It is of course not political per se, but by some coincidence people with certain human traits (in your case, slowness, cluelessness, being a newcomer, higher formal education level) and people with certain political leanings are often the same people.
And one can find people with certain traits (slowness, cluelessness, established presence, middling to low education level) and certain political leanings that also go hand in hand. Bad driving spans all political identities.
Just as excellent alpine skiers can handle any slope, excellent drivers handle their traffic problems with ease and they don't [non-permissible content removed] about others.
Yes, good skier can handle any slope, but being on a bunny slope tightly packed with hundreds of clueless and often irresponsible beginners, although not a problem, is still a big annoyance.
I would rather say that different manners of bad driving result from different poor human qualities, which often go hand in hand with different bad political leanings.
Seattle's not much fun to drive in although the rest of the state is okay.
Definitely a blue city - can't go four miles without hitting a bridge or a "detour" around yet another lake. And lots of steep hills. Bottlenecks everywhere, lots of traffic, tough finding parking in lots of places.
Seems like we had the expert skier analogy before, which means I get to drag out Schwarzenegger breaking his leg just standing at the top of a run at Sun Valley again. :P
Guy on the radio today was griping; said he liked driving in the left lane but got pulled over and ticketed last year for doing that. Cop told him to keep right except when overtaking other vehicles.
Seattle in the city center area is what I sometimes call "both pedestrian and vehicle unfriendly", due to the bad roads/traffic/oarking/drivers, middling transit, aggressive bicyclists, etc.
Warms my heart to hear of (probable) LLCs being cited.
a bunny slope tightly packed with hundreds of clueless and often irresponsible beginners, although not a problem, is still a big annoyance.
Agree, which is why we stay on the higher side of the runs that are Black & Blue. It is also where we learned to ski by brail in the white outs on boiler plate. Last time on the bunny slope was with our 3 yr old grandgirl 11 years ago.
I can believe it. I am surprised it isn't higher, but for the relative size of the city, still impressive.
The Thursday thing is true too - doesn't seem like it was that way just a few years ago, but suddenly, Thursday afternoons have become disastrous. Last Thursday, my average evening commute speed was 12mph, and the drive took 70% longer than usual (tracking such stats helps increase my ire, no doubt). Luckily, it is a short drive.
which is why we stay on the higher side of the runs that are Black & Blue. It is also where we learned to ski by brail in the white outs on boiler plate.
Oh, yes, I actually took my family to blacks and blues to teach them skiing to avoid human herds. Well, I can chat about skiing long time, but if we do, Steve is going to banish us from here. So, closer to business: "You’ll be scared but there’s also a giddiness that comes with it, the kind you’d get by turning off your headlights while driving down a straight highway on a moonless night somewhere far outside the city." ("Skiing by Braille", Skiing Magazine (online, Sep. 2009))
How relevant is skiing to driving? I think, for those of us who see in driving some element of, if not sport, but at least of 'activity', skiing analogies are directly relevant. Whereas numerous others, for whom driving is a transfer from A to B while maximizing safety and minimizing expenses, probably don't even understand why all this talk about skiing.
I also think skiers are often more level-headed and risk-averse drivers: they don't need to prove themselves on the road; they can do it better on the slopes.
Might I suggest a healthy mix of the two. And no inverts! Says Ski Patrol Paul. And as we have to drive to get there, we will undoubtedly cross paths with someone inconsiderate.
I'll put on my flame suite before I say this, but I don't think he was as good as people thought.
One simple reason - he never really had a legend to compete with. Senna died when he was young, and ironically, that's one of the few times Shumacher passed him.
The legends all were part of great rivalries. Who was his rival?
Yep and this family has two broken legs and a blown out knee to prove your point. Not only is boarding more fun, it's safer. :shades:
Easy road trip tomorrow and the inconsiderate deer are moving this time of year. Not to mention there's a bull moose wandering around the highways in the western UP.
My kids wanted me to try it and I fell hard on my tail bone.
It still hurts. That was in Feb 2010.
Back on topic - no AWD/4WD, stay home or bum a ride from a friend. Hated getting stuck behind cars that couldn't climb the hill at the entrance. They had to wait for sand.
Kids are into twin tips last I looked. I switched to boarding when I was 48ish.
Tis a bit of a steep learning curve though. The drive to the closest hill now is completely flat, although you can get stuck in the parking lot if you try. Bit different from the 3,400' elevation gain twisting through 172 turns on the 16 mile drive to my last home hill. You'd always wind up behind some slow drivers, but they were usually good to use the slow vehicle pullouts.
