As is the "relaxing" line - IMNSHO, if the difference between 60 and 70 is the difference between relaxed driving and frantic scared driving, maybe the Prius and penalty box set should stick to state highways and surface streets.
Exactly.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Eh, that's common here, but easy to compensate for. Simply preplan your lane change as if your signal was on... and then, the moment you start to move into the other lane, flick the signal on as you switch. That way, there isn't any chance for the other driver to cut you off (and you ARE still using your signal).
My example is probably one of *THE* most common events around here. Where someone in the passing lane will be moving at a rapid clip until they approach another car in the right lane. To which they one on the left lane slows down to stay in the blind spot of the driver in the right lane... and to block both lanes of a 2-lane (each way) highway.
Sometimes, if you're behind the LLCer, they will (rarely) get over into the right lane... but if they do, they will *ALWAYS* speed up by 10-15 mph faster than the speed they were traveling in the passing lane.
IE: Travelling at 55 mph in the passing lane. You approach at 65 mph. They get over into the right lane and then accelerate to 70 mph.
And how can I determine that? Well, if you've got your cruise control set for 65 mph... and you approach their rear in the passing lane as if they were standing still; they've simply GOT to be moving slower than 65 mph. And when they get over and then first match your speed; eventually pulling away from you, then they've GOT to be going faster than 65 mph.
Sounds like western WA. I've never been to a place where more speed up while being passed, then back way off once you've most past. Happened to me just yesterday.
Doesn't impact me much in the modern car as a little blip of the throttle can move me far past...but in the old car, it gets to me as speed gains can be time consuming.
It's a fun opposition to areas where you pass people, then they pass you, then you pass them - all the while your cruise control is on.
"The money savings argument is kind of ridiculous. Money savings is a personal choice, anyway. " I agree completely. It's a personal choice to drive faster and spend more money on gas, just like it's a personal choice to buy a car on looks, appearance, etc. But people trying to pretend that driving slower on the highway doesn't save money on gas is just as ridiculous. I think some people feel it's not "macho" to drive the speed limit in the right lane and they feel more "manly" when they speed. Pretty much a high school mentality, but pretty common.
So are you saying you drove a consistent 49mph and then a consistent 67mph to get those MPG readings? If not, then meaningless. If the 49mph average speed for that MPG consisted of stop and go city/suburb driving and the 67mph average was highway cruising, then you really can't compare the two.
The real test is on your next highway trip, drive at 65mph for at least 100 miles and then at 80 for at least 100 miles and note the difference. Of course some cars will have less MPG variability at higher speeds depending on aerodynamics.
Another speed/mpg factor is not racing off the line after stop lights/stop signs because that also wastes gas. Now if I'm in a hurry to get somewhere, then I'll just drive faster, but if not, then I do find it more relaxing driving with the cruise control on at 60mph in the right lane. I've had a Mazda RX-7 and Prius and in 99% of driving situations either car is just as "fun" to drive. Of course on windy/hilly back roads the RX-7 is much more fun but on the 99% of city/suburb/highway driving in an RX-7 is actually painful because the roads are so boring. I'd much rather have a boring car for the 99% of time I'm on boring roads. Maybe that's why some drivers here seem so frustrated...they're driving "spirited" cars on such boring roads so everything around them irrates them.
I've actually driven through Texas a few times, but never on a toll road. But then if I did have a need to drive 90mph on a regular basis, then I'd try to get a car that got good MPG at high speeds. From what I've read, Jetta/Golf TDI manuals get pretty good high speed MPG. People live in different parts of the country, so what's good in New Jersey, Ohio, Texas or California won't all match, especially when you throw in the rural/urban/suburban mix.
If there was no traffic on the road driving 100 would be just as relaxing to me as driving 55.
OK, wait a minute there. You have consistently maintained that people driving fast are at a heightened sensory condition vs. slower drivers, hence driving faster is safer. Now you say that driving 100 is just as relaxing as driving 55.
Those are average speeds over the distance covered, I'm sure. Traffic being what it is (especially over there in fintail's neck of the Northwest), it would be nearly impossible to maintain steady speed for those distances to make that comparison. He's comparing averages, which is every bit as valid (and much more practical information) than a steady-speed mileage run.
Key problem groups are the typical under 30 year old thrillseekers on overpowered supersports bikes, and retirement aged boomer types on huge heavy cruisers. Both make up virtually all crashes I see here.
In my area, seems that bikers on county, state, US roads/routes generally drive responsibly. Whether individuals, or groups of bikers. Crashes reported in the newspaper commonly are a 4-wheeler making a left turn in front of an oncoming bike.
Some of the bikers on interstates are crazy. Passing between lanes, some going maybe 20-30 or more over the limit.
