Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jeffandnicole]

It's crazy, above 80 MPH is reckless in Virginia, yet in Texas, 85 MPH is the posted speed on one highway. The reckless threshold should be 85 MPH for 70 MPH stretches. Most would agree.

80 is laughably low for a "reckless" threshold. Even 85 is too low. I would say anywhere from 90 to 100 mph is reasonable, depending upon the speed limit and the quality of the road (but always at least speed limit +20).

It all depends on the context, too. In a rolling backlog with trucks passing each other, if you are weaving around people at 85+, then yes, you probably are behaving recklessly. But in nice weather with low traffic volumes, there is absolutely nothing reckless about driving 90 mph on a high quality road like I-81.

In NJ, 40+ over the limit is reckless driving, which makes it 105 mph in a 65 zone.  It also makes it 80 mph in a 40 mph zone...65 mph in a 25 mph zone, etc.

[1995hoo]

In NJ, 40+ over the limit is reckless driving, which makes it 105 mph in a 65 zone.  It also makes it 80 mph in a 40 mph zone...65 mph in a 25 mph zone, etc.

When you think about it, what rational person would really disagree that 65 in a 25 is almost certainly reckless, given where 25-mph speed limits are normally posted?

Virginia's law used to be a little more nuanced than it is now. It used to be more than 20 mph over the posted speed limit, unless the posted speed limit were 35 mph in which case it was more than 60 mph, or in excess of 80 mph regardless of the posted speed limit. The statute was amended to delete that middle provision and to change the first part to "20 mph or more" over the posted speed limit. The latter was a minor change in the scheme of things.

[hbelkins]

Too many posts to try to answer and quote, so...

*Kentucky's speed limit on freeways is generally 70 mph. I tend to drive 75-77. And even then, I have my V1 on and will slow to 70 if it alerts. Most surface routes are still underposted at 55. On many of them, 60 or even 65 (like West Virginia signs its curvy four-lane corridors like US 119) would be reasonable.

*I think any arbitrary number being defined as "reckless driving" is bogus. 100 mph is not necessary reckless unless a driver is weaving in and out of lanes, cutting off other vehicles, etc.

*I have no desire to set my cruise to 79 in Virginia and run the risk of being targeted as an out-of-state driver. That's why I will stick to the speed limit on I-81 and be amazed at the number of vehicles that will blow past me, apparently without fear of being pulled over, despite my having seen lots of VSP cruisers in the median of I-81 in various locations between Abingdon and Wytheville (the stretch I most frequently travel). But what bothers me more is the 35-45 mph zones where in states not named Virginia, I would probably continue at 55-60 mph unless warned to slow down.

*On I-81, with the amount of traffic and the terrain, sometimes it's necessary to speed up a little more to pass a vehicle. It's easy to look down and find yourself doing 85 and it not seem appreciably faster than the 70-75 you were doing just a minute or so ago.

[Beltway]

*I have no desire to set my cruise to 79 in Virginia and run the risk of being targeted as an out-of-state driver.

That sounds unfounded.  I've seen countless out-of-state vehicles on Virginia Interstates going around that fast over the years and I can't think of one I saw yet getting stopped for that.  Besides, you are an out-of-state driver in every state other than yours.

Go 75 or 77.  That is still only a few miles less than 81.

*On I-81, with the amount of traffic and the terrain, sometimes it's necessary to speed up a little more to pass a vehicle. It's easy to look down and find yourself doing 85 and it not seem appreciably faster than the 70-75 you were doing just a minute or so ago.

No it is not, that is entirely under your control, and modern cruise control will maintain an exact or nearly exact speed.

