share the road as SAFELY as possible.
I also use my blinkers (I try to 98-99% of the time) and the incidence is not very high. I have on some occasions changed lanes quickly and closely and even with that does not elicit the response as you have mention. I also try to make a lane change where it does not force someone to slow down. I also wave at folks in the rear glass when they let me in. Also, if I can, I try to put some more distance between the one who let me in and me.
I know for me, I get a bit frosted if someone gets in front of me and slows down. I can understand folks needed or wanting to get in position for next move, off ramp etc. Keep talking and a pattern might emerge.
That it seems that if one does not like a tailgater, then that person must be holding up others from passing.
I agree with all the comments of dropping back, then picking up speed at the appropriate time to pass in the left (oncoming) lane. That is an easy task.
I think what we are talking about here is a different situation. Described as follows:
1. Car #1 going 70 in a 55. 2. Car #2 approaching from rear at 80. 3. Car #1 does not speed up or slow down to impede Car #2, but rather continues at 70. 4. Car #2 decides to get 2 feet from the bumper of Car #1.
Apparently, the only way Car #2 can maintain a speed of 80 is to force Car #1 to do so, because Car #2 apparently has not mastered the difficult art of passing on a two lane road. Or Car #2 doesn't have the patience to wait 60 seconds for a passing zone.
There is a certain "this is the sound of one hand clapping" going on in your scenario. Car number #2 is not heeding the "keep right except to pass" law! Which to my way of dreaming should be more vigorously enforced.
But in truth it is a defacto speed obstacle. For that reason it is not only tolerated but is rarely enforced. So what would car number 1 think and do if car number 2 got in front of car number 1 and proceeded to slow to 55 mph? You know it is the speed limit and I as car number two am now THE ENFORCER!!! Now not only is 55 safe, I can now safely pull out my cell phone and do my nails and pick my teeth in the rear view mirror!!??
I would submit and I would suspect you would just see the positions in the circle jerk reversed is all.
A more proactive approach: My take is car number two should have passed car #1 on the right long before he was in a position to tailgate. Car number 1 was advertising for a long time that he was not going to move out of the way.
Thats what car number 2 SHOULD have done. But he rides a bumper. But it's ludicrious to think that car number one, already travelling 15 over the posted speed limit should get off the roadway to permit car # 2 to pass on his terms. He's not "advertising" anything more than the fact that he really would rather not go much more than 15 over the posted speed. Chances are pretty good that car number 1 had to pass kinley going 55 long before he becomes the "lead" car. If he didn't, then this whole argument is moot since there wouldn't be any "bunching" on a road where a guy going 15 over doesn't have to pass somebody at some point in the trip.
Opps my take is applicable on a multi lane highway! In the retake of this on a two lane road, I would say that car #2 would have to go a minimum of 80-90 miles per hr to pass. Another thing is that it takes anywhere between 9-12 seconds to complete the pass. If he is tailgating, he just added precious death exposure time. (on coming traffic time)
In addition, if I was car #1 I would move right slightly in the lane to give car #2 a better sight pattern. As soon as he started to pass I would get off the gas (decrease or level out my own speed)so he can get over safely ASAP. (We all need to remember that on alternate times and days, sometimes we are the bug and sometimes we are the windshield.)
Whatever speed car #2 needs to pass is car #2's issue. If you need to go 90, but have to get it up to 95-100 to pass a guy going 85, that is your problem.
On the multi-lane highway issue, both cars should be right until the need to pass arises.
To answer the question of a car moving to the left lane and slowing down, I would simply pass on the right. Note that it is easier to give the salute this way!
I can really twist this thing around if we are talking rush hour traffic (but that has been beat to death).
Kinley, technically speaking, both cars are speeding. However, with the way traffic is these days, in many instances (one exception being bad weather) going at the speed limit is rather dangerous.
"...Whatever speed car #2 needs to pass is car #2's issue. If you need to go 90, but have to get it up to 95-100 to pass a guy going 85, that is your problem..."
Well for sure but like I said it is easy to reverse the circle jerk. If I as car #2 pass car #1 and suddenly get religion and get back down to 55 making the car in back go from 85 to 55 and do all those other things car number one who is now car #2 that is now his issue?
It's just past rush hour on North Central Expressway and the congestion has cleared, giving drivers a chance to step on the gas. Like school hall monitors, four police traffic officers enter the northbound lanes driving side by side, each precisely at the posted 60-mph limit. The technique is what police call a "safety ride."
is a real problem. It's not really what we have been beating aroound here, but ruking1 brings up another issue that I agree with. Actually, let's introduce two issues with passing on a multi-lane divided highway. Here's the situations that irk me:
I'm driving on a divided freeway, 2 lanes in each direction. I'm in the RIGHT lane, driving at SL+, minding my own business. No traffic. A car gradually catches up from behind, doing maybe SL+10. When he gets to me he changes into the LEFT lane, and begins to pass. So far, so good.
