Priceconomics.com: Is Every Speed Limit Too Low? (https://priceonomics.com/is-every-speed-limit-too-low/)
QuoteWhen Lieutenant Gary Megge of the Michigan State Police attends a meeting, he sometimes asks, "How many of you broke the speed limit on your way here?"
QuoteHearing his question, you might assume that Lt. Megge is a particularly zealous police officer. The type of person who walks half a city block to avoid jaywalking on an empty street. The model citizen who defers almost obnoxiously to the letter of the law. But that is not the point of Lt. Megge's question at all.
Quote"We all speed, yet months and months usually pass between us seeing a crash," Lt. Megge tells us when we call to discuss speed limits. "That tells me that most of us are adequate, safe, reasonable drivers. Speeding and traffic safety have a small correlation."
QuoteOver the past 12 years, Lt. Megge has increased the speed limit on nearly 400 of Michigan's roadways. Each time, he or one of his officers hears from community groups who complain that people already drive too fast. But as Megge and his colleagues explain, their intent is not to reduce congestion, bow to the reality that everyone drives too fast, or even strike a balance between safety concerns and drivers' desire to arrive at their destinations faster. Quite the opposite, Lt. Megge advocates for raising speed limits because he believes it makes roads safer.
The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130. Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling. Pretty much all other highways I find to be under-posted.
Neighborhood streets, OTOH, should often be less than 30 mph, especially where there are uncontrolled intersections. I would advocate 20 or 25 mph tops where there are uncontrolled intersections.
The Michigan State Police, unlike other police departments, actually get it.
This link was in the article: http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-72297_30536_25802-87384--,00.html
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2017, 11:36:46 AM
The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130. Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling.
Would this be true for nighttime and other time periods where traffic isn't as heavy?
I would think that not meeting the speed limit is a good thing. It's a *limit*, not a goal.
IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.
Most of the roads around me are about right. Many of the arterials in Meridian are 40 MPH, which I think is about right (and probably somewhat near the 85th percentile). 45 would be pushing it in most of those places due to the amount of turning traffic, but 35 would be too slow (and a lot of cities would probably have gone with 35). Eagle Rd/SH 55 is 50-55 MPH, which honestly might be too high. The 85th percentile speed on that road is probably around 45 MPH, even taking away peak hour congestion (but I don't have data to back that up). 80 MPH on the rural interstates is a good speed. 65 on the urban interstates is too low, it should be 70, maybe 75 in spots.
Stark contrast to growing up in Bend, where minor arterials were often posted at 25 MPH and everyone went 35, US-97 posted at 45 and everyone goes 55-60, and rural highways posted at 55 and everyone goes 70 (at least they mostly fixed that one). And then on two different roads they lowered speed limits from 45 to 35. I would have accepted lowering those to 40, but I think 35 is too low.
Boise has a couple head scratchers (27th St. being lowered to 25 as an attempted road diet, despite nearby more residential roads like 28th and 32nd being 30 MPH, and Hill Rd should probably be 35 the whole way), but overall I never really need to worry about speed limits here (except on the freeway, where it's easy to go 80 when there's not much traffic), it's nice.
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2017, 11:36:46 AM
The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130. Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling. Pretty much all other highways I find to be under-posted.
Neighborhood streets, OTOH, should often be less than 30 mph, especially where there are uncontrolled intersections. I would advocate 20 or 25 mph tops where there are uncontrolled intersections.
The residential areas are tricky, because people take advantage of the 5 over "grace mph", so I would do a lower speed. Even at 20 to 25mph you can do severe damage to a person in the street (if hit by a considerablely sized vehicle or any vehicle for that matter).
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 26, 2017, 04:57:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2017, 11:36:46 AM
The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130. Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling. Pretty much all other highways I find to be under-posted.
Neighborhood streets, OTOH, should often be less than 30 mph, especially where there are uncontrolled intersections. I would advocate 20 or 25 mph tops where there are uncontrolled intersections.
The residential areas are tricky, because people take advantage of the 5 over "grace mph", so I would do a lower speed. Even at 20 to 25mph you can do severe damage to a person in the street (if hit by a considerablely sized vehicle or any vehicle for that matter).
And you won't do severe damage to a person, even in another vehicle, at 70mph on a freeway if you aren't paying attention?
The point is changing the speed limit and setting them at the actual speed that it is safe to drive on the roads. My (admittedly anecdotal) experience is that if people feel like they're driving the actual maximum safe limit on the road, they stop doing all of the distracted driving things. No playing on the phones, no eating, no reading a book or doing their makeup and hair. They put all their attention on the road, as it requires that.
To me, the question I feel that should be presented, when we're worried about our kids on the road as a reason to lower the speed limit, is do you think its safer for the driver to do 25-30mph while playing on their phone not paying attention to the road, and possibly failing to hit their brake when the kid runs in the street... or 35mph with their full focus on the road, slamming on the brake when the kid runs out and impacting at a lower speed or missing the kid with a large screech of the tires? Because reality seems to dictate those are our choices.
Quote from: UCFKnights on April 26, 2017, 06:28:20 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 26, 2017, 04:57:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2017, 11:36:46 AM
The only highway I've driven with a too-high speed limit was the 85-mph portion of TX-130. Now, my preferred cruising speed would typically be between 85 and 90 mph, but the undulation of the roadway and the heavy-laden vehicle I was in made 80 mph less unsettling. Pretty much all other highways I find to be under-posted.
Neighborhood streets, OTOH, should often be less than 30 mph, especially where there are uncontrolled intersections. I would advocate 20 or 25 mph tops where there are uncontrolled intersections.
Well, drive 95, keep kids alive!
The residential areas are tricky, because people take advantage of the 5 over "grace mph", so I would do a lower speed. Even at 20 to 25mph you can do severe damage to a person in the street (if hit by a considerablely sized vehicle or any vehicle for that matter).
And you won't do severe damage to a person, even in another vehicle, at 70mph on a freeway if you aren't paying attention?
The point is changing the speed limit and setting them at the actual speed that it is safe to drive on the roads. My (admittedly anecdotal) experience is that if people feel like they're driving the actual maximum safe limit on the road, they stop doing all of the distracted driving things. No playing on the phones, no eating, no reading a book or doing their makeup and hair. They put all their attention on the road, as it requires that.
