Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options

Inconsiderate Drivers (share your stories, etc.)

1306307309311312478

Comments

  • shriftyshrifty Member Posts: 255
    After watching the videos a second time, I saw a few vehicles go up/down with little issues. The one that impressed me the most was around 1:20, a green Saturn Vue? Can't tell what type of SUV it was. Anyway, they were doing just fine down the hill, was rear-ended by a Honda that the driver locked up the wheels, and was knocked sideways a bit and recovered very well. You can see this driver braking appropriately when necessary.

    I don't think it really matters that much what type of vehicle you have, as long as the tires are good and you keep your traction. Unfortunately many drivers do not know this as we can clearly see in this video.

    A few winters ago I was driving up a steep hill and got about half-way up to the top. The road was solid ice and I began to slide down. I pumped the brakes on the way down, and watched the rear-view to see where I was going to end up as I went down. Made it to the bottom without too much difficulty, then backed up enough so I could get a better running start. Had to take the road at about 65-70 to slide up it.

    I think what bothers me the most about this video is that these are the people that cause insurance rates to be so high overall :mad:

    The person in the Caddie in Vid 2 was probably thinking what the heck is wrong with these people as they casually drove by....
  • jensadjensad Member Posts: 388
    Fintail this is a classic snow job!! Ha ha. Seriously this is some t/c. I am sure that the cars just sort of slowly slided in another car and then more cars sled into the front cars, and finally, as the man said, "oh my God" ect.

    I never had to work in snow, but I used to watch the cars on the freeway just slide into other cars and after they stopped the drivers still had their foot on the brake. In this photo I hope no one got injured/hurt/died. And you were ok Fintail? I hope so.

    Good luck to all and hope all enjoy the games today.

    jensad :)
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    I'm not the cameraman, I just happened upon it. Although I do like to go out in the snow and see the shenanigans when we get it here - takes about 2-3" to wreak absolute havoc in the northwest.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    edited January 2011
    >takes about 2-3" to wreak absolute havoc in the northwest.

    When you get snows like that, is the ground usually near or above freezing? Or do you get snows on cold ground that's in the low 20s?

    The slickest snow is when the ground is above 26-27 F or so and the stuff will pack under tires and form ice from the pressure of the tires.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    They usually start as marginal events here - initially above freezing and damp, then the cold and ice moves in, which makes chaos on the roads, especially as many local "authorities" aren't very good at dealing with such events. Add to that the immense amount of pseudo-outdoorspeople in SUVs and suburban cowboys in big 4x4 trucks, and it becomes a demolition derby.
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    The other issue western Washington has is wet snow. It doesn't get all that cold here so the snow that falls usually has big flakes and packs well. Non of that nice powdery stuff around here.

    I've talked to drivers from the east who say it is much harder to drive on this slippery stuff, although heavy snowfall is rare in these parts.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    No doubt some insurance adjusters put in some extra hours thanks to a few idiots there.

    A few things everyone should know but not everyone remembers - how to steer, don't stop, don't lock em up. Last time we had a good snow here I was driving my powerful RWD V8 car with low profile all season tires (not the best mix), having few if any problems...then someone who I won't profile in an MDX stopped in front of me for no reason - going up a hill. I honked, and luckily was able to get around. Had I stopped, I might have been stuck.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Comming home as a winner from the Casino I was on I-55 heading north from Joliet when a BMW X5 passed me. Well almost passed me, got to where its back bumper was equal to my front tires and slowed down to match my speed. It then turned on its turn signal and matched my speed for about a quarter mile. Now I had my cruise control set and didn't touch it nor the gas pedal so I know it wasn't me.

    He just stayed there for about 15-20 seconds with his turn signal on then gunned it and swerved into my lane. :confuse:

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • oregonboyoregonboy Member Posts: 1,650
    Well that was obviously your fault. He was in a BMW and actually SIGNALED. Clearly, it was your responsibility to get out of his way. :P
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Don't laugh, I got into an accident two or three years ago (I think I mentioned it here) where some idiot signaled and merged into my lane striking my front right fender with his back left.

    The guy tried to claim it was my fault because I saw him and didn't get out of the way.

    The police officer who responded did not agree with him.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    BMW driver stereotypes are so often true...

    That second incident reminds me of what happened to a friend when an idiotic teenage girl ran a stop sign and slammed into his pride and joy Monte Carlo SS. She tried to argue he should have stopped or swerved to get out of her way!

    Drivers licensing standards are way too lax.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    It would have been funny if that BMW driver got on here and told about how some idiot sped up as he was trying to pass.

