Wish there was a way for a car to display a sign like that.
A while back, recall reading about some kind of led product that one could put on backshelf of car. It was wide and would display a number of messages. Don't recall if the messages were standard or the car owner could program.
They have automatic-ish transmissions, but I suspect the average Camry toaster driver couldn't operate one any better than they could a Model T. You don't just throw it into "D" and take off.
I have seen those signs, too. I like the front mounted one better though, to appear in the mirror of the slowpoke. Sadly, they probably don't use that mirror regularly.
Agree. All trucks - semis, vans, pickups, etc - along with suvs should be relegated to the right lane at 55 mph. Cars "only" should have the higher speed limit - 65, 70, whatever.
Does it make sense from a fuel conservation standpoint to limit a crossover that gets 30-35 mpg while you let the S600 that gets less than 20mpg have free rein? Oh wait... he's rich and deserved to drive how he wants and use as much fuel as he pleases. :P Seriously, if you want to do this, I say anything with a GVWR over 5000 lbs should be plated accordingly and subject to the truck rules and speed limits.
Now 70/55 would not fly. Too much closing speed. Ideally should be a 5mph difference, but certainly no more than 10. 70/65 works pretty well in Indiana, but 65/55 less so in Ohio.
If we're serious about conserving fuel, set the higher limit at 65... or maybe 70 but enforce the hell out of it... i.e. 73 and the ticket book is coming out.
Does it make sense from a fuel conservation standpoint to limit a crossover that gets 30-35 mpg while you let the S600 that gets less than 20mpg have free rein? Oh wait... he's rich and deserved to drive how he wants and use as much fuel as he pleases
Well, there are always exceptions to the rule. But, yes, the S600 should get free rein. By definition it is a car. He/she is probably one of those one percenters and they should get privileges. They pay a huge amount of federal taxes to keep our country running.
On the other hand, the one percenters driving expensive station wagons such as Mercedes and BMW brands would be relegated to the right lane at 55 mph and get no privilege. They would be limited to 55 while drivers in cars such as Camry, Sonata, Civic, Fusion could go 65 or 70. Here, the bottom 99 percenters trump the one percenters in their fancy European wagons, suvs.
Over all oil consumption IN/from the US is DOWN 8%.
In fact it is SO bad (depending on ones point of view) that previously OVERWHELMED refineries actually EXPORT a huge % of fuels : RUG/PUG to LSD. They only make enough ULSD to satisfy very low and dropping demand.
Some would say it is a total coincidence that fuel prices are at the HIGHEST since this effort !!
So keep UP the good work. $5.00 RUG/PUG before the elections !!
I'd look at more than weight - perhaps some metric of weight/height/girth. S600 is kind of a distraction too (not to mention weighing in at 4950 per MBUSA :shades: ) - they barely sell. I'm a lot more worried about 4'10" housewives and distracted short leash other halves in their Suburbans. Weight isn't the issue, weight + visibility blocking + bad handling + height which slaughters other vehicles are the issues. I'd rather be alongside a S600 driving fast than an overweight SUV.
The last time a speed limit was forced upon the masses to conserve fuel, law enforcement probably lost more credibility than at any other time since before prohibition. Doing it again would fare no better.
Weight isn't the issue, weight + visibility blocking + bad handling + height which slaughters other vehicles are the issues.
Good criteria. And, "generally", that would put only cars in the left lanes. All others stay to the right. Probably would need to redefine cars what with some weird car/suv things out there such as Honda Crosstour. What the heck is that? Acura has one of these and others do as well.
Think how good life in the left lane could be with only cars. Today, especially in rush hour, pickups, vans, suvs, etc are irritants in the left lane blocking vision forward. Inconsiderates and not knowing it.
I'd look at more than weight - perhaps some metric of weight/height/girth. S600 is kind of a distraction too (not to mention weighing in at 4950 per MBUSA ) - they barely sell. I'm a lot more worried about 4'10" housewives and distracted short leash other halves in their Suburbans. Weight isn't the issue, weight + visibility blocking + bad handling + height which slaughters other vehicles are the issues. I'd rather be alongside a S600 driving fast than an overweight SUV.
Part of the reason that it took a while for Japanese cars to go "up-market" in the USA is that their vehicle taxes were based, at least in part, on the width of the vehicle. You might be on to something there.
Because this thread started as a fuel consumption thread, I talked about GVWR as a way to penalize the real gas pigs. That's gross weight, not curb weight, mind you... trying to get the large gas-guzzling sedans and still get the bigger SUVs, but not the station wagons that you can actually see around (a dying breed these days... you CAN see past my V70, thankyouverymuch, and at 28mpg highway I'm still not the problem yet).
The last time a speed limit was forced upon the masses to conserve fuel, law enforcement probably lost more credibility than at any other time since before prohibition. Doing it again would fare no better.