To me, the question I feel that should be presented, when we're worried about our kids on the road as a reason to lower the speed limit, is do you think its safer for the driver to do 25-30mph while playing on their phone not paying attention to the road, and possibly failing to hit their brake when the kid runs in the street... or 35mph with their full focus on the road, slamming on the brake when the kid runs out and impacting at a lower speed or missing the kid with a large screech of the tires? Because reality seems to dictate those are our choices.
I-95 drops down as low as 50 and 40 mph in CT. Those are speed traps waiting to happen if I ever saw one except you rarely see traffic enforcement on I-95 and never south of New Haven to the NY line. I think the state keeps speed limits low because of heavy traffic that's frequently stop and go and it's dangerous to have cars going 65-70 then having to suddenly stop (for no reason).
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 26, 2017, 04:57:42 PM
The residential areas are tricky, because people take advantage of the 5 over "grace mph", so I would do a lower speed. Even at 20 to 25mph you can do severe damage to a person in the street (if hit by a considerablely sized vehicle or any vehicle for that matter).
Yes, you can do damage at those speeds, but the damage is not determined by the speed limit, or even by the prevailing speed of travel - rather, it is determined by the speed the vehicle is traveling at the point of impact.
For one thing, a majority of collisions between a vehicle and a pedestrian involve a vehicle making a turn at an intersection. That turning vehicle is likely traveling below the speed limit already.
For another, a driver anticipating a collision is instinctively going to hit the brakes, which means that in general the vehicle will have slowed down before it actually hits the person.
Let's also bear in mind that drivers are adaptable. Even if we decide it's not safe to drive over 25 MPH in the presence of pedestrians, that doesn't mean no vehicle can ever safely travel over 25 MPH on a street where pedestrians may be present. It simply means the driver needs to be on the lookout for pedestrians and prepared to slow down if he sees any. There is a temptation to idiot-proof this by simply making the limit 25, however I would argue in favor of idiot-proofing it by not granting driving privileges to people who are incapable of adjusting their speed to current conditions.
And to answer the original question, yes - most speed limits are too low. More states need to adopt the Texas model of setting speed limits (rural two lane road? Usually posted at 70). Texas does it mostly right, the only thing I think they really do wrong is only allowing 80 on rural interstates in a small region of the state rather than throughout.
Quote from: connroadgeek on April 29, 2017, 07:18:35 PM
I-95 drops down as low as 50 and 40 mph in CT. Those are speed traps waiting to happen if I ever saw one except you rarely see traffic enforcement on I-95 and never south of New Haven to the NY line. I think the state keeps speed limits low because of heavy traffic that's frequently stop and go and it's dangerous to have cars going 65-70 then having to suddenly stop (for no reason).
Then it's not a speed trap.
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on April 26, 2017, 02:01:54 PM
IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.
Uh, YEAH!!! I occasionally travel to the Chicago/Naperville/Schaumburg area for work and am usually taking the tollway. I try to obey the speed limit because I don't want a ticket, but I feel as if I'll be run over because everyone else is going 65 or above.
Quote from: busman_49 on May 01, 2017, 09:44:09 AM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on April 26, 2017, 02:01:54 PM
IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.
Uh, YEAH!!! I occasionally travel to the Chicago/Naperville/Schaumburg area for work and am usually taking the tollway. I try to obey the speed limit because I don't want a ticket, but I feel as if I'll be run over because everyone else is going 65 or above.
I once drove from Michigan to Iowa without without dropping below 75 mph, hardly ever dropping below 80 mph.
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on April 26, 2017, 02:01:54 PM
IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.
I heard a bill is being talked about in springfield to make every interstate west of, and including 355, and south of, and including I-80 75 MPH
Cut to Virginia State Police representatives laughing hysterically.
Quote from: inkyatari on May 02, 2017, 05:02:01 PM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on April 26, 2017, 02:01:54 PM
IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.
I heard a bill is being talked about in springfield to make every interstate west of, and including 355, and south of, and including I-80 75 MPH
It exists and Oberweis is behind it (as he was for the 70 mph bill as well).
SB2036 (http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=2036&GAID=14&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=105516&SessionID=91&GA=100)
Quote from: inkyatari on May 02, 2017, 05:02:01 PM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on April 26, 2017, 02:01:54 PM
IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.
I heard a bill is being talked about in springfield to make every interstate west of, and including 355, and south of, and including I-80 75 MPH
That would be nice.
Would that include urban stretches of freeway like I-74 through Peoria or I-55 down by East St. Louis though?
Quote from: Takumi on May 02, 2017, 05:10:24 PM
Cut to Virginia State Police representatives laughing hysterically.
I've lived 14 years in NC and traveled through other states and have yet to find a state that matches Virginia's aggressive
revenue collection speed enforcement. The only place I've seen that comes close is the Ohio Turnpike. That turnpike is always crawling with state troopers every time I've driven it. Last time in 2013 one trooper was driving on there
exactly 70mph with traffic as far back behind him as you could see, bumper to bumper, and getting visibly pissed with him. As soon as he turned off, it was like seeing the green flag at a NASCAR race. Everybody took off! :-D
Virginia hit a fuckin' gold mine when they raised the speed limit on interstates to 70mph a few years ago without raising the Reckless Driving limit above 80mph. Virginia shouldn't have raised the speed limit to 70mph unless they included raising the Reckless Driving limit to at least 85mph as a package deal, IMO. But Virginia loves money too much.
You know, it's funny, I've lived in Virginia since I was one year old and I've never found the speed limit enforcement here to be nearly as draconian as everyone says it is, although I certainly agree that the "over 80 mph is reckless" thing is an abomination in 70-mph zones. I'll admit I don't drive as fast as I did when I was younger, but I used to bomb along Virginia highways at 90 mph or more on a regular basis (not just Interstates, either) and I never got nailed for it. Maybe it was luck.