One common trait of Harley type bikers is they like to make noise driving through small towns or at gas stations.
Through the years here in northern Illinois, you can count on young men motorcycle drivers to have their girl friends/wives as passengers and poorly dressed from May thru September. These women typically have on shorts, sneakers, halter top, no helmet. Even a low-speed spill will likely result in very nasty skin abrasions, ripped off skin and worse. Incredibly dumb.
"comparing averages, which is every bit as valid (and much more practical information) than a steady-speed mileage run"
If you can provide the standard deviation, then you might have something useful, but just the average speed over a distance with an average MPG tells you nothing. If you read the post about speed and MPG, that's only for highway driving...comparing MPH between 55-80mph and the loss of MPG. You can't use for comparing speeds of 20-40mph thinking you'll see the MPG differences.
It the same when some people think that if you drive 100 miles averaging 40mpg and another 100 miles averaging 20mpg, than your average mpg over the 200 miles = 30mpg, when in reality it's 26.6mpg
Again, a driving style that's gradual on the gas pedal, not racing to the red lights, keeping the speed at the limit on highways and driving consistently on the highways all will produce better MPG and save money. Trying to justify the opposite just won't work.
If someone enters your travel lane and you hit them how is that your fault? Right of way laws should protect you there.
I know I'm way late in responding here, but I haven't been in this forum for awhile.
Usually the way these laws are, it depends on who hits whom, and where. If someone pulls out in front of you and you rear-end them, usually you're going to be found at fault. The argument, for better or worse, is that even though you had the right-of-way, you still had the duty to try and stop and avoid the accident. You had "last opportunity" to prevent the accident, or whatever it's called.
Now, if they pull out of their driveway but don't get all the way out, and you hit them on the side, chances are it's going to be their fault. And, if they pull out of their driveway as you're passing and they hit you, it's definitely going to be their fault. Unless their Daddy is a judge.
The slower speed was solely on state highways between Jacksonville and suburban ATL. The higher speed was interstates between Macon and Gainesville, with some slow speed city driving at the end to lower the average. On the faster example, sometimes I was at 80, sometimes at 30 - in the slower journey, sometimes I was stopped, sometimes I was going 70. Nice try though. Nobody drives a "consistent" speed on any journey, eventually you will have to slow down, stop, traffic conditions change, LLCs obstruct, etc. And once again, saving money on gas doesn't matter to everyone.
The credential-free psychobabble about being "macho" is nice too. Driving marginally faster isn't "macho", it is simply more efficient.
I can't average 80 where I live, none of the hybrid and penalty box-driving scaredy cats would dare go that fast, not to mention the revenue enforcement officer issue.
Nobody here has been an advocate of jackrabbit starts and sudden stops. Another red herring distraction? Seems to be a strategy among some.
I think people are irritated because boring people in boring cars won't get out of the way, and won't stick to the slower roads where they belong...hint hint
If loud pipes save lives, imaging what learning to ride that thing could do :shades:
The crazy stunters who eventually meet a bad ending are just natural selection at work. 2 lane highways here must be deadlier to bikers than interstates.
Again, a driving style that's gradual on the gas pedal, not racing to the red lights, keeping the speed at the limit on highways and driving consistently on the highways all will produce better MPG and save money. Trying to justify the opposite just won't work.
I'm not sure where your argument is trying to go.... Nobody stated the contrary. The counterpoints were simply that fuel economy doesn't necessarily vary as dramatically at different speeds, depending on the vehicle, as what that website presented, and saving fuel is not necessarily the most important factor for the driver.
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
"I think people are irritated because boring people in boring cars won't get out of the way, and won't stick to the slower roads where they belong...hint hint "
How is driving 75mph instead of 65 mph on an interstate any less boring? Driving on any interstate is boring regardless of speed...it's a flat straight roadway Going 55, 65, 75 or 85 on an interstate is all boring. If you're driving a corvette at 85mph on an interstate it's boring or in a prius doing 55 it's also boring. I've done both. To me doing it in the corvette was not only boring but frustrating because of all that wasted power under the hood that won't be used in 99.99% of driving.
So don't try to say "it's too boring" driving 65mph vs 75mph...either speed is boring :P My point is that going 60 vs 75 mph saves me money, so if I'm going to be bored on a straight, flat, boring interstate, then I might as well drive in such a way as to save money.
Another plus by going slower is that in the right lane while driving 60mph I won't have to worry about passing cars (of course for some of you, passing cars in the left lane is the ultimate form of excitement :P ). By not passing cars, it's easier to maintain a consistent speed, which also improves MPG.
Anyway, all of you can enjoy your higher-speed boring highway drives, while I'm saving money when I'm enjoying my lower speed boring highway drives, but yes I know that I'll be on the highway several minutes longer because of my speed, but I don't think we need to revisit the illogical speed/time/money discussion!