At the end of the day, I think you're right. I think most of the Interstate speed limits we have on the books right now are actually fairly reasonable. If only LE wasn't too lazy to enforce the other laws, just because they might have to actually convince a judge that they saw someone doing something stupid/dangerous/illegal, it could be a much better place to drive.
You could burn even less fuel if you traded your car for a horse-and-buggy. But, you undoubtedly prefer the convenience of a car to that mode of transportation. Just as people prefer to take advantage of the modern capabilities of cars and drive 75 mph instead of 65 mph.
Gasoline prices will always fluctuate, and the fluctuation is caused by factors far larger than people driving 75 mph instead of 65 mph on the interstate. Religiously driving even 60 mph won't stop price jumps fueled by more demand in China or India. Compared to that elephant in the room, the difference in fuel consumption due to people driving 75 mph versus 65 mph is largely a proverbial drop in the bucket.
And the "we're running out of oil" mantra has been around since the 1920s. We aren't going to wake up one day and find out that there is no oil. If supplies become tighter, then prices will rise, which, in turn, will make other forms of fuel or new drivetrains (hybrids, for example) more economically feasible.
the type of dawdlling you and others describe on interstate level roads I rarely, if ever, see on interstates here in the left lane. Even on the 3 and 4 lane interstates completed here, the 2nd from left is rarely at or below speed limit.
Agreed. Aside from the Columbus area during "rush hour" times, I found that the traffic on Ohio interstates moved relatively smoothly, meaning that folks basically were able to drive the speeds they preferred.
That isn't so in the Seattle area ANY of the times I've been through there save for odd hours (like after 9pm to about 4am) of the day. But, I could even say that traffic through Chicago is smooth as glass at 3am, so that really isn't saying much for Seattle. :sick:
Frankly, I don't think it has nearly as much to do with the volume of traffic as the attitude of the drivers.
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
GVRW is better than curb weight, yes. But I guess I don't see guzzling being as much of a problem as large vehicles with unskilled drivers. Maybe we don't want to go down the anti-SUV road again, but I see the things as more of a menace than any other vehicle type. They seem to breed situational isolation and distracted driving. Of course, the real solution would be licensing endorsements for vehicles meeting certain metrics.
Decent quality tiny digital cameras can be had for around $200 now. No reason cops can't have these aimed at phone yappers and distracted idiots to be used as evidence - I'd trust it more than an insurance-supplied radar gun.
Crosstour and ZDX are cars, even though the owners might have a rugged delusion otherwise. CUVs are cars too.
The handling flaws and crash issues of some of those vehicles are even more worrisome than the blocked visibility. And to be fair, I will admit that on city streets, SUVs and cars seem to be equally represented among the idiots. I really wouldn't want to block them from a lane - but maybe have proof that the driver knows how to handle the vehicle. Of course, someone who drives a Spark can go out and drive a 40' motorhome 5 minutes later, so it's not going to happen.
You could burn even less fuel if you traded your car for a horse-and-buggy.
Yeah, but I'd want to "drive" it on the freeway since you can't get to some places w/o going on a freeway. Watch out for the "exhaust"! :P
My point was simple: we don't drive, and burn gasoline, in a world unto ourselves. Although some would like to think that, as it makes life much easier for them. It's related to the mentality of inconsiderate drivers, who think only of themselves as they drive.
Sure, we can't all go out and buy tiny condos to live in. Or trade our cars for horses. But there's some things we can do, without pain, to conserve natural resources and keep gas prices down.
And no, we won't run out of oil overnight. It will take many years. But it WILL run out. Maybe, as fintail postulated, by the time the grandchildren of today's kids are driving. That's only 50-60 years from now. Not that long in the grand scheme of things. I won't be around then, but my kids will be. Also keep in mind that gasoline is not the only thing made from oil. I am typing on something made from oil right now.
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.
Sorry that's not right multi-lane roads are designed to allow passing on either side. And it is really not much different from passing on the left, as long as you use a marked lane.
As for a LLCer moving to the right I wouldn't count on it. We are not talking about someone who is passing another car that just happens to be going slower than you. LLCer's rarely if ever "correct" themselves.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
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.
You're missing my point. You stated that if driving at higher speeds is more dangerous then you would have a lot more accidents on expressways than you would have on arterial roads. I responded that expressways are designed to be safer roads and if you made the arterial roads speed limits the same as expressways you would have a much higher rate of accidents.
My whole point is since the two roads are designed differently with different characteristics you cannot compare the two together to defend the statement that increases in speed do not increase danger. The only way you would be able to do such a comparison is to give each road the same speed limit.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The implementation of the national 55 mph speed limit had nothing to do with the drop in fatalities in 1974. The decline was caused by a drop in discretionary driving, which, in turn, had been spurred by the gasoline shortages in late 1973 and early 1974.
While the number of miles driven declined at the onset of the gas shortages in 1973 by the end of 1974 the were well on their way up again. Yet traffic fatalities stayed low.
