Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
But I've hit more cats at less than 40.
And once when I was 20, I hit a kid at about 25. He darted out in front of me. Messed up my brand new truck. I was not a happy camper.
However, I think you're very narrowly defining the terms of your scenario, and I think it's somewhat unrealistic to remove all the other variables.
Regardless, I would have to say that an accident that occurs at 100 mph would certainly be more dangerous (for anyone in the vicinity) than one that occurs at 50 mph. I know these are not the terms of your argument, but I'm not sure how you can look around that simple fact. So I guess your argument is sound, but I just think the premise is a bit shaky.
But I've had a blowout going down a straight freeway before. It ain't no big deal. At least not like it is on TV. A car magazine actually did tests blowing out the tires on an Explorer and found regular blowouts didn't make them flip.
If the highway is curvy, you can't do 100.
If it's wet, you can't do 100.
If it's dark, you can't do a 100.
It IS dangerous to speed in the other conditions and people shouldn't. But on a bright clear empty highway, there is no reason why a driver should not be able to cover 100 miles in 1 hour or so.
Liven up your evening and join your fellow enthusiasts every Tuesday from 6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET for our Mazda Mania Chat!
Whether you own a Mazda, would like to own a Mazda, or just like going ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM... be sure to stop by and meet and greet your fellow Town Hall users!
/direct/view/.ef1b553
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
You referenced the correct speed rated tires for 100-110. You know your car is in good mechanical shape.
You said it was clear and straight. I see no problem.
Check out the Ohio turnpike .
And again that was a hazard for me. Not the OTHER driver. I dont need anyone looking out for me. I'm trying to figure out why people want to keep ME from speeding. So far no one can come up with any valid reason other than off the wall sky is falling stuff. Guess maybe we should stop building bridges because some kid may decide to drop a boulder off the side.
I hit so many birds in my white RX7 Anniversary Edition that I thought it was cursed. I didn't see it as a reason not to drive it though.
If you think straight highway is rare, I invite you to nearly all interstate in the Southeast. Long straight ribbons dominate. Texas has miles of straight and lonely interstate. In my experience WV had the curviest interstates. But they were so scenic you wouldn't want to speed anyway.
I'm looking out for ME... and coincidently, MY insurance rates. If everyone where I live decides they they can ignore speed limits and 100 MPH is OK for them on straight stretches of road, MY rates are going to go up as a result. That's a fact simply because there's not a lot of sound judgement involved in the decison to drive 100 MPH on public roads in the US. The RARE occasions when something does happen are going to start piling up in those actuarial tables. I don't really care whether someone actually can handle those speeds or not. It's going to affect ME in long run because things ARE going to happen because of bad judgments at higher speeds.
Speed in and of itself does not kill. Bad judgements by people kill. 100+ on a public road is bad judgement in my book. And yes, I've been on plenty of flat straight stretches of road through the midwest where I could have run at 100 mph if there were no vehicles. But short of going out at 3am, I can't think of a time when I'm going to have the road to myself in ideal conditions, so it ain't going to happen.
You don't like speed limits, get them to legislate the change. I'm all for getting to where I want to go faster! But "civil disobedience" isn't the way I'd approach it.
We've kind of merged into the speed limits topic here. Let's swerve back towards the wild happenings on the road!
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
Turns out the death rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled went DOWN, as did the number of accidents. We're all driving faster than ever, and my insurance rates have only increased by as much as they did before the repeal of the speed limit.
Heck, Pennsylvanians may see a DECREASE in rates this year, as Philadelphia recently reached an agreement with auto insurance companies to lower rates for city drivers in reflection of a lower level of claims. There was talk that the rate rollback should be statewide. But when I drive the Pennsylvania Turnpike or I-81 at 80-85 mph when traffic is light, I can't but notice how many other cars are traveling at the same speed, or, for that matter, passing me.
As for two-lane roads - I watch my speed on those roads. It's a totally different driving environment compared to an interstate highway that requires stricter adherence to speed limits. Hawks or no hawks...
Regards,
Kyle
Sure, YOU can probably handle your car doing 100 mph on many different road conditions. I could probably too. Lots of Edmunds users are car nuts and take their driving seriously.