But how much money saved vs time? It is again all a personal decision. If I can get 30mpg at 70mph but 32mpg at 50mph, I am going to choose the faster speed. What is "illogical" is subjective.
I wish I lived in a place where 60 was the right lane. You can be in the left lane a lot at that speed, especially on 405, where the right lane often moves at 45-50. You'd love it here! Think of all the money saved
Thanks for the good wishes, and you can enjoy your turtle crawl - just stay in the lane where you belong, and maybe stick to scenic state highways as you have nowhere to go and all day to get there anyway :shades:
But how much money saved vs time? It is again all a personal decision. If I can get 30mpg at 70mph but 32mpg at 50mph, I am going to choose the faster speed. What is "illogical" is subjective.
Back in 2008, when gas prices were getting expensive, I remember driving my 2000 Intrepid up to PA to go to the Ford Show in Carlisle on one brutally hot June day. Just out of curiosity, I tried hypermiling it. No a/c (this was early in the morning, before it got hot). Tried to keep the speed around 55-60, which was hard to do, and I did get up to 65-70 once or twice. MPG on that run was 32.1 mpg, which I think is the best I ever got out of that car.
A few months later in October, I went up again, for the Fall Carlisle swap meet. This time I averaged more like 65-70 mph, with perhaps an occasional jaunt to 75 or 80. Flow of traffic, more or less. Fuel economy on that run was 30.82
The following week I went back up for the show in Hershey, PA. This time, I was running around 70-75 for the most part, and again getting up to 80 on occasion. This time around, 30.01.
So really, not a huge difference IMO. And going at those slow speeds like I did the first time around can actually be dangerous, when there's too much speed disparity between cars. Now, that first time I did it, everybody seemed to be going a bit slower, no doubt in reaction to gasoline that was approaching $4.00 per gallon for the first time. So, it wasn't as bad. But, now that people have gotten used to high gas prices and are driving faster, I'd be afraid to go that slow on my PA run.
Making that trip up for Hershey can be pretty adventurous too, as sometimes you'll get some old fossil who takes their Model-A or something similarly slow and putts along at 35-40 mph. :surprise:
I agree...if you're really only getting 2mpg more by going 55-60 vs 75mph, then I wouldn't worry about the MPG savings either. But from what I've read and experienced, most people will see a lot better MPG improvement that what you're seeing, but it does depend on the specific vehicle. That's the way statistics and averages work out.
I'm not sure where your argument is trying to go.... Nobody stated the contrary. The counterpoints were simply that fuel economy doesn't necessarily vary as dramatically at different speeds, depending on the vehicle, as what that website presented, and saving fuel is not necessarily the most important factor for the driver.
Overall, well stated.
I would only add that, in many modern models. say a BMW, Audi, Chrysler 300 or Lexus (there are many others) the fuel savings one might see are so small as to not be of any major importance to them.
Im not advocating speeding, but at least to me, going 60 on a 70 MPH Interstate highway just to get 32mpg .vs. 30.5 mpg, over the length of a 5-6 hour trip seems like poor justification for running 60. Now, if the mpg ratings were 32 .vs. 16, its a different story altogether... but in reality, it isn't.
Anymore between normal operating parameters, the car is designed to get as good mpg figures as possible. In a normal commute (09 TDI Jetta) with an average speed of 18 to 36 mpg (1.5 to .45 min) over 27 miles per trip we get between 39- 42 mpg. When cruising ( 90 mph or slightly less) without thought or fanfare (actually close to a no brainer) post 40-42 mpg. This is on a EPA rated vehicle of 29 C 40 H.
Now, we also get similar mpg results with a 03 Jetta TDI only (slightly) better range of 48-52 in both scenarios. A steady 90 mph will post 50 mpg. Any number of times I have run 584 miles in 6.25 hours for a 12.1 gal fuel stop and posted 48.26 mpg.
So yes the theory is great and all. However the real world gets ,.... in the way !? :shades:
Interesting, your mpg results aren't too far off what I posted - different cars, but the decrease in mpg with significant speed increase was not remarkable in either car.
In a couple days, I will take a small road trip in the E55 - I will average around 65mph, which will return around 25mpg - not unacceptable for a relatively old school gas swilling tuned V8. I'll keep proper lane positioning and wager I won't cut anyone off or obstruct anyone, either. I am usually considerate, until horn honking time comes around :shades:
My afternoon commute option C is an average speed of ~15mph (seriously) and mileage of around 15mpg. Negligent traffic controls are a big part of that.
Bikes aren't invisible to radar or laser clocking, but they are smaller targets.