    However I was using cruise control so that didn't happen.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    The same thing has happened to me when I use cruise, especially on 4 lane roads in rural SW WA where driving skill is low. I remember driving back from Christmas, cruising at about 66 in a 60, passing a woman in a SantaFe - she got neck and neck with me as I got beside her, then as I edged past, she dropped off and was far behind in a couple minutes. I don't get that.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited January 2011
    I normally try to "leave an out". Using your example, I like to STAGGER where I am in relation to folks to my left and right lanes (3 lanes abreast and ABOVE). If the driving skill is (as low) as you say, they can inadvertantly change lanes INTO you either to the left or right. If staggered, there should be empty space, albeit CLOSE. Probably another reason why I seldom (if ever) use CC.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    edited January 2011
    Yeah, I don't like running side by side with people either, or people who camp out in my blind spot or make it so I camp out in theirs. My car has an easy out too - just give enough throttle input to make a downshift, then I am long gone :shades:

    I'll admit I love CC on long boring relatively straight roads. It can be deactivated when needed, but it sure helps for relaxing when there's little else to do but move the wheel now and then and that heavy MB gas pedal makes my foot sore.
  • euphoniumeuphonium Member Posts: 3,425
    rural SW WA where driving skill is low.

    Not true. SW WA has the lowest auto insurance rates in the state. Check it out. ;)
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    Is that from driving skill or low traffic volume and density?

    A quick trip through the Aberdeen area might not one thinking they are super-skilled ;)
  • euphoniumeuphonium Member Posts: 3,425
    As for Aberdeen, you might have a point and they are in a different rated territory than we on the Columbia River.
  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Member Posts: 801
    I go out to L.A. to visit my cousin every six months or so. I didn't venture far beyond her neighborhood (Woodland Hills) behind the wheel...usually just a quick run to Whole Foods or a late run to IN-N-Out Burger. Then she was diagnosed with cancer just over a year ago....

    I've been out three times to visit since then and I've had to do the all the driving each time! The last two times I wanted to let her get some rest, so I took her three kids to their baseball practices, piano lessons, day camp and swim parties each day! So I had to learn to deal with L.A. traffic and L.A. Drivers in order to survive!

    Drivers in L.A. are the most aggressive, rude and inconsiderate in the country!!! Even worse, they are totally oblivious to the drivers around them and drive as if they are the only vehicle on the road and can do ANYTHING they want! No one uses a turn signal for turning, changing lanes or merging; safe following distance is "just as long as bumpers don't touch"; and lanes ending or merging, where sane motorists would usually use some caution, turn into a foot-to-floor game of 'chicken'!

    But on this recent visit, I decided that I wasn't going to spend the week yelling at the top of my lungs (and swearing like a sailor with her three kids, all under age 11, hearing every word) nor would I chew up a few Valium before venturing out on the highway! This time I decided "When in Rome, do as the Romans do!" I still used my turn signals and caught myself waving to apologize a few times (I'm Southern, being polite is in my DNA even when I'm in California)...but otherwise it was very liberating!

    I probably wouldn't have been quite so bold in a smaller car like my Mazda3, but her 6000-pound Lexus SUV was much more empowering! When something that big cuts in front of a jerk trying to prevent you from merging, he at least has enough sense to admit defeat!!!

    The hard thing for me was "turning it off" immediately when I got back to Atlanta. I drove like a bat-out-of-hell all the way home from the airport! =/
    2015.5 Volvo S60 T6 Drive-E Platinum, 2012 Mazda CX-9 GT
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,685
    I drove like a bat-out-of-hell all the way home from the airport!

    That is only because you were exactly that! :P
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • tallman1tallman1 Member Posts: 1,874
    "When in Rome, do as the Romans do!"

    That's how I felt when I was in Boston a few years ago. It was pretty much lawlessness. ;)

    The thing that always cracked me up about LA drivers was how they got next to the curb at red lights and then took off to pass the cars in the right lane... only to stop at the next intersection for another red light. Green means go fast so that you can hit your brakes in a block. Too funny. :D
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    Oh, you mean suburban Portland ;)
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I have gotten into LA a fair number of times over the years. I have come to see LA LA land driving styles as politely AGGRESSIVE. Perhaps it is just me, but I have the bad habit of actually signaling the majority of the time. My perception is most times I get cut a break and get let in.

    http://www.nhtsa.gov/

    Government statistics actually reveal that even as I perceive RURAL driving to be much more polite and civil, it really hides a much higher fatality and accident RATE than places like LA LA land.
  • jimbresjimbres Member Posts: 2,025
    That's how I felt when I was in Boston a few years ago. It was pretty much lawlessness.

    From time to time, I visit my sister in Boston, so I know what you mean.

    Many years ago, I head someone say that what makes the Boston driver so dangerous is that he doesn't fear death.
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,347
    LA driving should have less fatalities. You are rarely going fast enough to get hurt.