BUT... do you want EVERYONE ELSE also doing 100 or even 90 or 80? The idiot on the cellphone? The lady applying makeup in her SUV? The guy eating a happy meal and reading a book?
I trust myself, I'd probably trust you, but generally I don't trust the general populace very much. The driving skills simply are not there, and the driving judgement is not there.
http://www.edmunds.com/townhall/chat/townhallchat.html
6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET. Drop by for live chat with other members. Hope you can join us!
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
------------
--> 1
------------
--> 2
------------
--> 3
------------
--> 4
------------
| R | R |
| ^ | ^ |
| | | | |
| | |
My question is this: If you were in the left most lane turning right, which of the four lanes above would you feel safe turning into (use the numbers given)? If you were in the right most lane turning right, same question. I know what I would answer but I'm interested in what other people think, cause I've seen some pretty stupid stuff at this intersection.
All other options appear to involve more potential for side swipe type accidents.
So Ill count backwards from 100 and you tell me where exactly I cross the line from road menace to safe and prudent. 99...98...97...96...95...
Come on, Im waiting, Id love to know this magic speed where everything changes all of a sudden.
Driving is inherently dangerous. Piloting a motor vehicle at more than 45 mph is taking your life in your hands. A highway is just a dangerous place to be. But now to decide how I want to drive safely I have to compute the law of averages. On a flat straight highway Im sharing with other vehicles that is away from urban streets, what's more likely to present a danger to me? IMHO, its not some suddenly appearing object darting directly in front of my vehicle from the side of the road.
That's what happens when you're driving down a city street. No, the danger to me on the highway is posed by the car to my left and the car to my right. The whole dynamic has changed. Im now sharing road space with other people who I am in a sense trusting with my life by allowing them to drive 4 thousand pound cars next to me and in front of me at 70 mph plus. To do that for extended periods of time without error is actually not a very easy thing for most people when you think about it. And when they do make that error, it will involve infringing upon the road space of someone either to their left or their right.
Therefore I refuse to hover in clumps of cars unnecessarily. I will not allow someone else's accident to become mine. And I firmly believe left lane blockers are the biggest danger on the American road ways today because they create clusters of cars driving in close proximity in situations where that should be totally avoidable.
So the only option left to me is to always be going 15-20 mph faster than everyone else. And that, around here, often means 90 or above. You cannot hit me when Im there and gone in under 10 seconds.
The only fender benders I ever had were at parking lot speeds due to me mis judging the size of a vehicle. The only close calls I ever had on the highway were never from fantom objects darting in front of my vehicle. They were from almost being sideswiped by people who wandered in their lanes or didn't check their mirrors before getting over. The only time that ever happens was when I was going with the general speed of traffic, a mistake I try not to make too often.
The threat to my life and safety on a highway is next to me, usually not in front of me. The solution is not to allow anyone to be next to me if I can help it.
As for I-76 in Philly...its gotten better since the construction by the King of Prussia Mall was finished. But back then when it was ongoing, it had an effect on traffic that reached almost the full 12-15 miles all the way into the city. The whole thing would be congested at the wierdest times, including Saturday and Sunday nights.
The rolling traffic jams that we have now are caused by a combination of it being a two lane road, left lane blockers, and people who feel you must slow down to 45 or below when you hit the Conshohocken Curve. This despite the fact that it really isn't sharp enough to necessitate slowing down that much and can easily be taken safely at 65 -70 mph.
Well in theory, that would be the speed limit +/- some. So really we'd just be jumping into a whole other argument. Speed limits are supposed to be created by measuring the actual speed of cars traveling over a particular road segment and taking other factors into account. (In reality I'm not sure how it's done). That is how the "experts" decide.
I guess we all disagree with the speed limit everytime we speed (*raises hand*), but it seems you are disagreeing a heckuva lot more when you reject a 65mph limit by 35 mph.
And while I definitely agree that two cars next to each other is an inherently dangerous situation, nor do I like blowing by someone at a huge speed differential. If you creep up on someone very quickly, they probably won't even see you, and could possibly change lanes suddenly. (I think gee35c talked about dropping speed before passing)
As for the phantoms, most people are killed in accidents at high speed by what they never saw nor expected.