No, they were completely correct. There is no consistent proof that lowering the speed limit on limited access highways results in lower fatality rates. This has been studied extensively.
Yes and many of the ones that have been done suggest that the odds of a fatal accident increase with speed. The ones that don't almost always seem to be put out by advocates for higher speed limits.
The majority of states enacted mandatory safety belt laws in the 1980s. (The final state to enact a mandatory seat belt law was South Dakota. It took effect on January 1, 1995. Which means that it has been well over a decade since motorists have been required to wear safety belts in every state.)
Being required to wear seat belts and actually wearing them are two different things. It took years to start getting compliance up. Even after South Dakota enacted its seat belt law national seat belt usage was estimated at 2/3rds. It slowly increased to where its almost 90%. So yes increased seat belt usage has been a factor in decreasing fatalities since the national SL was repealed.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
On a double yellow 55 mph 2-lane road in my area with dips, curves and crests, encountered a woman driver in a curve going in other direction holding apparently a cell phone to her head.
And? If that's all I have to ask so what?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
My post was directed at those who wail about "speeders" while they, themselves, exceed the speed limit on a regular basis. And then they complain if they get caught. Speed limits are apparently for everyone else.
Most of the people I know who "wail" about speeders usually don't go much over the SL and rarely ever get a ticket.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
LOL ! In the municipal employee's salary issue, published in the local rag, it is a question of almost all of them making 6 figures !! Defacto: it is a rare one that does not.
As someone who has done payroll for municipalities and for state agencies all I can say is HOGWASH
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
but many people drank beer back in the day because it was safer than the water
That's true, the brewing process kills a lot of the stuff living in the water. There was a show not to long ago called "How Beer Saved the World", they took some swamp water and brewed some beer with it using a middle ages recipe and tested the beer. It was safe to drink.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
We were talking about this the other day and come up with these points.
In some places it is, but those are the exceptions.
We all knew roads we drove down regularly where traffic routinely goes 10+ over the limit. These roads would be a financial boom if they would enforce the limit yet we never see anyone pulled over on them.
Most of us could recall where were passed LEO's with a radar gun on a lonely road doing 5+/- over and never have been pulled over. If it was revenue based then we should have been pulled over seeing the lack of possible tickets being issued.
Most of the "speed traps" we can recall seeing or know are routinely on have been on roads where going excessively over the limit is quite possibly dangerous.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
So PA is like the autobahn of the eastern seaboard, sounds good!
Not to sure about that, Every time I go through PA (admittedly not very often) I see people pulled over and usually at least two or three within 100 miles of Ohio.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Funny thing about speed limits is how little time is really affected if speeding.
That is so true. The average American drives less than 50 miles a day and they maybe average 40 MPH. So how much time can they actually save by doing 5-10 MPH more? not very much.
A few examples.
Ignoring traffic and traffic controls I could save about 2 minutes doing 10 over the limit than doing the limit on my commute home. 2 lousy minutes early getting home. I won't even notice that in the great scheme of things. I won't be watching any TV show I like 2 minutes earlier, I won't be eating dinner 2 minutes earlier I will wake up the same time the next morning.
Next weekend I will be going to a family reunion/vacation in the WI Dells. It's a little more than 200 miles going 10 MPH faster might save me 15 minutes. That's if I take the interstate. :shades:
Not to mention there is a diminishing rate of return in speed increases, every unit in increased speed yields a smaller unit of time saved. say you are driving 100 miles at 65 MPH and increase your speed by 1 MPH, you will save yourself 1.4 minutes. Increase by another 1 MPH you now save 1.36 minutes, another 1 mph increase saves you 1.32 minutes and so on.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
If you get paid $30 per hour in your job, then by wasting 29 hours driving insanely slow, you just spent $870 of opportunity cost (in time) for that couple hundred savings in gas.
Lets look at this logically presuming you work 48 weeks out of the year (taking time off for vacations, holidays, sick and what not) that 29 hours represents a little over 3.5 minutes each way commuting. That 3.5 minutes is not taken off of your work hours, you still will arrive and leave at the same time. You just leave home 3.5 minutes earlier and get home 3.5 minutes later.
Now if you are like 99.9% of people you are not earning money those 3.5 minutes before you leave work or when you get home. So that 29 hours a year don't cost you diddly squat.
And you still wake up the same time the next morning.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
First was a MB pulling out from a side street to a four lane busy street making a left turn. Wanted to beat the traffic coming at them from their left (My oncoming traffic) gunned it and made the left turn, Unfortunately I was coming from the other direction in the left lane right as they pulled out. Luckily for the both of us there was no traffic in the right lane so I was able to swerve and miss them. Otherwise I would not have been able to stop from hitting him (Her?).
Second was someone who was a bit impatient with me doing about 40 in a 35 MPH SL. Road was straight but had a significant dip along the way. To the right was a forest preserve with an entrance and to the left was a subdivision. The road was stripped as non passing and there was traffic some distance a head of me.