If low real world actual speeds actually reduced accidents, then all of the slower residential and underposted arterial roadways would have lower accident rates than say... freeways, with their high speed limits. Why isn't that the case?
OK I know I have been away for a while and this is a somewhat older post but I feel the need to address this.
You are comparing apples to oranges here. The residential and arterial roads are typically stop and go with traffic lights spaced along the road. They also have traffic slowing down considerably to turn off the road as well as entering it at a considerably slow speed. You also have traffic making left turns across oncoming traffic and cross traffic on those residential and arterial roads. all of this you do not have on freeways.
Also on the freeways you usually have open shoulders that you don't always get on surface roads and oncoming traffic is separated by a barrier not just a line painted on the road as you have on surface roads.
In short the freeway is a much safer design than your residential and arterial roads. Having a safer design makes it safer despite having higher speeds. It does not mean that speed has no effect on safety.
Put a 65 MPH speed limit on those residential and arterial streets and you will see a rise in accidents.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
If your having issues with tailgaters, your probably one or more of the following:
I think it is a stretch to blame the tailgating on the one being tailgated. There is no excuse to tailgate regardless of what the person in front of them are doing.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
snakeweasel: Put a 65 MPH speed limit on those residential and arterial streets and you will see a rise in accidents.
Except that they have raised the speed limit to 75-85 mph on some interstates, and there has not been any consistent proof that it led to more accidents or fatalities.
The nation's death rate per 100 million miles traveled is at its lowest figure ever, and even the raw number of fatalities is at its lowest point in 60 years.
Worrying about people driving 75-80 mph on interstates is a waste of time, resources and energy. It's safe, it has been safe, and it's time to move on to more pressing matters.
I think it is a stretch to blame the tailgating on the one being tailgated. There is no excuse to tailgate regardless of what the person in front of them are doing.
There's no excuse for LLCing, impeding traffic, and other inconsiderate driving behaviors, but that doesn't stop people from doing it.
It is not much of a stretch, as I personally very rarely have an issue with tailgaters, and when I do on that rare occassion, I simply get the hell out of the way!
Really getting out of the way can diffuse a tailgating situation in a matter of less than 2 seconds. Within 3 seconds, they might not even be close to you anymore.
When I've been rear-ended in the past it had nothing to do with tailgating, but mere inattention and incompetence. One was a guy going forward before the light turned green. Another was a cop on a motorcycling splitting lanes/traffic and then deciding to take a sharp right behind me to get to the other side and not having the room to do it (crash bar swiped my back bumper; bike tips over).
I must admit I was more concerned about my back bumpers condition after that accident than the officer or his bike still struggling to get it upright on the right most lane of the freeway. :P Of course, I was going all of 0 MPH when he hit me, so I knew it was a very low speed hit (not much of a bump felt either).
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Put a 65 MPH speed limit on those residential and arterial streets and you will see a rise in accidents.
Highly doubtful. Do you have any valid statistics showing a roadway where speed limits were increased and accidents went up?
I'm looked at multiple traffic surveys, and when speed limits were increased the 85th percentile went up all of -1 MPH to +2 MPH. Hence, raising the speed limit doesn't change the actual speeds of traffic. People in TX keep commenting they were already going 85, it was about time the speed limits caught up to reality.
I seriously can't imagine higher speed limits increasing accidents; especially since higher speed limits don't have much of an effect on traffic. Now if your increasing speed limits by 15 or more, perhaps that'll have an effect; as it hasn't been done that I know of. Even spots that are 70 first went to 65 from 55, and then later on up to 70.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Except that they have raised the speed limit to 75-85 mph on some interstates, and there has not been any consistent proof that it led to more accidents or fatalities.
Back in the 70's when the speed limit was reduced to 55 mph there was a marked decrease in traffic fatalities. Those who supported higher speed limits said that the lower speed limits were not responsible for the lower fatality rates but rather safer designed roads and safer cars coming out on the roads. They were half right, it was safer roads and cars and lower limits.
But my point is the same things you claimed reduced traffic fatalities in the 70's are at work keeping traffic fatalities where they are now. Over the last several years there has been a greater occurrence of seat belt usage and more and better safety devices in cars that have been credited in saving hundreds if not thousands of lives a year. But the reductions in highway fatalities don't reflect the numbers saved by increased safety in cars and also in road design.