I was impressed by the courtesy of Philly drivers on 76 from the turnpike to downtown during our summer visit. They let me over when I needed as an out-of-towner as I tried to move over into a faster moving lane. Maybe it was respect for the OSU license plate holder! But they were much better than metropolitan Ohio drivers.
I did have gripe about King-of-Prussia traffic pattern. Tried to drive to see what restaurants were around the mall and the road past dumped me onto 76 toward downtown with prior warning.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Generally, the people in the left lane take lanes 1 and 2, and the ones in the right take lanes 3 and 4. Every once in a while we get someone in the left that thinks they can go into any of 1-3, or the right that think 2-4. Much beeping and tire screeching when that happens.
Generally, the people in the left lane take lanes 1 and 2, and the ones in the right take lanes 3 and 4. Every once in a while we get someone in the left that thinks they can go into any of 1-3, or the right that think 2-4. Much beeping and tire screeching when that happens.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Harry
And this is definitely Philly we're talkin about?
"I did have gripe about King-of-Prussia traffic pattern. Tried to drive to see what restaurants were around the mall and the road past dumped me onto 76 toward downtown with prior warning"
YEs, the signs in the area are horrible. That exact same thing has happened to me many times, and Ive been driving through that area for over 6 years. That used to be a good rule of thumb for navigating that area by the mall where 202, 476, 76, 422, and the PA turnpike all come together. It's like trying to put a home entertainment center together except you have this huge jumble of poorly labeled random wires you cannot trace that are wound into one ball. When you see the first sign for the turn or exit you need to take that means you've already blown by it, and you won't get another opportunity to back track for at least 15 miles. There's one section that drives me nuts because I forget the thing is screwed up every time.
At the light, the sign for the road you want to be on is in the far right lane. 10 feet past the light, the sign for that same road is now in the middle lane and the right lane is exit only and leads to a road that takes me in the opposite direction from where I need to go and which has no exits for 10 miles. If I remember correctly it gets me trapped on 422 West when I want to be on 76 toward the down town area. So of course I barrel down the road at 85 plus to get to the first available exit that will let me turn around.
"Usually the conditions required for 100mph driving are not so great for speed inforcement. I've never gotten a 100mph ticket. Only for 75 or so when I thought I was "safe" and stopped following my "speeding rules"."
Same here. When Im doing 80 or above, it's on roads where it's nearly impossible for cops to hide. And Im on such high alert that I can spot them in time to slow down. Only one single speeding ticket Ive ever gotten was 72 in a 55 in extremely light traffic while matching the speeds of other vehicles, not weaving in and out, not tailgating, or doing anything particularly obnoxious.
My head just happened to be turned in the wrong direction when I cruised past the cop sitting right there out in the open and I was the one fish out of hundreds that didn't slip off the hook that day.
65...70...75...80...85...90...95...100...105...110...115...120...- 125?
You have to agree that at some point you are becoming a danger to the general public. As oldharry posted, I think 20-25 mph over the posted limit is where reckless driving begins.
Liven up your evening and join your fellow enthusiasts every Tuesday from 6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET for our Mazda Mania Chat!
Whether you own a Mazda, would like to own a Mazda, or just like going ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM... be sure to stop by and meet and greet your fellow Town Hall users!
/direct/view/.ef1b553
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
I can respect that opinion without agreeing with it. PErsonally, I think it's what else you may be doing while behind the wheel other than driving that has more of an effect on how reckless you are. Tell everyone else out here to take the cell phone out of their ears, the sandwich out of their hands, their attention off their screaming babies in the backseat, and teach them not to daydream at 55 when traffic is flowing at 70, and then Ill listen to people warning me about my speed. Until then, when conditions allow it, I will be past you so quickly that by the time you think to get indignant about the speed Im traveling at you'll already be watching my tail lights disappear.
Bottom line is that whether others drive with a cell phone or not has no bearing on how fast you drive, do please do not try to justify or defend or defer on that basis.
