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.
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.
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.
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 01, 2015, 01:24:37 PM
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
Apples and oranges.
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 01, 2015, 01:24:37 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: spooky on June 01, 2015, 02:47:18 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 01, 2015, 01:24:37 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: Kacie JaneQuote from: spookyIMHO, 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.
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.
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 01, 2015, 01:24:37 PM
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.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 02, 2015, 10:26:37 AM
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.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 02, 2015, 10:26:37 AMBe 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?
QuoteThere 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.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 02, 2015, 10:41:33 AM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 01, 2015, 01:24:37 PM
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.
Speeding may be dangerous and deadly, but driving slower than normal is much worse.
*tries to figure out what could be "much worse" than "dangerous and deadly"*
Quote from: KEK Inc. on June 01, 2015, 01:27:44 PM
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.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on June 02, 2015, 01:04:58 PM
*tries to figure out what could be "much worse" than "dangerous and deadly"*
+9
Quote from: Kacie Jane on June 02, 2015, 11:00:08 AM
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.
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.
Slow for sure
Quote from: froggie on June 02, 2015, 11:16:03 AM
QuoteThere 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.
Where is the data on the threat caused by overly slow vehicles?
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 02, 2015, 03:34:13 PM
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.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 02, 2015, 02:48:50 PMAs to construction equipment, I missed the part where I said not to do it.
It was this part...
Quote from: SP Cook on June 02, 2015, 10:26:37 AMBe 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.
In your first post, you didn't say to schedule/route construction and freight "properly", you said to cease driving, which is obviously impossible. But so is your ideal. What, you want semis to only drive in the middle of the night? I'm not inside your head, so I don't know what your deeming proper timing and routing, but restrictions much beyond what's already in place would make costs skyrocket, if it can even be done. Freight has to get over the mountains somehow, and it can't all go by train or plane.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 02, 2015, 02:48:50 PM
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.
False. At 70 mph, stopping distance is 315 feet. Even outside the Great Plains, you should be able to see that far ahead the vast majority of the time. Not always, but most of the time. And if the curve is so sharp that you can't see that far ahead, it's not entirely coincidental that it's also a curve so sharp that maybe you shouldn't be taking it at 70 mph.
QuoteAs 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.
You're absolutely right that most modern freeways are designed so that you can take the curves at a (reasonably) fast speed, which may in fact be higher than the legislated speed limit. (Your second sentence, however, is hilariously false. Most freeways are designed for what... 75? I floored my last rental car to 100 on a nice straight patch in the Nevada desert and could have gotten it well beyond that if I wanted to. Deadly speeds are easily attainable if you're dumb enough.)
But that has nothing to do with the point I was making. Leaving other vehicles and hazards out of it and speaking solely about physics, while driving 75 or even 80-85 might indeed be
safe, it is
less safe than 70, which is less safe than 65, which is less safe than.... It is less safe because you have less control over your vehicle, even if you still have enough control. The old saw that "you are going to cause an accident by driving too fast" -- okay, fine, you're not
going to, you're not guaranteed to, but you are more likely to, as a basic understanding of physics will teach you.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 02, 2015, 02:48:50 PM
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.
No. You know what causes accidents? Following cars too closely.
Keep in mind that if the "hazard" is someone taking curves "too slowly", they're not stationary, you've followed them into the curve. Especially in the second example (where you're following them going only 10mph faster), if you can't slow to their speed (you don't need to stop, you just need to not hit them) then you're either following them too closely or not paying attention, probably both.
Slow drivers are annoying. And like I said in my first post in this thread, they disrupt the flow of traffic more. But they themselves are not dangerous, aggressive drivers' reactions (or lack thereof) to them are.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 02, 2015, 03:37:30 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 02, 2015, 03:34:13 PM
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.
Just going to hazard a guess here. But that might be because if someone is going the speed limit, and a speeder comes up behind them and rear-ends them, then the speeder is at fault, not the one going the speed limit.
Keep in mind that on a freeway, you will seldom need to actually come to a complete stop. Evasive maneuvers will more likely be bringing your speed down or suddenly diverting course into the other lane or the shoulder.
There are other options than using an Interstate for those who cannot do so safely. There are usually conventional highways that can be used in lieu of the Interstate, freight can be sent by rail rather than truck, etc.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on June 01, 2015, 04:01:16 PM
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.
Agreed!
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 02, 2015, 10:41:33 AM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 01, 2015, 01:24:37 PM
1) Slow drivers, that either go speed limit...
Stop right there. You can't say a driver going the speed limit is disrupting traffic.
Sure you can, I'm not saying it's correct but if the majority of traffic is going 65mph in a 50mph and someone is doing 50mph, then they are disrupting even though they are within the law. In this case eeryone else is speeding.
Or on a 2-lane road someone doing 35mph in a 35mph zone meanwhile most go 45mph in the zone.
I get annoyed when this happens just like when there is a long line at a fast food restaurant, there is nothing wrong legally tho.
With that said if somebody is passing a car in the left lane and doing 65 in a 65, that is perfectly legal. In a law perspective, nobody is allowed to go over 65 and you can pass when someone is going under 65. Left lane has a speed limit too. Others on this forum get ticked when someone is doing that. If I come across it, as I usually go 75mph, I try not to tailgate b/c they're in their means to do it.
A seemingly rare and reasonable article (http://www.ohio.com/news/local/bob-dyer-indiana-will-fine-left-lane-hogs-1.596681) about the Indiana law--although it's not an outright news article; it's Bob Dyer's column. Still, much better than the "look out law-abiding drivers!" claptrap that has been out so much about the law. He correctly points out that it's FLOW that is important, not the absolute SPEED.