Quote from: 1995hoo on May 02, 2017, 09:34:36 PM
You know, it's funny, I've lived in Virginia since I was one year old and I've never found the speed limit enforcement here to be nearly as draconian as everyone says it is, although I certainly agree that the "over 80 mph is reckless" thing is an abomination in 70-mph zones.
IMHO, Maryland is worse, both with speed cameras not allowed in Virginia, and also the cops seem to work harder and with more creativity. I wonder whether the Virginia State Police leans so much on the state's radar detector ban that it otherwise puts in less speed enforcement effort.
I also remember back when Maryland did those rolling roadblocks to enforce the NMSL. Never saw that in Virginia that I can recall. In fairness to Maryland, though, I think part of it had to do with some federal regulation about a certain percentage of drivers having to obey the 55-mph limit, and the feds were permissive about how states could meet it.
Quote from: 1995hoo on May 03, 2017, 07:39:08 AM
I also remember back when Maryland did those rolling roadblocks to enforce the NMSL. Never saw that in Virginia that I can recall. In fairness to Maryland, though, I think part of it had to do with some federal regulation about a certain percentage of drivers having to obey the 55-mph limit, and the feds were permissive about how states could meet it.
Interesting, because I never saw any rolling roadblocks here in the Midwest during the NMSL in the 1980s. IIRC, Michigan would actually pull over people who were Nestoring for obstruction of traffic.
An issue I see here is +10-15-25MPH speed over limit used by most traffic, making realistic speed limits dangerous as everyone would go over.
It can be resolved by new speed limit paradigm (just thinking another day - posting something like "recommended speed 70 / enforcement 80" encourages actually staying below limit. Problem is that any new paradigm would be quickly abused by local agencies.
Another issue that stupid old documents - like 4th amendment - don't allow effective operation of government and law enforcement. Ability to write ticket to anyone and make them pay fee for tax on surcharge along with ability to inspect any car is priceless for governments and police.
Quote from: tribar on May 02, 2017, 06:00:59 PM
Quote from: inkyatari on May 02, 2017, 05:02:01 PM
Quote from: Joe The Dragon on April 26, 2017, 02:01:54 PM
IL tollway needs to be 70-75 on all roads.
I heard a bill is being talked about in springfield to make every interstate west of, and including 355, and south of, and including I-80 75 MPH
That would be nice.
Would that include urban stretches of freeway like I-74 through Peoria or I-55 down by East St. Louis though?
Synopsis from the bill Brandon linked to...
QuoteAmends the Illinois Vehicle Code. Provides that unless some other speed restriction is established under a Chapter in the Code governing rules of the road, the maximum speed limit outside an urban district for any vehicle is 60 miles per hour (rather than 55 miles per hour) on all highways, roads, and streets that do not have 4 or more lanes of traffic and are not interstate highways and 75 miles per hour (rather than 70 miles per hour) on Interstate Route 355, Interstate Route 80, and every interstate west of Interstate Route 355 and south of Interstate Route 80.
I've found that going 78 mph from NJ to FL doesn't phase the cops one bit, regardless of the speed limit (which is almost always going to be 65 or 70).
I'm also aware of the traffic around me. If I'm doing 78 and passing everyone, then I'll slow it down. If I'm doing 78 and in a line of traffic doing the same thing, I'll maintain my speed. If I'm doing 78 and getting passed by people in the 80's, I'll speed it up. Sure, I can't use the 'well, everyone else is doing it excuse' if I am caught, but the odds are with me that if a lot of traffic is going fast, I'm not going to stand out. If the limit drops to 60 or 55, then I'll drop my speed below 70 or as appropriate for the conditions.
Overall, I've found traffic speeds to be increasing. I see it most often in NJ, where I still believe 80+ on most of our interstates will get you stopped, but so much traffic is going 80+, the chances of getting caught are decreased (not to mention an absolute lack of cops sitting in the median lately...and those that do are usually visible from a long distance away). But on my recent trip, unless there was a left lane hog in the way, speeds frequently exceeded 80 mph up and down the east coast.
And that's even in Virginia, which actually has posted a sign in each direction on 95 saying that over 80 mph is considered Reckless Driving! (And really, that's hardly the definition of Reckless Driving...in most states, 11 over or 16 over the limit is called "Speeding".) I only saw one sign each direction, both in the southern part of the state. I would think a sign like this would be appropriate every few miles!
I remember when they widened I-55 between Weber Rd., and the I&M Canal (Southwest of Chicago,) from two lanes to three, in addition to doing a pretty crappy job of the whole project, they actually widened the shoulder on the other side of overpasses from the direction of travel to accommodate hiding police cars.
I keep wondering, if in three lane areas, if structuring each lane to a specific range of speeds would go. 45-65 right lane, 55-75 middle lane, 65-85 left lane. No semis in the far right lane. Probably won't work, but I've been curious about this.
The only issues I have are at stoplights or when I get behind someone who is too slow.
Wait, is the limit the HIGHEST speed allowed or the lowest?
It should be noted it's the 85th percentile, not the 80th.
My biggest speed limit gripe is with I-91 being 45 MPH through Springfield, MA. No one follows it though and I can't see how it could even be enforced.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 03, 2017, 10:44:59 AM
It should be noted it's the 85th percentile, not the 80th.
Exact numbers are probably based on some assumptions about speed distribution. Which are, by their nature, just assumptions. Adding to the issue is 5 MPH granularity of speed limits - and speed distributions are probably not very wide, I can see data with average +/- 7-10 MPH
I suspect 80% to 85% difference is about 1-2 MPH, something like 77 and 79 respectively... And speed limit is going to be either 75 or 80 anyway.
And I just like this image!
(https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa10001/images/speedconceptscover.jpg)
Quote from: LM117 on May 02, 2017, 06:11:24 PM
Last time in 2013 one trooper was driving on there exactly 70mph with traffic as far back behind him as you could see, bumper to bumper, and getting visibly pissed with him. As soon as he turned off, it was like seeing the green flag at a NASCAR race. Everybody took off! :-D
In the name of safety, no less! I'd bet the farm there was a good share of reckless driving as soon as he turned off, with lots of people trying to get ahead of the pack and likely going even faster to do it than they would have in the first place.
And as a personal note..