If you're pointing a radar gun at a bike off in the distance, and the backdrop behind it is a semi, which is being targeted?
It's actually why some "less conservative" bikers like to shoot and scoot through lots of traffic, because that traffic gives them quite a bit of "cover".
Riding for so many years, I learned that the safest way to ride on an Interstate or limited access highway is to run slightly faster than the traffic flow... 1-3 mph. It keeps you from staying in blind spots very long, and it helps minimize getting rear ended.
The key is to not stay in one spot too long.
In my life, I guess I've ridden well over 150,000 miles and never been stopped for speeding.
Curious to learn who else in here has never (yet) gotten a speeding ticket besides me - Buehler?
I've never got ANY ticket since I moved to US 13 years ago. Before that, I drove over about 2 decades, and had several tickets for various violations, but just a few. In those rare instances when I was pulled over and fined, I can swear the police officer was NEVER wrong; when I was pulled over, it always was for a good reason. I have no accidents, only a few minor scratches during my first year and two minor scratches (neither one was my fault) in the following 3 decades.
Having said that, I drive mostly cautiously and respectfully, but almost always 15-20 over the speed limit.
Heh, that's a pretty big margin over the speed limit. I'm on the road this week and was going 75 in a 70 on the Interstate yesterday. Sure enough, an on-coming Michigan state trooper signaled and did a U-Turn in the median and pulled out after I went by.
He didn't do anything but exit in a mile. Guess he was frying other fish. Got my attention though.
I've had a few Troopers follow me for several miles during winter months when I'm going ~60 in 55 zones, but never pulled over. I guess they were hoping I'd slip a tire or something and they'd get to nab me for "driving too fast for conditions," but no such luck for them.
One time, at about midnight - maybe 1am (coming home from broomball), I passed a Trooper who was going about ten under (~45 mph), driving an Expedition with all-season on it. I was in my Forester with studless winter tires going 58 or 59. Sure enough, the fella speeds up to match me, follows me all the rest of the way toward my house (about eight miles), then keeps going down the main highway when I turned off to my local feeder road. But, he actually slowed behind me (even though there were two lanes) as I slowed to make my left turn, then slowly drove by as I turned.
Goofy. It was reasonably slick that evening, so it would have been quite hilarious for me if he would have slid a bit trying to keep up.
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
Thank heavens I have a short commute, and that probably the majority of my annual mileage comes from faster cruising. A Volt or Leaf would be an even better commuter for me, as I'd never need a drop of gas. Fortunately. I don't want a commuter car and a nice car, one modern car is enough as there's also an old relic in the stable. A low displacement mosquito of a bike or a motorized skateboard has more appeal to me than a Prius :shades:
As I pulled out to pass in a #1 of 4 lanes I caught sight of a VERY fast moving motorbike, closing in the #1 lane. To me, that was the cue to "keep right except to pass" as two slow pokes going 80 mph in front of me were probably clueless . As the motorbike closed on me in the now #2 lane, I could make out it was a M/C LEO. It overtook me and moved into my lane app 3 ft in front of my drivers fender, presumably to pass the two clueless folks going 80 mph in the #1 lane !! It had no front code lights, but did have rear code lights. Funny how they both slammed on the brakes as soon as they realized it was a CHP on a M/C.
Would have been even more amusing if he would slid off the road and ditched it while trying to intimidate you :shades: But nah, I am sure he was out there to keep things safe, not make money come in.
A few times in my driving career, I've been speeding and aware of it (thinking it's not enough to warrant an extra tax/ticket), cop comes out from the trap, lights blazing, my blood boils as I think I am about to get pulled over, and he zooms past and nabs someone else or just keeps going.
The thing is, everyone has a different speed to which they are comfortable driving at for a particular road.
Being forced to drive faster than it is frightening to many... while driving slower than that speed is boring.
And to solve that problem with the minimum of fuss and aggrevation, slower traffic must keep right.
Or in other words, 'if you ain't passing the car on the right... get behind 'em!'
I mean, it's not like you'll rear-end 'em if you do get over; cause that'd imply that your speed is GREATER than the car on the right that you slotted behind. Which means you were passing.
But how much money saved vs time? It is again all a personal decision. If I can get 30mpg at 70mph but 32mpg at 50mph,
OK. Cite some links that have evidence of your claims. Seems like the high speed drivers will try any argument to discredit Al Gore's call for conservation of energy.
I was going cross state yesterday from Grand Rapids to Port Huron. Not a lot of traffic on that interstate generally I guess. People were pretty good to pass and move over. A couple of times I had to flip off the cruise control when a truck passed another one as I was approaching. The truck speed is 60 but most seemed to be going 5 to 7 over that.
