AARoads Forum

Apologies if this isn't on-topic enough for the main road board, but I wanted to pose a two-part question solely out of curiosity.

(1) What's the fastest you've ever driven?
(2) What's the most you've ever sped by?

For me the answer to both is 115 in a 70 -- I-82 downhill from the Umptanum Ridges in Washington.
I've sped by 40 mph in two different places... 105 in a 65 on I-295 in NJ, and 90 in a 50 over the Newark Bay Bridge (I-78/NJTP between Exits 14 and 14A).

Those were all a few years ago though when I was younger and stupider.  In the past 3 years, the fastest I've driven is 90 (in a 70) on I-5 here in Washington.

I keep things pretty safe, so the most I've ever done was about 85 mph on CA-99, where the speed limit was 75 mph for a brief stretch. Although I've sped up to 30 mph once, on US-395 between Independence and Bishop.

Quote from: Kacie Jane on April 22, 2011, 11:18:17 PM
Apologies if this isn't on-topic enough for the main road board, but I wanted to pose a two-part question solely out of curiosity.

(1) What's the fastest you've ever driven?
(2) What's the most you've ever sped by?

For me the answer to both is 115 in a 70 -- I-82 downhill from the Umptanum Ridges in Washington.
I've sped by 40 mph in two different places... 105 in a 65 on I-295 in NJ, and 90 in a 50 over the Newark Bay Bridge (I-78/NJTP between Exits 14 and 14A).

Those were all a few years ago though when I was younger and stupider.  In the past 3 years, the fastest I've driven is 90 (in a 70) on I-5 here in Washington.

in 2007, I rented a red Volkswagen Jetta and that little car can go!! At one point, I was driving 100 mph on I-55 through north Mississippi while passing by an 18-wheeler. The speed limit is 70, so 30 miles over. BTW, the Jetta wasn't rented by design. I wanted a compact and the Jetta was being returned as I was checking in at Enterprise.

My 115 was in a rental as well, but I'm blanking on make/model.  The other two were in my mom's 96 Cavalier (and took place around '02-'03), which I discovered topped out at 105. ;-)

My car now (that I somehow managed to hit 90 in on an empty freeway at 2:30 AM) is an 86 Camry.

27 in a 25 on my bike :)

I've certainly gone more than 2 over in a car, but I don't keep track of it.

I was driving a Volvo XC90 the night of my high school prom and was running late and in a bit of a hurry to pick up my date and looked down at my speedometer and found myself doing 110 (in a 65 off freeway in the dark). Oops. Needless to say, I ended up being actually being early for the pickup.

Also in high school there was a long hill a couple miles from school out of town, and we used to test our and our friends cars top speeds. We got into triple digits a lot, but I don't remember ever breaking 110. The speed limit on that road was 45, so 105ish in a 45 is the most I've sped. We pretty much all had four-cylinder cars- my 4-cylinder Wrangler wouldn't do much more than 90 but a friends 1990 Toyota pickup with a 4 banger I definitely broke 100 with.

For long stretches, I have trouble going less than 75 on rural freeways no matter the speed limit, and then lots of rural roads are really underposted at 35-45 (you can see a couple miles in the distance and as long as there isn't another car you're good) and I end up going 60-70

QuoteI wanted a compact and the Jetta was being returned as I was checking in at Enterprise.

Wait, wouldn't a Jetta be a compact?

139 in what is ostensibly a 55 (if not a 45!); the last of the Sherman Pass road eastbound, the straight section with a 7% grade just before its intersection with US-395.  Dead straight road, no traffic, perfect visibility ... had to speed-test the car.  :)

I have a picture of the digital speedometer reading 139.

it was a Honda Civic, btw.  2009 or 2010 issue.

130.

(in metric, of course. :sombrero: Limit was 100.)

Was leaving Ottawa region at 1 AM after watching a movie at a drive-in with friends. Had to be back home ASAP to sleep before getting up at 7. I live in the greater Montreal area.

I passed a speed trap too. But I could see the police SUV move a bit and turn its headlights on as I approached... I was sure I was screwed... out of province on top of that. But after 10 km of driving I assumed they didn't go after me after all.

(that's 80 mph in a 62, by the way.)

About 6 months before, I got a ticket for doing 124 km/h in a 100. (77 in 62). Usually, at that speed, some people would pass me...

My bro would push my car to 1505km/h (95 mph), even if I was with him on the passenger seat. He can't borrow my car anymore.

110. '94 Camry v6. It was a back county road in Indiana (450N I believe - Tippecanoe County) that was completely flat, straight, in good condition, no traffic, and no crossroads. The speed limit was probably 55 but wasn't posted. It had room to go but I ran out of road.

In my current car, I know I've hit 100 once or twice in Miami where traffic often moves 85-90, but I don't know what speed specifically I got to since I wasn't trying necessarily.

Hit 100 in a 70 along Florida's Turnpike in a 1998 Mazda Protege. It took stomping the gas pedal all the way down to get it that high. This was after I was passed by a BMW (I think) as well as another car going over 100. The highest I've gone before that was only 96 in the same car.

Now I have a 2011 Mazda 6. Fastest I've gone in that one would be around 85 in a 70.

Quote from: Kacie Jane on April 22, 2011, 11:18:17 PM
For me the answer to both is 115 in a 70 -- I-82 downhill from the Umptanum Ridges in Washington.

My top speed is on that same stretch of road, too, specifically, leaving Ellensburg right right after getting over Manastash Ridge.  I only hit 88mph, however. :spin:  You kind of need to go fast in order to survive in the left lane there.

Most I've ever sped by would about 20 over on Oregon 99E between Halsey and Shedd--75 in a 55.  Of course, that 55 zone really ought to be a 65 . . .

106 in a 75 zone on I-15 in central Utah. The thing is, everyone else was going that same speed too. Spring break traffic itching to head back home.  I think I hit 110 in northern Nevada once, but that doesn't feel as accomplishing to me (if you can call that an accomplishment) as there was no traffic whatsoever in front of or behind me.

Quote from: CL on April 23, 2011, 01:03:08 AM
106 in a 75 zone on I-15 in central Utah. The thing is, everyone else was going that same speed too. Spring break traffic itching to head back home.  I think I hit 110 in northern Nevada once, but that doesn't feel as accomplishing to me (if you can call that an accomplishment) as there was no traffic whatsoever in front of or behind me.

I've been passed repeatedly while doing 122.  Damn I-15 between Barstow and the Nevada state line.

For me, about 85 on an unopened segment of Corridor X near Jasper back in 2007.

Does doing a normal 80-ish on the NJ Turnpike with the "REDUCE  PEED" signs flashing 35 for false congestion count?

110 in a 55(?) on Amboy Road in CA at some point between 29 Palms and Amboy, also on Borrego Valley Road east of Borrego Springs, CA

100 in a 65 on the NY Thruway.

75 in a 25 on a quiet residential street....Biscuit City Rd in South Kingstown, RI. Ah, to be 16 again.... :-/

Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 23, 2011, 01:04:58 AM
I've been passed repeatedly while doing 122.  Damn I-15 between Barstow and the Nevada state line.

Hate to be the bearer of doom and gloom....but last Friday I literally saw 8 CHP between Barstow and Nevada on I-15. Seemed like every 20 minutes one would zoom past me and pull someone over ahead of me. But it's probably just a Friday Vegas traffic focused enforcement here. (drove back via US 95 and I-40 and probably made better time.)

110 or so, US12 west of Baker, Montana. Those were the days. Can't do that legally now.

Quote from: Quillz on April 22, 2011, 11:20:53 PM
I keep things pretty safe, so the most I've ever done was about 85 mph on CA-99, where the speed limit was 75 mph for a brief stretch. Although I've sped up to 30 mph once, on US-395 between Independence and Bishop.

I think the maximum limit in California is 70, not 75.

Anyways, the fastest I've ever driven is 90 in a 65 on the 4-lane expressway segment of CA-58 between Barstow and Kramers Junction.  That incident is also the fastest I've sped by, 25 MPH.

90 on US 71 between Wadena and Bemidji, don't remember what the limit was.
90 on I-10 west of San Antonio.
85 on I-5 in places between Portland and Eugene.
85 on the Thruway between Albany and Rochester. Got busted for that one, and the NYDMV gleefully reamed my wallet for all its worth.

Fastest sustained for more than just a quick blip would be 90 (this being on interstates with a 65 limit). And, honestly, I don't think my little Ford Focus is capable of much more than that. I was doing 90 on a long straightaway on I-81 in New York once with no one in front of me and decided "screw it, floor it!"... and I got complaint from the engine rather than further acceleration. Though, this segment was uphill by maybe a couple percent, and on a cold day.
I did get up to nearly 100 once  on I-395 in Connecticut when I wasn't paying attention to my speed, on a flat section.

My spedometer theoretically pegs at 120. Whether or not the car can actually get there is an open question. Maybe downhill on a hot sunny day...

Haven't really experimented with speed much, honestly.  Fastest ever, IIRC, is 87 on I-75 in Georgia just south of I-675 (speed limit 65).  Most sped by is about 25 - roughly 80 in a 55 on numerous occasions on freeways in both Atlanta and the DC area.

I've gotten up to triple digits in my old Mercury Cougar, on a country road in Northern Michigan, so that would have been a 55 MPH zone. Not something I do often, but that's where I grew up so I'm aware that you can usually drive as fast as you like on many of the roads up there.

Years ago, I've done 105 twice, once on the Schuylkill Expwy outside of Philly, and a second time on a rural two-lane PA Rt 125 (marked 55) in Central PA.   

On I-5 northbound bet LA and San Fran, in the rural part, at night, I had the cruise control set at 95 in the flow of traffic in the left lane for over 2 hrs...

Quote from: Duke87 on April 23, 2011, 07:35:35 AM
Fastest sustained for more than just a quick blip would be 90 (this being on interstates with a 65 limit). And, honestly, I don't think my little Ford Focus is capable of much more than that.

a 2007 Ford Focus tops out at 113.  This has been tested empirically.  as has the ability to talk one's way down to a verbal warning not long thereafter...

Quote from: citrus on April 23, 2011, 02:25:00 AM
75 in a 25 on a quiet residential street....Biscuit City Rd in South Kingstown, RI. Ah, to be 16 again.... :-/

I think I once hit 92 in a 15 at the San Jose airport.  Oh, to hopefully never have to drive through a signage that confusing again ... I found myself on the main loop, as opposed to getting to the rental car return facility, at least 7 times before figuring out that I had to blatantly disobey four consecutive choices for "rental car return". 

I caught my flight... barely.

QuoteHate to be the bearer of doom and gloom....but last Friday I literally saw 8 CHP between Barstow and Nevada on I-15. Seemed like every 20 minutes one would zoom past me and pull someone over ahead of me. But it's probably just a Friday Vegas traffic focused enforcement here. (drove back via US 95 and I-40 and probably made better time.)

oh, I'm aware.  CHP has increased their enforcement by what I would conservatively estimate as a factor of 50 in the last few months.  The state demands revenue. 

it used to be that the major freeways, one could get away with anything... but now, I've had to abandon any hope of making the Sacramento run at an average of 90mph.  Nowadays, 70 if I'm lucky!  Cruise control on 74-77 the whole way and they leave me alone.

115 in a 65, or 75 in a 25. No comments on either, except to say (like Kacie) I was younger then.

Oh, and by the way, there's a couple roads in Wilsonville, Oregon, where you can legally exceed the posted limit by 20mph.  The city has a couple of 35 zones that they just randomly posted without going through the legal speed zoning process, so they're still legally 55 zones.  Actually, half of the posted limits on arterial/collector roadways in that town north of Barber Street have no legal basis and technically violate state law, and so any ticket would get thrown out of court on the precedent of the 2010 case Miles v. Milwaukie. 

One day as a senior in high school I was bored and decided to see how fast my Chevy Cavalier would go on the way home from school. When I got on the county road to our house I ran it up to just over 100 before I lost my nerve.

I haven't tested my PT Cruiser and I doubt I will try.

Quote from: Tarkus on April 23, 2011, 04:34:50 PM
Oh, and by the way, there's a couple roads in Wilsonville, Oregon, where you can legally exceed the posted limit by 20mph.  The city has a couple of 35 zones that they just randomly posted without going through the legal speed zoning process, so they're still legally 55 zones.  Actually, half of the posted limits on arterial/collector roadways in that town north of Barber Street have no legal basis and technically violate state law, and so any ticket would get thrown out of court on the precedent of the 2010 case Miles v. Milwaukie. 

Details on Miles v. Milwaukie, please. Google's not turning anything up...

I've sometimes hit 80 on the Thruway (65mph limit) for short stretches when paying more attention to traffic than to my speed.  I also occasionally hit 70-75 on US 11 and similar roads (55mph limit) when passing.

I've done 75 up US11 with no other traffic around! :D

I've hit 80-85 on the Thruway before, mostly in an effort to keep up with traffic. Car doesn't seem to like going that fast, though...

Fastest I've ever done is about 95 down a back road, mostly to see just how fast a 1997 Mercury Mistake would go...  :-D

It's interesting to see the number of people on here who have only achieved double digit speeds. I would have thought in a country where people drive big cars on big roads that 100 would be more common. Anyway here's my records:
I've done 137 on my Yamaha R6 after some nut I was passing decided he would try and keep up. When he got to 130 his 2 liter non-turbo engine ran out of steam.

The fastest I've done in a car is 130 in Germany. No need to keep an eye out for cops there :colorful:

Quote from: Truvelo on April 24, 2011, 12:27:32 PM
It's interesting to see the number of people on here who have only achieved double digit speeds. I would have thought in a country where people drive big cars on big roads that 100 would be more common.

For the most part, the roads I've driven tend to have too much traffic, curves, and/or hills to make it reasonable.  The farthest west I've driven is actually in the state of Florida; places east of there usually don't have very many truly wide open stretches.

And after today, I may have to amend my entry for "most sped by" - finally went to see the east end of I-70 today, and I think I may have still been doing around 55 when the speed limit dropped to 25 entering the park and ride facility.

I've done 100mph in each of the fifty states, and also every Canadian province I've driven to.

Ha, 130 on I-69 in Fort Wayne, IN when I was a senior in high school in the middle of the night. I had never been more proud of my 1999 Acura RL. Driving between Fort Wayne and Indianapolis on 69, I had a sustained speed between 90 and 100 MPH a few times.

