Which is worse fast or slow?

[Mergingtraffic]

Here's a debate:

Which reduces safety and disrupts traffic flow more?

1) Slow drivers, that either go speed limit or slower when nobody else does.  Left lane campers also going the speed limit or slightly below

or

2) Fast Drivers, that go 80mph in a 65mph when others are doing about 65mph.  Or the weavers that cut in and out of traffic.

Discuss...I've come across both recently.

[KEK Inc.]

Anything that grossly deviates from the flow of traffic is unsafe. 

That said, the slow drivers hogging the left lane disrupts traffic flow more than the speeder. 

[kkt]

They're both disruptive, however the left lane camper just makes things slower, driving way too fast increases the chance of a serious accident that could injure or kill innocent parties and make a much slower trip for everyone.

[UCFKnights]

Here's a debate:

Which reduces safety and disrupts traffic flow more?

1) Slow drivers, that either go speed limit or slower when nobody else does.  Left lane campers also going the speed limit or slightly below

or

2) Fast Drivers, that go 80mph in a 65mph when others are doing about 65mph.  Or the weavers that cut in and out of traffic.

Discuss...I've come across both recently.

The slow pokes... they're making everyone have to violate the standard procedure to deal with them and causing everyone to need to weave to get around them. I only find the speeders bad when they go in front of you and then have to hit their brake... while, sure, its more dangerous, the accidents from them are relatively rare to the delays caused by others

[froggie]

Apples and oranges.

[spooky]

Here's a debate:

Which reduces safety and disrupts traffic flow more?

1) Slow drivers, that either go speed limit or slower when nobody else does.  Left lane campers also going the speed limit or slightly below

or

2) Fast Drivers, that go 80mph in a 65mph when others are doing about 65mph.  Or the weavers that cut in and out of traffic.

Discuss...I've come across both recently.

IMHO, the slow driver disrupts traffic flow more, while the fast driver reduces safety more.

[US 41]

I drive slow (the speed limit) all the time. If the Speed Limit is 30 on a multilane highway and everyone is passing me in the left lane going 45 I will still drive 30. I never camp out in the left lane, unless you consider passing a semi going 65 mph at 70 mph camping out. I try to stay in the right lane as much as possible. If I am in a big city I usually try to hang out 1 lane left of the right lane. I have never gotten pulled over or been involved in an accident. Slower drivers are typically safer if they are paying attention. Now people driving slow because they are playing on their phones are obviously not driving safely.

[Kacie Jane]

Here's a debate:

Which reduces safety and disrupts traffic flow more?

1) Slow drivers, that either go speed limit or slower when nobody else does.  Left lane campers also going the speed limit or slightly below

or

2) Fast Drivers, that go 80mph in a 65mph when others are doing about 65mph.  Or the weavers that cut in and out of traffic.

Discuss...I've come across both recently.

IMHO, the slow driver disrupts traffic flow more, while the fast driver reduces safety more.

This.  I'm curious why you phrased the original question "and", as there's no reason the two things are necessarily related.

[Pete from Boston]

All speeders are not weavers.  I have a problem with people who weave at high speed, and people who tailgate at high speed, the latter of which should result in license suspension.  Other than that it's just the absurd 90-in-a-pack-of-70 idiots, not speeders in general, that are a real issue to me.

Slow drivers (well below the limit and not in a passable lane) are annoying, but annoying is better than threatening.

[froggie]

IMHO, the slow driver disrupts traffic flow more, while the fast driver reduces safety more.

This.  I'm curious why you phrased the original question "and", as there's no reason the two things are necessarily related.

Exactly why I called this an apples-and-oranges question/comparison.

[SP Cook]

There is no evidence that "speeding" is dangerous at all.  In fact, as artificially low speed limits have been raised, without exception, traffic mortality and morbidity have declined.  Every time.  And, of course we have the evidence of places like Germany, where safe and fast driving is the norm.  Really it only takes a basic understanding of physics to realize the old saw that  "you are going to cause an accident by driving too fast is silly. 

"Weavers" are a different issue.  Most are really just poor drivers.  Is it smart to go to the point that you "take" a lane and depend on everybody else to slow down?  No.   But it really is unrelated to "speeding".

People who drive too slowly, even if they practice proper lane discipline, are the most dangerous drivers.  Proper use of modern highways is predicated on everyone driving an appropriate speed.  When someone drives too slowly, they cause any number of dangerous situations behind them.  Be they old men in Buicks, slow moving construction equipment, trucks without the power to properly be in mountainous areas, or whatever.  If you do not feel comfortable driving at the speed everyone else is are right to feel uncomfortable.  The remedy is to cease driving, at least on that type of highway.

[jeffandnicole]

Here's a debate:

Which reduces safety and disrupts traffic flow more?

1) Slow drivers, that either go speed limit...

Stop right there.  You can't say a driver going the speed limit is disrupting traffic.  What else would you say:  Drivers that fully stop at stop signs are reducing safety?  Drivers failing to pass in non-passing zones are reducing safety?  Drivers not drunk are reducing safety?

If a driver is driving by the law, they really can't be reducing safety.  Now, if a driver is driving the speed limit while camping out in the left lane, that's totally different.  They *are* breaking a law - which is a failure to keep to the right. 

Thus, driving the speed limit, or even below the limit, in itself, is OK.  It's when they combine that with other illegal activities is what is unsafe.