Lately my general highway speed went down by about 5 MPH. Reason? Upgrade to a car which has an MPG display. Although my old Civic still had better MPG than this one - just seeing how number changes with average speed is a good one for me.
Regarding the 85th percentile, what I read about it gave me the impression (although I may have been reading too much into it) that the real point wasn't the "85" number but was the shape of the speed distribution curve. To describe, if the 85th percentile speed was 73, there may be in a survey several cars going 71, several going 72, and several going 73, while maybe there are fewer going 74, only a couple going 75, maybe one or two going 76, another going 78, a few more in the 80s, and so on. The 85th percentile represents the highest speed with a cluster rather than a rarity of presumably reasonable drivers selecting that speed. Those going faster have fewer other drivers choosing their speed, showing that they may be demonstrating reckless disregard for safety. The point is that the 85th percentile itself may not be a magic number, but just an average of where the shape of the distribution curve starts to change. If the clusters change to isolated examples at a lower or higher speed, then that speed may warrant consideration as the limit. Based on the way it was described, that's what I took from it.
I also listened to the discussion about the speed study conducted on I-20 in Parker County, Texas when the plan was to increase the speed limit to 70 only as far east as Weatherford. The engineer said something about clustering of speeds and where that started to change as the reason for ending the increase at that point. She talked about clustering rather than 85th percentile numbers.
Quote from: wxfree on May 04, 2017, 03:05:36 AM
Regarding the 85th percentile, what I read about it gave me the impression (although I may have been reading too much into it) that the real point wasn't the "85" number but was the shape of the speed distribution curve. To describe, if the 85th percentile speed was 73, there may be in a survey several cars going 71, several going 72, and several going 73, while maybe there are fewer going 74, only a couple going 75, maybe one or two going 76, another going 78, a few more in the 80s, and so on. The 85th percentile represents the highest speed with a cluster rather than a rarity of presumably reasonable drivers selecting that speed. Those going faster have fewer other drivers choosing their speed, showing that they may be demonstrating reckless disregard for safety. The point is that the 85th percentile itself may not be a magic number, but just an average of where the shape of the distribution curve starts to change. If the clusters change to isolated examples at a lower or higher speed, then that speed may warrant consideration as the limit. Based on the way it was described, that's what I took from it.
85th percentile has nothing to do with clustering or a bell curve.
The NJDOT website does a good, simple job in explaining the 85th percentile.
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/roadway/speed.shtm
Quote
Average speed or mean speed is the sum of all individual speed measurements divided by the total number of vehicles.
Median speed - the speed at or below 50 percent of vehicles travel.
85th percentile speed - the speeds at or below 85% of all vehicles are observed to travel under free flowing conditions.
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 03, 2017, 11:01:34 AM
From what I've gathered, speed limits were generally adhered to until the NMSL made every highway 55, regardless of how congested or sparse traffic was. After that point, speed limits became a political pawn for all roadways rather than a useful engineering instrument.
That doesn't explain why people go +9 or more on roads where the speed limit is well below 55, such as 25 on residential streets which, as far as I know did not change significantly during or after the NMSL.
Quote from: bzakharin on May 04, 2017, 05:41:22 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 03, 2017, 11:01:34 AM
From what I've gathered, speed limits were generally adhered to until the NMSL made every highway 55, regardless of how congested or sparse traffic was. After that point, speed limits became a political pawn for all roadways rather than a useful engineering instrument.
That doesn't explain why people go +9 or more on roads where the speed limit is well below 55, such as 25 on residential streets which, as far as I know did not change significantly during or after the NMSL.
The NMSL taught drivers that speed limits, any speed limit at all, just don't matter. It was a major mistake that will take a few generations to fix.
Quote from: kalvado on May 04, 2017, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
"Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits and we can't.
Quote from: vdeane on May 04, 2017, 09:03:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 04, 2017, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
"Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits and we can't.
I didn't have a chance to drive in Germany yet.. But maybe 0.03 alcohol limit also plays a role? Maybe 80% manual transmissions? Maybe more relying on common sense and less on US-style legislating proper sneezing procedures?
Putting it simple - every single day I see 2-3 idiots insisting on keeping right near exit 7 northbound on Northway. You want to
enforce that idiocy?
Quote from: vdeane on May 04, 2017, 09:03:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 04, 2017, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
"Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits and we can't.
Agreed. Decently high traffic volumes, generally no more than two or three lanes each direction, top-of-the-line luxury sports cars sharing the road with motor homes, trucks limited to low speeds... Without people keeping right (or at least moving right when being approached), there would be more accidents.
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
Maybe 80% manual transmissions?
I don't follow. How does having a stick shift help prevent accidents?
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
Maybe 80% manual transmissions?
I don't follow. How does having a stick shift help prevent accidents?
It keeps one focused on driving and not doing other things that are considered
distracted driving.
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 04, 2017, 09:03:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 04, 2017, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
"Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits and we can't.
Agreed. Decently high traffic volumes, generally no more than two or three lanes each direction, top-of-the-line luxury sports cars sharing the road with motor homes, trucks limited to low speeds... Without people keeping right (or at least moving right when being approached), there would be more accidents.
How all that relates to "no speed limit"?
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 11:14:03 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 04, 2017, 09:03:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 04, 2017, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
"Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits and we can't.
Agreed. Decently high traffic volumes, generally no more than two or three lanes each direction, top-of-the-line luxury sports cars sharing the road with motor homes, trucks limited to low speeds... Without people keeping right (or at least moving right when being approached), there would be more accidents.
How all that relates to "no speed limit"?
It relates because in Germany there is a very wide range of speeds encountered on the highway. With more restrictive speed limits, the range of speeds encountered is narrower, and therefore the frequency of lane use conflict also decreases. Or, to put it another way, a guy legally driving 100 mph is going to encounter fewer obstacles if the left lane is kept clear than if it isn't.
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 12:13:02 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 11:14:03 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 04, 2017, 09:03:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 04, 2017, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
"Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits and we can't.
Agreed. Decently high traffic volumes, generally no more than two or three lanes each direction, top-of-the-line luxury sports cars sharing the road with motor homes, trucks limited to low speeds... Without people keeping right (or at least moving right when being approached), there would be more accidents.