So what does this guy do? At the point where the road dips he guns it and makes an illegal pass. Well sitting at the entrance of the forest preserve was an LEO who saw the who thing, pulled out with lights flashing after I passed him.
So to save himself zero time the guy got himself possible two traffic tickets.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Parking lots seem to bring out some of the worst in inconsiderate driving (or parking). Today I was sitting in my car, checking email before I left a parking lot. I hear and feel a big "thunk" on the right side, look over and a Ram pickup has pulled into the spot next to me, driver flung the door open and hit my car. I got out and said, "Could you please be more careful?" He looks at me and mutters something like, "There's not much room." Well duh. He squeezed his huge pickup into a fairly small space, when there was lots of room elsewhere in the parking lot to park his rig with no one around him. I reply, "I'm sorry you have such a big truck." He walks off.
FWIW, I was centered in my spot.
Then I go to back out, and of course the big truck blocks my view to the right rear so I back out ever so slowly, hoping cars coming from that direction will at least honk if not wait so I can back up safely. One jerk decides to almost hit me before he finally honks, so I hit the brakes. Another car is approaching from the left, and they are considerate and wait for me to back out. (They probably wanted my space!)
One place where we could give people a break is in parking lots. It's very difficult to back out of a parking space. Not only do you need to check 3 directions at once, but there's usually a big vehicle on one or both sides totally blocking your view until you back your vehicle out quite a ways. So how about giving people backing out a break? Sure, technically the people backing out are supposed to yield to vehicles in the drive lane. But it's a lot easier for drivers moving down the drive lanes to see cars backing out than for the drivers who are backing out to see the cars in the drive lanes. So at least give the backers early warning with a horn honk, and maybe even let them back out safely, if you have a few seconds to kill. While you're waiting, you can calculate the mucho bucks it's costing you to wait for those few seconds.
If he got paid $30 per hour in his job, then by wasting 30 hours fighting the ticket and posting about it, he just spent $900 of opportunity cost (in time) for that speeding ticket.
I think 8 to 10 hours is a fairer number for what you have to do and spend on a single speeding ticket court fight. This can even be streamlined further by using the same paperwork over and over, and simply updating the date, citation number, officer's name, and so forth.
You do have to make sure the DA's office, City Attorney, and Police Department didn't move so that your address and contact information is current for the discovery requests. Figure about $3 for postage, first class is sufficient with a proof of service from an independent party dropping it in the mailbox.
Since using the 10 hours figure comes out to $300 using $30/hour, and the ticket refund for dismissal is $360, I find it highly profitable to fight the ticket (and that's tax free money; a penny saved is more than a penny earned).
Also, that doesn't even begin to include the extra cost of bogus insurance premium hikes for 3 years due to said ticket if you don't fight it and win.
On the other hand, if you choose to only show up at the courthouse on the day of the trial, you have to prepay the fine, so figure lost interest on $360 for about 4-5 months. Interest is so low right now that's negligible opportunity cost.
But the satisfaction and immense feeling of a job well done in making the city/police spend all kinds of time and money on your case (responding to discovery requests, writing trials by declaration, and so forth like postage), and then making sure the city and courts do not benefit financially in any way, shape, or form; (other than holding your money hostage for a few months) well.... that's priceless. :P
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I would think the lesson is slow down. Then you won't have to go to court.
There's more than 39,999 other violations besides speed that you can be written up for in CA.
The lesson is cops should use their brains a bit when doing traffic enforcement. A 15 MPH over the speed limit leeway is a good rule of thumb perhaps when safety is an element of the crime (basic speed law), but it doesn't work if the speed limit isn't set correctly (to the 85th percentile).
Even rules of thumb have to have some room for interpretation; stop being lazy traffic cops; use your brains! Use some quality good judgment!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Now if you are like 99.9% of people you are not earning money those 3.5 minutes before you leave work or when you get home. So that 29 hours a year don't cost you diddly squat.
Oh yes it does.. You have to get up 3.5 minutes earlier in order to get to work on time to allow for a longer slow commute.
Also, if you work hourly and your emloyer allows overtime, you could get paid a time and a half for those extra 7 minutes everyday.
Are you an employee that watches the clock? I'd rather have employees that are focused on productivity and efficiency, and giving me an extra 7 minutes of effort a day is a good worker to me. I was salaried and didn't see anything wrong with working "free" overtime. I'd have less time to provide "free" overtime to my company if I dawdle along during my commutes.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Great. Try staying off freeways for the next month, report back on your experience.
I tested out the "no freeways" feature with my Garmin navigation unit in my car for a few weeks in the San Diego area.
Although possible to get places avoiding the interstates, some routes are a major cluster****. And this is with the help of a "shortest route" computer doing the processing. No way could someone remember how to get somewhere when there's 200 turns to remember to go 15 miles (well, 15 miles in a straight line).
I'm going to have to side with Backy on this one.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Try staying off freeways for the next month, report back on your experience.