My point is that lives saved by better safety equipment in cars, more seat belt use can hide increases in fatalities due to other things.
Basic physics tells us that the faster a car goes the harder it is to control it, the longer it takes to stop it, the less maneuverable it becomes and the more force it has on impact.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Basic physics tells us that the faster a car goes the harder it is to control it, the longer it takes to stop it, the less maneuverable it becomes and the more force it has on impact.
So? Basic physics also tells us that the rate of acceleration during a fall is 9.8 meters per second squared.
With that kinda logic, we ought to ban bridges, cause we might fall off them, accelerating to our uncontrollable deaths.
Snake says: "Basic physics tells us that the faster a car goes the harder it is to control it, the longer it takes to stop it, the less maneuverable it becomes and the more force it has on impact."
Snake got it right.
I say mainly immature people/drivers want to excessively go over posted speed limits for their thrills. These people need to be taken off of the roads. They do not deserve the "privilege" of driving.
The stories blame cell phones, texting, deferred road work, more econoboxes, a warmer winter (more motorcycles and bicycles on the roads), more drug use and on the pedestrian side, more distracted walkers.
There's no excuse for LLCing, impeding traffic, and other inconsiderate driving behaviors, but that doesn't stop people from doing it.
Who said anything about any of those things? I was talking about tailgating. Even if there was say a LLC there still is no excuse for tailgating, drop back a bit, be patient and pass on the right when able. And just because people do one thing doesn't make another wrong thing right.
Remember two wrongs don't make a right. But two wrights make an airplane.
Really getting out of the way can diffuse a tailgating situation in a matter of less than 2 seconds. Within 3 seconds, they might not even be close to you anymore.
Two problems with that. First is that it's not always easy to get out of the way and sometimes it is near impossible. Secondly getting out of the way doesn't defuse the situation, it just passes it on.
Many times going to work I get tailgated, there really is no use moving over for him as there is a car 20 feet in front of me and there is a car about 20 feet in front of him and a car about 20 feet in front of him and so on for 30 or 40 miles. The tailgater is just bullying his way through traffic, a sort of "get out of my way I am more important than you." mentality as they try to shove their way through traffic.
The other day I was on a road that was one lane in each direction doing about 40 in a 35 (due to line of sight issues in many spots a little over 40 or so is most likely the safest speed). Some idiot came flying up behind me at what I estimate to have been between 55 and 60 (definitely an unsafe speed on this road) and sat so close to me that I couldn't see his headlights. Now along this road there is no shoulder and the foliage comes right up alongside the road so there was no getting out of his way.
Not only that if I was able to get out of his way he would be just inches away from the back bumper of the car that was a little bit ahead of me. The jerk was just being aggressive and it wasn't paying off. I waited to see if he would back off but he didn't. So I introduced him to speed limit land as a slowed down to a speed that was more a resemblance to the posted speed limit. This was more of a safety issue as it would allow me to stop in such away that the idiot behind me might be able to stop if I came around one of those blind curves and found myself on top of a stopped car that hit a deer (it happens on this road often) or some other danger.
Funny thing is even though I slowed down it really didn't slow us down. We still ended up at the light at the end of the road right behind the traffic we were following.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Not really, residential streets are not designed for high speed.
Also I have read many studies that show that at speeds over a certain speed (between 35 and 40 MPH depending on the study) risk of serious or fatal accidents increase by as much as 5% for each 1 MPH increase.
If you don't believe me find a nice residential street that has a curve that is easy to take at 30 MPH and take it at 75 MPH and tell me what happens.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I think that people who understand those basic facts are the better drivers because the understand how things like speed can affect their driving and act accordingly.
I have no problems with driving 80 MPH on I-88 between DeKalb, IL and Sterling/Rock Falls on a Sunday morning. Driving half that speed down North Michigan Ave in Chicago at 4:30 Friday afternoon is a #@&* death wish.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Winners today - woman in a Jetta going 50 in a free flowing 60, then took an off ramp at a snails pace. After I got around her, got tailgated by a sour greybeard in a Mustang with a dead foglight. So tempting to brake check. Then while on foot, saw 1000x phone yappers, 100x crosswalk crowders, and a woman in a Jeep who was holding a phone and the steering wheel with one hand, and eating from a bag of food with the other. No cops in the vicinity, revenues are too low. Must fight those dangers going 10 over on downhill stretches of open road. Speed kills!