How all that relates to "no speed limit"?
It relates because in Germany there is a very wide range of speeds encountered on the highway. With more restrictive speed limits, the range of speeds encountered is narrower, and therefore the frequency of lane use conflict also decreases. Or, to put it another way, a guy legally driving 100 mph is going to encounter fewer obstacles if the left lane is kept clear than if it isn't.
OK, let me understand this.. SOmeone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits?
Hmmm.. some new concept here..
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
Putting it simple - every single day I see 2-3 idiots insisting on keeping right near exit 7 northbound on Northway. You want to enforce that idiocy?
I would consider moving over so someone can merge in to be a legitimate reason to leave the right lane, as long as one does not stay there for no reason afterwards (people merging from most exits are usually going slower anyways, so it even counts as a pass). In any case, I-87 would flow a LOT better if people would wait for a gap in traffic big enough for them to not only move over but to accelerate to the speed of the other lane before the people in that lane would have to slow down to "let them in" (if you're changing lanes correctly, nobody will need to let you in, as long as traffic hasn't already jammed up); around here, people usually butt in with no regard for what traffic is doing. I've seen more people cut someone off at 40 mph than actually use the acceleration lane, for example. When changing lanes, they have no problem doing so from nearly a complete stop even if the lane they are moving in to is moving at 55, causing traffic in that lane to have to slam on their brakes. While the Northway certainly has a lot of traffic per lane, IMO a large part of the congestion is caused by people around here not knowing how to merge or change lanes.
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 01:21:43 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 12:13:02 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 11:14:03 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 04, 2017, 09:03:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 04, 2017, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
"Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits and we can't.
Agreed. Decently high traffic volumes, generally no more than two or three lanes each direction, top-of-the-line luxury sports cars sharing the road with motor homes, trucks limited to low speeds... Without people keeping right (or at least moving right when being approached), there would be more accidents.
How all that relates to "no speed limit"?
It relates because in Germany there is a very wide range of speeds encountered on the highway. With more restrictive speed limits, the range of speeds encountered is narrower, and therefore the frequency of lane use conflict also decreases. Or, to put it another way, a guy legally driving 100 mph is going to encounter fewer obstacles if the left lane is kept clear than if it isn't.
OK, let me understand this.. SOmeone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits?
Hmmm.. some new concept here..
If they're going 100 mph, they're probably spending the majority of their time passing.
Quote from: vdeane on May 05, 2017, 01:45:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
OK, let me understand this.. SOmeone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits?
Hmmm.. some new concept here..
If they're going 100 mph, they're probably spending the majority of their time passing.
Exactly. And did I say something about people not keeping right while going 100 mph? No, I don't believe I did. Should read like this:
Someone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits.
Quote from: vdeane on May 05, 2017, 01:45:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
Putting it simple - every single day I see 2-3 idiots insisting on keeping right near exit 7 northbound on Northway. You want to enforce that idiocy?
I would consider moving over so someone can merge in to be a legitimate reason to leave the right lane, as long as one does not stay there for no reason afterwards (people merging from most exits are usually going slower anyways, so it even counts as a pass). In any case, I-87 would flow a LOT better if people would wait for a gap in traffic big enough for them to not only move over but to accelerate to the speed of the other lane before the people in that lane would have to slow down to "let them in" (if you're changing lanes correctly, nobody will need to let you in, as long as traffic hasn't already jammed up); around here, people usually butt in with no regard for what traffic is doing. I've seen more people cut someone off at 40 mph than actually use the acceleration lane, for example. When changing lanes, they have no problem doing so from nearly a complete stop even if the lane they are moving in to is moving at 55, causing traffic in that lane to have to slam on their brakes. While the Northway certainly has a lot of traffic per lane, IMO a large part of the congestion is caused by people around here not knowing how to merge or change lanes.
Did you ever drive from 7 to 87 north?
There is a good 3 lane funneled into 1 lane and another lane from light-controlled entrance (irregular) merged in on top of that.. If you think people merging at that spot can do 55, i think you didn't actually tried that during rush hour. And yes, traffic count of 13k one way and 21k the other way sounds a bit funny.. I would say probably 20K is about right - all merging from 1 lane...
And if we're talking urban/suburban with 1 -2 miles between exits, you need to move over quite often...
Quote
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 01:21:43 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 12:13:02 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 11:14:03 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 04, 2017, 09:03:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 04, 2017, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 04, 2017, 08:18:01 AM
Agreed. Just as setting the speed limit too low so that most people speed doesn't change the equation either. I'm not arguing for keeping people with licenses who have lost their ability to drive. I'm pro increasing enforcement of other laws like keeping right except to pass, tailgating, and use of turn signals in place of all speed enforcement.
I would take a once every 5 years trip to court due stupid speed limit rather than daily clusterfuck on the road due to thoughtless "keep right" enforcement
"Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits and we can't.
Agreed. Decently high traffic volumes, generally no more than two or three lanes each direction, top-of-the-line luxury sports cars sharing the road with motor homes, trucks limited to low speeds... Without people keeping right (or at least moving right when being approached), there would be more accidents.
How all that relates to "no speed limit"?
It relates because in Germany there is a very wide range of speeds encountered on the highway. With more restrictive speed limits, the range of speeds encountered is narrower, and therefore the frequency of lane use conflict also decreases. Or, to put it another way, a guy legally driving 100 mph is going to encounter fewer obstacles if the left lane is kept clear than if it isn't.
OK, let me understand this.. SOmeone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits?
Hmmm.. some new concept here..
If they're going 100 mph, they're probably spending the majority of their time passing.
And not bothering to return to right lane... Let me see what it looks like.. Oh, yes, split speed limits!
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 01:54:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 05, 2017, 01:45:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
OK, let me understand this.. SOmeone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits?
Hmmm.. some new concept here..
If they're going 100 mph, they're probably spending the majority of their time passing.
Exactly. And did I say something about people not keeping right while going 100 mph? No, I don't believe I did. Should read like this:
Someone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits.
Hmmm... SOmeone wants to have a cake and eat it too?