Irk #1: He advances into my left blind spot, and matches speed.... mile after mile, he just rides there. No traffic, no reason, just stays there. Why? He had to have been moving faster than me to catch up, why not go on and pass. Complete the maneuver! Do it! Execute!
Irk #2: Same guy, but he passes as he should, changes back into the right lane, and promptly drops speed until I'm on top of him. Now I have to turn cruise off or pass him back. Why do so many people do that? If I pass someone I feel an obligation to maintain the same or more speed than them, at least for a while, so as not to inconvenience them.
Agreed with both items. But more often than not I'm the other guy (the one who wants to pass), and in this situation also there are irritating moments:
- when there is a passing zone and I'm passed by another car while maintaining my speed, and finding the rear bumpers of that car a mile further because the driver slowed down;
- when I'm passing and the guy on the right lane accelerates...
"Everybody's rear wheels are safely going forward. "
Everybody is in a significantly more dangerous situation than if they were allowed to separate at their own speeds.
The Smith System Defensive Driver Training program lists 5 main defensive actions every driver should always take. One of them is "Leave yourself an out." Bunching up traffic like that eliminates everybody's "out." Any mistake by any single driver will almost certainly result in a multi-vehicle collision.
Onother Smith System action is to "Look for impediments well ahead." They recommend 15 seconds ahead, which is a long way, but in that pack nobody can see more than a few seconds ahead.
That sort of rolling roadblock contributes to a much more dangerous situation, and constrains people to sit through it whether they wish to or not.
I agree with your remarks even though I have not taken the "SSDDT" of which you speak. The "leave yourself an out " was what I learned first at 15 years old (37 years ago)and the seeing 15 seconds ahead has always resonanted with me in the real world of driving, since most passes can take anywhere from 9-12 seconds. It might ruin somebody's day if they had 12 seconds to pass and only 6 seconds of room.
They can call it whatever they want, but my take on the 3 ship police cruise was merely a SHOW of force.
"The Smith System Defensive Driver Training program lists 5 main defensive actions every driver should always take. One of them is "Leave yourself an out." Bunching up traffic like that eliminates everybody's "out." Any mistake by any single driver will almost certainly result in a multi-vehicle collision."
The patrol cars do not cause the "bunching up". The bunching up is the result of the individual drivers electing to do so. What prevents them from staying behind the patrols at safe distances and driving as though the patrols were absent? When the followers choose to chomp at the bit, that is not the fault of the patrols. Each individual driver has the responsiblity to follow at a safe distance, leave 15 seconds, and have an escape formula, but they don't and higher speeds will not provide those factors, only individual driver decisions will. I've never heard of a major crash as a result of or participating in a safe patrol. Those who try to fly without wings cause the crashes.
is about as good as the police's in that photo. It won't happen. Maybe in your utopia, or theirs, but not in this world. So why use a tactic that will not work just because you wish it would?
The fact is that cars will gradually catch up to the pack and proceed in a bunch. Longing to replace "what is" with "what should be" is idealism. That's fine for setting standards and selecting a direction. Ignoring "what is" all together is somewhere between ignorant and stupid, and not what we employ police for. They are demonstrably causing more of a problem than they are fixing.
There is also an invisible phenomenon that happens as a result of the "safety maneuver" or more commonly after an accident. I do not think it has a name, but if someone knows it please post.
On the freeway,have you ever been backed up behind and come to a place where there was an accident and or safety maneuver and ALL folks stop with no apparent reason?(longer after the event has gone?)Now if this is a a good safety practice why do we not put up stop signals to effect this phenomenon??
Oh, you say the police are at fault for causing the followers to bunch up? Another argument for not assuming personal responsibility, but trying to "lay the responsibility on somebody other than ourselves". So a crash occurs following the patrol, would a citation be issued to the patrol?I don't think so. Take more responsibility for your driving decisions and not make a scapegoat of others for your ineptitude.
the folks near the police cars know why traffic is moving so slowly. The folks behind (who most likely are travelling somewhat below the speed limit won't have a clue, so they will begin their "bob and weave" manuever back in the pack, creating a hazard for those around them. Bottom line - the police were successful in slowing traffic down. What would be interesting would be a follow up story on the accidents that occured behind this rolling blockade.
Here we go again. "I don't speed, why should you ? " If you want to go faster than me, you have a problem. " etc, etc. "Why can't we all just get along" - Rodney King
That would include having some courtesy and respect for your fellow motorists.