I will reiterate that the most dangerous drivers (to me) aren't the speed limit campers and they aren't the cell phone car drivers. They are the people (usually male, usually in the 20s or 30s, sometimes 40s) who weave through traffic at high speed regardless of whom else is on the road, nor why, challenge any sporty looking car to a street race at a red light, tailgate incessently, and are deeply concerned by how they are "seen" by the rest of traffic. Those are the folks who seem to cause the 20 car pileups.
As for the excessive justifications of dangerous and reckless operation, he doth protest too much. I believe that's a quote from someone else.
"usually male, usually in the 20s or 30s, sometimes 40s"
Brain development studies show there is a maturation of logic ability that finalizes in the early 20s for _most_ young adults. That's when they begin to have 'common sense' and a respect for others. They become responsible and take on the leadership of a family. For some this continues into the later adulthood or redevelops in a need to be young again -- hence the red sports car and the 20 year younger date on the arm.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Would you drive your car towards an object at 90-100 mph and pass within 6-8 feet of that object if you weren't sure if that object was going to move or stay still?
Most people understandably say no, but a lot of us do it every day. 45-50 mph on a two lane raod with oncoming traffic. Just a matter of perspective!
I think about that when I see statements like... "I will be past you so quickly that by the time you think to get indignant about the speed Im traveling at you'll already be watching my tail lights disappear". In that instant when you're about to zip past "safely" because you can "handle the speed", you have NO idea whether that other person is going to change lanes with no signal, spill coffee on their lap and lurch over, or even have a mechanical failure that's going to cause an unexpected move.
You can be as confident and sure of your ability to drive at speed as you want, but there are things that you can't control.
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
I drive extremely fast at times. It is always when there is almost no traffic at all. It is on Interstates with limited access. I was on a 520 mile each way trip. I averaged 75 mph. That was with getting off the Interstate for a pit stop for a soda and gas.
The Interstate highway system was designed and constructed for early 60's, late 50's type cars to cruise at 70 MPH. That was with bias ply tires, and marginal hydraulic brakes.
So modern cars are capable of much higher speeds.
LOL at the concept of a mature male in his early 20's The best comment on his driving skills is the insurance rates are highest for that type driver.
.
speed", you have NO idea whether that other person is going to change lanes with no signal, spill coffee on their lap and lurch over, or even have a mechanical failure that's going to cause an unexpected move.
I drive fast on Interstates with almost no traffic. Limited access would mean that coffee is available only off the Interstate. As far as mechanical failure and erratic lane changes with no signal, These are extremely unlikely IMO. I do believe that limiting exposure time to such an occurance provides a safety cushion
Read the posts here about driving 100+ safely for
verification...
Kinetic energy of the vehicle is four times what it is at 55 mph, and we're under control at 110 mph???? while riding on four patches of rubber the size of a picture postcard contacting the road. I don't think so.
I have good tires, too. Michelins. That's still not safe at over 80-85 in my opinion.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
And the hawk was just doing whatever it is that hawks do. It wasn't acting at random. Human beings are behind the wheel of the other vehicle. I simply can't take it for granted that they're going to do the right thing. The track record goes against that!
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
Interstate travel usually relates to economic activity, whether for business or pleasure. This time saved means time spent on other more productive activities. This time saved will come at a cost of increased risk of accidents. Each society and country will determine these limits accordingly.
For example, Germany has high rates of speed, but given their investment in driver training and car maintenance culture, their fatality rates are comparable to ours per mile driven, not overly high as one might surmise.
Several other countries eg England, have much lower rates of fatalities but with higher speed limits.
Conversely, some countries, notably in south east asia have lower rates of speed, but comparatively horrendous casualty figures.
In this list, we would rank somewhere in the middle, with considerable room for improvement in both speeds of travel, and also fatality rates. Whether we, as a society, want to improve these figures, and at what price, is the main issue I guess.