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 12:13:02 PM
It relates because in Germany there is a very wide range of speeds encountered on the highway. With more restrictive speed limits, the range of speeds encountered is narrower, and therefore the frequency of lane use conflict also decreases. Or, to put it another way, a guy legally driving 100 mph is going to encounter fewer obstacles if the left lane is kept clear than if it isn't.
Question is - where that 100 MPH car actually is driving so that he is bothered about obstacles in left lane?
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:02:28 PM
Did you ever drive from 7 to 87 north?
There is a good 3 lane funneled into 1 lane and another lane from light-controlled entrance (irregular) merged in on top of that.. If you think people merging at that spot can do 55, i think you didn't actually tried that during rush hour. And yes, traffic count of 13k one way and 21k the other way sounds a bit funny.. I would say probably 20K is about right - all merging from 1 lane...
And if we're talking urban/suburban with 1 -2 miles between exits, you need to move over quite often...
Not at rush hour, but I get a feeling it's free flowing up until someone cuts someone else off. That's how it works at exit 4, which has similar issues at a smaller scale. I've seen traffic go from free flowing to parking lot in the time it takes me to go from the bridge to the ramp. Whenever I merge onto the Northway, 99% of the time I have zero trouble finding a gap to slip into... even when all the other people are cutting across the gore lines and butting in at 30-40 mph (creating a parking lot) even before the acceleration lane even begins! People here are just scared of accelerating on ramps and using acceleration lanes for some reason (unfortunately, this timidness extends to virtually everything and everywhere else with respect to driving in the Capital District except for downtown Albany (where I've actually been honked at for things like not exceeding the speed limit by 10 mph, not running a red light, and not running over a pedestrian) for some reason).
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:05:36 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 01:54:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 05, 2017, 01:45:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
OK, let me understand this.. SOmeone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits?
Hmmm.. some new concept here..
If they're going 100 mph, they're probably spending the majority of their time passing.
Exactly. And did I say something about people not keeping right while going 100 mph? No, I don't believe I did. Should read like this:
Someone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits.
Hmmm... SOmeone wants to have a cake and eat it too?
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 12:13:02 PM
It relates because in Germany there is a very wide range of speeds encountered on the highway. With more restrictive speed limits, the range of speeds encountered is narrower, and therefore the frequency of lane use conflict also decreases. Or, to put it another way, a guy legally driving 100 mph is going to encounter fewer obstacles if the left lane is kept clear than if it isn't.
Question is - where that 100 MPH car actually is driving so that he is bothered about obstacles in left lane?
The autobahn has too much traffic for someone to go 100 mph in the right lane for long periods of time. From what I've read, think the Thruway in the finger lakes during Labor Day weekend. All the time.
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:02:28 PM
And not bothering to return to right lane... Let me see what it looks like.. Oh, yes, split speed limits!
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:05:36 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 01:54:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 05, 2017, 01:45:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
OK, let me understand this.. SOmeone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits?
Hmmm.. some new concept here..
If they're going 100 mph, they're probably spending the majority of their time passing.
Exactly. And did I say something about people not keeping right while going 100 mph? No, I don't believe I did. Should read like this:
Someone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits.
Hmmm... SOmeone wants to have a cake and eat it too?
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 12:13:02 PM
It relates because in Germany there is a very wide range of speeds encountered on the highway. With more restrictive speed limits, the range of speeds encountered is narrower, and therefore the frequency of lane use conflict also decreases. Or, to put it another way, a guy legally driving 100 mph is going to encounter fewer obstacles if the left lane is kept clear than if it isn't.
Question is - where that 100 MPH car actually is driving so that he is bothered about obstacles in left lane?
Again, I never suggested
not returning to the left lane. You keep saying I said that, but I didn't.
Want to drive 100 mph? Go ahead! Stay in the right lane until you need to pass someone. Move left, pass the other vehicle, move back into the right lane. Or, if traffic is thick, there might not be as much moving back into the right lane, but that's as expected. Someone coming up from behind at 120 mph? Get the heck over at the earliest opportunity. Absolute speed has little to do with how you choose your lane. Two basic rules apply: (1) keep right unless you have a reason to be in the left lane, and (2) pass on the left.
Contrast that to a highway where keeping right is not part of the culture. Drive 100 mph, then encounter a cluster of vehicles, and have no idea which lane you need to be in to continue past them. The guy in the left lane is going basically the same speed as the guy in the right lane, maybe even slower, who the heck knows? Gotta slow down to their speed to figure it out, change lanes as you determine, then get back up to 100 mph, and do it all over again at the next cluster of vehicles. There are your obstacles.
And yes, I've been on the Autobahn (as a passenger only). Both in a passenger vehicle going 90-95 mph and also in a Fiat RV (five speed stick shift on the column) that never topped 70 mph.
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 02:28:30 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:02:28 PM
And not bothering to return to right lane... Let me see what it looks like.. Oh, yes, split speed limits!
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:05:36 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 01:54:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 05, 2017, 01:45:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
OK, let me understand this.. SOmeone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits?
Hmmm.. some new concept here..
If they're going 100 mph, they're probably spending the majority of their time passing.
Exactly. And did I say something about people not keeping right while going 100 mph? No, I don't believe I did. Should read like this:
Someone can drive 100 MPH and not keep right, because "Keep right" is a major reason why Germany can have roads without speed limits.
Hmmm... SOmeone wants to have a cake and eat it too?
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 12:13:02 PM
It relates because in Germany there is a very wide range of speeds encountered on the highway. With more restrictive speed limits, the range of speeds encountered is narrower, and therefore the frequency of lane use conflict also decreases. Or, to put it another way, a guy legally driving 100 mph is going to encounter fewer obstacles if the left lane is kept clear than if it isn't.
Question is - where that 100 MPH car actually is driving so that he is bothered about obstacles in left lane?
Again, I never suggested not returning to the left lane. You keep saying I said that, but I didn't.
Want to drive 100 mph? Go ahead! Stay in the right lane until you need to pass someone. Move left, pass the other vehicle, move back into the right lane. Or, if traffic is thick, there might not be as much moving back into the right lane, but that's as expected. Someone coming up from behind at 120 mph? Get the heck over at the earliest opportunity. Absolute speed has little to do with how you choose your lane. Two basic rules apply: (1) keep right unless you have a reason to be in the left lane, and (2) pass on the left.