[Kacie Jane]

Really it only takes a basic understanding of physics to realize the old saw that  "you are going to cause an accident by driving too fast" is silly.

Really?  Because a basic understanding of physics tells me that the faster a vehicle is going, the harder it is to maintain control around curves, and the longer it takes to stop.

Be they old men in Buicks, slow moving construction equipment, trucks without the power to properly be in mountainous areas, or whatever.  If you do not feel comfortable driving at the speed everyone else is are right to feel uncomfortable.  The remedy is to cease driving, at least on that type of highway.

So then how do you propose we repave freeways?  Or transport freight through mountain passes?  Teleporters?

[froggie]

There is no evidence that "speeding" is dangerous at all.

Kacie beat me to it, but you should really take a physics course and learn about friction, force, and curves.

[doorknob60]

Here's a debate:

Which reduces safety and disrupts traffic flow more?

1) Slow drivers, that either go speed limit...

Stop right there.  You can't say a driver going the speed limit is disrupting traffic.  What else would you say:  Drivers that fully stop at stop signs are reducing safety?  Drivers failing to pass in non-passing zones are reducing safety?  Drivers not drunk are reducing safety?

If a driver is driving by the law, they really can't be reducing safety.  Now, if a driver is driving the speed limit while camping out in the left lane, that's totally different.  They *are* breaking a law - which is a failure to keep to the right. 

Thus, driving the speed limit, or even below the limit, in itself, is OK.  It's when they combine that with other illegal activities is what is unsafe.

I'm going to use an extreme example here, but it gets the point across. In Costa Rica, all road work zones have a set Speed Limit of 30 km/h (at least from what I saw). There is a long work zone (I believe about 45 km long, though I only saw half of it) on a major highway, where they are expanding the old 2 lane highway to be 4 lanes. The speed limit on the 2 lane highway was most likely 80 km/h before the road work started. Throughout most of the work zone, 80 km/h is a safe speed, and what most of the traffic is going. If a line of cars moving 80 km/h meets a car going 30 km/h, that's an unsafe situation. It'd be safer if the car going 30 sped up to match the speed of everyone else.

[Henry]

Speeding may be dangerous and deadly, but driving slower than normal is much worse.

[Kacie Jane]

*tries to figure out what could be "much worse" than "dangerous and deadly"*

[texaskdog]

Anything that grossly deviates from the flow of traffic is unsafe. 

That said, the slow drivers hogging the left lane disrupts traffic flow more than the speeder. 

well said on both counts.

[Pete from Boston]

*tries to figure out what could be "much worse" than "dangerous and deadly"*

+9

[SP Cook]

Really?  Because a basic understanding of physics tells me that the faster a vehicle is going, the harder it is to maintain control around curves, and the longer it takes to stop.

So then how do you propose we repave freeways?  Or transport freight through mountain passes?  Teleporters?

You make several basic mistakes here. 

Modern expressways are designed for high speed travel.  And the world in not flat.  To drive at a speed that would actually allow you to come to a complete stop the very first time you saw a lane blockage in most non-Great Plains areas is to drive at 20 or maybe 30 MPH.  That is not how interstates work.  Rather, interstates are predicated on driving at an acceptable speed, and depending on others to do so as well. 

As to "curves", you might want to check out out the design specs for a modern expressway.  It is perfectly safe to take most curves safe and fast.  The types of speeds that would cause a loss of control on a properly designed and maintained expressway's curve are simply not atainable in an automobile.

UNLESS, there is the dangerous element.  The driver driving too slowly.  Say they are in the middle of a curve.  Say they should be going at least 70, but are going 40.  By the time you see them, whether you are going 70 or 50, it is too late.  Because slow driving is dangerous.  It causes accidents.

As to construction equipment, I missed the part where I said not to do it.  Mining coal is dangerous.  Fishing for lobster is dangerous.  LIFE is dangerous.  That does not mean you eliminate these things.  It means you do your best.  Which, in this case would be properly timed and regulated moves of construction equipment.  Proper routing of trucks.  The use of properly powered equipment (a huge problem in my area is trucks pulling loads that are too large, because the owners do not wish to pay to lease a more powerfule, and thus faster and thus safer, truck)  And so on.

And, for people, in whatever lane, who simply refuse to drive at appropriate speeds, it means getting them to do so, or getting them off the road.

[Brandon]

Slow drivers in the left lanes and the weavers.  The slow drivers cause some of the weaving, but there are some around Chicago that weave due to making the exit at the last possible moment from the far lane, or just simply change lanes two or three at a time.

[ET21]

Slow for sure

[Brandon]

There is no evidence that "speeding" is dangerous at all.

Kacie beat me to it, but you should really take a physics course and learn about friction, force, and curves.

There's a difference between "speeding" and going to fast (or slow) for a roadway's conditions.  20 mph may be too fast on an urban street with cars parked on the side.  55 mph may be way too slow on a freeway.

[Pete from Boston]

Where is the data on the threat caused by overly slow vehicles?

[jeffandnicole]

Where is the data on the threat caused by overly slow vehicles?

Very hard to find.

If an accident was caused by a speeder, or a red light runner, then it's generally widely reported by the media.  But when an accident is caused by a pedestrian, or by someone going the speed limit, there's generally little followup. There's an official report somewhere (accident report), but unless someone takes the time and money to purchase those reports and dissect them all, it's rare to hear of someone at or below the speed limit who was at fault.