Guess I could have gone faster but had plenty of time and I liked getting over 26mpg on the last tank by not hammering it, although most of that tank was on 55mph roads. Camping without the canoe or bikes too, so pretty light load in the van for a change.
Had one woman speed up in a merge situation so that the entering car had to slow to get on the Interstate. Oh, wait, that was my wife hitting the gas. I refrained from telling her to chill. :shades:
No, it didn't bother me that much, but I do think that one in particular was trying to intimidate. Impaired driving (alcohol) is a huge issue around here, so I always know that the patrol cars are going to be on heightened awareness from about 11pm through 3am (or later), so if I'm out during those hours I do cut them a little slack.
I would think, though, that after a mile or two it would be pretty obvious that I wasn't a viable target.
I've also experienced the situation you shared... in Canada! It was the strangest thing, too, because I was on a four lane divided highway outside Kamloops on my way to Helix, Oregon, in my 1969 Chevy C20 pickup.... going 60-65 (mph) in a 110 (km/h) zone (for optimized fuel/time economy reasons, in case Bob was wondering! ) I'd been driving this speed since Alaska, basically, so there was no reason to think I would ever get pulled over for speeding.
This particular Mounty was stationed at the base of a large saddle (steep downhill curving up into another long uphill stretch). Now, I saw a car parked down there and someone standing next to it, so I moved over into the left lane of what seemed like a basically empty road as a safety measure. Gravity took the truck somewhat faster than I typically drove it, probably up to about 70 mph (which, I think, is little faster than 110 km/h).
When I approached, this guy just starts walking out into the middle of the highway, pointing at me. I didn't know what to think, so I slowed, moved even further left so as not to hit the fool, and continued on by. As I approached/passed, I realized it was an officer (car was brown, dressed in brown, in southern BC in July... which is ALSO BROWN! :confuse: ). As I started thinking that maybe he was pulling me over, despite the crazy and odd method for doing so, I looked in my rearview and saw a little red sports coupe right on my butt.
Oh, hahah; I guess that dude was the target.... I'm glad he didn't rear end me! He must have been flying, because he wasn't there a few moments earlier when I first took the left lane. But, he did pull over and I'm sure he received a handsome ticket.
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
Best "fun" drive i ever had in Texas was creeping along a dirt back road at 15 miles an hour, occasionally scrapping the oil pan on the odd rock, and serendipitously running into a hot spring campground operation in the middle of nowhere, somewhere between Big Bend NP and Marfa.
My wife thinks it'd be fun to have a Prius and play with all the dashboard gizmos.
"My wife thinks it'd be fun to have a Prius and play with all the dashboard gizmos. "
I suspect a lot of Prius dawdlers are doing exactly this. They are hypermiling it via the readouts, or are simply playing with the buttons. Please keep her off the public roads
Sounds like the taxman was more dangerous than the speeders. Funny how that works. Also funny that it was in BC - I remember back in the late 90s some of the fastest suburban freeway traffic I had seen was in the vallry east of Vancouver - there'd often be people moving at 85++, no enforcement.
The mistaken identity thing has happened to me a few times, mostly on city streets.
Comments
Exactly.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
My example is probably one of *THE* most common events around here. Where someone in the passing lane will be moving at a rapid clip until they approach another car in the right lane. To which they one on the left lane slows down to stay in the blind spot of the driver in the right lane... and to block both lanes of a 2-lane (each way) highway.
Sometimes, if you're behind the LLCer, they will (rarely) get over into the right lane... but if they do, they will *ALWAYS* speed up by 10-15 mph faster than the speed they were traveling in the passing lane.
IE: Travelling at 55 mph in the passing lane. You approach at 65 mph. They get over into the right lane and then accelerate to 70 mph.
And how can I determine that? Well, if you've got your cruise control set for 65 mph... and you approach their rear in the passing lane as if they were standing still; they've simply GOT to be moving slower than 65 mph. And when they get over and then first match your speed; eventually pulling away from you, then they've GOT to be going faster than 65 mph.
Yeah, maybe I need to be more aggressive on the lane changes, vs. the signal-first-then-change-lanes approach.
Doesn't impact me much in the modern car as a little blip of the throttle can move me far past...but in the old car, it gets to me as speed gains can be time consuming.
It's a fun opposition to areas where you pass people, then they pass you, then you pass them - all the while your cruise control is on.
If there was no traffic on the road driving 100 would be just as relaxing to me as driving 55.
So are you saying you drove a consistent 49mph and then a consistent 67mph to get those MPG readings? If not, then meaningless. If the 49mph average speed for that MPG consisted of stop and go city/suburb driving and the 67mph average was highway cruising, then you really can't compare the two.
The real test is on your next highway trip, drive at 65mph for at least 100 miles and then at 80 for at least 100 miles and note the difference. Of course some cars will have less MPG variability at higher speeds depending on aerodynamics.