Even if there was say a LLC there still is no excuse for tailgating, drop back a bit, be patient and pass on the right when able.
Absolutely wrong. This is the worst plan of action, to pass on the right (although all to often this is the last resort left). The most dangerous maneuver on the road, and besides, it denies LLC a chance to correct his mistake and leave the left lane.
Many times going to work I get tailgated, there really is no use moving over for him as there is a car 20 feet in front of me and there is a car about 20 feet in front of him and a car about 20 feet in front of him and so on for 30 or 40 miles. The tailgater is just bullying his way through traffic, a sort of "get out of my way I am more important than you" mentality as they try to shove their way through traffic.
Exactly. See this all the time and for many, many years on I90. I do move over when tailgater is a huge suv or big or jacked-up pickup truck. They just go on and bully the next car/vehicle in line. I think these people are mentally unstable and dangerous.
I've never seen why undertaking is such a big dangerous issue, but I live in a strange and idiotically slow area. Here, you have to pass on the right regularly, or you'll just be stuck behind another timid simp going 55 in the left lane, and who drops back a little more every time he/she is passed. Correcting the mistake seems to be a rarity for those types.
I've never seen why undertaking is such a big dangerous issue
Undertaking may come after overtaking (on the right)
I have to do it regularly too if I don't want to be seen as rude and boorish, blinking lights and honking. I consider it dangerous because 1) you enter another car's blind spot, and 2) generally nobody expects you there, and 3) LLC may have a last-moment change of heart and move to the right lane, exactly when you enter his blind spot, and 4) on multi-lane roads, usually there are even slower cars in the right-most lane, which often decide to cut you off exactly when you are in the middle of passing. I always try to make sure there is enough space for avoidance maneuver, just in case.
I flash lights on the highway now and then, but never honk - I doubt it would be heard over the blaring stereo and the phone conversation :sick:
But I undertake probably every time I am on the highway for more than 10 miles or so, out of necessity. I guess if I pass on the left, I am still in a blind spot, around here in this diverse environment, you never know what the other guy is going to do, and you also have not much better of an escape route - barrier or oncoming traffic. I'll roll the dice I guess. I also often speed up in a pass, just to get it over with.
If you don't believe me find a nice residential street that has a curve that is easy to take at 30 MPH and take it at 75 MPH and tell me what happens.
Your missing the point. If the residential street is not designed for high speeds, the cars won't go high speeds just because the speed limit is set too high.
If a residential street is designed for high speeds, they might want to consider rezoning and redistricting that land and bull dozing the houses (or you might thing twice about buying a house next to a high speed roadway (regardless if the sign is artificially underposted or not).
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Today an impatient car passed me on the right in traffic. A crow was on the shoulder but he was driving too fast so it failed to get out of the way in time, and ....
* SMACK *
He hit it. One dead bird. His windshield survived but must be a mess.
Jeez people. Why rush in traffic, to advance one car length, seriously?
If a residential street is designed for high speeds, they might want to consider rezoning and redistricting that land and bull dozing the houses (or you might thing twice about buying a house next to a high speed roadway (regardless if the sign is artificially underposted or not).
What a great solution! Just because a road is capable of a higher-than-posted speed, cities should bull-doze the houses along that road and relocate those families. :confuse: :mad: :sick:
There's lots of such roads in the city where I live. The main roads are all laid out in a grid pattern. The land is pretty flat. The main roads are 4 lane. So a case could be made that just about any road that is posted today in the 30-40 mph range could be increased by at least 10 mph, maybe more. So, why not do that? Because these roads are in a densely-populated city, with sidewalks lining them, lots of pedestrian and bike traffic, lots of kids and elderly folk near the roads, lots of driveways emptying onto the roads. So, let's bull doze thousands of homes so that drivers like you who are in a big hurry can drive faster.
Comments
Yes, good skier can handle any slope, but being on a bunny slope tightly packed with hundreds of clueless and often irresponsible beginners, although not a problem, is still a big annoyance.
Definitely a blue city - can't go four miles without hitting a bridge or a "detour" around yet another lake. And lots of steep hills. Bottlenecks everywhere, lots of traffic, tough finding parking in lots of places.
Seems like we had the expert skier analogy before, which means I get to drag out Schwarzenegger breaking his leg just standing at the top of a run at Sun Valley again. :P
Guy on the radio today was griping; said he liked driving in the left lane but got pulled over and ticketed last year for doing that. Cop told him to keep right except when overtaking other vehicles.