Contrast that to a highway where keeping right is not part of the culture. Drive 100 mph, then encounter a cluster of vehicles, and have no idea which lane you need to be in to continue past them. The guy in the left lane is going basically the same speed as the guy in the right lane, maybe even slower, who the heck knows? Gotta slow down to their speed to figure it out, change lanes as you determine, then get back up to 100 mph, and do it all over again at the next cluster of vehicles. There are your obstacles.
And yes, I've been on the Autobahn (as a passenger only). Both in a passenger vehicle going 90-95 mph and also in a Fiat RV (five speed stick shift on the column) that never topped 70 mph.
If you don't realize that, driving pattern you suggest is a safety nightmare. FOr one, because passing at a smaller speed differential becomes a russian roulette that someone else going 60 MPH above your speed may make contact with your bumper because you didn't see them..
Actually lane change is already a relatively high risk step - compared to staying in lane.
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:39:51 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 02:28:30 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:02:28 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 02:05:36 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 01:54:34 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 05, 2017, 01:45:37 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 07:35:17 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 12:13:02 PM
If you don't realize that, driving pattern you suggest is a safety nightmare. FOr one, because passing at a smaller speed differential becomes a russian roulette that someone else going 60 MPH above your speed may make contact with your bumper because you didn't see them..
Actually lane change is already a relatively high risk step - compared to staying in lane.
(Sorry, but these nested posts were getting out of control. :-/ )
I agree that, in heavy traffic, staying in your lane is best both for driver safety and efficiency of the road, but it's also in heavy traffic that fast-driving traffic is not as likely to have any room to move right in the first place. In sparser traffic, where there is actually room and time to move right, I'd say the risk in doing so is inherently less.
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 03:08:53 PM
(Sorry, but these nested posts were getting out of control. :-/ )
I agree that, in heavy traffic, staying in your lane is best both for driver safety and efficiency of the road, but it's also in heavy traffic that fast-driving traffic is not as likely to have any room to move right in the first place. In sparser traffic, where there is actually room and time to move right, I'd say the risk in doing so is inherently less.
(trimming it even further!)
Well, for me that boils down to a simple statement:
"keep right" is applicable at relatively small traffic density window. less than 100-200 VPH, and nobody cares. More than 1500-2000 VPH, and right lane is now blocked rock solid, no way for entering vehicles to get in (and now room for move over, second lane is also dense)
Same story as with roundabouts - a niche solution is promoted as absolute one.
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 03:13:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 03:08:53 PM
(Sorry, but these nested posts were getting out of control. :-/ )
I agree that, in heavy traffic, staying in your lane is best both for driver safety and efficiency of the road, but it's also in heavy traffic that fast-driving traffic is not as likely to have any room to move right in the first place. In sparser traffic, where there is actually room and time to move right, I'd say the risk in doing so is inherently less.
(trimming it even further!)
Well, for me that boils down to a simple statement:
"keep right" is applicable at relatively small traffic density window. less than 100-200 VPH, and nobody cares. More than 1500-2000 VPH, and right lane is now blocked rock solid, no way for entering vehicles to get in (and now room for move over, second lane is also dense)
Same story as with roundabouts - a niche solution is promoted as absolute one.
So what happens between 100-200 and 1500-2000 vph?
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 04:24:01 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 05, 2017, 03:13:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 05, 2017, 03:08:53 PM
(Sorry, but these nested posts were getting out of control. :-/ )
I agree that, in heavy traffic, staying in your lane is best both for driver safety and efficiency of the road, but it's also in heavy traffic that fast-driving traffic is not as likely to have any room to move right in the first place. In sparser traffic, where there is actually room and time to move right, I'd say the risk in doing so is inherently less.
(trimming it even further!)
Well, for me that boils down to a simple statement:
"keep right" is applicable at relatively small traffic density window. less than 100-200 VPH, and nobody cares. More than 1500-2000 VPH, and right lane is now blocked rock solid, no way for entering vehicles to get in (and now room for move over, second lane is also dense)
Same story as with roundabouts - a niche solution is promoted as absolute one.
So what happens between 100-200 and 1500-2000 vph?
ANd over there a lot of things may happen. Including situation, when separation between vehicles in right lane is sparse enough, but overall count is high enough for keep right to make sense. That is why I call the issue "keep right
no matter what".
I didn't mean to bring this off topic, but clearly I wasn't saying or intending that you have to go back to the right lane in every single gap. But if you aren't passing somebody and won't be for over, say, 30 seconds , you should get back to the right. The fact is its safer for you to do the extra lane changes then to force the people behind you to go to the right and pass you on the right. People generally shouldn't be ABLE to pass you on the right (ignoring assholes who are cutting people off to do it and forcing people to hit their breaks to accommodate it)
It drives me nuts here how when I'm trying to go 79mph, the person enters the 3 lane highway at 70mph, immediately goes to the center lane even though no one is in the right lane because "they don't want to have to worry about vehicles merging at the next entrance", which causes the person in the center lane to move to the left at their speed of 75 mph, and i'm forced to slow down to 75mph while he passes, or I can easily maintain my speed by just moving myself all the way to the right lane which no one seems to want to use. Seems to happen everyday here, and for many of the faster drivers, they're stuck between trying to use the left lane to pass, and then being forced to use the empty right lane if they want to pass.
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 05, 2017, 07:34:08 PM
It drives me nuts here how when I'm trying to go 79mph, the person enters the 3 lane highway at 70mph, immediately goes to the center lane even though no one is in the right lane because "they don't want to have to worry about vehicles merging at the next entrance", which causes the person in the center lane to move to the left at their speed of 75 mph, and i'm forced to slow down to 75mph while he passes, or I can easily maintain my speed by just moving myself all the way to the right lane which no one seems to want to use. Seems to happen everyday here, and for many of the faster drivers, they're stuck between trying to use the left lane to pass, and then being forced to use the empty right lane if they want to pass.