Another speed/mpg factor is not racing off the line after stop lights/stop signs because that also wastes gas. Now if I'm in a hurry to get somewhere, then I'll just drive faster, but if not, then I do find it more relaxing driving with the cruise control on at 60mph in the right lane. I've had a Mazda RX-7 and Prius and in 99% of driving situations either car is just as "fun" to drive. Of course on windy/hilly back roads the RX-7 is much more fun but on the 99% of city/suburb/highway driving in an RX-7 is actually painful because the roads are so boring. I'd much rather have a boring car for the 99% of time I'm on boring roads. Maybe that's why some drivers here seem so frustrated...they're driving "spirited" cars on such boring roads so everything around them irrates them.
OK, wait a minute there. You have consistently maintained that people driving fast are at a heightened sensory condition vs. slower drivers, hence driving faster is safer. Now you say that driving 100 is just as relaxing as driving 55.
Which is it?
Traffic being what it is (especially over there in fintail's neck of the Northwest), it would be nearly impossible to maintain steady speed for those distances to make that comparison.
He's comparing averages, which is every bit as valid (and much more practical information) than a steady-speed mileage run.
They are as meaningless as CNN polls.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
In my area, seems that bikers on county, state, US roads/routes generally drive responsibly. Whether individuals, or groups of bikers. Crashes reported in the newspaper commonly are a 4-wheeler making a left turn in front of an oncoming bike.
Some of the bikers on interstates are crazy. Passing between lanes, some going maybe 20-30 or more over the limit.
One common trait of Harley type bikers is they like to make noise driving through small towns or at gas stations.
Are the bikes invisibile to radar or laser clocking? The way some ride, they must be...
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If you can provide the standard deviation, then you might have something useful, but just the average speed over a distance with an average MPG tells you nothing. If you read the post about speed and MPG, that's only for highway driving...comparing MPH between 55-80mph and the loss of MPG. You can't use for comparing speeds of 20-40mph thinking you'll see the MPG differences.
It the same when some people think that if you drive 100 miles averaging 40mpg and another 100 miles averaging 20mpg, than your average mpg over the 200 miles = 30mpg, when in reality it's 26.6mpg
Again, a driving style that's gradual on the gas pedal, not racing to the red lights, keeping the speed at the limit on highways and driving consistently on the highways all will produce better MPG and save money. Trying to justify the opposite just won't work.
I know I'm way late in responding here, but I haven't been in this forum for awhile.
Usually the way these laws are, it depends on who hits whom, and where. If someone pulls out in front of you and you rear-end them, usually you're going to be found at fault. The argument, for better or worse, is that even though you had the right-of-way, you still had the duty to try and stop and avoid the accident. You had "last opportunity" to prevent the accident, or whatever it's called.
Now, if they pull out of their driveway but don't get all the way out, and you hit them on the side, chances are it's going to be their fault. And, if they pull out of their driveway as you're passing and they hit you, it's definitely going to be their fault. Unless their Daddy is a judge.
The credential-free psychobabble about being "macho" is nice too. Driving marginally faster isn't "macho", it is simply more efficient.
I can't average 80 where I live, none of the hybrid and penalty box-driving scaredy cats would dare go that fast, not to mention the revenue enforcement officer issue.
Nobody here has been an advocate of jackrabbit starts and sudden stops. Another red herring distraction? Seems to be a strategy among some.
I think people are irritated because boring people in boring cars won't get out of the way, and won't stick to the slower roads where they belong...hint hint
The crazy stunters who eventually meet a bad ending are just natural selection at work. 2 lane highways here must be deadlier to bikers than interstates.
I'm not sure where your argument is trying to go.... Nobody stated the contrary. The counterpoints were simply that fuel economy doesn't necessarily vary as dramatically at different speeds, depending on the vehicle, as what that website presented, and saving fuel is not necessarily the most important factor for the driver.
How is driving 75mph instead of 65 mph on an interstate any less boring? Driving on any interstate is boring regardless of speed...it's a flat straight roadway Going 55, 65, 75 or 85 on an interstate is all boring. If you're driving a corvette at 85mph on an interstate it's boring or in a prius doing 55 it's also boring. I've done both. To me doing it in the corvette was not only boring but frustrating because of all that wasted power under the hood that won't be used in 99.99% of driving.
So don't try to say "it's too boring" driving 65mph vs 75mph...either speed is boring :P My point is that going 60 vs 75 mph saves me money, so if I'm going to be bored on a straight, flat, boring interstate, then I might as well drive in such a way as to save money.