I think it's doable except in parts of Arizona where the state highways have been taken over by the freeway.
Typing this in Minneapolis and I tried to get here on the backroads, but forgot to change the GPS from the "fastest route possible". Then we switched drivers and missed a turn and wound up on I-35 for the last 45 minutes of the trip.
Even though the motel is close to an interchange, since I fixed the GPS, I've been able to avoid them today going back and forth to downtown. Surface streets are usually more entertaining when you're a tourist, but if I had to commute in this town, I'd try to take the train. Pretty bad traffic.
Come to the UP; you'll be lucky to find a 4-lane, much less an Interstate, except over by the Soo. It's 400 miles to hit the next one over at Duluth.
Are you an employee that watches the clock? I'd rather have employees that are focused on productivity and efficiency, and giving me an extra 7 minutes of effort a day is a good worker to me.
Do you seriously believe that workers drive fast so they can give their employer a few extra minutes every day?
Do you seriously believe that workers drive fast so they can give their employer a few extra minutes every day?
Maybe not to give their employer a few extra minutes every day, but as a means to an end.
To be more productive and efficient, and a better worker/manager; to get MORE things done each and every day. And at the end of a project, to get that BONUS or raise. That's the real reason.
Everyone has there reasons for not wanting to waste excessive time on the roads. Maybe you love your kids and want to get home 7 minutes sooner to spend more time with them? Maybe your a video game freak and want to get home ASAP to play it?
Maybe you like having more personal time to do whatever you enjoy doing?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Yep, to and from downtown Minneapolis from certain starting points is very doable on surface streets. Don't try it if you live on the south side of the Minnesota River, however; your car will get a little wet if you don't take one of the freeway bridges over the river!
BTW, that is an accurate statement you made: "I'd try to take the train." It is THE train... as in, one train.
"Just because there's 10 cars LLCing in front of you, it doesn't make your LLCing right!" MOVE over to the right for faster traffic!
Problem is that if that car at the very head of the line is about to pass somebody, nobody else in that line thinks they're LLCing (when in reality all but the front 2-3 cars probably are). And I think this annoying "queueing" mentality is most prevalent in Oregon and Wisconsin (are they the 2 westernmost states in the lower 48 with a 65mph SL?)
Comments
A while back, recall reading about some kind of led product that one could put on backshelf of car. It was wide and would display a number of messages. Don't recall if the messages were standard or the car owner could program.
I have seen those signs, too. I like the front mounted one better though, to appear in the mirror of the slowpoke. Sadly, they probably don't use that mirror regularly.
Does it make sense from a fuel conservation standpoint to limit a crossover that gets 30-35 mpg while you let the S600 that gets less than 20mpg have free rein? Oh wait... he's rich and deserved to drive how he wants and use as much fuel as he pleases. :P Seriously, if you want to do this, I say anything with a GVWR over 5000 lbs should be plated accordingly and subject to the truck rules and speed limits.
Now 70/55 would not fly. Too much closing speed. Ideally should be a 5mph difference, but certainly no more than 10. 70/65 works pretty well in Indiana, but 65/55 less so in Ohio.
If we're serious about conserving fuel, set the higher limit at 65... or maybe 70 but enforce the hell out of it... i.e. 73 and the ticket book is coming out.
Well, there are always exceptions to the rule. But, yes, the S600 should get free rein. By definition it is a car. He/she is probably one of those one percenters and they should get privileges. They pay a huge amount of federal taxes to keep our country running.
On the other hand, the one percenters driving expensive station wagons such as Mercedes and BMW brands would be relegated to the right lane at 55 mph and get no privilege. They would be limited to 55 while drivers in cars such as Camry, Sonata, Civic, Fusion could go 65 or 70. Here, the bottom 99 percenters trump the one percenters in their fancy European wagons, suvs.
In fact it is SO bad (depending on ones point of view) that previously OVERWHELMED refineries actually EXPORT a huge % of fuels : RUG/PUG to LSD. They only make enough ULSD to satisfy very low and dropping demand.
Some would say it is a total coincidence that fuel prices are at the HIGHEST since this effort !!
So keep UP the good work. $5.00 RUG/PUG before the elections !!
The last time a speed limit was forced upon the masses to conserve fuel, law enforcement probably lost more credibility than at any other time since before prohibition. Doing it again would fare no better.
Good criteria. And, "generally", that would put only cars in the left lanes. All others stay to the right. Probably would need to redefine cars what with some weird car/suv things out there such as Honda Crosstour. What the heck is that? Acura has one of these and others do as well.
Think how good life in the left lane could be with only cars. Today, especially in rush hour, pickups, vans, suvs, etc are irritants in the left lane blocking vision forward. Inconsiderates and not knowing it.
Part of the reason that it took a while for Japanese cars to go "up-market" in the USA is that their vehicle taxes were based, at least in part, on the width of the vehicle. You might be on to something there.