    Rural driving you can go faster, and hit big trees. And deer. And tractors.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited January 2011
    Speed has been shown NOT to be the killer, despite the SPEED KILLS campaign. Indeed most fatalities (80%) happen @ 45 mph and under. I am not sure what parts of LA you commute in, but most times 75-90 mph is fairly common and cars are usually less than 1.5 to 2 seconds apart.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    I would suspect that rual driving has a higher accident and fatality rates due to higher rates of speed, slower response time for emergency services and lack of lighting along rual roads.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Actually studies have found that increasing speeds increases the chance of getting into a fatal accident. It's basic physics that the faster you go the longer it takes to slow down, the more force your vehicle is excerting, the harder it is to manuver and your response time is reduced.

    Your stat of most fatalities happen at 45 MPH and under is meaningless unless one knows how much driving is done at 45 or lower.

    However if you strongly believe that the laws of physics are suspended when one gets behind the wheel of a car try this: Drive your car into a brick wall at 10 MPH then drive it into a brick wall at 110 and let us know the results.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    That is what YOU are saying. It is CLEARLY not what I have said. Indeed a tad less than 20% can be attributed to "speed", which you have clearly ignored.

    Indeed of what you are saying is true venues such as Nascar etc should experience WAY more deaths than they do as they routinely crash into walls, etc @ sometimes normal xxx digit speeds.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    Where are these studies?

    Autobahns have lower fatality rates than American roads. US has lower interstate limits than many countries, but far from lower fatality rates.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited January 2011
    Indeed part of the reason that gets little to NO press here in North America is they want to keep the speed limits @ 65 mph and BELOW !! Doubters (like SW) should keep in mind we are achieving the LOWEST death and fatality rates with far more of the vehicle fleet population moving at least @ the 85th percentile which is MORE than 65 mph !!!!!. The advisory speed limit on the German autobahn is actually not much more @ 80 mph. I am sure revenue is better @ 65 miles and or less !!!
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    edited January 2011
    You clearly said that speed is not the killer and that most fatalities happen at under 45 MPH. However most driving happens at under 45 MPH.

    As for NASCAR they have accidents all the time, the only reason deaths do occur all the time is that the drivers are in reenforced steel cages wearing fire proof suits.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Comparing apples to oranges aren't we. it has been repeated how much better drivers in Germany are (I believe you even have said this although I could be wrong).

    As for the studies I will look for them again.

    Do you have any studies that state that driving faster is safer?

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited January 2011
    If 100% -80% = 20% fatality rate (speed) is a stretch for you to see, then what really do you want me to say? :surprise:
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    I don't have any studies - studies usually have financial or political motivations. I've just seen stats that don't show slower limit areas are any safer.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    Revenue - that's pretty much what it comes down to. It's not some idea of "safety", at least not primarily.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,685
    While I really prefer not to jump into this sort of no-win argument, I must say that I am surprised at the lack of compromise in this particular one.

    Anyone who stops to think about vehicle fatalities for a moment should quickly come to the understanding that there are several factors at work here, with many being clearly illustrated by snakeweasel's comments. Here are a few more:

    1. Collisions are more likely when vehicles moving in opposing directions cross paths. In other words... at intersections.

    2. Most intersections take place on "low speed" roads (i.e., 45 mph or less).

    3. Side impact collisions are brutal on the body, which is why there have been so many improvements in side impact protection (including curtain air bags) and such a focus on this area.

    4. Modern vehicles are made to protect people from their own idiocy. As such, a vehicle will absorb quite a beating, including speed, and still allow a person to walk away (or survive) the crash. It doesn't matter the level or type of injury; if nobody dies, it is not a fatality.

    So, take it all together, and the rates really have nothing to do with speed - they have to do with the type of crashes. Yes, speed creates force and all things being equal, you are more likely to die in an identical crash at 80 mph than 45 mph. But, that is just probability... you could very well survive both crashes just fine. Possibly. But, consider if you were T-boned (a very common crash at intersections) at 45 mph in a brand new 5-star car with curtains. You might live with or without serious injury. Take that same crash with the vehicle hitting you at 80 mph... well, yeah, good luck. :surprise:

    So, are you more likely to die by driving faster? No. In a crash, are you more likely to die, all other things being equal, if the force of the crash is greater? Yes.

    Please, try not to dismiss points of view because one person's shade of grey is not the same as the other's; it might just be an issue of lighting.... ;)
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,347
    like they say, you can't repeal the laws of physics.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • jimbresjimbres Member Posts: 2,025
    From where I'm sitting, it looks as if you & rdub7 are talking about 2 different things.

    He's talking about the role of speed as a causal factor - to what extent does speed (as opposed to driver inattention, driver impairment, weather conditions, mechanical problems, road conditions etc.) cause the accident to happen in the 1st place?