Quote from: corco on April 22, 2011, 11:39:37 PM

QuoteI wanted a compact and the Jetta was being returned as I was checking in at Enterprise.

Wait, wouldn't a Jetta be a compact?

It is. At the time I arrived at Enterprise, they didn't have a compact ready. A few minutes later, a Jetta arrived and that's how I ended up with it. Had a compact not arrived, I would've been upgraded to the next classification, though at the same price.

Quote from: Bickendan on April 24, 2011, 04:58:38 AM

Quote from: Tarkus on April 23, 2011, 04:34:50 PM
Oh, and by the way, there's a couple roads in Wilsonville, Oregon, where you can legally exceed the posted limit by 20mph.  The city has a couple of 35 zones that they just randomly posted without going through the legal speed zoning process, so they're still legally 55 zones.  Actually, half of the posted limits on arterial/collector roadways in that town north of Barber Street have no legal basis and technically violate state law, and so any ticket would get thrown out of court on the precedent of the 2010 case Miles v. Milwaukie.  

Details on Miles v. Milwaukie, please. Google's not turning anything up...

Here (http://www.oregonlive.com/milwaukie/index.ssf/2010/04/driver_fights_her_way_out_of_milwaukie_speed_trap.html) you go.  Short version: Milwaukie was photo enforcing a 25 zone that was really a 35 zone per a valid speed zone order. Driver caught going 37.  Driver appeals to Clackamas County Circuit Court, and while she still ended up getting charged for going 37 in a 35, the fine was dropped entirely and the city was legally forced to raise the speed limit.

from what the article states - not only was it a "valid speed 35 zone", but it was signed for 35!!!

I don't think any reasonable person can be expected to follow an invisible lower speed limit in lieu of the clearly posted one.

95 in LA (I-10 east of downtown)... to keep up with traffic.

Quote from: Master son on April 24, 2011, 11:44:34 PM
95 in LA (I-10 east of downtown)... to keep up with traffic.

I have to call BS on that. Everyone knows that LA freeways are gigantic parking lots :P

Quote from: Tarkus on April 24, 2011, 09:34:59 PM

Quote from: Bickendan on April 24, 2011, 04:58:38 AM

Quote from: Tarkus on April 23, 2011, 04:34:50 PM
Oh, and by the way, there's a couple roads in Wilsonville, Oregon, where you can legally exceed the posted limit by 20mph.  The city has a couple of 35 zones that they just randomly posted without going through the legal speed zoning process, so they're still legally 55 zones.  Actually, half of the posted limits on arterial/collector roadways in that town north of Barber Street have no legal basis and technically violate state law, and so any ticket would get thrown out of court on the precedent of the 2010 case Miles v. Milwaukie. 

Details on Miles v. Milwaukie, please. Google's not turning anything up...

Here (http://www.oregonlive.com/milwaukie/index.ssf/2010/04/driver_fights_her_way_out_of_milwaukie_speed_trap.html) you go.  Short version: Milwaukie was photo enforcing a 25 zone that was really a 35 zone per a valid speed zone order. Driver caught going 37.  Driver appeals to Clackamas County Circuit Court, and while she still ended up getting charged for going 37 in a 35, the fine was dropped entirely and the city was legally forced to raise the speed limit.

Thanks. That got posted to my Facebook wall.

When I was in LA, I was doing 80+ around the freeways at times. Generally I stick to the speed limit or a very low tolerance (+5). Usually if I'm speeding it's because I wasn't paying attention to the throttle or that the limit dropped.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 24, 2011, 06:48:36 PM
I've done 100mph in each of the fifty states, and also every Canadian province I've driven to.

You got to be kidding me. :wow:

Quote from: The Premier on April 25, 2011, 08:37:48 AM

You got to be kidding me. :wow:

Serious cat is serious.

Ah, I like this thread.  I'm surprised that there haven't been more triple-digit speeds posted.  I would not have expected that from a bunch of roadgeeks.  Perhaps the most reckless among us tend to not want to admit it publicly - or maybe roadgeeks tend to be a little more honest.

As for me, here goes:  It seems that I have chosen sparsely populated stretches of two-laners for my speed adventures.
135 in a Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4; on US 231 north of Montmorenci, Ind.
130 in an Audi TT roadster (top up, of course); on St Rd 18 east of Fowler, Ind.

I'll always wonder how fast I could have gone if neither car had been speed-limited by settings in the ECMs.  Of course, had there not been something to keep me from going faster, I might not be here to share this with you all.  The factory specs for that model of TT listed a max speed of 152 and who knows what the Mitsu 3K would have done.  Geesh, it would really move.  In both cases I still had a lot of unused pedal under my foot.

Oh, ironically, of the speedy cars I've owned over the years, one that wasn't speed-limited (as far as I know), was a 1995 Z28.  I've never really had a chance to really let it loose on a wide-open highway, but I did have it up to 125 once on a straight stretch of CR 200 S. in Tippecanoe Co., Ind.  Once again, lots of pedal left unused -- just ran out of road.  By today's standards a 1995 Z28 is weak and underpowered, but I'm convinced that GM has done many of us an unwitting favor by keeping the HP down.  Let us just say, without inviting argument and debate on the matter, that the 90s-era Camaro/TA/Firebird was a difficult-to-drive death machine. (I still like 'em a lot, though.)

Now that I'm older and wiser, I'm not likely to take such chances again; but if I do, it will probably be in my daily driver (Audi sedan).  I may just live to tell about it...

85-90 while coming down from EB M-6 to SB US-131 in January of this year (clear day)
Set cruise at 82 on I-96 from Fruitport to Coopersville yesterday.
I usually set my cruise between 78 and 80 on the freeway and around 65 on non-freeways with a 55 mph limit.
On M-6 south of Grand Rapids, traffic averages at least 80 mph.
Yesterday I was passed while going 80 on US-31 just south of Ludington.
When going from WB M-6 to WB I-196, I often don't have to get off of cruise control.
I once hit 45 on the road coming into my high school (25 mph limit).
This has all been done in a 1996 Buick Park Avenue.

Quote from: Bickendan on April 25, 2011, 02:21:49 AM

Quote from: Master son on April 24, 2011, 11:44:34 PM
95 in LA (I-10 east of downtown)... to keep up with traffic.

I have to call BS on that. Everyone knows that LA freeways are gigantic parking lots :P

Everyone who hasn't driven on one (:

Quote from: ftballfan on April 25, 2011, 04:01:19 PM
Set cruise at 82 on I-96 from Fruitport to Coopersville yesterday.
I usually set my cruise between 78 and 80 on the freeway and around 65 on non-freeways with a 55 mph limit.
On M-6 south of Grand Rapids, traffic averages at least 80 mph.
Yesterday I was passed while going 80 on US-31 just south of Ludington.

I've heard, and found, that 78 seems to be the magic number on most freeways in our state. Sometimes that's not enough though. I remember one day a few months ago where I was doing 85 in the left lane on US 23 north of Ann Arbor and was holding traffic up.

124 on I-24 between Nashville & Murfreesboro.....in a 79 Corvette Pace Car edition. It probably would have done better than that, but I came to my senses.

I have broken the 100 MPH twice on short "just to say I did it" stretches in 2 countries: 

Once in Canada, on Alberta Highway 41, somewhere on a long downhill grade between the Montana Border and the Trans-Canadian Hwy 1 in 1992, and another time in the U.P. of Michigan ten years later on a flat stretch of M-77 between US 2 and M-28.

I may have eclipsed the 100 MPH one other time on I-94 between Jackson, MI & the Indiana border back in 1990, but I was driving a 1983 Nissan Sentra with a speedometer that would be "pegged" at the maximum of 85MPH.

138 mph in my old Eagle Talon TSi, plenty quick and the limit was 65 on an empty freeway at night many, many moons ago. The road never felt so narrow.

I feel kind of ashamed to admit I once drove 70 in a 25, and that was in a resident area...really stupid, something nobody should do. Had I hit a someone, I would have spent a good chunk of my life in jail. I take the residential speed limits seriously after realizing it's not cool, and cops love to write easy tickets that way.

That said, I occasionally brush 85-90 on the closed-access stuff, but that's rare anymore. Sometimes you're just keeping up with traffic on the interstate, and it happens for a short stretch or two. But I don't feel comfortable going more than 80 for more than a few moments, as I get older...

The exception is suggested limits on curves. If the weather's fair and traffic is light, than 2x the limit's suggestion is a formula than generally works for me, if I know my reflexes are up to the task.

Quote from: formulanone on April 26, 2011, 09:32:45 PM
The exception is suggested limits on curves.

oh Hell yeah!  that's not an enforceable law; that's a challenge! I've done 62 around an advisory 15 before, barely surviving past the point of slipping off the edge...

the East LA Interchange has a curve that is signed with an advisory 35 (I-5 southbound) - I've had cruise control on 92 and held my own through that curve.

And here I thought I was really something doing 60 on an advisory 35. :spin:  My general rule tends to be 10 over the advisory.  If I'm familiar with the road, I'll sometimes take it a little faster than that.  If it's unfamiliar and really gnarly, I usually will follow it, however.

Speaking of advisory curves on ramps, the ramps at either end of M-6 are advisory 55, but I've managed to easily stay at 80+ going through those ramps.

I usually respect the advisory signs as being for inclement weather or for trucks.  Typically around here, I find them to be under posted by 20-30mph.

As for speed, I usually settle in about 70-75mph on the freeways here which is what traffic moves at anyway (even in the 55mph zones).  Now I have topped over 100mph in the Arizona desert, and traffic there was moving about 95mph on average.  What's interesting is that I'll be in the middle of the pack during normal times, but when it snows or rains, I'll pass just about everyone on the road.  It's fun to maintain 65mph in a decent snowstorm.

I have also taken a fair amount of the Hana Highway in Hawai'i at 40+mph.  I wound up going about 30mph on the curves and 50mph on the straightaways.  IIRC, it's signposted for 15-25mph.

Quote from: Brandon on April 27, 2011, 09:30:47 AM
What's interesting is that I'll be in the middle of the pack during normal times, but when it snows or rains, I'll pass just about everyone on the road.  It's fun to maintain 65mph in a decent snowstorm.

in California, people do not slow down for inclement weather - even as they are passing vehicles which have spun out and hit the guardrail on the side of the road!  I'll be doing 50-60 or whatever I feel is safe, and having cars bombing past me doing 90-100.  Fools never learn.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 27, 2011, 10:28:01 AM

Quote from: Brandon on April 27, 2011, 09:30:47 AM
What's interesting is that I'll be in the middle of the pack during normal times, but when it snows or rains, I'll pass just about everyone on the road.  It's fun to maintain 65mph in a decent snowstorm.

in California, people do not slow down for inclement weather - even as they are passing vehicles which have spun out and hit the guardrail on the side of the road!  I'll be doing 50-60 or whatever I feel is safe, and having cars bombing past me doing 90-100.  Fools never learn.

I've heard horror stories from my parents who recently moved out to Bakersfield from Joliet.  The California drivers seem to have trouble even in a light rain much less a big snow.

I pay no attention to curve advisory speeds. I just judge if/how much I need to slow down based on how the curve itself looks and feels.

Different states do advisory speeds differently. In PA or MA, you should be able to do 30-40 over pretty easily. But watch out when you get to Kentucky - they mean business on the twisty roads.

Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 27, 2011, 07:43:48 PMBut watch out when you get to Kentucky - they mean business on the twisty roads.

West Virginia doesn't even put up advisory signs sometimes.

diamond warning sign - advisory 15
diamond warning sign, and chevrons on guardrail - advisory 10
diamond warning sign knocked down, guardrail caved in - advisory 5

I have gone as much as 105 in a 99 Lincoln Town Car on I-55 from Weber Rd to Route 53.  Partly because i had someone piss me off with their driving, so i got his plate and called District 5 IL State Police.  It's nice having connections.  So that was 50 over east of Naperville Rd (now Veterans Pkwy).

Other than that, i don't go over 85 at all.  I usually do 67 in 55 and 73 in 65 on the local expressways.

Today I approached 80 on a 55 mph back road trying to find a place to relieve myself. I did find a place to relieve myself, but I had to go back in the woods off a two-track.

While I'm not going to post how much I've sped by, I will chime in on the advisory speeds. I totally disregard them. They are a useless waste of sign materials. There's a 25 mph flyover here I always take in an SUV at 50 no problem, there's a freeway-freeway cloverleaf signed 35 that I always take at 60, and there are even some 15 or 20 ramps I take at 60. However, I've found the reverse to also be true with VDOT. For example, the ramp from Jefferson Ave northbound to I-64 eastbound in Newport News is signed with an advisory speed of 35, but you WILL flip over if you take it higher than 20. It's little more than a right turn. Also, posting advisory speeds for things like intersections bugs me. A 60 mph divided highway intersects a rural secondary route that's barely paved and that justifies a 45 mph advisory speed? Not buying it. Signals, however, are another matter entirely.

Fastest I've driven -- 90 mph, from Atlanta to Columbus (GA) and back. That was awhile ago.
Speed over the speed limit -- 30 mph over. Most of Atlanta's freeways are 55 mph.


Be well,

Bryant

I don't drive nearly as fast as I did when I was younger for various reasons, including (but not limited to) too much traffic in the DC area, not driving on rural highways as much, more traffic on the highways here in Virginia than in the Southeast where I lived during part of the 1990s, not wanting my insurance to increase with a ticket, and various others.

Fastest speed ever was 120 mph late one night. I won't say where. I wanted to see how fast my car would go, but when I hit 120 it felt too fast for the road and I slowed down. I believe at the time the speed limit in there was 55 mph, so that's 65 mph over the limit. Unbelievably stupid thing to do because it would have netted jail time had a cop spotted me.

Fastest sustained speed was an extended run with the cruise control set at 100 mph on I-59 northeast of Birmingham in March 1997. I had driven from Duke down to Montgomery, Alabama, and I was taking the scenic route back since I was tired of I-85. Nobody on the road except for some guy in an S-Class Mercedes who went flying past me.

One of my current cars is an RX-7 convertible and I hit 100 in it once when I got fed up with a couple of aggressive drivers and decided to dust them. I had the top down at the time and somehow my hat didn't fly off.


