Which is worse fast or slow?

[Kacie Jane]

As to construction equipment, I missed the part where I said not to do it.

It was this part...

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

In your first post, you didn't say to schedule/route construction and freight "properly", you said to cease driving, which is obviously impossible.  But so is your ideal.  What, you want semis to only drive in the middle of the night?  I'm not inside your head, so I don't know what your deeming proper timing and routing, but restrictions much beyond what's already in place would make costs skyrocket, if it can even be done.  Freight has to get over the mountains somehow, and it can't all go by train or plane.

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

False.  At 70 mph, stopping distance is 315 feet.  Even outside the Great Plains, you should be able to see that far ahead the vast majority of the time.  Not always, but most of the time.  And if the curve is so sharp that you can't see that far ahead, it's not entirely coincidental that it's also a curve so sharp that maybe you shouldn't be taking it at 70 mph.

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

You're absolutely right that most modern freeways are designed so that you can take the curves at a (reasonably) fast speed, which may in fact be higher than the legislated speed limit.  (Your second sentence, however, is hilariously false.  Most freeways are designed for what... 75?  I floored my last rental car to 100 on a nice straight patch in the Nevada desert and could have gotten it well beyond that if I wanted to.  Deadly speeds are easily attainable if you're dumb enough.)

But that has nothing to do with the point I was making.  Leaving other vehicles and hazards out of it and speaking solely about physics, while driving 75 or even 80-85 might indeed be safe, it is less safe than 70, which is less safe than 65, which is less safe than....  It is less safe because you have less control over your vehicle, even if you still have enough control.  The old saw that "you are going to cause an accident by driving too fast" -- okay, fine, you're not going to, you're not guaranteed to, but you are more likely to, as a basic understanding of physics will teach you.

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

No.  You know what causes accidents?  Following cars too closely.

Keep in mind that if the "hazard" is someone taking curves "too slowly", they're not stationary, you've followed them into the curve.  Especially in the second example (where you're following them going only 10mph faster), if you can't slow to their speed (you don't need to stop, you just need to not hit them) then you're either following them too closely or not paying attention, probably both.

Slow drivers are annoying.  And like I said in my first post in this thread, they disrupt the flow of traffic more.  But they themselves are not dangerous, aggressive drivers' reactions (or lack thereof) to them are.

[Kacie Jane]

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

Very hard to find.

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

Just going to hazard a guess here.  But that might be because if someone is going the speed limit, and a speeder comes up behind them and rear-ends them, then the speeder is at fault, not the one going the speed limit.

[Scott5114]

Keep in mind that on a freeway, you will seldom need to actually come to a complete stop. Evasive maneuvers will more likely be bringing your speed down or suddenly diverting course into the other lane or the shoulder.

There are other options than using an Interstate for those who cannot do so safely. There are usually conventional highways that can be used in lieu of the Interstate, freight can be sent by rail rather than truck, etc.

[Mergingtraffic]

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

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

Agreed!

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

Stop right there.  You can't say a driver going the speed limit is disrupting traffic.

Sure you can, I'm not saying it's correct but if the majority of traffic is going 65mph in a 50mph and someone is doing 50mph, then they are disrupting even though they are within the law.  In this case eeryone else is speeding. 

Or on a 2-lane road someone doing 35mph in a 35mph zone meanwhile most go 45mph in the zone. 

I get annoyed when this happens just like when there is a long line at a fast food restaurant, there is nothing wrong legally tho.

With that said if somebody is passing a car in the left lane and doing 65 in a 65, that is perfectly legal.  In a law perspective, nobody is allowed to go over 65 and you can pass when someone is going under 65.  Left lane has a speed limit too. Others on this forum get ticked when someone is doing that.  If I come across it, as I usually go 75mph, I try not to tailgate b/c they're in their means to do it. 

[PurdueBill]

A seemingly rare and reasonable article about the Indiana law--although it's not an outright news article; it's Bob Dyer's column.  Still, much better than the "look out law-abiding drivers!" claptrap that has been out so much about the law.  He correctly points out that it's FLOW that is important, not the absolute SPEED.