Warms my heart to hear of (probable) LLCs being cited.
Agree, which is why we stay on the higher side of the runs that are Black & Blue. It is also where we learned to ski by brail in the white outs on boiler plate. Last time on the bunny slope was with our 3 yr old grandgirl 11 years ago.
Seattle is within the Top 10 Worst for traffic. according to Yahoo today.
The Thursday thing is true too - doesn't seem like it was that way just a few years ago, but suddenly, Thursday afternoons have become disastrous. Last Thursday, my average evening commute speed was 12mph, and the drive took 70% longer than usual (tracking such stats helps increase my ire, no doubt). Luckily, it is a short drive.
Oh, yes, I actually took my family to blacks and blues to teach them skiing to avoid human herds. Well, I can chat about skiing long time, but if we do, Steve is going to banish us from here. So, closer to business: "You’ll be scared but there’s also a giddiness that comes with it, the kind you’d get by turning off your headlights while driving down a straight highway on a moonless night somewhere far outside the city." ("Skiing by Braille", Skiing Magazine (online, Sep. 2009))
How relevant is skiing to driving? I think, for those of us who see in driving some element of, if not sport, but at least of 'activity', skiing analogies are directly relevant. Whereas numerous others, for whom driving is a transfer from A to B while maximizing safety and minimizing expenses, probably don't even understand why all this talk about skiing.
I also think skiers are often more level-headed and risk-averse drivers: they don't need to prove themselves on the road; they can do it better on the slopes.
Really. Let's stick to snowboarding. :P
And no inverts! Says Ski Patrol Paul.
And as we have to drive to get there, we will undoubtedly cross paths with someone inconsiderate.
So drive. Ski. Post.
Not so excellent anymore. Last time he ran into the back of another driver and knocked him out plus himself. That was very inconsiderate.
Soooo disappointed. Thought we'd be top 3 at least!
One simple reason - he never really had a legend to compete with. Senna died when he was young, and ironically, that's one of the few times Shumacher passed him.
The legends all were part of great rivalries. Who was his rival?
Nothing as pathetic as someone great at one time not knowing when to quit for good. Two Michaels tried to come back and failed. Jordan and Schumacher.
Once in a while you'd see him in DC in his SL roadster, top down.
Easy road trip tomorrow and the inconsiderate deer are moving this time of year. Not to mention there's a bull moose wandering around the highways in the western UP.
My kids wanted me to try it and I fell hard on my tail bone.
It still hurts. That was in Feb 2010.
Back on topic - no AWD/4WD, stay home or bum a ride from a friend. Hated getting stuck behind cars that couldn't climb the hill at the entrance. They had to wait for sand.
Tis a bit of a steep learning curve though. The drive to the closest hill now is completely flat, although you can get stuck in the parking lot if you try. Bit different from the 3,400' elevation gain twisting through 172 turns on the 16 mile drive to my last home hill. You'd always wind up behind some slow drivers, but they were usually good to use the slow vehicle pullouts.
Got behind an old woman today, Lexus ES, going about 19 in a 30. It had the classy gold emblem package too. Discreet and elegant.
OK I know I have been away for a while and this is a somewhat older post but I feel the need to address this.
You are comparing apples to oranges here. The residential and arterial roads are typically stop and go with traffic lights spaced along the road. They also have traffic slowing down considerably to turn off the road as well as entering it at a considerably slow speed. You also have traffic making left turns across oncoming traffic and cross traffic on those residential and arterial roads. all of this you do not have on freeways.
Also on the freeways you usually have open shoulders that you don't always get on surface roads and oncoming traffic is separated by a barrier not just a line painted on the road as you have on surface roads.
In short the freeway is a much safer design than your residential and arterial roads. Having a safer design makes it safer despite having higher speeds. It does not mean that speed has no effect on safety.
Put a 65 MPH speed limit on those residential and arterial streets and you will see a rise in accidents.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I think it is a stretch to blame the tailgating on the one being tailgated. There is no excuse to tailgate regardless of what the person in front of them are doing.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Are you saying that if a board is a car, then skiing is akin to riding two motorbikes at once?
Except that they have raised the speed limit to 75-85 mph on some interstates, and there has not been any consistent proof that it led to more accidents or fatalities.
The nation's death rate per 100 million miles traveled is at its lowest figure ever, and even the raw number of fatalities is at its lowest point in 60 years.