Regarding the comment by "deathtopumpkins," I don't think advisory speeds are always worthless. I think it depends to a great deal on the car you're driving. I once had a 1977 Ford Granada and I very quickly learned that in that car, you ignored those yellow signs at your peril, especially on the loop-around ramps at cloverleafs.

Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 23, 2011, 10:54:47 AM
Years ago, I've done 105 twice, once on the Schuylkill Expwy outside of Philly, and a second time on a rural two-lane PA Rt 125 (marked 55) in Central PA.   

105 on the Sure-kill???  IMO You're either suicidal or telling a tall tale.

105 on PA 125 - in the midst of the coal country mountains between Shamokin and Pine Grove.  I'll buy that on a downhill stretch, but still tempting fate!  :banghead:

I'm going to add a question to my original post, one that most of you have already answered.
3) How fast do you typically drive?

Let me preface this by saying that my car doesn't have cruise control, so I don't have the luxury of choosing a speed and pressing a button.  (And since I'm used to not using it, the past couple of times I've rented a car, I've tried to use the cruise control and just end up overriding it virtually immediately.)  On freeways, my speed tends to be between 65 and 80 dependent on grade, traffic, curves, day/night, but regardless of whether the speed limit is 60 or 70 -- meaning I have little problem going 65 in a 70 (in the right lane of course) if conditions warrant, but ditto for 80 in a 60.

Surface streets I tend to be within 5 mph of the speed limit in either direction -- with the exception of a couple of arterials here in Bellingham that are posted as 25 but I and everyone else treat as 35.  Rural 2-laners I take case by case, and either follow the speed limit, or follow my freeway rule (maybe minus 5 to 10 mph).

Regarding advisory speeds, I don't tend really ignore them so to speak, but I certainly don't treat them as limits either.  More I just use it as a gauge for how sharp the curve is, which is particularly useful if the jurisdiction just tacks up the standard curve sign for everything, regardless of how sharp or numerous the curves are.  For example, south of Bellingham, the speed limit on I-5 is 60, and there are a couple of curves posted with an advisory speed of.... 60!  Obviously, those curves are not terribly sharp, and I can proceed at my normal speed.  However, if I'm exiting on a loop with an advisory speed of 30, obviously I need to hit the brakes a little, but probably not all the way down to 30.

Quote from: hobsini2 on April 27, 2011, 08:48:12 PM
I have gone as much as 105 in a 99 Lincoln Town Car on I-55 from Weber Rd to Route 53.  Partly because i had someone piss me off with their driving, so i got his plate and called District 5 IL State Police.  It's nice having connections.  So that was 50 over east of Naperville Rd (now Veterans Pkwy).

Other than that, i don't go over 85 at all.  I usually do 67 in 55 and 73 in 65 on the local expressways.

Careful though.  The state trooper likes to hide in the weigh station there, especially in the southbound one at night.

Quote from: Kacie Jane on April 29, 2011, 11:02:45 PM
I'm going to add a question to my original post, one that most of you have already answered.
3) How fast do you typically drive?

On rural freeways, it's usually the posted speed limit plus ten (80 in a 70, 75 in a 65, etc.)
On urban freeways, I tend to virtually ignore the posted limit and instead go with the flow of traffic.  Here in the DC area, I find that usually results in roughly 70 in a 55; in Atlanta, that would be 75 in a 55.
On rural non-freeways, traffic permitting, I usually aim for around 7 mph over the posted limit.
On major arterials through towns here in Montgomery County, I keep it down to about 3 over if possible.  If traffic is light, I'm sometimes forced to apply cruise control to combat the widespread combination of artificially low speed limits (what would be, say, 45 most places is 30 here) and ubiquitous speed cameras.

As for curve advisory speeds, the general rule of thumb for my car appears to be that I can exceed the posted advisories by about 15 easily, at least here in Maryland.

Quote from: mightyace on April 29, 2011, 10:43:08 PM

Quote from: jemacedo9 on April 23, 2011, 10:54:47 AM
Years ago, I've done 105 twice, once on the Schuylkill Expwy outside of Philly, and a second time on a rural two-lane PA Rt 125 (marked 55) in Central PA.   

105 on the Sure-kill???  IMO You're either suicidal or telling a tall tale.

105 on PA 125 - in the midst of the coal country mountains between Shamokin and Pine Grove.  I'll buy that on a downhill stretch, but still tempting fate!  :banghead:

On the "sure-kill" I was able to sustain for only 1/2 mile, and it was at night when traffic is "lighter".  The PA 125 was on the straighaway that goes under I-81.  Both were years ago when I was younger and foolish...I don't have the nerve to try either again...or really go 100 period!

Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 27, 2011, 07:43:48 PM
Different states do advisory speeds differently. In PA or MA, you should be able to do 30-40 over pretty easily. But watch out when you get to Kentucky - they mean business on the twisty roads.

Yep. You can generally do 10 over the advisory speed in Kentucky. Of course I do more than that on road with which I'm familiar.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 01, 2011, 12:27:58 AM

Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 27, 2011, 07:43:48 PM
Different states do advisory speeds differently. In PA or MA, you should be able to do 30-40 over pretty easily. But watch out when you get to Kentucky - they mean business on the twisty roads.

Yep. You can generally do 10 over the advisory speed in Kentucky. Of course I do more than that on road with which I'm familiar.

In NJ, advisory speeds would be posted 5 MPH below the design speed on an existing road. (10 MPH for new roads in theory, though I've never seen that invoked. Always 5 MPH anyway.) So 10 over is what I'd expect to be a reasonable limit in a well-signed state.

Quote from: Kacie Jane on April 29, 2011, 11:02:45 PM
I'm going to add a question to my original post, one that most of you have already answered.
3) How fast do you typically drive?

....

I drive slower than I used to for a variety of reasons. Lately I haven't been out on the open highway outside of the immediate DC area all that often. I try to keep it to 65 on the Beltway, in part because I know there's almost no chance of getting a ticket at that speed because so many people go faster. In the I-395 express lanes I generally set the cruise control at 70 (speed limit is 65). Last time I was out I-66 in the 70-mph zone west of Haymarket it was a fairly windy day and I kept it to 70. I was actually about the fastest car on the road that day, but it was VERY windy.

The fact that 81 mph is grounds for a reckless driving ticket in Virginia, regardless of what the speed limit is (i.e., the rule is 20 mph over OR in excess of 80 mph), definitely affects my speed.

In DC I have a pretty good sense for where the stationary speed cameras are and, like everyone else, I just slow down until I'm past them.

nowadays I do 77 in a 70 or 73 in a 65. 

I insist on a rental car with cruise control.  I've had some rental cars that are so shaky with regards to power (see: Kia Rio!) that one second you're struggling to do 76 up a grade, but a moment later when the road levels out, within seconds you're doing 83 - a change of 7mph within about 2-3 seconds. 

add to that the fact that there is no steering wheel adjustment, so for a tall person, the steering wheel blocks the speedometer numbers between 40 and 90 mph ... I found myself either in peril of a speeding ticket, or having to consciously crane my neck to look at the speedometer once every 2-3 seconds, which just cannot possibly be a safe driving pattern!

so from now on, I insist on cars with a) unobstructed speedometer, and b) cruise control. 

My car does not have cruise control. Which is just as well, I wouldn't use it if I had it. I'm not comfortable taking my foot off the pedals and giving up that control. Besides, my style of driving is never anything resembling constant speed, so it wouldn't work for me if I was.

Quote from: Duke87 on May 02, 2011, 08:45:45 PM
My car does not have cruise control. Which is just as well, I wouldn't use it if I had it. I'm not comfortable taking my foot off the pedals and giving up that control. Besides, my style of driving is never anything resembling constant speed, so it wouldn't work for me if I was.

it's one less thing to worry about.  since I drive a different car every week, I don't get the thousands of miles of experience in which I can figure out what speed I'm going just by the sound and feel. 

my style of driving often involves having cruise control on for as long as an entire tank of gas.

I forgot to mention that I am a stickler for obeying the speed limit in school zones, especially near elementary schools since little kids often don't have a sense of traffic safety habits and are so unpredictable.

In my neighborhood I try to keep it to 30 mph (limit is 25) and I get tailgated daily. A lot of my neighbors think it's OK to go 35 to 45 in our neighborhood. I don't care....tailgate me and I'll nail it right on 25.

Quote from: 1995hoo on May 02, 2011, 08:58:23 PM
I forgot to mention that I am a stickler for obeying the speed limit in school zones, especially near elementary schools since little kids often don't have a sense of traffic safety habits and are so unpredictable.

I do my best to stay the Hell out of school zones during school hours for that precise reason.  Well, that and the glut of traffic.  If I am going sign-hunting, I will do so when children are not present.  (Luckily, most municipalities have added the "when children present" banner to their school-zone speed limit signs.  No use in enforcing an artificially low speed limit at 1.30am.

I always shake my head at the wisdom of building a school on a sufficiently busy arterial that the regular speed limit is 70, and the school speed limit is 55.

(only in Texas...)

Our school zones in Virginia have signs with two yellow lights such that the reduced speed limit applies only when the lights are flashing (normally only at the beginning and end of the school day–if you drive past a school at midday or at night the lights won't be flashing). I like this system because it's easy, because you don't have to read small print on signs telling you of the school hours, and because it makes it easy for the signs to be adjusted for different schools' hours. When I was growing up, the elementary schools were in session from 9:10 to 3:35 (except Mondays when they closed at 1:35), the junior highs were from 8:10 to 2:35, and the high schools were from 7:30 to 1:50. So a uniform approach to school zone hours wouldn't have worked. The "25 when flashing" is a pretty good system.

I think the high schools could do with more relaxed rules, but I understand why they don't distinguish when they post the school zone speed limits.

Fastest I've ever done was 135 in a 65 (yes, that's 70 over) about 6 years ago in my Volvo 940 turbo wagon on an undisclosed freeway in Massachusetts.  This was at approx. 1AM, so there was very little traffic.  Trying to leave some guy in a then-newer Maxima who was in the next lane and for whatever inexplicable reason wanted to ride with his bumper lined up with the middle of my rear quarter panel.  This is something I absolutely CANNOT STAND - either pass me or get behind me, but DON'T keep riding next to me.  Gently speeding up and slowing down resulted in him adjusting his speed likewise to match mine and stay planted right there.  I was doing 75 and made a burst to 95 to try to lose him.  I put some good distance on him, but it pissed him off to the point of getting behind me, throwing his brights on and riding right up on my bumper.  That's when I said fuck it and planted it on the floor.

I was still pulling pretty good by 135, backing off only because I was on Q-rated (93mph) snow tires at the time.  The mods done to that car proved effective as I left the Maxima in the dust.  He eventually caught back up, though, once I let off and resumed my cruising speed of 75.  Since I had a CB in the car, I hopped on 19 and let the truckers I was coming up on know that I had a road raging freak behind me, gave 'em my 20 and ID'd my car and asked 'em if they could kindly impede his progress.  They agreed to oblige - not surprising since truckers HATE douchey "four wheeler" drivers -  I made another brief high-speed burst (~100) past them and watched as one of the truckers pulled out in the left lane immediately behind me, blocking Maxima Douche.  Mission accomplished :D

Quote from: US-43|72 on May 15, 2011, 05:58:01 PM
for whatever inexplicable reason wanted to ride with his bumper lined up with the middle of my rear quarter panel.

gotta love shadowing behavior.

I had this happen to me once with a Nissan 350Z (what is it with Nissan drivers?).  then, when I moved over a lane, he fell behind.  So far behind that I had lost track of his headlights, as it was night.  And did I mention it was rainy?

next thing you know ... I'm still doing about 64-67 in a 65 (no cruise control; it remains rainy!) - and then I see a blur in my mirrors.  The Nissan must be doing at least 120, and he wants to pass me.  He is one lane to the right of me - I am in the #2 lane on a four-lane freeway.  He merges to the #2 lane ... then the #1 lane ...

then the #0 lane - the paved median!  and then the #-1 lane rejects him!  Sparks fly as he bounces off the median barrier.  He doesn't even tap the brake lights; I just see him recede into the distance in front of me, completely oblivious to the damage to his vehicle, as he continues doing 120-130mph in the rain.

in other news, I took a Hyundai Elantra up to 122 today.

As a warning, Florida cops do tend to ticket drivers for 1-5 over the limit in school zones. Being that they range from 15mph to 25mph depending on the area, it is usually a good idea to go roughly 1-2 under for safe measure. Judges are typically not sympathetic on that front, even though you rarely see kids cross the road anymore (usually it's what I call impatient parent zones).

Fastest speed of my young driving career was 95 on NY 17 somewhere between Middletown and Monticello, NY. I assume I'll get faster one day--most of my driving happens during the day in heavily populated areas.

I'm not sure what my fastest sped by is, but it may be 90 in a 55 on I-280 westbound coming home from the city when I worked in Manhattan last summer. I would get out of the 50 mph Newark section like a cannon. Even in rush hour, the three left lanes on 280 westbound right after the road widens from 2 to 5 lanes all at once (because of a big left entrance) are usually fairly empty since not that much traffic gets on at that entrance. So I'd pull over to the left and just go go go because by that time I was tired and just wanted to get home. I know I hit at least 80 while doing that, maybe I hit 90 by the time the speed limit went back up to 65 as I got further west.

In school zones, I _always_ slow to at least below the posted speed. Most places I've seen "when flashing" or "when children present". There's many that list times when it is in effect, but I've yet to see one that was an all-day limit.

And, the first time I saw a 55mph school zone in Texas, I couldn't believe they felt the need to even post it. Honestly, I don't see any kids getting out of the way of a car going 55mph.

So, I got my Focus up to 105 on the Northway (I-87) on Friday. It definitely had a little more in it, but I ran out of straightaway. This being in a 65, so 40 over.

That's not the most over I've gone, though, seeing as I've achieved 90 in a 45. This was while passing two cars in one shot which, I believe, is also technically not legal.

On that note, I did manage to pass three cars in one shot on US7 in Vermont. Surprising what you can do when the yokels are doing 50 in a 50 and you're doing 80 in a 50 on a nice, long straightaway when there is no one coming the other way. :cool:

QuoteThis was while passing two cars in one shot which, I believe, is also technically not legal.

That's illegal? It can be a dick move, but I didn't know it was illegal

Quote from: corco on May 30, 2011, 06:50:04 PM

QuoteThis was while passing two cars in one shot which, I believe, is also technically not legal.