I don't want to be forced to slow down to 45-50 at every entrance ramp because that's the speed people merge at any more than you want to be forced to slow down to 75 because that's as fast as the person in front of you is passing at.
Quote from: Duke87 on May 06, 2017, 01:20:36 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on May 05, 2017, 07:34:08 PM
It drives me nuts here how when I'm trying to go 79mph, the person enters the 3 lane highway at 70mph, immediately goes to the center lane even though no one is in the right lane because "they don't want to have to worry about vehicles merging at the next entrance", which causes the person in the center lane to move to the left at their speed of 75 mph, and i'm forced to slow down to 75mph while he passes, or I can easily maintain my speed by just moving myself all the way to the right lane which no one seems to want to use. Seems to happen everyday here, and for many of the faster drivers, they're stuck between trying to use the left lane to pass, and then being forced to use the empty right lane if they want to pass.
I don't want to be forced to slow down to 45-50 at every entrance ramp because that's the speed people merge at any more than you want to be forced to slow down to 75 because that's as fast as the person in front of you is passing at.
I think everyone agrees if someone is merging at a slower speed in front of you, you should move to the left to pass them, before you're required to slow down. Then after you pass that merging traffic, you move to the right. Its really not complicated, and only required a single lane change for a single car without anyone slowing down, instead of the alternative requiring multiple cars to change lanes and people to pass on the right to maintain the flow.
We've had enough threads get hijacked into an argument about the right lane.
Let's get back to the topic.
Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 12:36:50 PM
We've had enough threads get hijacked into an argument about the right lane.
Let's get back to the topic.
And I think this is relevant. This is about overall arrangement of road traffic. One of speed limit considerations should be managability of merge. Sure. I can step on a gas and get to traffic flow (SL+20) by the end of long ramp near my place. Those with NJ plates going faster than that in right lane are free to do some brakes check. I saw many trucks struggling with that. Heck, they are struggling with achieving speed limit on that uphill ramp. But from the formal perspective that means speed limit is too high, isn't it?
Quote from: kalvado on May 08, 2017, 04:56:57 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 12:36:50 PM
We've had enough threads get hijacked into an argument about the right lane.
Let's get back to the topic.
And I think this is relevant. This is about overall arrangement of road traffic. One of speed limit considerations should be managability of merge. Sure. I can step on a gas and get to traffic flow (SL+20) by the end of long ramp near my place. Those with NJ plates going faster than that in right lane are free to do some brakes check. I saw many trucks struggling with that. Heck, they are struggling with achieving speed limit on that uphill ramp. But from the formal perspective that means speed limit is too high, isn't it?
It could also mean that you're not using the ramp for its intended purpose, as the acceleration lane to merge smoothly onto the freeway. Rule of thumb, you should be near the speed limit at the end of the ramp.
Quote from: Brandon on May 08, 2017, 05:34:01 PM
Quote from: kalvado on May 08, 2017, 04:56:57 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 08, 2017, 12:36:50 PM
We've had enough threads get hijacked into an argument about the right lane.
Let's get back to the topic.
And I think this is relevant. This is about overall arrangement of road traffic. One of speed limit considerations should be managability of merge. Sure. I can step on a gas and get to traffic flow (SL+20) by the end of long ramp near my place. Those with NJ plates going faster than that in right lane are free to do some brakes check. I saw many trucks struggling with that. Heck, they are struggling with achieving speed limit on that uphill ramp. But from the formal perspective that means speed limit is too high, isn't it?
It could also mean that you're not using the ramp for its intended purpose, as the acceleration lane to merge smoothly onto the freeway. Rule of thumb, you should be near the speed limit at the end of the ramp.
To merge smoothly or to be near the speed limit? Former requires going much faster, later makes merge messy...
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 04, 2017, 06:12:57 AM
Quote from: wxfree on May 04, 2017, 03:05:36 AM
Regarding the 85th percentile, what I read about it gave me the impression (although I may have been reading too much into it) that the real point wasn't the "85" number but was the shape of the speed distribution curve. To describe, if the 85th percentile speed was 73, there may be in a survey several cars going 71, several going 72, and several going 73, while maybe there are fewer going 74, only a couple going 75, maybe one or two going 76, another going 78, a few more in the 80s, and so on. The 85th percentile represents the highest speed with a cluster rather than a rarity of presumably reasonable drivers selecting that speed. Those going faster have fewer other drivers choosing their speed, showing that they may be demonstrating reckless disregard for safety. The point is that the 85th percentile itself may not be a magic number, but just an average of where the shape of the distribution curve starts to change. If the clusters change to isolated examples at a lower or higher speed, then that speed may warrant consideration as the limit. Based on the way it was described, that's what I took from it.
85th percentile has nothing to do with clustering or a bell curve.
The NJDOT website does a good, simple job in explaining the 85th percentile.
http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/refdata/roadway/speed.shtm
Quote
Average speed or mean speed is the sum of all individual speed measurements divided by the total number of vehicles.
Median speed - the speed at or below 50 percent of vehicles travel.
85th percentile speed - the speeds at or below 85% of all vehicles are observed to travel under free flowing conditions.
Setting the speed limit to the 85th%tile speed and allowing a 10% tolerance for enforcement is sort of like grading students. Those at the 85%tile get a B. Those within 10% above get an A. Those who are faster than that don't belong in the class.
Quote from: Duke87 on May 06, 2017, 11:39:29 AM
Meanwhile there tends to be enough traffic that I cannot just quickly dart into the center lane. Or, even if there is a gap, NY drivers have this uncanny habit of reacting to turn signals as an invitation to speed up and prevent you from changing lanes because how dare you try to get in front of them. Which leaves slowing down as the only way to avoid crashing into the maniacs who don't know what "yield" means.
This is not limited to New York City and environs. I think it fair to say that
many drivers in the Northeast (defined for the purposes of this discussion as someplace in Virginia to the U.S./Canada border) do that.
One of the joys of driving in California is that most drivers will let you in if you signal. Of course, the driving population is large enough that asinine drivers and driving habits can be found even in the Golden State.
As much as I fuss about my local drivers, the one good thing they will do is let someone in if they need it (all bets are off just 2 hours west in Raliegh, though).