Because this thread started as a fuel consumption thread, I talked about GVWR as a way to penalize the real gas pigs. That's gross weight, not curb weight, mind you... trying to get the large gas-guzzling sedans and still get the bigger SUVs, but not the station wagons that you can actually see around (a dying breed these days... you CAN see past my V70, thankyouverymuch, and at 28mpg highway I'm still not the problem yet).
The last time a speed limit was forced upon the masses to conserve fuel, law enforcement probably lost more credibility than at any other time since before prohibition. Doing it again would fare no better.
At the end of the day, I think you're right. I think most of the Interstate speed limits we have on the books right now are actually fairly reasonable. If only LE wasn't too lazy to enforce the other laws, just because they might have to actually convince a judge that they saw someone doing something stupid/dangerous/illegal, it could be a much better place to drive.
Gasoline prices will always fluctuate, and the fluctuation is caused by factors far larger than people driving 75 mph instead of 65 mph on the interstate. Religiously driving even 60 mph won't stop price jumps fueled by more demand in China or India. Compared to that elephant in the room, the difference in fuel consumption due to people driving 75 mph versus 65 mph is largely a proverbial drop in the bucket.
And the "we're running out of oil" mantra has been around since the 1920s. We aren't going to wake up one day and find out that there is no oil. If supplies become tighter, then prices will rise, which, in turn, will make other forms of fuel or new drivetrains (hybrids, for example) more economically feasible.
Agreed. Aside from the Columbus area during "rush hour" times, I found that the traffic on Ohio interstates moved relatively smoothly, meaning that folks basically were able to drive the speeds they preferred.
That isn't so in the Seattle area ANY of the times I've been through there save for odd hours (like after 9pm to about 4am) of the day. But, I could even say that traffic through Chicago is smooth as glass at 3am, so that really isn't saying much for Seattle. :sick:
Frankly, I don't think it has nearly as much to do with the volume of traffic as the attitude of the drivers.
Decent quality tiny digital cameras can be had for around $200 now. No reason cops can't have these aimed at phone yappers and distracted idiots to be used as evidence - I'd trust it more than an insurance-supplied radar gun.
Demand, yes. Price? No.
The handling flaws and crash issues of some of those vehicles are even more worrisome than the blocked visibility. And to be fair, I will admit that on city streets, SUVs and cars seem to be equally represented among the idiots. I really wouldn't want to block them from a lane - but maybe have proof that the driver knows how to handle the vehicle. Of course, someone who drives a Spark can go out and drive a 40' motorhome 5 minutes later, so it's not going to happen.
Keep Right
Currently in my area the CHP and or local leos can literally be SWAMPED just by ticketing folks that do not use turn signaling.
Regarding a signal comment - revenue enforcers should pursue that over minor league speeders. Huge pedestrian hazard, not to mention for other cars.
Yeah, but I'd want to "drive" it on the freeway since you can't get to some places w/o going on a freeway. Watch out for the "exhaust"! :P
My point was simple: we don't drive, and burn gasoline, in a world unto ourselves. Although some would like to think that, as it makes life much easier for them. It's related to the mentality of inconsiderate drivers, who think only of themselves as they drive.
Sure, we can't all go out and buy tiny condos to live in. Or trade our cars for horses. But there's some things we can do, without pain, to conserve natural resources and keep gas prices down.
And no, we won't run out of oil overnight. It will take many years. But it WILL run out. Maybe, as fintail postulated, by the time the grandchildren of today's kids are driving. That's only 50-60 years from now. Not that long in the grand scheme of things. I won't be around then, but my kids will be. Also keep in mind that gasoline is not the only thing made from oil. I am typing on something made from oil right now.
Sorry that's not right multi-lane roads are designed to allow passing on either side. And it is really not much different from passing on the left, as long as you use a marked lane.
As for a LLCer moving to the right I wouldn't count on it. We are not talking about someone who is passing another car that just happens to be going slower than you. LLCer's rarely if ever "correct" themselves.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
You're missing my point. You stated that if driving at higher speeds is more dangerous then you would have a lot more accidents on expressways than you would have on arterial roads. I responded that expressways are designed to be safer roads and if you made the arterial roads speed limits the same as expressways you would have a much higher rate of accidents.
My whole point is since the two roads are designed differently with different characteristics you cannot compare the two together to defend the statement that increases in speed do not increase danger. The only way you would be able to do such a comparison is to give each road the same speed limit.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
While the number of miles driven declined at the onset of the gas shortages in 1973 by the end of 1974 the were well on their way up again. Yet traffic fatalities stayed low.
No, they were completely correct. There is no consistent proof that lowering the speed limit on limited access highways results in lower fatality rates. This has been studied extensively.
Yes and many of the ones that have been done suggest that the odds of a fatal accident increase with speed. The ones that don't almost always seem to be put out by advocates for higher speed limits.