That's illegal? It can be a dick move, but I didn't know it was illegal

I recall learning that when you're passing on a two-lane road it is illegal, at least in Virginia, to pass more than one vehicle at a time–legally you have to pass one, move back onto your side of the road, then pass another. Practically speaking I've never heard of this law being enforced. It doesn't apply on a road where there is more than one lane on each side because in that circumstance you don't have the safety concern of driving in the lane used by oncoming traffic.

Thing about laws like that is that they may vary from state to state, which is hardly unusual for traffic laws (consider, for example, that in North Carolina it is illegal to make a left on red from a one-way street into another one-way street).

It may be impossible to achieve such a maneuver anyway if the first car you're passing isn't giving the car ahead adequate space so that you can merge back into the proper lane.

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 31, 2011, 09:34:03 AM
It may be impossible to achieve such a maneuver anyway if the first car you're passing isn't giving the car ahead adequate space so that you can merge back into the proper lane.

Or if he's an asshole who speeds up when you go to pass him.

Quote from: 1995hoo on May 31, 2011, 08:45:21 AMI recall learning that when you're passing on a two-lane road it is illegal, at least in Virginia, to pass more than one vehicle at a time–legally you have to pass one, move back onto your side of the road, then pass another. Practically speaking I've never heard of this law being enforced. It doesn't apply on a road where there is more than one lane on each side because in that circumstance you don't have the safety concern of driving in the lane used by oncoming traffic.

I do occasionally pass multiple vehicles at one time, especially when they are travelling in a platoon and tailgating each other.  I think the real purpose of the Virginia law is to give the police a little more leverage over reckless drivers who get into the passing lane and just keep going regardless of the oncoming traffic.

^ I can see why they would want the law, but as long as you're not a total menace, there's little point in enforcing it. That said, I passed more than one vehicle last week on a two-lane road for the first time in years...Florida's roads can be quite straight at times, and sometimes her terrain is quite flat, too (see SR 31). Also, if the road isn't too narrow, it's doable, but it's kind of like passing in an intersection.

I'be also heard that slower traffic cannot hold up more than 5 cars on a two-lane road in some states (Washington springs to mind), or must move onto the shoulder. I wish there was such a law in the Sunshine State.

^ The same kind of situations come up in Nevada quite often. There's been a couple times where I've passed a couple cars at once on a two-lane highway. Those were situations where I could tell the vehicles were traveling together, and it was one of those places in the middle of Nevada where the road is straight and wide open for like 20 miles at a time.

It does not appear that Nevada has a law requiring passing one car at a time. However, Nevada made the "cannot hold up 5 or more vehicles" rule into law in 2001--the 2009 MUTCD's turnout series of signs are almost the exact specification NDOT has used since 2001 in areas where turnouts are provided.

Unfortunately our roads are unlike those in the middle of Nevada or anywhere else in North America that uses the grid system.

Last week I was up in Scotland and the place was full of foreign RV's but at least they had the decency to keep a good distance apart to allow passing traffic to pull in if required although in the case of the picture below there was a sufficient gap in oncoming traffic to pass two before the bend.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedcam.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk%2Frv.jpg&hash=01616f18d7185563f3ac9859b174bf7b79a438d3)

Quote from: corco on May 30, 2011, 06:50:04 PM

QuoteThis was while passing two cars in one shot which, I believe, is also technically not legal.

That's illegal? It can be a dick move, but I didn't know it was illegal

I'm pretty sure it's illegal in Connecticut. Probably because in the conditions that exist here it normally shouldn't be possible without doing something reckless, like going 90 in a 45. If I had attempted it and only gotten up to, say, 65 (still 20 over!), I would have stayed in the oncoming lane too long and creamed head-on into the next guy coming the other way.
I can see where it would and should be legal in states where you have passing zones with light enough oncoming traffic and far enough visibility to reasonably permit it, but Connecticut is not like that.

I've gone 97 MPH (156 km/h) on I-280 SB in Los Altos Hills.  

I cruised at 83 MPH (134 km/h) in a 55 (90) passing a cop going the other way on US-101 in Southern Oregon.  The cop did turn around at the next turnout, and I slowed down to the speed limit.  Fortunately, he passed me and joined an entourage of other cops around a white van with illegal substances.  I lucked out.  :P  

Quote from: roadfro on May 31, 2011, 04:07:26 PM
It does not appear that Nevada has a law requiring passing one car at a time. However, Nevada made the "cannot hold up 5 or more vehicles" rule into law in 2001--the 2009 MUTCD's turnout series of signs are almost the exact specification NDOT has used since 2001 in areas where turnouts are provided.

So, this can set up a situation where you're breaking the law no matter what you do.  i.e. You're doing the speed limit but have 10 cars behind you.  So, you're nailed for holding up traffic.  Or, you speed up and get nailed for speeding.

NO FAIR!!!!!!!!

Hopefully, in such a case, you can get to a turnout before the cops nab you.

_______________________________________________

Such, a rule wouldn't work on rural TN roads as many of them have no shoulders.  (even in areas where there's plenty of room for them)

Or you could pull over and let them go.

QuotePractically speaking I've never heard of this law being enforced.

I have.  Ironically it was a laywer who was teaching law at at a college that got the ticket.

QuoteI'be also heard that slower traffic cannot hold up more than 5 cars on a two-lane road in some states (Washington springs to mind), or must move onto the shoulder. I wish there was such a law in the Sunshine State.

I really wish NY had this.  I've been in long lines of cars often on US 11 and work zones on NY 17.

Quote from: deanej on June 01, 2011, 12:12:58 PM
Or you could pull over and let them go.

What if there's no place to pull over?  That's what I'm saying about TN rural roads.

My main point is that, IMO, it is not RIGHT to put someone in a position where they are breaking the law no matter what they do.  If you are doing the speed limit on a two lane road, you should NEVER get a ticket no matter how many cars are behind you!  Why should I have to pull over if 10 people behind me want to break the law?  Isn't that aiding and abetting a crime?

Now, if you are going below the limit, that's another story.

I've passed as many as 11 in one burst.

this weekend I passed 6 18-wheelers in a convoy in one fell swoop.   I must've had about 10 miles of visibility on a straight section of US-93 in Nevada.

also: got pulled over for 58 in a 55 in Oregon.  After a thorough search of my car, which culminated in a very long explanation of how US-99 has not been signed since 1969, and my attempt to sell the offending 99 marker to the cops for 200 bucks (they declined) ... I was let go with a verbal warning.

wtf?

Quote from: mightyace on June 01, 2011, 04:35:17 AMSo, this can set up a situation where you're breaking the law no matter what you do.  i.e. You're doing the speed limit but have 10 cars behind you.  So, you're nailed for holding up traffic.  Or, you speed up and get nailed for speeding.

NO FAIR!!!!!!!!

As Deanej points out, you can pull over and let them pass.  "DELAY OF X VEHICLES ILLEGAL" signing is provided only where there are actually turnouts that can be used for stopping.  The legal Catch-22 situation you describe doesn't arise.

QuoteSuch a rule wouldn't work on rural TN roads as many of them have no shoulders.

It would work perfectly fine if Tennessee DOT actually built turnouts, improved shoulders, passing lanes and other aids to safe operation on two-lane rural highways.  But that would require money and probably also some changes in engineering policy since turnouts are seen as a largely Western thing.

Quote from: mightyace on June 01, 2011, 12:34:24 PMWhy should I have to pull over if 10 people behind me want to break the law?  Isn't that aiding and abetting a crime?

You cannot be charged with aiding and abetting because you are not acting as an agent of the people behind you who want to cruise above the speed limit.  You are not in communication with those people, so it is impossible to show that you pulled over because you wanted or expected them to break the law.

Proving a charge of aiding and abetting requires much more than a mere demonstration that your actions made it more convenient for someone else to break the law.

Quote from: J N Winkler on June 01, 2011, 01:22:18 PM

Quote from: mightyace on June 01, 2011, 12:34:24 PMWhy should I have to pull over if 10 people behind me want to break the law?  Isn't that aiding and abetting a crime?

You cannot be charged with aiding and abetting because you are not acting as an agent of the people behind you who want to cruise above the speed limit.  You are not in communication with those people, so it is impossible to show that you pulled over because you wanted or expected them to break the law.

Proving a charge of aiding and abetting requires much more than a mere demonstration that your actions made it more convenient for someone else to break the law.

But, if I'm going the legal limit and cars are piled up behind me, then at least some of them want to speed.  If not, they wouldn't be on my bumper.

Please, someone, tell me why going the speed limit on a two lane road should be a crime under any circumstances. Because, if I'm doing the legal limit, the only way they can get in front of me is to speed.  Ergo, the number of cars behind me should not matter.

EDIT:
I know some of you may say, I'd be impeding the flow of traffic.  But, again, if I'm going the legal limit, I'm not impeding the flow of traffic a legal speeds.

Also, I'm only applying this to two lane roads (single lane in each direction.)

EDIT 2:
I'm also looking at this strictly from a legal basis.  If you want to say I SHOULD move over for courtesy or safety, that's another story.  I may still disagree, but maybe not...

If I want to speed on a two lane but you're ahead of me only doing limit, the most I'll do is grumble. I'll deal with it. It's annoying, but you're obeying the law and I respect that.

If you're below the limit, even if only by 5 mph, pull over and let me by.

^^^

That's how I try to operate.  I like to say I never speed, but that would not be honest.

And, I would do just as Bickenden does.  Stew if they're doing the limit or faster, but please get out of the way if you're slower.

I will speed up reasonably to keep traffic flowing.  If the speed limit is 70, and a truck is doing 65 and I'm passing him doing 77 ... if you're coming up behind me doing 83, I will speed up to 83.

if you're coming up behind me doing 100; sorry but you're out of luck.  you get 83 out of me.  maybe 90 if I'm feeling generous.

if you're coming up behind me doing 150, I will slow down to 65 just to fuck with you.  100 may very well be reasonable given the traffic level.  Any traffic level above 'nobody for miles' and 150 is patently stupid.

Quote from: mightyace on June 01, 2011, 04:48:38 PMBut, if I'm going the legal limit and cars are piled up behind me, then at least some of them want to speed.  If not, they wouldn't be on my bumper.

One does not necessarily follow from the other.  You do not have to assume that they do want to speed and a prosecutor can't argue that you should so assume.  There are many reasons other than a desire to speed which might result in traffic riding your bumper when you are driving the speed limit.  Because you are not in communication with any of the following drivers, you can't make assumptions about which reasons might be operative.  Some of the following drivers might want to drive at the speed limit but be in front.  Others might be so habituated to following other cars in city traffic that when they find themselves on the open highway, they look for a car to tailgate.  Pulling over to let the following cars pass is no guarantee that any of them will drive faster.  In fact, one of the hazards of using turnouts is finding yourself following a slower vehicle which you allowed to pass.

If your theory that turning out equals aiding and abetting were to be accepted as gospel, then to escape legal jeopardy drivers would have to stay in front of a multi-car platoon in order to prevent any of the following cars from driving faster than the speed limit.  This is absurd, unsafe, and fundamentally inconsistent with defensive driving.

QuotePlease, someone, tell me why going the speed limit on a two lane road should be a crime under any circumstances.

It is not the speed that is being criminalized:  it is the participation in unsafe platoon formation.  You do not have the right to drive at the speed limit through stop signs, red lights, active railroad crossings, etc. and mandatory use of turnouts is conceptually similar to these conditions.

QuoteBecause, if I'm doing the legal limit, the only way they can get in front of me is to speed.  Ergo, the number of cars behind me should not matter.

But the legality or otherwise of the speeds they choose as they maneuver around you is not your concern, legally speaking.  That is between them and the police (or between them and God, if something goes terribly wrong).

QuoteI know some of you may say, I'd be impeding the flow of traffic.  But, again, if I'm going the legal limit, I'm not impeding the flow of traffic at legal speeds.

Perhaps not, but you are participating in an unsafe platoon and this can be criminalized since it is an action under your control.  I don't really have a problem with it being unlawful to delay vehicles when appropriate measures of relief (such as turnouts) are provided.  If it were a general rule of the road, as opposed to a special rule applying to lengths of highway for which turnouts have been provided, then yes, I would have a major problem with it, because in the absence of legal specialization (such as dedication to a particular class of vehicle) the highways have to be open to all, including slow-moving traffic.

QuoteAlso, I'm only applying this to two lane roads (single lane in each direction.

I understood this to be the case.  On freeways it is sometimes suggested that when two vehicles are carrying out competing overtakes in the same lane and the slower vehicle is in front, the slower vehicle should speed up to avoid undue delay to the following faster vehicle, even if it means the slower driver has to increase his or her excess above the speed limit.  I do not agree with this argument.  If the slower driver does speed up, it is a courtesy to the faster driver, not something to be expected as of right.

Part of the justification for having a special rule for two-lane highways with turnouts versus freeways and the like is that traffic operations on rural two-lanes, and particularly on the kinds of roads where turnouts are provided, are very different.  Operating speeds are typically lower, often as a result of the same topographical constraints which prevent more competent improvements (such as full passing lanes) being provided.  LOS is defined by time spent following other vehicles rather than by volume/capacity ratio per se.  Again, because of topographical constraint, there is often a wide spread in speeds (some drivers have more of an appetite for speed through curves than others) with most of the distribution lying under the speed limit.  Turnouts and delay bans, if observed and enforced, have the potential to ease driving without the need to remove whole mountainsides to provide passing lanes.

I've noticed the correlation that people who are driving slowly are some of the least likely to use a turnout.  they seem to believe that their right to do 15 mph below the limit is inalienable.

if someone is coming up behind me on a mountain road doing 90 because they have a motorcycle or a Z3, I'll use the next turnout even if I myself am attempting to take the curves doing 15 over the limit.

Quote from: J N Winkler on June 01, 2011, 05:41:02 PM
That is between them and the police (or between them and God, if something goes terribly wrong).

We found out on May 21 that no such thing will go terribly wrong.

Quote from: NE2 on June 01, 2011, 05:52:23 PM
We found out on May 21 that no such thing will go terribly wrong.

okay, I'll bite.  what happened on May 21? 

Nothing, to the embarrassment of one Harold Camping.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 01, 2011, 05:49:36 PMI've noticed the correlation that people who are driving slowly are some of the least likely to use a turnout.  they seem to believe that their right to do 15 mph below the limit is inalienable.