Another plus by going slower is that in the right lane while driving 60mph I won't have to worry about passing cars (of course for some of you, passing cars in the left lane is the ultimate form of excitement :P ). By not passing cars, it's easier to maintain a consistent speed, which also improves MPG.
Anyway, all of you can enjoy your higher-speed boring highway drives, while I'm saving money when I'm enjoying my lower speed boring highway drives, but yes I know that I'll be on the highway several minutes longer because of my speed, but I don't think we need to revisit the illogical speed/time/money discussion!
I wish I lived in a place where 60 was the right lane. You can be in the left lane a lot at that speed, especially on 405, where the right lane often moves at 45-50. You'd love it here! Think of all the money saved
Thanks for the good wishes, and you can enjoy your turtle crawl - just stay in the lane where you belong, and maybe stick to scenic state highways as you have nowhere to go and all day to get there anyway :shades:
With DC traffic it's option C, 26mpg at close to 0mph. :sick:
Back in 2008, when gas prices were getting expensive, I remember driving my 2000 Intrepid up to PA to go to the Ford Show in Carlisle on one brutally hot June day. Just out of curiosity, I tried hypermiling it. No a/c (this was early in the morning, before it got hot). Tried to keep the speed around 55-60, which was hard to do, and I did get up to 65-70 once or twice. MPG on that run was 32.1 mpg, which I think is the best I ever got out of that car.
A few months later in October, I went up again, for the Fall Carlisle swap meet. This time I averaged more like 65-70 mph, with perhaps an occasional jaunt to 75 or 80. Flow of traffic, more or less. Fuel economy on that run was 30.82
The following week I went back up for the show in Hershey, PA. This time, I was running around 70-75 for the most part, and again getting up to 80 on occasion. This time around, 30.01.
So really, not a huge difference IMO. And going at those slow speeds like I did the first time around can actually be dangerous, when there's too much speed disparity between cars. Now, that first time I did it, everybody seemed to be going a bit slower, no doubt in reaction to gasoline that was approaching $4.00 per gallon for the first time. So, it wasn't as bad. But, now that people have gotten used to high gas prices and are driving faster, I'd be afraid to go that slow on my PA run.
Making that trip up for Hershey can be pretty adventurous too, as sometimes you'll get some old fossil who takes their Model-A or something similarly slow and putts along at 35-40 mph. :surprise:
Overall, well stated.
I would only add that, in many modern models. say a BMW, Audi, Chrysler 300 or Lexus (there are many others) the fuel savings one might see are so small as to not be of any major importance to them.
Im not advocating speeding, but at least to me, going 60 on a 70 MPH Interstate highway just to get 32mpg .vs. 30.5 mpg, over the length of a 5-6 hour trip seems like poor justification for running 60. Now, if the mpg ratings were 32 .vs. 16, its a different story altogether... but in reality, it isn't.
Some autos have 8 ratios now, so they can lower RPMs waaaay down at high speeds. CVTs also have a very wide range of gearing.
I heard the new Outback can go nearly 80mph at just 2000 or so rpm. That sure helps.
Of course rolling resistance decreases linearly, while aero resistance increases in a non-linear manner, so you still give up something.
Now, we also get similar mpg results with a 03 Jetta TDI only (slightly) better range of 48-52 in both scenarios. A steady 90 mph will post 50 mpg. Any number of times I have run 584 miles in 6.25 hours for a 12.1 gal fuel stop and posted 48.26 mpg.
So yes the theory is great and all. However the real world gets ,.... in the way !? :shades:
In a couple days, I will take a small road trip in the E55 - I will average around 65mph, which will return around 25mpg - not unacceptable for a relatively old school gas swilling tuned V8. I'll keep proper lane positioning and wager I won't cut anyone off or obstruct anyone, either. I am usually considerate, until horn honking time comes around :shades:
If you're pointing a radar gun at a bike off in the distance, and the backdrop behind it is a semi, which is being targeted?
It's actually why some "less conservative" bikers like to shoot and scoot through lots of traffic, because that traffic gives them quite a bit of "cover".
Riding for so many years, I learned that the safest way to ride on an Interstate or limited access highway is to run slightly faster than the traffic flow... 1-3 mph. It keeps you from staying in blind spots very long, and it helps minimize getting rear ended.
The key is to not stay in one spot too long.
In my life, I guess I've ridden well over 150,000 miles and never been stopped for speeding.
Curious to learn who else in here has never (yet) gotten a speeding ticket besides me - Buehler?
I've never got ANY ticket since I moved to US 13 years ago. Before that, I drove over about 2 decades, and had several tickets for various violations, but just a few. In those rare instances when I was pulled over and fined, I can swear the police officer was NEVER wrong; when I was pulled over, it always was for a good reason. I have no accidents, only a few minor scratches during my first year and two minor scratches (neither one was my fault) in the following 3 decades.