The majority of states enacted mandatory safety belt laws in the 1980s. (The final state to enact a mandatory seat belt law was South Dakota. It took effect on January 1, 1995. Which means that it has been well over a decade since motorists have been required to wear safety belts in every state.)
Being required to wear seat belts and actually wearing them are two different things. It took years to start getting compliance up. Even after South Dakota enacted its seat belt law national seat belt usage was estimated at 2/3rds. It slowly increased to where its almost 90%. So yes increased seat belt usage has been a factor in decreasing fatalities since the national SL was repealed.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
And? If that's all I have to ask so what?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Most of the people I know who "wail" about speeders usually don't go much over the SL and rarely ever get a ticket.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I would think the lesson is slow down. Then you won't have to go to court.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
As someone who has done payroll for municipalities and for state agencies all I can say is HOGWASH
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
That's true, the brewing process kills a lot of the stuff living in the water. There was a show not to long ago called "How Beer Saved the World", they took some swamp water and brewed some beer with it using a middle ages recipe and tested the beer. It was safe to drink.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
We were talking about this the other day and come up with these points.
In some places it is, but those are the exceptions.
We all knew roads we drove down regularly where traffic routinely goes 10+ over the limit. These roads would be a financial boom if they would enforce the limit yet we never see anyone pulled over on them.
Most of us could recall where were passed LEO's with a radar gun on a lonely road doing 5+/- over and never have been pulled over. If it was revenue based then we should have been pulled over seeing the lack of possible tickets being issued.
Most of the "speed traps" we can recall seeing or know are routinely on have been on roads where going excessively over the limit is quite possibly dangerous.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Not to sure about that, Every time I go through PA (admittedly not very often) I see people pulled over and usually at least two or three within 100 miles of Ohio.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
That is so true. The average American drives less than 50 miles a day and they maybe average 40 MPH. So how much time can they actually save by doing 5-10 MPH more? not very much.
A few examples.
Ignoring traffic and traffic controls I could save about 2 minutes doing 10 over the limit than doing the limit on my commute home. 2 lousy minutes early getting home. I won't even notice that in the great scheme of things. I won't be watching any TV show I like 2 minutes earlier, I won't be eating dinner 2 minutes earlier I will wake up the same time the next morning.
Next weekend I will be going to a family reunion/vacation in the WI Dells. It's a little more than 200 miles going 10 MPH faster might save me 15 minutes. That's if I take the interstate. :shades:
Not to mention there is a diminishing rate of return in speed increases, every unit in increased speed yields a smaller unit of time saved. say you are driving 100 miles at 65 MPH and increase your speed by 1 MPH, you will save yourself 1.4 minutes. Increase by another 1 MPH you now save 1.36 minutes, another 1 mph increase saves you 1.32 minutes and so on.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I keep thinking I should get a bumper sticker that says "Riding my a** won't make me or the thousands of cars ahead of me go any faster."
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Lets look at this logically presuming you work 48 weeks out of the year (taking time off for vacations, holidays, sick and what not) that 29 hours represents a little over 3.5 minutes each way commuting. That 3.5 minutes is not taken off of your work hours, you still will arrive and leave at the same time. You just leave home 3.5 minutes earlier and get home 3.5 minutes later.
Now if you are like 99.9% of people you are not earning money those 3.5 minutes before you leave work or when you get home. So that 29 hours a year don't cost you diddly squat.
And you still wake up the same time the next morning.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
That's a change from the 80's when Ohio was dubbed "Microwave alley" due to the heavy speed enforcement by the state police.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I cannot think of any place that I cannot get to without getting on a freeway.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Second was someone who was a bit impatient with me doing about 40 in a 35 MPH SL. Road was straight but had a significant dip along the way. To the right was a forest preserve with an entrance and to the left was a subdivision. The road was stripped as non passing and there was traffic some distance a head of me.
So what does this guy do? At the point where the road dips he guns it and makes an illegal pass. Well sitting at the entrance of the forest preserve was an LEO who saw the who thing, pulled out with lights flashing after I passed him.
So to save himself zero time the guy got himself possible two traffic tickets.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
FWIW, I was centered in my spot.
Then I go to back out, and of course the big truck blocks my view to the right rear so I back out ever so slowly, hoping cars coming from that direction will at least honk if not wait so I can back up safely. One jerk decides to almost hit me before he finally honks, so I hit the brakes. Another car is approaching from the left, and they are considerate and wait for me to back out. (They probably wanted my space!)
One place where we could give people a break is in parking lots. It's very difficult to back out of a parking space. Not only do you need to check 3 directions at once, but there's usually a big vehicle on one or both sides totally blocking your view until you back your vehicle out quite a ways. So how about giving people backing out a break? Sure, technically the people backing out are supposed to yield to vehicles in the drive lane. But it's a lot easier for drivers moving down the drive lanes to see cars backing out than for the drivers who are backing out to see the cars in the drive lanes. So at least give the backers early warning with a horn honk, and maybe even let them back out safely, if you have a few seconds to kill. While you're waiting, you can calculate the mucho bucks it's costing you to wait for those few seconds.