Yes, I have noticed the same thing.  I have expounded (at, it must be said, boring length) on the theoretical arguments in favor of turnouts and the associated delay bans, but in practice I wonder if they really work.  I have not managed to find any studies which looked into whether turnouts really improve traffic operation, and I can see some potential for them to make things worse.  For example, if there are turnouts and signs indicating that they must be used, and a really slow car in front is not using them, I'd expect the presence of the signs and turnouts to set the stage for a road-rage incident which might not happen if there were not this apparent legal expectation that slower vehicles should get out of the way.

Quote from: roadfro on May 31, 2011, 04:07:26 PM
It does not appear that Nevada has a law requiring passing one car at a time. However, Nevada made the "cannot hold up 5 or more vehicles" rule into law in 2001

California has had a law like this on the books for quite a long time (as long as I've been driving).  In California, if there are 5 or more vehicles behind you on a two-lane highway, you are supposed to pull over at the next turnout to allow everyone to pass.  If I'm not mistaken, you cannot be ticketed for impeding unless the cop sees you not using a designated turnout.

Depends on the state - in some places local drivers happily pull over to let you speed on by, because they have nowhere to go and take their time, whereas you have 14 more hours of daylight and 13.95 more hours of scheduled driving (.05 hours to refuel).

Quote from: NE2 on June 01, 2011, 05:54:30 PM
Nothing, to the embarrassment of one Harold Camping.

how quickly I forget.  I hadn't thought of that guy since, oh about May 20th.

Quote from: J N Winkler on June 01, 2011, 06:08:56 PM

Yes, I have noticed the same thing.  I have expounded (at, it must be said, boring length) on the theoretical arguments in favor of turnouts and the associated delay bans, but in practice I wonder if they really work.  I have not managed to find any studies which looked into whether turnouts really improve traffic operation, and I can see some potential for them to make things worse.  For example, if there are turnouts and signs indicating that they must be used, and a really slow car in front is not using them, I'd expect the presence of the signs and turnouts to set the stage for a road-rage incident which might not happen if there were not this apparent legal expectation that slower vehicles should get out of the way.

California's "vehicles must use turnouts" sign even has on it the appropriate citation of the Civil Vehicular Code!  I believe it's the only sign in CA's MUTCD that has that legend - as if to say "yes, this really is the law, you jackass - now get out of the way".

Quote from: Steve on June 01, 2011, 07:27:26 PMthey have nowhere to go

then why go anywhere?  stop wasting gasoline and stay home and have a beer.

Idaho has a similar law- 3 cars behind you and you must pull off. This is well marked and slow vehicle turnouts are clearly indicated (especially along Idaho 55 and US-95).

As far as the speeding/pull over debate, it bothers me that people assume that the speeding law is more important than other laws. People use this as justification for not keeping right except to pass, too.

Why is the legal speed law more important than any other law? Why does the legal speed law take precedence over other laws? Too much of bad driving is cloaked in "Well, I'm going the speed limit."

It's not to the benefit of traffic safety to have large clumps of cars traveling together- if you have three cars you're much more likely to have a multi-car collision than if you have one car. Laws that try to disperse those clumps have just as much merit to safety as laws that regulate maximum speed. If you're on a rural stretch of road (which is usually where these pullouts apply), there's plenty of asphalt for two cars to share without having to be within 50 feet of each other.

Quote from: mightyace on June 01, 2011, 12:34:24 PMWhy should I have to pull over if 10 people behind me want to break the law?  Isn't that aiding and abetting a crime?

No, because you have done nothing to encourage or assist anyone to break the law. You have merely declined to actively prevent them from doing so. If someone is trying to rob a bank, you have not committed a crime if you don't tackle them and try to stop them. If someone is trying to speed, you have not committed a crime if you don't impede their progress.

QuotePlease, someone, tell me why going the speed limit on a two lane road should be a crime under any circumstances. Because, if I'm doing the legal limit, the only way they can get in front of me is to speed.  Ergo, the number of cars behind me should not matter.

I believe the laws in question more have in mind vehicles which are traveling considerably under the speed limit. Construction vehicles, large trucks on steep hills, trailers, etc.

Quote from: corco on June 01, 2011, 07:52:01 PM
Why is the legal speed law more important than any other law? Why does the legal speed law take precedence over other laws? Too much of bad driving is cloaked in "Well, I'm going the speed limit."

Because of how heavily this law is enforced. I'm pretty sure that speeding is probably the #1 most-issued traffic ticket, and everyone knows that municipalities love giving them out for revenue purposes. Additionally, speeding is easy to prove, unlike most other driving laws, and thus much easier to convict for.

If speed enforcement wasn't so tight, people wouldn't be so worried about doing the speed limit.

Quote from: NE2 on June 01, 2011, 05:52:23 PM

Quote from: J N Winkler on June 01, 2011, 05:41:02 PM
That is between them and the police (or between them and God, if something goes terribly wrong).

We found out on May 21 that no such thing will go terribly wrong.

1)I'm sure the idiom used about dying is available in America - it's certainly pretty obvious what is being meant here. May 21 didn't tell us that we don't die.
2)One crackpot who got a load of devoted followers being proved wrong disproves God's existence? Sounds like a huge massive logical leap, a blind bit of dogmatic faith - even if you didn't pick up the idiom, you come across as stupid.
3)If Harold Camping giving a false prediction is so paradigm changing, how come you take it back to May 21, and not 1994 when he first did something similar?

Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 01, 2011, 07:33:28 PM

Quote from: Steve on June 01, 2011, 07:27:26 PMthey have nowhere to go

then why go anywhere?  stop wasting gasoline and stay home and have a beer.

While staying home and having a beer is a good thing, are you a roadgeek if you don't understand using roads for pleasure? That said, doing it and annoying everyone by holding them up isn't a good thing.

There's a road near me that was built with ~20' lanes so that it is cheaper than having a divided highway, or even a undivided 4-lane road, but still has easy overtaking. You often get cars going 55 (speed limit 60, natural speed for the road a bit more than 60) sitting near to the centre line, blocking the overtaking that the road is meant to encourage. I'm wondering which came first - the national decline in overtaking manoeuvres outside of multi-lane roads, or the inability of many drivers to recognise that someone is wanting to overtake them and they should move left and help them do so.

When cycling on quiet, narrower roads, if a car comes behind me, I move over to the edge of the gutter, slow down and try and get them to pass me - I'm always surprised at how little the offer gets taken up, even when I try and direct them to pass me with my hand - they still feel it's better to be about 2 feet behind me, going slow enough that they aren't making much noise (which is the main reason why I want them to pass me).

Quote from: english si on June 02, 2011, 05:25:08 AM
While staying home and having a beer is a good thing, are you a roadgeek if you don't understand using roads for pleasure? That said, doing it and annoying everyone by holding them up isn't a good thing.

if you don't understand roads for pleasure, then no, you are not a roadgeek.  are we just approaching the same question from opposite sides of the grammar?

even if I cannot articulate exactly where I am going, I still feel like I am going somewhere.  For example, last weekend I did an exploration trip of Oregon and Idaho.  I got pulled over, and the police asked me where I was going, and the best I could do was "Portland, maybe?  Probably not.  I haven't decided yet."

so of course, in their mind, that equates not to "roadgeek" but to "drug dealer".  Damn cops. 

Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 02, 2011, 11:29:43 AMeven if I cannot articulate exactly where I am going, I still feel like I am going somewhere.  For example, last weekend I did an exploration trip of Oregon and Idaho.  I got pulled over, and the police asked me where I was going, and the best I could do was "Portland, maybe?  Probably not.  I haven't decided yet."

The "correct" answer to that question is generally the first line on the last D-series distance sign or post-interchange route confirmation sign you passed.  It is "correct" because it is specific and gives an impression of purposeful travel.  Even if you have no plans to stay in that town, the police can't get after you for lying because you are not promising to them that you are going there or planning to stay there--you retain the freedom to change your mind.

An indefinite answer just encourages them to ask you to submit to voluntary searches and to try other tricks designed to escalate reasonable suspicion up to probable cause.

I always just say the next town on the highway at border checkpoints- I haven't been pulled over while roadgeeking but I suspect I'd say the same thing if that happened.

It's technically correct and honest and it won't raise suspicion.

Quote from: J N Winkler on June 02, 2011, 11:47:59 AM
The "correct" answer to that question is generally the first line on the last D-series distance sign or post-interchange route confirmation sign you passed.  It is "correct" because it is specific and gives an impression of purposeful travel.  Even if you have no plans to stay in that town, the police can't get after you for lying because you are not promising to them that you are going there or planning to stay there--you retain the freedom to change your mind.

An indefinite answer just encourages them to ask you to submit to voluntary searches and to try other tricks designed to escalate reasonable suspicion up to probable cause.

I hear ya, but damn, trying to come up with stories on-the-fly is tough work.  I need at least 5 beers in me to be able to prevaricate quite so fluidly, and is that what they are encouraging me to do?  Really?

"so where are you headed today?"
"Klamath Falls"
"what's there?"
"uh... well, not a US 97 and state highway 39 pair of cutouts anymore"
"son, what the Hell is wrong with you?  you on drugs, boy?"

yeah ... that degenerates quickly.

"so where are you headed today?"
"Klamath Falls"
"what's there?"
"a motel so I can get some sleep"
"it's 8.30 in the morning.  you on drugs, boy?"

not so much ...

"so where are you headed today?"
"Klamath Falls"
"what's there?"
"your mom"

Quote from: corco on June 02, 2011, 11:50:23 AM
I always just say the next town on the highway at border checkpoints- I haven't been pulled over while roadgeeking but I suspect I'd say the same thing if that happened.

It's technically correct and honest and it won't raise suspicion.

when it comes to border patrol checkpoints, I usually have a story prepared, but the fact is, I do significantly less roadgeeking in the constitution-free zone - I really am attempting to get to Point B and have decided to bite the bullet and take the infested highway because it is fastest.  In these cases, I am heading likely home to San Diego (no need to explain that) or out to (usually) Phoenix.

Generally speaking, it is a tragedy that I've been discouraged from exploring the southern part of the US because it is very interesting from a scenery and a historical perspective.  But I will not forget the vicious interrogation I got because I was exploring old US-80 at the (frighteningly appropriately named) Sentinel exit off I-8 in Arizona.

first question I got asked: "who are you picking up?"

I really did respond with "sir, that question is predicated on a false premise and therefore I cannot answer it in a logical manner."

It went downhill from there.

I should've just gone with "your mom".

First time I ever entered Canada, it was 2:30 in the morning and I was 17. Being a smart ass, the girl in the booth asked where I came from, and I pointed behind me and said, "That road right there."

She wasn't amused. An hour later, I got to legally enter Canada.

Sykotyk

Quote from: Sykotyk on June 02, 2011, 12:07:35 PM
First time I ever entered Canada, it was 2:30 in the morning and I was 17. Being a smart ass, the girl in the booth asked where I came from, and I pointed behind me and said, "That road right there."

She wasn't amused. An hour later, I got to legally enter Canada.

Sykotyk

actually, once coming back into the US from Canada, I was asked "how long have you been in the US?" because I have a green card.  I answered "about 45 seconds? dunno how far back the border is".  I wasn't trying to be a smartass; I just answered the question in the frame of mind I happened to be in, which is "I am crossing an international border at this exact moment".  the agent actually laughed and, after clarifying, asked me two or three more questions and waved me on.  Smoothest return to the US I've ever had.  This was in 2006, btw, at the I-81 entry point.

Something tells me that trick doesn't work at international crossings due to the depth they go with questions (too bad; I'm normally so close to Canada it would be nice to do some roadgeek trips up there!), but I'll keep it in mind if border patrol ever decides to set up a road block when I'm out (been lucky so far).

Btw, the exact location of the border at I-81 is the bridge between Wellesly and Hill Islands.  It's not particularly easy to see due to the stone walls; they're just high enough that the International Rift isn't visible from a vehicle.

Quote from: deanej on June 02, 2011, 12:31:19 PM
(too bad; I'm normally so close to Canada it would be nice to do some roadgeek trips up there!)

indeed - and I am so close to Mexico, and let me tell you, my greatest aversion to going there is not the crime and violence in that country (easily avoided if you exercise a bit of caution) but rather, the US border patrol.

QuoteSomething tells me that trick doesn't work at international crossings due to the depth they go with questions (too bad; I'm normally so close to Canada it would be nice to do some roadgeek trips up there!),

My plan if I know it's coming is to have a plan. It's important to be very honest at border crossings, so what you have to do is massage what you're doing so that it sounds palatable. If I were to drive into Canada just to do a roadgeek related loop, I'd say "I'm working on an academic project that requires me to go up to Canada for the day to explore this area" and if they inquire what that project is, say you're exploring the cultural geography of whatever the region is called. That's not lying (it would be impossible for them to prove whether or not you're exploring the cultural geography of something) and it sounds sufficiently academic that it should fly.

It also explains why you're by yourself- if you're on a roadtrip to explore an area you should be with friends, but if you're doing something academic it's perfectly understandable why nobody is with you.

I've always had good results with "I'm a photographer - I'm going on a photo trip".  SLR camera gives credibility. 

as for why I am by myself - I usually do not have the patience to get into the intricacies of introverted vs. extroverted personalities... but luckily, people generally tend to just observe that I am by myself - an observation which I can confirm without elaboration - and rarely do I get the point blank "why are you by yourself?"  (because there isn't anyone else with me, you fucking twit)

Gee, you guys have had much longer conversations with officials at land border crossings than I have ever had.  The lengthiest one I had was the second time I entered Mexico, at Ojinaga, and it became clear to me (massively in retrospect) that the officials were dancing around the fact that I was supposed to have paid for my tourist permit the first time I entered and this had not happened.  Arrival at UK ports of entry (always by air, sea, or rail) tends to be where I have difficulties.

Quote from: corco on June 02, 2011, 12:57:49 PMMy plan if I know it's coming is to have a plan. It's important to be very honest at border crossings, so what you have to do is massage what you're doing so that it sounds palatable. If I were to drive into Canada just to do a roadgeek related loop, I'd say "I'm working on an academic project that requires me to go up to Canada for the day to explore this area" and if they inquire what that project is, say you're exploring the cultural geography of whatever the region is called. That's not lying (it would be impossible for them to prove whether or not you're exploring the cultural geography of something) and it sounds sufficiently academic that it should fly.