Aim High in Steering (15 seconds ahead) Get the Big Picture (306 degree visibility and attention) Keep your Eyes Moving Leave Yourself an Out Make Sure they See You
Comments
;^)
Again you make a good point about dropping back x amount of distance behind someone you intend to pass. The fact of the matter is that a tailgated in the critical moments, if he is say two or less car lengths behind, makes a TERRIBLE passer! Why? He cannot go instantly 20 mph faster in one or two car lengths?!!! Which means he will spend precious seconds trying to make his car "wind up" enough to pass, in the oncoming lane!!!!.
Using this principle, I don't tail gate to pass. Why? Oh Jeopardy, What is the meaning of DUMB? If a guy is in front of you and if he does not move when you are legally behind him (ie safe distance) chances are he is not going to get out of the way with you on his tail!! So at the very least one should look to pass long before you are tailgating.
Oh yes I got that !
Part of the problem with passing are cars stacking up behind a slow vehicle in traffic, a honey dipper, for example. They are inexperienced, incapable of making a decision, or just afraid to pass the slow vehicle. They also speed up to not let someone trying to pass pull in in front of them, So that 2-3 cars out of the 7-8 stacked up behind the honey dipper can be passed at one time. Car number 3 will race the passing vehicle to try to keep the passer from getting in front of them. I have experienced this more than once.
I used to be much more confrontational. I now realize that I share the road with an unlimited number of anal pores. But, old habits are hard to break.
I am glad you brought up an example. To tell you the truth I don't know if TX has a similar 5 vehicle back up law as CA, but if I had to hazard a guess, I would say yes for they have a slew of "slow" moving equipment paying taxes to share the road. Not to mention it is a great aggie state. And did I forget BEEF!!??
1. You don't have to take your shoes off to count to 5.
2. So a slowpoke didnt have to look in a mirror and wonder if he is one.
3. Even if you have a 5th grade reading level past the 12 grade. ALL can count to five, if the cops ever gave a ticket.
The way traffic is in California, might they just put "bunching ticket" booths at every urban interstate on ramp? ...every picture I see of LA freeways has a lot of bunched cars.
Well, every police officer has a LOT of discretion. Like today I saluted a CHP as I was going by him, at let us say at approximately the speed limit.:) He just smiled and actually saluted back. Other times I have been passed like I was standing still by CHP without his lights on.
So if I was to give a rule of thumb 5-9 over the speed limit on freeways, (sleeps ville) at 10 mph over if they have some program goals they might pull you over.
But I have to tell you during my latest trip to and through Los Angeles 80-90 in a 65 zone and you were barely keeping up with the flow. As a matter of fact, I followed a bomb squad truck for app 35 miles. As the cars moved out of its way (lights and siren on) my daughter counted 25 cars following this police vehicle (it was going 90-95)
While they were pulled over, traffic resumed its normal speed and was whizzing by at 75-80 mph, which is pretty typical for the Turnpike...
Well in the spirit of dedicated public service, I will gladly let some other customer be served first!!
That's not a value statement for others - just my choice of driving strategy. :-)
I think that is the beauty of our highway and freeway systems, anybody can almost set their own speeds ! The "no impediment" laws are really there so that the greater % of drivers can share the road as SAFELY as possible.
I also use my blinkers (I try to 98-99% of the time) and the incidence is not very high. I have on some occasions changed lanes quickly and closely and even with that does not elicit the response as you have mention. I also try to make a lane change where it does not force someone to slow down. I also wave at folks in the rear glass when they let me in. Also, if I can, I try to put some more distance between the one who let me in and me.
I know for me, I get a bit frosted if someone gets in front of me and slows down. I can understand folks needed or wanting to get in position for next move, off ramp etc. Keep talking and a pattern might emerge.
I agree with all the comments of dropping back, then picking up speed at the appropriate time to pass in the left (oncoming) lane. That is an easy task.
I think what we are talking about here is a different situation. Described as follows:
1. Car #1 going 70 in a 55.
2. Car #2 approaching from rear at 80.
3. Car #1 does not speed up or slow down to impede Car #2, but rather continues at 70.
4. Car #2 decides to get 2 feet from the bumper of Car #1.
Apparently, the only way Car #2 can maintain a speed of 80 is to force Car #1 to do so, because Car #2 apparently has not mastered the difficult art of passing on a two lane road. Or Car #2 doesn't have the patience to wait 60 seconds for a passing zone.
Either way, Car #2 is in the wrong.
There is a certain "this is the sound of one hand clapping" going on in your scenario. Car number #2 is not heeding the "keep right except to pass" law! Which to my way of dreaming should be more vigorously enforced.
But in truth it is a defacto speed obstacle. For that reason it is not only tolerated but is rarely enforced. So what would car number 1 think and do if car number 2 got in front of car number 1 and proceeded to slow to 55 mph? You know it is the speed limit and I as car number two am now THE ENFORCER!!! Now not only is 55 safe, I can now safely pull out my cell phone and do my nails and pick my teeth in the rear view mirror!!??