I think 8 to 10 hours is a fairer number for what you have to do and spend on a single speeding ticket court fight. This can even be streamlined further by using the same paperwork over and over, and simply updating the date, citation number, officer's name, and so forth.
You do have to make sure the DA's office, City Attorney, and Police Department didn't move so that your address and contact information is current for the discovery requests. Figure about $3 for postage, first class is sufficient with a proof of service from an independent party dropping it in the mailbox.
Since using the 10 hours figure comes out to $300 using $30/hour, and the ticket refund for dismissal is $360, I find it highly profitable to fight the ticket (and that's tax free money; a penny saved is more than a penny earned).
Also, that doesn't even begin to include the extra cost of bogus insurance premium hikes for 3 years due to said ticket if you don't fight it and win.
On the other hand, if you choose to only show up at the courthouse on the day of the trial, you have to prepay the fine, so figure lost interest on $360 for about 4-5 months. Interest is so low right now that's negligible opportunity cost.
But the satisfaction and immense feeling of a job well done in making the city/police spend all kinds of time and money on your case (responding to discovery requests, writing trials by declaration, and so forth like postage), and then making sure the city and courts do not benefit financially in any way, shape, or form; (other than holding your money hostage for a few months) well.... that's priceless.
There's more than 39,999 other violations besides speed that you can be written up for in CA.
The lesson is cops should use their brains a bit when doing traffic enforcement. A 15 MPH over the speed limit leeway is a good rule of thumb perhaps when safety is an element of the crime (basic speed law), but it doesn't work if the speed limit isn't set correctly (to the 85th percentile).
Even rules of thumb have to have some room for interpretation; stop being lazy traffic cops; use your brains! Use some quality good judgment!
"Just because there's 10 cars LLCing in front of you, it doesn't make your LLCing right!" MOVE over to the right for faster traffic!
Oh yes it does.. You have to get up 3.5 minutes earlier in order to get to work on time to allow for a longer slow commute.
Also, if you work hourly and your emloyer allows overtime, you could get paid a time and a half for those extra 7 minutes everyday.
Are you an employee that watches the clock? I'd rather have employees that are focused on productivity and efficiency, and giving me an extra 7 minutes of effort a day is a good worker to me. I was salaried and didn't see anything wrong with working "free" overtime. I'd have less time to provide "free" overtime to my company if I dawdle along during my commutes.
I tested out the "no freeways" feature with my Garmin navigation unit in my car for a few weeks in the San Diego area.
Although possible to get places avoiding the interstates, some routes are a major cluster****. And this is with the help of a "shortest route" computer doing the processing. No way could someone remember how to get somewhere when there's 200 turns to remember to go 15 miles (well, 15 miles in a straight line).
I'm going to have to side with Backy on this one.
I think it's doable except in parts of Arizona where the state highways have been taken over by the freeway.
Typing this in Minneapolis and I tried to get here on the backroads, but forgot to change the GPS from the "fastest route possible". Then we switched drivers and missed a turn and wound up on I-35 for the last 45 minutes of the trip.
Even though the motel is close to an interchange, since I fixed the GPS, I've been able to avoid them today going back and forth to downtown. Surface streets are usually more entertaining when you're a tourist, but if I had to commute in this town, I'd try to take the train. Pretty bad traffic.
Come to the UP; you'll be lucky to find a 4-lane, much less an Interstate, except over by the Soo. It's 400 miles to hit the next one over at Duluth.
Are you an employee that watches the clock? I'd rather have employees that are focused on productivity and efficiency, and giving me an extra 7 minutes of effort a day is a good worker to me.
Do you seriously believe that workers drive fast so they can give their employer a few extra minutes every day?
ROFL.
Case Dismissed for LOP.
Lack of Prosecution.
Beautiful in its simplicity.
Maybe not to give their employer a few extra minutes every day, but as a means to an end.
To be more productive and efficient, and a better worker/manager; to get MORE things done each and every day. And at the end of a project, to get that BONUS or raise. That's the real reason.
Everyone has there reasons for not wanting to waste excessive time on the roads. Maybe you love your kids and want to get home 7 minutes sooner to spend more time with them? Maybe your a video game freak and want to get home ASAP to play it?
Maybe you like having more personal time to do whatever you enjoy doing?
BTW, that is an accurate statement you made: "I'd try to take the train." It is THE train... as in, one train.
The only means to an end here is your attempts to justify your speeding with anything other than the truth: you just like driving fast.
Problem is that if that car at the very head of the line is about to pass somebody, nobody else in that line thinks they're LLCing (when in reality all but the front 2-3 cars probably are). And I think this annoying "queueing" mentality is most prevalent in Oregon and Wisconsin (are they the 2 westernmost states in the lower 48 with a 65mph SL?)