I wouldn't choose that approach because it would encourage them to wonder why you were over-volunteering information.  Excessive volubility is often seen as a sign of a guilty mind, as is quick resort to an obviously prefabricated narrative which relies on specialized knowledge or is not immediately checkable as objective fact.

I'd recommend watching the movie Ararat (which uses a lengthy interview with a Canadian customs officer as a framing device) for an idea of how that can play out.  For that matter, the description of the Russian interrogators' tactics in Le Carré's Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (either the book or the Alec Guinness miniseries adaptation) also gives an idea of what immigration and customs officers can do--they can go at you in shifts until your imagination runs out and you cannot think of anything else but the real reason you are seeking entry or importation of goods.

Instead, I'd keep it simple.  "Tourism"--one word--usually does it for me.

QuoteIt also explains why you're by yourself- if you're on a roadtrip to explore an area you should be with friends, but if you're doing something academic it's perfectly understandable why nobody is with you.

I don't agree with this.  Travelling solo is not something that should require elaborate explanation or efforts at window dressing.  I usually travel alone, and the majority of times I have crossed the border I have been alone, and I have never once been asked why I am alone.  Travel is an intense experience that can make or break friendships, so it is perfectly normal for some people to prefer to travel by themselves, even as tourists.

Quote from: J N Winkler on June 02, 2011, 02:02:35 PM
The lengthiest one I had was the second time I entered Mexico, at Ojinaga, and it became clear to me (massively in retrospect) that the officials were dancing around the fact that I was supposed to have paid for my tourist permit the first time I entered and this had not happened.

I've never had any conversations entering Mexico, beyond one time when they asked me to pop the trunk and gave me a cursory inspection.  It is the internal checkpoints in Mexico where I have conversations, and they are always brief.  My level of Spanish (if not my California vehicle registration) very quickly establishes that I'm a tourist and therefore if I am not harassed, I might spend my dolares in the country.

QuoteI wouldn't choose that approach because it would encourage them to wonder why you were over-volunteering information.  Excessive volubility is often seen as a sign of a guilty mind, as is quick resort to an obviously prefabricated narrative which relies on specialized knowledge or is not immediately checkable as objective fact.

This is true- I'd only volunteer that information if asked.

The worst I've ever been searched driving into Canada (I had to get out of my car, go into a secondary room, and empty my pockets while my car was being searched) was when I just spilled every little piece of information without them asking. In retrospect, it sounded really prefabricated (even though in that instance I actually had a destination and was being honest!), so I agree with that.

QuoteI usually travel alone, and the majority of times I have crossed the border I have been alone, and I have never once been asked why I am alone.  Travel is an intense experience that can make or break friendships, so it is perfectly normal for some people to prefer to travel by themselves, even as tourists.

It may be tougher at a younger age. The border partrol seems to be under the impression that there aren't many 18-22 year olds that take daytrips across international boundaries by themselves for legitimate reasons.

Quote from: corco on June 02, 2011, 02:53:24 PM
It may be tougher at a younger age. The border partrol seems to be under the impression that there aren't many 18-22 year olds that take daytrips across international boundaries by themselves for legitimate reasons.

indeed.  60 years old, in an RV, as an obvious husband and wife team? "come on in! welcome to Canada!"  20s, alone, in a small car in disreputable condition? "get off my lawn!"

Quote from: corco on June 02, 2011, 02:53:24 PMThis is true- I'd only volunteer that information if asked.

The worst I've ever been searched driving into Canada (I had to get out of my car, go into a secondary room, and empty my pockets while my car was being searched) was when I just spilled every little piece of information without them asking. In retrospect, it sounded really prefabricated (even though in that instance I actually had a destination and was being honest!), so I agree with that.

Thanks--I understand your approach better.  It is certainly a good idea to be prepared for follow-up questions when they are asked.

QuoteIt may be tougher at a younger age. The border partrol seems to be under the impression that there aren't many 18-22 year olds that take daytrips across international boundaries by themselves for legitimate reasons.

This was a factor I hadn't considered; I didn't start crossing international boundaries on a reasonably frequent basis until I was 23.  (First time was actually at age 16, but I was with my parents at the time.)  I can see why they would be suspicious, just in terms of income (or the lack of it) for travelling, presumed access to a party scene involving drugs, and having to stick to a college schedule.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 02, 2011, 04:34:13 PMindeed.  60 years old, in an RV, as an obvious husband and wife team? "come on in! welcome to Canada!"  20s, alone, in a small car in disreputable condition? "get off my lawn!"

The last time I visited Canada was in 2003, while I was still in my twenties, in a 1986 Nissan Maxima with oxidized paint.  I entered Canada at the Roosville POE (north end of US 93).  Are you bringing in liquor?  No?  OK, go on ahead.  Then, re-entering the US at the north end of US 97, I find a shared Customs facility still under construction, and a single inspector handling traffic out in the open (no booth, etc.).  After staring at my passport for a long time he finally points at the Turkish airport visa and says something.  I point at my ears, shrug, and look confused.  Open your trunk, please.  I do that, he looks, I feel the trunk lid close, and that's it.  Then I stop a few yards later to get a photo of the project funding sign for the POE, which has obviously been made by the Americans because it gets the Canadian maple leaf symbol subtly wrong.

Both time's I've crossed into Canada and both times crossing back into the US "I'm/We're going to visit/were visiting some friends for the weekend" has flown just fine as explanation. Of course, in both instances, it was true.

The thing is, the next thing they ask is "how do you know these friends?". I was kinda worried that "through the internet. We share a fascination with roads." might raise an eyebrow, but it didn't.

The best question I've gotten is "how many people are you traveling with?". No mister border guard sir, we are not hiding anyone in the trunk! It's just the two of us! :rolleyes: (of course, all I actually said was "it's just the two of us.")



I don't know that I'd ever attempt to cross the border without having a specific destination. Too fishy and I can't make up stories. But then again, it's too far away for me to reasonably make a day trip out of it, so I'm not going to Canada without spending a night there anytime soon regardless.

The best answer I ever gave at Customs was entering the UK at Heathrow on 6 September 2003. I had flown in from JFK and was flying back the following afternoon. The lady asked how long I'd be in the country and I said, "Until tomorrow afternoon." Then she asked, "What is the purpose of your journey?" I grinned enormously and said, "To fly home on Concorde!" Her eyes flew wide open and in this classic British accent, full of envy, she said, "Lucky YOU!!!!!" and stamped my passport. Fastest immigration control I've ever experienced and by far the most fun. The answer was completely accurate; I just figured I'd spend the weekend in London since I'd flown over.

That picture in my avatar was taken the following afternoon. I'm in seat 20D.

Quote from: corco on June 02, 2011, 02:53:24 PM

QuoteI wouldn't choose that approach because it would encourage them to wonder why you were over-volunteering information.  Excessive volubility is often seen as a sign of a guilty mind, as is quick resort to an obviously prefabricated narrative which relies on specialized knowledge or is not immediately checkable as objective fact.

This is true- I'd only volunteer that information if asked.

The worst I've ever been searched driving into Canada (I had to get out of my car, go into a secondary room, and empty my pockets while my car was being searched) was when I just spilled every little piece of information without them asking. In retrospect, it sounded really prefabricated (even though in that instance I actually had a destination and was being honest!), so I agree with that.

QuoteI usually travel alone, and the majority of times I have crossed the border I have been alone, and I have never once been asked why I am alone.  Travel is an intense experience that can make or break friendships, so it is perfectly normal for some people to prefer to travel by themselves, even as tourists.

It may be tougher at a younger age. The border partrol seems to be under the impression that there aren't many 18-22 year olds that take daytrips across international boundaries by themselves for legitimate reasons.

In Windsor or Sarnia, just answer "Niagara" as a destination.  Usually you'll get welcomed like a cherished guest.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg560.imageshack.us%2Fimg560%2F1658%2Fimg3921g.jpg&hash=01c0903f697708f4ebab3682baca182a326c70dc)

/pictures or it didn't happen


This was after peak, though. My car tops out at 110.

Quote from: Duke87 on September 24, 2011, 09:32:25 PM

This was after peak, though. My car tops out at 110.

somewhere I have a photo of my rental car (2011 Honda Civic) doing 139.  down a 7% hill.

I'll beat that when I am in Europe in about a month - hoping to get up to 260-270 km/h on the autobahn.

Fastest I've ever gone in a car is about 120 mph. This was in an '84 Crown Vic with an 85mph speedometer; I had to gauge my speed on the time between each one-mile spaced crossroad. It took about 3-4 miles to build up a sufficient head of steam. This was on a very flat, open 2-lane road in southern Michigan when I was in my teens.

I had a couple cars governed to 106 mph; those were ridiculously easy to hit. I suspect my Cobalt is similarly limited, but I haven't found a suitable area to try it; most open 2-lanes in my area are not flat or straight for long enough.

Fastest I've ever gone is between 115 & 120 mph on US 281 between Frederick, SD and the ND border... Light traffic, no hills, and no curves.

I think the fastest I've ever gone was about 100 heading on the 15 to Vegas.  Second place would be about 95 on the 5 north of the 99 split in that long stretch between LA and the 580 split.

I'm timid compared to you guys! Wow!

Quote from: Duke87 on September 24, 2011, 09:32:25 PM
/pictures or it didn't happen

Heh, no modern pics, but somewhere in my video tape collection, there's video of me driving at extra-legal speeds on a highway at night. Thank goodness YouTube's invention was over a decade away.

Fastest I've ever gone was 145 twice; once in a '87 Mustang GT in NW Florida and once in my current car on I-95 pulling away from some idiot that insisted on riding my rear bumper at 85...so I left him.

I topped out in my old BMW at 130mph (governor-limited) on a long flat straightaway on US 50 in Nevada.  Nobody on the road for miles ahead of or behind me, land completely empty on both sides, and Top Gun flight training controlled that airspace so "bears in the air" weren't an issue either.

Quote from: oscar on September 29, 2011, 01:03:19 PM
I topped out in my old BMW at 130mph (governor-limited) on a long flat straightaway on US 50 in Nevada.  Nobody on the road for miles ahead of or behind me, land completely empty on both sides, and Top Gun flight training controlled that airspace so "bears in the air" weren't an issue either.

how far does police radar work, anyway?  I figure in the desert haze I can spot a police car (similar color as the background, lights off) maybe a mile away.  if it had its lights on, easily 10-15 miles...

Always wanted to drive the stretch of I-80 west of Salt Lake City, UT.  Looking on a map, it's straight as an arrow and I imagine you can really open it up.  I-94 in North Dakota looks to be the same way too.

Quote from: OCGuy81 on September 29, 2011, 03:55:16 PM
Always wanted to drive the stretch of I-80 west of Salt Lake City, UT.  Looking on a map, it's straight as an arrow and I imagine you can really open it up.  I-94 in North Dakota looks to be the same way too.

rural two-laners tend to be less heavily patrolled.  I once took Utah state highway 21 about 83 miles in 47 minutes.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on September 29, 2011, 01:28:17 PM

Quote from: oscar on September 29, 2011, 01:03:19 PM
I topped out in my old BMW at 130mph (governor-limited) on a long flat straightaway on US 50 in Nevada.  Nobody on the road for miles ahead of or behind me, land completely empty on both sides, and Top Gun flight training controlled that airspace so "bears in the air" weren't an issue either.

how far does police radar work, anyway?  I figure in the desert haze I can spot a police car (similar color as the background, lights off) maybe a mile away.  if it had its lights on, easily 10-15 miles...

The claims are up to two miles.  I call bullshit.  No cop can identify an individual vehicle more than 1/4 mile at best.

The fastest I've ever gone was 96 in a 65 on the Garden State Parkway near Asbury Park.

The highest (and only time) I've ever been ticketed was for doing 40 in a 25 on a stretch of road in Blacksburg, VA that should be 35 at the very least.  Wouldn't have gotten pulled over for that back in Jersey.

It depends; I would imagine that a quarter mile, unless you're the only car on the road, is about the most an officer of the law is permitted to ticket via visual identification. Probably depends on the jurisdiction, since I'm sure in urban areas, there's been precedence to permit/deny tickets in the past for a variety of good/bad reasoning.
Instant-on radar is the killer, it man's well before you have a chance, unless you have a rabbit car in front of you (and sure is it satisfying when that rabbit was driving like prick when it came up to pass you the first time).

X-band radar, which is rarely used anymore, can be detected over a mile away. K-band has a shorter detection distance, usually about half a mile or less. Ka-band is even finer, but I recall the distances a radar detector picked it up were even less. Never received a laser/lidar ticket, and stopped using detectors about a decade ago. The stationary speed limit-based speed detectors tend to spit out radar in every conceivable direction, so you're much more likely to pick up from a greater distance than Smokey in his cruiser. Obviously a cop car traveling the opposite direction will pick you up quicker than a stationary one.

Quote from: Brandon on September 29, 2011, 07:50:52 PMThe claims are up to two miles.  I call bullshit.  No cop can identify an individual vehicle more than 1/4 mile at best.

If you're the only car on the road and the cop is running laser and is steady enough, that's probably quite possible.  I don't see why it wouldn't be.

The fastest I've gone is 120 in my parents' old 1992 Camry station wagon.  I used to drive between Atwood and Colby, Kansas, (just shy of 30 miles) without dipping below 100.  One time I I did it in 16 or 17 minutes after dark in the fog.  Two things I remember from those 'need for speed days':

(1) pulling out to pass someone, seeing an oncoming vehicle, switching to the brake pedal, and feeling the slightest weave  :-o Talk about freak out!
(2) driving my dad's old 5-speed 1997 Camry one night and not knowing what a governor was; I hit 113 mph and it knocked it of gear *clunk*.  Talk about freak out!

One day my some friends and I decided to take an old Suzuki Samurai on a long downhill to see how fast it would top out at.  We made it to 70.