Worrying about people driving 75-80 mph on interstates is a waste of time, resources and energy. It's safe, it has been safe, and it's time to move on to more pressing matters.
There's no excuse for LLCing, impeding traffic, and other inconsiderate driving behaviors, but that doesn't stop people from doing it.
It is not much of a stretch, as I personally very rarely have an issue with tailgaters, and when I do on that rare occassion, I simply get the hell out of the way!
Really getting out of the way can diffuse a tailgating situation in a matter of less than 2 seconds. Within 3 seconds, they might not even be close to you anymore.
When I've been rear-ended in the past it had nothing to do with tailgating, but mere inattention and incompetence. One was a guy going forward before the light turned green. Another was a cop on a motorcycling splitting lanes/traffic and then deciding to take a sharp right behind me to get to the other side and not having the room to do it (crash bar swiped my back bumper; bike tips over).
I must admit I was more concerned about my back bumpers condition after that accident than the officer or his bike still struggling to get it upright on the right most lane of the freeway. :P Of course, I was going all of 0 MPH when he hit me, so I knew it was a very low speed hit (not much of a bump felt either).
Highly doubtful. Do you have any valid statistics showing a roadway where speed limits were increased and accidents went up?
I'm looked at multiple traffic surveys, and when speed limits were increased the 85th percentile went up all of -1 MPH to +2 MPH. Hence, raising the speed limit doesn't change the actual speeds of traffic. People in TX keep commenting they were already going 85, it was about time the speed limits caught up to reality.
I seriously can't imagine higher speed limits increasing accidents; especially since higher speed limits don't have much of an effect on traffic. Now if your increasing speed limits by 15 or more, perhaps that'll have an effect; as it hasn't been done that I know of. Even spots that are 70 first went to 65 from 55, and then later on up to 70.
Back in the 70's when the speed limit was reduced to 55 mph there was a marked decrease in traffic fatalities. Those who supported higher speed limits said that the lower speed limits were not responsible for the lower fatality rates but rather safer designed roads and safer cars coming out on the roads. They were half right, it was safer roads and cars and lower limits.
But my point is the same things you claimed reduced traffic fatalities in the 70's are at work keeping traffic fatalities where they are now. Over the last several years there has been a greater occurrence of seat belt usage and more and better safety devices in cars that have been credited in saving hundreds if not thousands of lives a year. But the reductions in highway fatalities don't reflect the numbers saved by increased safety in cars and also in road design.
My point is that lives saved by better safety equipment in cars, more seat belt use can hide increases in fatalities due to other things.
Basic physics tells us that the faster a car goes the harder it is to control it, the longer it takes to stop it, the less maneuverable it becomes and the more force it has on impact.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
So? Basic physics also tells us that the rate of acceleration during a fall is 9.8 meters per second squared.
With that kinda logic, we ought to ban bridges, cause we might fall off them, accelerating to our uncontrollable deaths.
Snake got it right.
I say mainly immature people/drivers want to excessively go over posted speed limits for their thrills. These people need to be taken off of the roads. They do not deserve the "privilege" of driving.
Spike in Traffic Fatalities Puzzles Experts (Inside Line)
Economy is improving, more traffic deaths (UPI)
The stories blame cell phones, texting, deferred road work, more econoboxes, a warmer winter (more motorcycles and bicycles on the roads), more drug use and on the pedestrian side, more distracted walkers.
Who said anything about any of those things? I was talking about tailgating. Even if there was say a LLC there still is no excuse for tailgating, drop back a bit, be patient and pass on the right when able. And just because people do one thing doesn't make another wrong thing right.
Remember two wrongs don't make a right. But two wrights make an airplane.
Really getting out of the way can diffuse a tailgating situation in a matter of less than 2 seconds. Within 3 seconds, they might not even be close to you anymore.
Two problems with that. First is that it's not always easy to get out of the way and sometimes it is near impossible. Secondly getting out of the way doesn't defuse the situation, it just passes it on.
Many times going to work I get tailgated, there really is no use moving over for him as there is a car 20 feet in front of me and there is a car about 20 feet in front of him and a car about 20 feet in front of him and so on for 30 or 40 miles. The tailgater is just bullying his way through traffic, a sort of "get out of my way I am more important than you." mentality as they try to shove their way through traffic.