I would submit and I would suspect you would just see the positions in the circle jerk reversed is all.
A more proactive approach: My take is car number two should have passed car #1 on the right long before he was in a position to tailgate. Car number 1 was advertising for a long time that he was not going to move out of the way.
In addition, if I was car #1 I would move right slightly in the lane to give car #2 a better sight pattern. As soon as he started to pass I would get off the gas (decrease or level out my own speed)so he can get over safely ASAP. (We all need to remember that on alternate times and days, sometimes we are the bug and sometimes we are the windshield.)
On the multi-lane highway issue, both cars should be right until the need to pass arises.
To answer the question of a car moving to the left lane and slowing down, I would simply pass on the right. Note that it is easier to give the salute this way!
I can really twist this thing around if we are talking rush hour traffic (but that has been beat to death).
Kinley, technically speaking, both cars are speeding. However, with the way traffic is these days, in many instances (one exception being bad weather) going at the speed limit is rather dangerous.
Well for sure but like I said it is easy to reverse the circle jerk. If I as car #2 pass car #1 and suddenly get religion and get back down to 55 making the car in back go from 85 to 55 and do all those other things car number one who is now car #2 that is now his issue?
One take can be aggressive mets passive aggressive. Does this really help in sharing the road?
I'm driving on a divided freeway, 2 lanes in each direction. I'm in the RIGHT lane, driving at SL+, minding my own business. No traffic. A car gradually catches up from behind, doing maybe SL+10. When he gets to me he changes into the LEFT lane, and begins to pass. So far, so good.
Irk #1: He advances into my left blind spot, and matches speed.... mile after mile, he just rides there. No traffic, no reason, just stays there. Why? He had to have been moving faster than me to catch up, why not go on and pass. Complete the maneuver! Do it! Execute!
Irk #2: Same guy, but he passes as he should, changes back into the right lane, and promptly drops speed until I'm on top of him. Now I have to turn cruise off or pass him back. Why do so many people do that? If I pass someone I feel an obligation to maintain the same or more speed than them, at least for a while, so as not to inconvenience them.
Comments?
- when there is a passing zone and I'm passed by another car while maintaining my speed, and finding the rear bumpers of that car a mile further because the driver slowed down;
- when I'm passing and the guy on the right lane accelerates...
The scenario I set forth above did not plan for one car passing another and then slowing down, which is of course irritating.
Everybody is in a significantly more dangerous situation than if they were allowed to separate at their own speeds.
The Smith System Defensive Driver Training program lists 5 main defensive actions every driver should always take. One of them is "Leave yourself an out." Bunching up traffic like that eliminates everybody's "out." Any mistake by any single driver will almost certainly result in a multi-vehicle collision.
Onother Smith System action is to "Look for impediments well ahead." They recommend 15 seconds ahead, which is a long way, but in that pack nobody can see more than a few seconds ahead.
That sort of rolling roadblock contributes to a much more dangerous situation, and constrains people to sit through it whether they wish to or not.
They can call it whatever they want, but my take on the 3 ship police cruise was merely a SHOW of force.
The patrol cars do not cause the "bunching up". The bunching up is the result of the individual drivers electing to do so. What prevents them from staying behind the patrols at safe distances and driving as though the patrols were absent? When the followers choose to chomp at the bit, that is not the fault of the patrols. Each individual driver has the responsiblity to follow at a safe distance, leave 15 seconds, and have an escape formula, but they don't and higher speeds will not provide those factors, only individual driver decisions will. I've never heard of a major crash as a result of or participating in a safe patrol. Those who try to fly without wings cause the crashes.
The fact is that cars will gradually catch up to the pack and proceed in a bunch. Longing to replace "what is" with "what should be" is idealism. That's fine for setting standards and selecting a direction. Ignoring "what is" all together is somewhere between ignorant and stupid, and not what we employ police for. They are demonstrably causing more of a problem than they are fixing.
There is also an invisible phenomenon that happens as a result of the "safety maneuver" or more commonly after an accident. I do not think it has a name, but if someone knows it please post.
On the freeway,have you ever been backed up behind and come to a place where there was an accident and or safety maneuver and ALL folks stop with no apparent reason?(longer after the event has gone?)Now if this is a a good safety practice why do we not put up stop signals to effect this phenomenon??
"Why can't we all just get along" - Rodney King
That would include having some courtesy and respect for your fellow motorists.
Aim High in Steering (15 seconds ahead)
Get the Big Picture (306 degree visibility and attention)
Keep your Eyes Moving
Leave Yourself an Out
Make Sure they See You
Pretty much common sense in my view.