I bribed my way out of a ticket once, in México.  In March 2010, our group's two vehicles were pulled over for going 89 km/h in a 60 km/h zone near the junction of federal highway 2 and the western bypass of Nuevo Laredo.  To be fair, I thought the speed limit was 80 km/h (still speeding, but not much), as they had just installed the lower speed zone since my last visit.  Getting a ticket would have meant going to the police station downtown, and I didn't really want to waste an hour and a half.  The officer showed me the fine listed in the table in his ticket book, I kept saying that I didn't know the limit was 60, and eventually asked if there was any way I could pay the ticket directly to him.  He came back with (I translate from Spanish):  "˜OK, I'm going to help you.  For 400 pesos, you can pay it directly to me.'  I was thinking that's a pretty good deal for two tickets, so I gave him 400 pesos.  He then walked back to the other vehicle and said, "˜That guy up there paid for you, but give me 40 dollars anyway'.  ZING!!!  Oh well, at least we avoided the trip to the police station!  :-D

I'll never forget the time we were heading to a wedding in the very southwestern tip of Michigan.  I was standing in the wedding, and we were to make it just in time for the rehearsal, coming from a motel in Des Moines.  Anyway, our trip had us driving across the southern reaches of Chicagoland on a Friday afternoon.  No surprise that I-80 was backed up, averaging about 15 mph.  What I couldn't believe, however, was once we got free of traffic on I-94 through the corner of Indiana.  It was like someone pulled the rope on the chute and let the bull out.  It's the only time I've gone 88 mph and had traffic keeping up with me.

I had a roommate back when I lived near Chicago who took his car up to 100 mph on the Eisenhower in Chicago itself.  He just wanted to experience what his car could do.  This is a guy who routinely drives way under speed limit and spends a lot of time coasting in neutral (he saves an insane amount of gas driving this way, by the way).

My normal cruising speed is between 5 and 10 over the limit; I used to do about 12 or 13 over, but speeding tickets have tamed the beast.

I normally go around the speed limit or with the traffic flow. My car's ability to effortlessly hit high speeds in normal driving conditions, along with the attitudes of local law enforcement, keeps me honest.

On the way back from visiting family this morning, I found that the conditions were right (flat, straight road, nobody in front of me).  So on a rural two-lane stretch of US 27 in northern Florida, I took the car up to an even 100 (speed limit 60) just to say that I did, then went back down to my regular cruising speed.  It really didn't seem very different from normal.

Quote from: Eth on December 26, 2011, 09:11:12 PM
On the way back from visiting family this morning, I found that the conditions were right (flat, straight road, nobody in front of me).  So on a rural two-lane stretch of US 27 in northern Florida, I took the car up to an even 100 (speed limit 60) just to say that I did, then went back down to my regular cruising speed.  It really didn't seem very different from normal.

What car? I've had some cars at 100 that drive great and others that feel like they're going to fall apart.

Don't do it for too long. Your tires may not be rated for speeds that high.

If you stay perfectly straight, 110 doesn't feel all that different from 80 besides that the car makes more noise and vibrates more.

You will notice the difference, however, the instant you make a slight turn to the steering wheel to try and correct. At ludicrous speed, it is much harder to control steering and you will probably notice yourself starting to wiggle and swerve a bit rather than just normally correct. This is your car saying "slow down, asshole". :-P

Basically, if your car is in working order, it has been tested to run for hours (or at least, until the fuel supply runs out) at least 100 mph; this basically a closed test track without real traffic, though. Most tires are speed rated to at least 112 mph on even the most basic of transportation (S rating), but that doesn't actually mean they have an iota of added performance in them, such as enhanced cornering capability and grip, wet weather performance, heat dissipation, or advanced sidewall construction to deal with taking a bend or curve with any bit of agility.

That said, the average car and driver shouldn't be hitting those speeds for any serious length of time on a public road, save one designed for it.

Quote from: Duke87 on December 27, 2011, 06:58:21 PM
You will notice the difference, however, the instant you make a slight turn to the steering wheel to try and correct. At ludicrous speed, it is much harder to control steering and you will probably notice yourself starting to wiggle and swerve a bit rather than just normally correct. This is your car saying "slow down, asshole". :-P

indeed - I didn't dare change lanes at 147 on the autobahn.  As soon as there was traffic coming up, I slowed down to about 125, which is what felt like the highest speed in which I could maneuver without too much mental load.

My previous car would start screaming when it would get above normal freeway speeds, and it's 20 years old, so I never really pushed it hard. The speedometer goes to 140 but I think the fastest I went in it was about 95. My current car (a different generation but the same make/model) is a completely different story...I went up to about 95 on the test drive and it felt like it could have gone much faster without much problem. Getting onto I-95 from a US 301 onramp, I once reached about 85 by the time I hit the interstate (something that, unless you're Jake, I wouldn't try) and could have kept going with ease except for a curve nearby.

This morning on the way to work, I was pushing it to do the minimum speed.  Yesterday, one of my ignition coils started misfiring, so I've been keeping the revs low until we get it into the shop.  At 6:30 AM on a Saturday, 42 mph is doable even on Wichita freeways, but I'm not sure I want to take the highway going home this afternoon......

Just had this one happen to me yesterday.

I passed a few vehicles in the left lane, going about 10 over the limit (75 in a 65).  On the other side of the highway, a trooper passed by me; in my mirror, I saw him turn around across the median.  I got back in the right lane, slowed down to 65, and so did everyone behind me (they had been going about 72 or 73).  The trooper pulled over a commercial vehicle, and the rest of us just kept going.

Should I feel good (that I got off), or should I feel bad (for the other guy, who probably wasn't even going as fast as the cop's radar said, because that was my car's speed)?  I kind of feel both.

Quote from: kphoger on July 17, 2013, 05:59:46 PM
should I feel bad

for that thread resurrection?  probably  :sombrero:

Might not have even been speeding.  In NY at least, they can electronically read registration/inspection from the stickers.  Also, sometimes troopers hold different vehicle classes to different standards.

So...I never answered the original question 2 years ago. My top speed is 105 MPH, in a 55. I-95 in downtown Petersburg one night, in my deceased silver Prelude. Most of my high speeds have been to see what RPMs these cars will reach at these speeds in their highest gear. My 1997 Prelude has Z-rated tires (150+ MPH) and thus could probably reach its speedometer's maximum of 150 under the right circumstances. I'm working on getting a slightly larger displacement version of the same engine for my 1993, which weighs less and has a transmission geared for higher top speed, but I'll never know how fast it'll take the car because its speedometer only goes up to 140.

Quote from: Takumi on July 17, 2013, 09:46:34 PMI'll never know how fast it'll take the car

it's an exact multiple of your RPMs.  note a reference pair of "speed, RPM"; later note the tach at the highest speed; do the math when you get home.

That's how I arrived at the rough conclusion of 150 for the other car. The fuel pump automatically cuts out at 7400 RPM, and at 3700 RPM I'm going 76 or 77 MPH. (I have yet to test this empirically; the roads that aren't full of cops and/or traffic have poor pavement, lots of curves, or poor sight lines. I can think of only one spot that would MAYBE work, but even that is within spitting distance of a county courthouse.)

Quote from: Takumi on July 17, 2013, 10:33:26 PM
That's how I arrived at the rough conclusion of 150 for the other car. The fuel pump automatically cuts out at 7400 RPM, and at 3700 RPM I'm going 76 or 77 MPH. (I have yet to test this empirically; the roads that aren't full of cops and/or traffic have poor pavement, lots of curves, or poor sight lines. I can think of only one spot that would MAYBE work, but even that is within spitting distance of a county courthouse.)

do you have the option to take it to a track?  I'd go with that to acclimate yourself to driving fast.  my 147 was set on the autobahn - astonishingly legal, and surprisingly, surprisingly fast.  past 135 or so, I had every bit of my attention on the road, and I knew that even if the car could go much past 147, I couldn't.  (there was a speed-limited section of road coming up, so I had to ease up at 147mph.)  my co-pilot was monitoring the speedometer; at the end of the run, I had to ask "so, how did I do?"

(139mph on a very nicely paved two-laner in Mumble?  eh, astonishingly illegal.  don't tell anyone.)

The closest track to me is Virginia International Raceway near Danville, about 2 hours away. In order to take the car onto the track at speed, I'd have to spend hundreds of dollars to go through a training class (which is something I wouldn't mind doing, honestly), then either joining their driver's club ($2500 initial fee + $175 a month) or latching onto another driving club and going onto the track on their specified track day. There's also an option to take the car onto the track behind a pace car at highway speeds with no passing, but that seems a bit asinine to me. There are plenty of roads within a 20 mile radius that I can drive like that.

This is an interesting discussion.  My top speed is 95.  I was once an unfortunate passenger in a car going 95 in a 35 through town.  I've driven 95 twice.  The first time was on US 67 (a freeway) north of Midlothian, Texas.  It was a crappy car, and only got that fast going down the hill.  I just wanted to see what it could do.  I don't remember exactly when it was, during or after NMSL, but the speed limit was either 55 or 70.  The second time was on US 259 (2-lane) in Oklahoma, speed limit 65, while passing a logging truck.  That truck went ridiculously slow up the hill, and then very fast going down when I passed.  The truck passed me going down the next hill; I wanted to keep going 65, and he wanted to go about 90 again.  I passed him again (going much slower) up the next hill without going over the yellow stripe.  I learned to hate following a logging truck.

Just under 110 mph in a 70 is the fastest I've gone.  I was trying to see how fast a car who'd passed me was going.  That was in my 05 Town and Country believe it or not.  I hit the rev limiter and couldn't go any faster.

I think the fastest I've ever hit is only around 86-87 MPH, on a couple occasions. One, when driving along I-84 in Idaho (Speed Limit 75), and also some remote highways in Oregon, but only hit those speeds when passing (Speed Limit 55, but should be 70).

Also, I did 70 in a 45 when in a major hurry (I needed to get from the SW end of town to the NE end, grab something, and then all the way to the far west side in about 30 minutes), although that is a bad idea (that Bend Parkway...)

EDIT: Oh, almost forgot, I think I hit 70 MPH on Skyliners Rd. east of Mt. Washington Dr. in Bend. The Speed Limit is 40 MPH, but there's a 0.5-1 mile long, straight stretch with nothing on it, and during lunch hours with the high school close by, the average speed is like 60. One time I was going 55-60 there, and someone else passed me, despite the double yellow line :D Gotta love high school. Just make sure you slow down before it turns to 25 (and where cops wait) :P

EDIT 2: And if you count school zones, I blew past a 20 MPH school zone on Hamby Rd. (outskirts of Bend, normally 45 MPH Speed Limit) at like 55 MPH, but that was force of habit, because I think that's the only time I had gone on that road during school zone times (it's usually on weekends or in the evening I drive through there).

Quote from: kphoger on July 17, 2013, 05:59:46 PM
Just had this one happen to me yesterday.

I passed a few vehicles in the left lane, going about 10 over the limit (75 in a 65).  On the other side of the highway, a trooper passed by me; in my mirror, I saw him turn around across the median.  I got back in the right lane, slowed down to 65, and so did everyone behind me (they had been going about 72 or 73).  The trooper pulled over a commercial vehicle, and the rest of us just kept going.

Should I feel good (that I got off), or should I feel bad (for the other guy, who probably wasn't even going as fast as the cop's radar said, because that was my car's speed)?  I kind of feel both.

The false assumption is that you (and many others) believe that cops are only worried about one thing - speed. 

There could be several reasons why the trooper went after that truck.  The trooper could've been on a truck compliance team and happened to randomly go after that truck.  Or that truck was specifically picked for another reason.  Maybe another cop saw that truck did something wrong or had a clear issue and radioed for another officer to stop the truck.  Maybe the truck left the scene of something and was wanted.  Maybe the officer noticed the required numbering on the truck was missing.  Maybe a headlight was out.

Whatever the reason, I'm going to guess it wasn't because you were doing 10 over (and why do people slow down anyway? The cop already saw you...you just made it easier on him to catch up to you, and in a way you are admitting you knew you were speeding by slowing down in the first place!).

My most embarrassing ticket has to be the time I went 61 in a 35, through the entire town of Mount Pleasant, Utah in about two minutes.  The chief of police said, "Son, you sure know how to weave."

Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2013, 09:15:59 PM
Might not have even been speeding.  In NY at least, they can electronically read registration/inspection from the stickers.  Also, sometimes troopers hold different vehicle classes to different standards.

I would be extremely surprised if NY police can scan registration stickers while on the move. More likely they're using the automated license plate readers like everywhere else in the country, scanning the plates and not the stickers.

Quote from: Takumi on July 17, 2013, 11:30:31 PM
The closest track to me is Virginia International Raceway near Danville, about 2 hours away. In order to take the car onto the track at speed, I'd have to spend hundreds of dollars to go through a training class (which is something I wouldn't mind doing, honestly), then either joining their driver's club ($2500 initial fee + $175 a month) or latching onto another driving club and going onto the track on their specified track day. There's also an option to take the car onto the track behind a pace car at highway speeds with no passing, but that seems a bit asinine to me. There are plenty of roads within a 20 mile radius that I can drive like that.

dang!  there isn't some random small-town Al's Racetrack, Bait, and Tackle? 

the training course doesn't sound bad at all - the driver's club seems like a terrible use of money, though, at your level of interest.  do all the club members drive Bugattis or something, so they can consider the driver's club fee a drop in the bucket?

Quote from: wxfree on July 17, 2013, 11:36:34 PM
That truck went ridiculously slow up the hill, and then very fast going down when I passed.

what an asshole.

I once had a truck chase me down the I-40 hill westbound out of Flagstaff.  he tailgated me, refusing to pass, up to about 106mph, until I last-second took an exit and damn near burned my brakes out coming to a stop.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 18, 2013, 12:42:03 PM

Quote from: wxfree on July 17, 2013, 11:36:34 PM
That truck went ridiculously slow up the hill, and then very fast going down when I passed.

what an asshole.

I once had a truck chase me down the I-40 hill westbound out of Flagstaff.  he tailgated me, refusing to pass, up to about 106mph, until I last-second took an exit and damn near burned my brakes out coming to a stop.

Sounds like a movie I saw once (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel_%281971_film%29).

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 18, 2013, 12:39:58 PM
dang!  there isn't some random small-town Al's Racetrack, Bait, and Tackle?

Nothing over half a mile.

Quote
the training course doesn't sound bad at all - the driver's club seems like a terrible use of money, though, at your level of interest.  do all the club members drive Bugattis or something, so they can consider the driver's club fee a drop in the bucket?