The other day I was on a road that was one lane in each direction doing about 40 in a 35 (due to line of sight issues in many spots a little over 40 or so is most likely the safest speed). Some idiot came flying up behind me at what I estimate to have been between 55 and 60 (definitely an unsafe speed on this road) and sat so close to me that I couldn't see his headlights. Now along this road there is no shoulder and the foliage comes right up alongside the road so there was no getting out of his way.
Not only that if I was able to get out of his way he would be just inches away from the back bumper of the car that was a little bit ahead of me. The jerk was just being aggressive and it wasn't paying off. I waited to see if he would back off but he didn't. So I introduced him to speed limit land as a slowed down to a speed that was more a resemblance to the posted speed limit. This was more of a safety issue as it would allow me to stop in such away that the idiot behind me might be able to stop if I came around one of those blind curves and found myself on top of a stopped car that hit a deer (it happens on this road often) or some other danger.
Funny thing is even though I slowed down it really didn't slow us down. We still ended up at the light at the end of the road right behind the traffic we were following.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Not really, residential streets are not designed for high speed.
Also I have read many studies that show that at speeds over a certain speed (between 35 and 40 MPH depending on the study) risk of serious or fatal accidents increase by as much as 5% for each 1 MPH increase.
If you don't believe me find a nice residential street that has a curve that is easy to take at 30 MPH and take it at 75 MPH and tell me what happens.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
How so? people don't purposely fall off of bridges. Seems like you are using poor logic.
You are comparing apples and aircraft carriers.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I have no problems with driving 80 MPH on I-88 between DeKalb, IL and Sterling/Rock Falls on a Sunday morning. Driving half that speed down North Michigan Ave in Chicago at 4:30 Friday afternoon is a #@&* death wish.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Absolutely wrong. This is the worst plan of action, to pass on the right (although all to often this is the last resort left). The most dangerous maneuver on the road, and besides, it denies LLC a chance to correct his mistake and leave the left lane.
Exactly. See this all the time and for many, many years on I90. I do move over when tailgater is a huge suv or big or jacked-up pickup truck. They just go on and bully the next car/vehicle in line. I think these people are mentally unstable and dangerous.
Texting gets all the blame but I think people have been distracted for years, with anything but the task of driving.
Undertaking may come after overtaking (on the right)
I have to do it regularly too if I don't want to be seen as rude and boorish, blinking lights and honking. I consider it dangerous because 1) you enter another car's blind spot, and 2) generally nobody expects you there, and 3) LLC may have a last-moment change of heart and move to the right lane, exactly when you enter his blind spot, and 4) on multi-lane roads, usually there are even slower cars in the right-most lane, which often decide to cut you off exactly when you are in the middle of passing. I always try to make sure there is enough space for avoidance maneuver, just in case.
But I undertake probably every time I am on the highway for more than 10 miles or so, out of necessity. I guess if I pass on the left, I am still in a blind spot, around here in this diverse environment, you never know what the other guy is going to do, and you also have not much better of an escape route - barrier or oncoming traffic. I'll roll the dice I guess. I also often speed up in a pass, just to get it over with.
Your missing the point. If the residential street is not designed for high speeds, the cars won't go high speeds just because the speed limit is set too high.
If a residential street is designed for high speeds, they might want to consider rezoning and redistricting that land and bull dozing the houses (or you might thing twice about buying a house next to a high speed roadway (regardless if the sign is artificially underposted or not).
The force of impact is only relevant when there is an impact to be had.
So when the tailgater is a Fiat Abarth you continue to camp out? :P
Today an impatient car passed me on the right in traffic. A crow was on the shoulder but he was driving too fast so it failed to get out of the way in time, and ....
* SMACK *
He hit it. One dead bird. His windshield survived but must be a mess.
Jeez people. Why rush in traffic, to advance one car length, seriously?
What a great solution! Just because a road is capable of a higher-than-posted speed, cities should bull-doze the houses along that road and relocate those families. :confuse: :mad: :sick:
There's lots of such roads in the city where I live. The main roads are all laid out in a grid pattern. The land is pretty flat. The main roads are 4 lane. So a case could be made that just about any road that is posted today in the 30-40 mph range could be increased by at least 10 mph, maybe more. So, why not do that? Because these roads are in a densely-populated city, with sidewalks lining them, lots of pedestrian and bike traffic, lots of kids and elderly folk near the roads, lots of driveways emptying onto the roads. So, let's bull doze thousands of homes so that drivers like you who are in a big hurry can drive faster.
Unbelievable.