Absolutely true. So do I want to hover next to them for 15 minutes at a time waiting for one of these things to happen like so many people seem prone to do? Or do I want to move by without delay so that if the lurch over, they only hit empty air? Those things HAVE all happened to me, and I have had nearly disastrous accidents. This was never when I was speeding. This was always when I was going with the flow of traffic moving along in the pack. I HAVE NEVER had close calls while speeding because less time in close proximity to each vehicle= less time for them to hit me. My first and foremost priority in highway driving will always be never to allow another car to be next to me when it's not absolutely necessary.
And why do you assume I weave through traffic?
All other things (road conditions, cell phones, coffee, navigation systems, crying children, eating, etc.) being equal, I argue that by driving this much faster than surrounding traffic other drivers are less likely to see you approaching. Physics 101: the greater the speed differential between two vehicles involved in a collision, the greater the damage to the vehicles and the likelihood of injury to the occupants.
Bottom line - accidents do happen and driving FASTER will do nothing to prevent them. You have been lucky so far and I hope your luck continues.
I have good tires, too. Michelins. That's still not safe at over 80-85 in my opinion
First, the only thing kinetic energy may have an influence on going any particular speed is the amount of heat you will generate putting on the brakes. How fast you will stop is dependent on you, your car, your brakes, your tires. the road. Kinetic energy will be dissipated as heat.
Secondly, all manufacture's tires have speed ratings. For example, a "Z" rating is 149+ MPH.
I had Pirelli P7000 "Z" rated tires on the spots car I took the 520 mile trip in. I never had them over 130. BTW the lowest speed rating is "P" for 93 MPH.
It is possible to have tires that are not up to the speed the vehicle is capable of. I have never driven as fast as the tires are rated. I try to leave a 10-15 MPH cushion.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
A good reason to do away with commute lanes during commute traffic! In this neck of the woods the speed differential can be as high as 65 mph!
I drove the German Autobahn for 6 years. Loved it. We'll never have it because Americans wouldn't put up with all the rules and regulations that go along with it.
Conversely, I've driven in Italy, been a passenger in Venezuela, and heard horror stories from travellers to the Orient. All these drivers have a healthy contempt for rules other than bigger is better. I'm glad we're not at that level yet.
I say yet because I believe our situation is deteriorating. Not because of excess speed but because of excess traffic on an aging infrastructure. Not to mention a licensing system that allows vitually anyone to obtain a license.
Bottom line: When it's your time going 15mph in the slow lane or 115 in the fast doesn't make a lick of difference because it's never YOUR fault. It's somebody else's bone head move that sent you to the morgue. So we happily assume a certain level of risk knowing it could never happen to ME.
I do not have a Navigation System, I only use a cell phone when stopped. It is off all other times. My children are grown and and only whine. I do not eat or drink while driving.
Once again, I only drive over 100 when there is no traffic. It goes without saying that road conditions are excellent.
Driving that fast requires significant concentration. One has to be able to look as far ahead as possible. It takes 4 times as far to come to a complete stop for each doubling of speed, So if my car can stop 0-60 in 125 feet. it will take 500 feet to stop 120-0. So I have to be able to see about 1/4 mile ahead (over 1000 feet). At 120 that 1/4 mile takes 7 1/2 seconds.
BTW physics has nothing to do with innatentive drivers.
I did not imply that YOU in any way are an inattentive driver. I was pointing out that there are too many drivers out there, for whatever reason, that present a hazard and that driving faster does not minimize this. In fact, it increases the likelihood of serious injury in the event of an accident.
I did not link physics to inattentive driving. Re-read the post.
My point was that whether you choose to believe it or not, excessive speeding (defined by me for the purposes of this discussion as greater than 20-25mph or more over the posted limit) is not now, ever was or ever will be safer than driving at a reasonable rate of speed. It is dangerous to others when done in traffic (even light traffic) and dangerous to yourself when done on "isolated" roads.
brakes, the kinetic energy had to be used up in some way whether it's the brake pads, rubber contact patch with the road, or impacting another object.
One of the laws of physics is conservation of energy. You may choose to dissipate it as heat in your brakes - pads, rotors drums, whatever. If you want to lock up your brakes and heat up the road and your tires, you can. It will take you a lot longer to stop with locked up brakes. You can dissipate the energy by colliding with something and deforming your car.
You can do whatever you think best.
What is that?