Pretty much. Their website shows a high-end exotic on the front page, so it's definitely catered towards that crowd. The only Hondas that fit that would be the NSX or maybe the equally rare S2000 CR. The highest-end cars I would ever have any interest of owning are the Nissan GT-R or the BMW M5, both of which can now be bought for far below their original prices.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 18, 2013, 06:28:22 AM
There could be several reasons why the trooper went after that truck.  The trooper could've been on a truck compliance team and happened to randomly go after that truck.

It's been my experience that, for a cop to actually fling his cruiser across a median (GSV of the area here (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.672722,-96.864275&spn=0.000034,0.018411&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=37.672722,-96.864275&panoid=PVxsLEEZdYBXaFRTSU6LQg&cbp=12,264.16,,0,9.34)), it's because he's clocked someone speeding.  It could have been something else, of course, but knowledge of the area leads me to believe otherwise (nearby highways with more trucks, fairly low tolerance for speeding, &c).

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 18, 2013, 06:28:22 AM
Or that truck was specifically picked for another reason.  Maybe another cop saw that truck did something wrong or had a clear issue and radioed for another officer to stop the truck.  Maybe the truck left the scene of something and was wanted.  Maybe the officer noticed the required numbering on the truck was missing.  Maybe a headlight was out.

Fairly remote possiblity.  It was some sort of utility truck, and was coming in from a fairly remote stretch of highway (coming in on US-400 from at least Leon).  I usually notice burnt headlights while driving, and didn't notice anything like that.  So possible, yes; likely, no.  To compare, I once drove a commercial vehicle with half its license plate broken off, and wasn't even warned about it for a whole year–and that was only because I'd already been pulled over on a Scott's Law violation–whereas I once had a trooper whip across a median because he'd clocked me (in a passenger car) at 6 mph over the limit.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 18, 2013, 06:28:22 AM
Whatever the reason, I'm going to guess it wasn't because you were doing 10 over (and why do people slow down anyway? The cop already saw you...you just made it easier on him to catch up to you, and in a way you are admitting you knew you were speeding by slowing down in the first place!).

I might be mistaken about the accuracy of radar guns, but I don't believe he would have had the precision to see me doing 75 mph, but rather that the fastest moving vehicle in the pack of four was doing 75 mph.  The reason cars slow down in that situation is so he can't tell who the fastest vehicle in the pack had been.  In that situation, since the pack is still tightly bunched (but now going 63—65 instead of 73—75 mph), a trooper will often just pick off the last driver in the line of vehicles.  Seems to be precisely what happened, probably supported by keeping commercial drivers to higher standards.

Quote from: kphoger on July 18, 2013, 01:53:12 PMScott's Law violation

what is Scott's law?

(apart from "Oklahoma DOT sucks")

Ah.  Apparently it's an Illinois term.  It's the "Move Over Law".

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 18, 2013, 02:20:52 PM

Quote from: kphoger on July 18, 2013, 01:53:12 PMScott's Law violation

what is Scott's law?

(apart from "Oklahoma DOT sucks")

It is a law that I would love to see broken someday. :P

City driving in Illinois, I do 70 on all highways and 5 above on all local roads unless it get too hazardous (weather, construction, etc)

Farm driving, 75 on the highway, 5 over on local roads.

Max speed I've ever done, 95 in a 65 zone

My max speed varies based on where I am.  In NY I do 5 over more or less religiously.  In Ontario and Quebec, I generally drive the speed I would for a similar road in NY; I figure the lower speed limits and laxer enforcement cancel each other out.  In NJ I keep up with traffic; the fastest I've gotten is a short burst of 85 on the Turnpike.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 17, 2013, 09:49:00 PM

Quote from: Takumi on July 17, 2013, 09:46:34 PMI'll never know how fast it'll take the car

it's an exact multiple of your RPMs.  note a reference pair of "speed, RPM"; later note the tach at the highest speed; do the math when you get home.

False! Cars top out below their redline at the point when the wind drag from the speed equals the remaining motive power of the engine. For a 7,000 rpm car this can be anywhere from 5,500 to 6,500 rpm (typical range) depending on aerodynamics.

Quote from: Steve on July 22, 2013, 04:30:29 AM
False! Cars top out below their redline at the point when the wind drag from the speed equals the remaining motive power of the engine. For a 7,000 rpm car this can be anywhere from 5,500 to 6,500 rpm (typical range) depending on aerodynamics.

...or whatever "governor" the auto manufacturer set for the vehicle. Many German sports sedans were limited to a top speed of 155 mph (250 km/h), and usually pickup trucks are limited to some vague number (110 or so?) to prevent lift-off.

Popular examples from the past were the Buick Grand National and GNX, which were each limited to 124 mph; despite their impressive acceleration numbers, the engineers and/or legal department weren't too confident of the limitations regarding the aging G-body.

Quote from: Steve on July 22, 2013, 04:30:29 AM

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 17, 2013, 09:49:00 PM

Quote from: Takumi on July 17, 2013, 09:46:34 PMI'll never know how fast it'll take the car

it's an exact multiple of your RPMs.  note a reference pair of "speed, RPM"; later note the tach at the highest speed; do the math when you get home.

False! Cars top out below their redline at the point when the wind drag from the speed equals the remaining motive power of the engine. For a 7,000 rpm car this can be anywhere from 5,500 to 6,500 rpm (typical range) depending on aerodynamics.

I think you misunderstood what I wrote.  I said that, at whatever speed you have topped out at (regardless of redline), if your speedometer needle is buried, measure your RPMs and multiply by a previously determined proportionality constant.

Quote from: formulanone on July 22, 2013, 02:19:42 PM
...or whatever "governor" the auto manufacturer set for the vehicle. Many German sports sedans were limited to a top speed of 155 mph (250 km/h), and usually pickup trucks are limited to some vague number (110 or so?) to prevent lift-off.

my 2001 Ford Taurus threw itself into neutral when I hit 117 coming down a hill.  only time I'd ever gotten it over 114.

speaking of driving 110+, the cruise control can be set to 113, but not to 114.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 22, 2013, 03:35:55 PM

Quote from: formulanone on July 22, 2013, 02:19:42 PM
...or whatever "governor" the auto manufacturer set for the vehicle. Many German sports sedans were limited to a top speed of 155 mph (250 km/h), and usually pickup trucks are limited to some vague number (110 or so?) to prevent lift-off.

my 2001 Ford Taurus threw itself into neutral when I hit 117 coming down a hill.  only time I'd ever gotten it over 114.

speaking of driving 110+, the cruise control can be set to 113, but not to 114.

Back when I was young and reckless, I liked taking my dad's 1997 Camry 5-speed at very fast speeds.  Back then, I didn't even know what a governor was.  So there I was, driving on K-25 at night, when *THUNK* it threw itself into neutral at 113 mph.  I've never been so scared in my life!  Then I realized what had happened.

Fastest I've done personally is about 90 in a 1984 Honda Civic hatchback on a dead straight section of Interstate 80 somewhere in Wyoming - IIRC, this was just after NMSL was repealed and the road had just been re-posted at 65.

Fastest I've been passed was by an individual in a older Lincoln Town Car just after the I-384/I-84 split east of Scranton who was doing about 95.  This was during a steady rain, and about 30 miles later, I went by Mr. Hot Rod Lincoln.  He had spun out in the median, was out of the car, and two Pennsylvania State Police troopers were just arriving on scene.

Quote from: formulanone on July 22, 2013, 02:19:42 PM
...or whatever "governor" the auto manufacturer set for the vehicle. Many German sports sedans were limited to a top speed of 155 mph (250 km/h), and usually pickup trucks are limited to some vague number (110 or so?) to prevent lift-off.

This then begs the question: on a scale of "any idiot can do that in their garage" to "even the best mechanics couldn't do it", how easy is it to remove or deactivate the governor on a car if it has one?

If it is a question of how the computer controlling an automatic transmission is programmed, then it cannot be done without access to the code, which due to the proprietary nature of such things means no one who doesn't have inside access can do it.

Quote from: Duke87 on July 22, 2013, 09:13:25 PM

Quote from: formulanone on July 22, 2013, 02:19:42 PM
...or whatever "governor" the auto manufacturer set for the vehicle. Many German sports sedans were limited to a top speed of 155 mph (250 km/h), and usually pickup trucks are limited to some vague number (110 or so?) to prevent lift-off.

This then begs the question: on a scale of "any idiot can do that in their garage" to "even the best mechanics couldn't do it", how easy is it to remove or deactivate the governor on a car if it has one?

If it is a question of how the computer controlling an automatic transmission is programmed, then it cannot be done without access to the code, which due to the proprietary nature of such things means no one who doesn't have inside access can do it.

If I wanted to defeat a speed limiter, I'd start by unplugging the vehicle speed sensor.  The speedometer wouldn't work, so you'd want to use a GPS to see how fast you got to.  I suspect that would work, but the computer might still look at transmission gear and engine RPM to keep from being outsmarted.  Unplugging the sensor that reads engine speed would likely disable the engine.  If you were still limited after unplugging the VSS, maybe unplugging the sensor on the transmission would work.

Unplugging sensors will set a trouble code and may cause de-rating and result in lower top speed.

Quote from: Duke87 on July 22, 2013, 09:13:25 PM
This then begs the question: on a scale of "any idiot can do that in their garage" to "even the best mechanics couldn't do it", how easy is it to remove or deactivate the governor on a car if it has one?

Some performance vehicles have a healthy aftermarket, which usually delve into the ECU (engine control unit)  to see what's hidden, and to save a lot of headaches later on. Of course, there's no guarantee it's been discovered for the average family sedan or typical econobox, if there was limited interest in performance upgrades for said vehicle.

Usually, the top-speed governor is the first thing to be investigated...probably because that's one of the first benchmarks to be broken by a performance tuning shop, but also to figure out how fuel cut-off is handled. So if it's a model that's been thoroughly analysed in that fashion, I've heard that removing the artificial limitation would be fairly easy, if you knew what you were doing with the right scan-tools and right equipment. Some dealerships even offer this for a few grand or so, although prices and participation may vary, warranty-busting procedures, yada yada yada.

I wouldn't be shocked if there was some sort of [insert everyday-car model] that offered a simple way to defeat this, but that's also why every car or truck, make or model has it's own internet forum...

Quote from: wxfree on July 22, 2013, 09:38:39 PM

Quote from: Duke87 on July 22, 2013, 09:13:25 PM

Quote from: formulanone on July 22, 2013, 02:19:42 PM
...or whatever "governor" the auto manufacturer set for the vehicle. Many German sports sedans were limited to a top speed of 155 mph (250 km/h), and usually pickup trucks are limited to some vague number (110 or so?) to prevent lift-off.

This then begs the question: on a scale of "any idiot can do that in their garage" to "even the best mechanics couldn't do it", how easy is it to remove or deactivate the governor on a car if it has one?

If it is a question of how the computer controlling an automatic transmission is programmed, then it cannot be done without access to the code, which due to the proprietary nature of such things means no one who doesn't have inside access can do it.

If I wanted to defeat a speed limiter, I'd start by unplugging the vehicle speed sensor.  The speedometer wouldn't work, so you'd want to use a GPS to see how fast you got to.  I suspect that would work, but the computer might still look at transmission gear and engine RPM to keep from being outsmarted.  Unplugging the sensor that reads engine speed would likely disable the engine.  If you were still limited after unplugging the VSS, maybe unplugging the sensor on the transmission would work.

Unplugging sensors will set a trouble code and may cause de-rating and result in lower top speed.

One night as I was driving up Interstate 93 to my brother's in Andover (MA), the speedometer on my 1988 Prelude failed (I was doing about 65 just before the failure).  The transmission (automatic) immediately dropped to second gear and the dashboard lit up like a Christmas tree.  A couple of days later, I took the car into my local mechanic.  He removed the speedo and tach, unsoldered all the connections, cleaned up the contacts and wires, resoldered everything, and reseated the gauges.  Never had the problem again, and it only cost me about 40 bucks.

I hit 100 on U.S. 52 between Winston-Salem and Lexington. It was around 6 AM on a Saturday and the highway was as empty as could be. Speed limit was 65.

The most I've sped by would probably be going around 90 in a 50. This was going downhill on the newly-widened stretch of U.S. 321 in Caldwell County, NC.

In Massachusetts (and probably everywhere else), almost everyone goes faster than the speed limit on exit ramps. If it says "30 MPH exit", people will be going 40. The exception is if there is traffic.

Quote from: 1 on August 15, 2013, 11:22:09 AM
In Massachusetts (and probably everywhere else), almost everyone goes faster than the speed limit on exit ramps. If it says "30 MPH exit", people will be going 40. The exception is if there is traffic.

Those aren't speed limits. They're advisory speeds–i.e., they recommend you not go faster than the posted number, but it's not illegal to do so. It really depends on what you're driving whether you need to pay heed to those. Back when I was 16 years old I drove a 1977 Ford Granada. I had learned to drive on my father's 1982 Honda Accord and my mother's 1988 Volvo 740 and I was used to ignoring the numbers on those yellow signs. I quickly learned that wasn't a good idea in that Granada, especially on cloverleaf loop-arounds! Think about it, I'm sure at some point you've been behind a tractor-trailer that had to take the ramp at a slower speed than you would.

Quote from: 1 on August 15, 2013, 11:22:09 AM
In Massachusetts (and probably everywhere else), almost everyone goes faster than the speed limit on exit ramps. If it says "30 MPH exit", people will be going 40. The exception is if there is traffic.

Those signs are yellow and mean it is an advisory (meaning design) speed and not the speed limit of the ramp.  Most smaller vehicles can usually go 5-10 over with no problem under normal highway conditions.

Those tend to be seriously low up here too. The exit I take to get to work has a 30 mph advisory speed, but I can comfortably take it at 60 in my SUV.

Quote from: Big John on August 15, 2013, 11:58:17 AM

Quote from: 1 on August 15, 2013, 11:22:09 AM
In Massachusetts (and probably everywhere else), almost everyone goes faster than the speed limit on exit ramps. If it says "30 MPH exit", people will be going 40. The exception is if there is traffic.

Those signs are yellow and mean it is an advisory (meaning design) speed and not the speed limit of the ramp.  Most smaller vehicles can usually go 5-10 over with no problem under normal highway conditions.

This is Mass., where speed limit signs are used in advisory situations for curves. Bugs the hell out of me. Haven't seen a speed trap yet. I'll still go 50 in a "25" for a curve that I can take at 45 on a road that's otherwise 50.