    You're talking about the effect of speed on the severity of the accident.

    He's looking at the beginning of a chain of events that might end with a fatality. You're looking at the end of that chain.

    You're both correct, more or less. You're right - hitting a tree at 65 mph is much more likely to kill than hitting the same tree at 15 mph.

    And he's right - speed, by itself, doesn't cause accidents. Many years ago, Car & Driver ran a terrific article that made this point convincingly. If it's anywhere on the Web, I can't find it, so I'm relying on memory. As I recall, the author's argument was that dangerous driving is driving in disregard of current conditions: road, weather, vehicle capabilities, etc.

    So driving a poorly maintained car at 35 mph in bad weather while on cold medication that dulls your responses is much more dangerous than driving 100 mph in a well-maintained car designed for that speed, in good weather with excellent visibility, on a dry, well kept-up road, in light traffic & while not impaired in any way.

    In short, bad driving decisions cause accidents. How fast you're going after you've made that bad decision will have something to do with your survival.
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    No its not a strech for me. 80% of fatalities at 45 MPH or less is meaningless unless we know how much driving is done at 45 MPH or less.

    If 80% of fatalities are at speeds of 45 MPH or less means that 20% of fatalities are speed related then one could say that if 1% of fatalities are at speeds of 5 MPH or less than 99% of fatalities are due to speed. Or since 100% of fatalities are at speeds of225MPH or less than no fatalities are caused by speed.

    Your conclusion is flawed as it is based on an assumption that an arbitrary speed. This is ignoring the amount of driving above or below that speed.

    What I am looking for is X% of fatalities are at or below a certain speed and Y% of driving is done at or below that same speed. Only then is the stat meaningful.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    OK you don't have any studies just opinion. Can you address this without saying its financial or political?

    http://ec.europa.eu/transport/wcm/road_safety/erso/knowledge/Content/20_speed/sp- eed_is_a_central_issue_in_road_safety.htm

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    edited January 2011
    I am not seeing anything different from you. Where are those studies?

    Am I wrong in saying it is financial or political? Studies in this subject usually are funded by insurance crooks or lazy public sector revenuers. just like that vague (and if you read it, quite ancient using endless data that's 15-20 years old) EC material that has nothing to do anything here.

    Speed limits rise, deaths don't.

    Also funny that the European bureaucrat body would use American sourced data for the page you link, but nobody looks to the EU if they want to find responsible and sustainable governance.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    This would be right down Tidester's alley. :sick:

    R [per mile driven] ~ (exposure )* (accident rate) * ( kill factor)

    = (1 + d/v) * (c*v + d*(v - u)^2)* (1 - exp(-v/30))

    A mathematical analysis of the "speed kills" arguments
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,347
    speeds limits aren't the relevant speed factor to look at. Actual speed is.

    consider that no one drives the SL on the highway (or any road for that matter!) where I am, raising or lowering it doesn't really change much.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited January 2011
    Actually your conclusion about MY conclusions is what is FLAWED. I am ignoring nothing that is relevant. Again you can search or google just as I can. Here is one to start you off and has the some to a lot of the information we have been discussing http://www.nhtsa.gov/

    http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2010/feb/10/speed-related-traffic-fatalities-gro- - ssly-by/

    ..."A check of any state’s own data generally shows speed as a factor in about 10 percent of fatal crashes. Please read “Crash statistics often mislead,” (June 30, 2007, at gosanangelo.com). These figures — which are already exaggerated — are then further inflated by NHTSA spin doctors."...
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    People do exceed the limits, but I think percentage wise rather than in raw speed. If some of the scaredy-cats out there who have been allowed too much power were able to get some dreamy 45mph national speed limit, people wouldn't speed to the same point they would if the national limit was something like 75. They might all go 10-20% higher though. 10-15% is my usual cut-off, to keep the revenue enforcers from looking at me :shades:
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    See the link in MSG # 15788 for the ARTIFICIAL speed LIMITS problem.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    Watching about 10 episodes of Ice Road Truckers driving in India, the 3 drivers who went there to drive trucks in cities, mountains said that there is one death every 4 minutes on India's roads. US death rate on roads much lower, but still unnecessary given our superior roads, mindset, safety features of vehicles sold in US. Many drivers in India appear very reckless.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    So wasn't it you that wanted to know the results of crashing into a wall at high to higher speed? BUT BUT BUT... Also there was another post that said something along the lines about basic physics etc etc?
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited January 2011
    http://ibiblio.org/rdu/nhtsalie.html

    ..."A report by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety shows the fatality rate on the western autobahn has been virtually identical to the death rates on U.S. Interstates for over ten years"...

    http://www.gettingaroundgermany.info/autobahn.shtml
Sign In or Register to comment.