Having said that, I drive mostly cautiously and respectfully, but almost always 15-20 over the speed limit.
He didn't do anything but exit in a mile. Guess he was frying other fish. Got my attention though.
One time, at about midnight - maybe 1am (coming home from broomball), I passed a Trooper who was going about ten under (~45 mph), driving an Expedition with all-season on it. I was in my Forester with studless winter tires going 58 or 59. Sure enough, the fella speeds up to match me, follows me all the rest of the way toward my house (about eight miles), then keeps going down the main highway when I turned off to my local feeder road. But, he actually slowed behind me (even though there were two lanes) as I slowed to make my left turn, then slowly drove by as I turned.
Goofy. It was reasonably slick that evening, so it would have been quite hilarious for me if he would have slid a bit trying to keep up.
As I pulled out to pass in a #1 of 4 lanes I caught sight of a VERY fast moving motorbike, closing in the #1 lane. To me, that was the cue to "keep right except to pass" as two slow pokes going 80 mph in front of me were probably clueless . As the motorbike closed on me in the now #2 lane, I could make out it was a M/C LEO. It overtook me and moved into my lane app 3 ft in front of my drivers fender, presumably to pass the two clueless folks going 80 mph in the #1 lane !! It had no front code lights, but did have rear code lights. Funny how they both slammed on the brakes as soon as they realized it was a CHP on a M/C.
A few times in my driving career, I've been speeding and aware of it (thinking it's not enough to warrant an extra tax/ticket), cop comes out from the trap, lights blazing, my blood boils as I think I am about to get pulled over, and he zooms past and nabs someone else or just keeps going.
Being forced to drive faster than it is frightening to many... while driving slower than that speed is boring.
And to solve that problem with the minimum of fuss and aggrevation, slower traffic must keep right.
Or in other words, 'if you ain't passing the car on the right... get behind 'em!'
I mean, it's not like you'll rear-end 'em if you do get over; cause that'd imply that your speed is GREATER than the car on the right that you slotted behind. Which means you were passing.
There was one time on I-95, where my average fuel economy was 12mpg after driving 37 miles.
OK. Cite some links that have evidence of your claims. Seems like the high speed drivers will try any argument to discredit Al Gore's call for conservation of energy.
Nothing political about it.
Guess I could have gone faster but had plenty of time and I liked getting over 26mpg on the last tank by not hammering it, although most of that tank was on 55mph roads. Camping without the canoe or bikes too, so pretty light load in the van for a change.
Had one woman speed up in a merge situation so that the entering car had to slow to get on the Interstate. Oh, wait, that was my wife hitting the gas. I refrained from telling her to chill. :shades:
I would think, though, that after a mile or two it would be pretty obvious that I wasn't a viable target.
I've also experienced the situation you shared... in Canada! It was the strangest thing, too, because I was on a four lane divided highway outside Kamloops on my way to Helix, Oregon, in my 1969 Chevy C20 pickup.... going 60-65 (mph) in a 110 (km/h) zone (for optimized fuel/time economy reasons, in case Bob was wondering!
This particular Mounty was stationed at the base of a large saddle (steep downhill curving up into another long uphill stretch). Now, I saw a car parked down there and someone standing next to it, so I moved over into the left lane of what seemed like a basically empty road as a safety measure. Gravity took the truck somewhat faster than I typically drove it, probably up to about 70 mph (which, I think, is little faster than 110 km/h).
When I approached, this guy just starts walking out into the middle of the highway, pointing at me. I didn't know what to think, so I slowed, moved even further left so as not to hit the fool, and continued on by. As I approached/passed, I realized it was an officer (car was brown, dressed in brown, in southern BC in July... which is ALSO BROWN! :confuse: ). As I started thinking that maybe he was pulling me over, despite the crazy and odd method for doing so, I looked in my rearview and saw a little red sports coupe right on my butt.
Oh, hahah; I guess that dude was the target.... I'm glad he didn't rear end me! He must have been flying, because he wasn't there a few moments earlier when I first took the left lane. But, he did pull over and I'm sure he received a handsome ticket.
OK, the above comment completely obliterated what little credibility you might have had...
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Best "fun" drive i ever had in Texas was creeping along a dirt back road at 15 miles an hour, occasionally scrapping the oil pan on the odd rock, and serendipitously running into a hot spring campground operation in the middle of nowhere, somewhere between Big Bend NP and Marfa.
My wife thinks it'd be fun to have a Prius and play with all the dashboard gizmos.
I suspect a lot of Prius dawdlers are doing exactly this. They are hypermiling it via the readouts, or are simply playing with the buttons. Please keep her off the public roads
The mistaken identity thing has happened to me a few times, mostly on city streets.