[Beltway]

Here is one of your favorite posters --

From: gpsman <gps...@driversmail.com>
Newsgroups: misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: out of my way, punk!
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <f4353720-6cb5-408a-aa76-1d7bec3cfb54@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.27.157.240
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1217311498 329 127.0.0.1 (29 Jul 2008 06:04:58 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 06:04:58 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.15)
   Gecko/20080623 Firefox/2.0.0.15,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com misc.transport.road:8985 rec.autos.driving:7246

On Jul 24, 1:37 pm, N8N <njn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 24, 11:50 am, gpsman <gps...@driversmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 23, 3:58 pm, Alexander Rogge <a_r...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > The problem of traffic congestion is being caused by the LLBs, not
> > > necessarily the traffic density.  This is very obvious when watching the
> > > brake lights in the braking waves caused when the LLBs cause traffic to
> > > bunch up behind them.
>
> > Traffic could not bunch up behind them...
>
> > It's a pretty simple matter to maintain a R&P following distance, but
> > of course many people seem to feel they don't have time for that.
> > They seem to have concluded a few car lengths closer to the vehicle to
> > their front will speed their travel.
>
> Most people, when coming up behind a significantly slower vehicle on
> the highway, will slow, but at the same time allow their following
> distance to close up a little.  reason being that a) they expect other
> drivers to be "going with the flow"

You don't know what other drivers expect, and if they expect a
significantly slower vehicle to accelerate to go with the flow their
expectation is unreasonable.

> and b) a conscientious driver will
> not slow sharply unless absolutely necessary to avoid creating a
> "braking wave" behind them that will end with a panic stop by a car a
> few cars behind.

Lifting off the throttle a little sooner seems most likely to
eliminate any need for braking.

And a conscientious driver isn't so conscientious that they give a
rat's ass about any vehicle several vehicles to their rear.

You seem to have forgotten, the multitudes of morons on your roadways
are "perfectly safe"... or is this that r.a.d. exception... they're
"perfectly safe" as long as they never have to slow not of their own
accord?

> Also, they're looking for an opportunity to change
> lanes while slowing, and want to maintain as much speed as possible so
> as not to have to accelerate at full throttle to avoid cutting off
> another driver - or worse yet, find themselves stuck behind a slow
> driver and *unable* to accelerate fast enough to be able to change
> lanes around the slowpoke.  (the latter being a good argument for not
> driving underpowered vehicles...)

The former being a good argument for recision of one's license.

An obsession with velocity, especially to the degree where one would
strive to "maintain as much speed as possible" is illogical,
especially for the ridiculous reasons you've outlined.

A few seconds or a minute or two makes no difference to the driver who
has allotted sufficient time to travel.

> > 999 times of 1000 brake lights on a highway most strongly suggests a
> > driving error on the part of those braking, since they could have
> > lifted off the throttle sooner and avoiding braking entirely.
>
> I would agree with that statement, except that I've actually been
> driving a POS '05 Impala for the last few years.  Braking in that
> vehicle is unavoidable;

For you that may be true.  A competent driver knows and compensates
for the handling characteristics of their vehicle.

> it has essentially zero compression braking.
> It will actually pick up speed on a slight downgrade with the throttle
> fully closed.

"Not your fault", huh?
 -----

- gpsman

[Rothman]

Driving the speed limit strictly on I-81 is extreme.  Only time I got pulled over for speeding in VA was due to a speed trap in Waverly.  Driven down I-81 many times at 8 or 9 above the speed limit with no problem.

[sprjus4]

*Kentucky's speed limit on freeways is generally 70 mph. I tend to drive 75-77. And even then, I have my V1 on and will slow to 70 if it alerts. Most surface routes are still underposted at 55. On many of them, 60 or even 65 (like West Virginia signs its curvy four-lane corridors like US 119) would be reasonable.

Agreed. Many surface highways can easily handle 65 mph. Same here in Virginia. I'm not complaining too hardly, a lot are 60 mph.

*I think any arbitrary number being defined as "reckless driving" is bogus. 100 mph is not necessary reckless unless a driver is weaving in and out of lanes, cutting off other vehicles, etc.

Agreed. If you're on a straightaway with no traffic, who are you harming going 100 mph? I'm not saying do it, but it's not "reckless".

*I have no desire to set my cruise to 79 in Virginia and run the risk of being targeted as an out-of-state driver. That's why I will stick to the speed limit on I-81 and be amazed at the number of vehicles that will blow past me, apparently without fear of being pulled over, despite my having seen lots of VSP cruisers in the median of I-81 in various locations between Abingdon and Wytheville (the stretch I most frequently travel). But what bothers me more is the 35-45 mph zones where in states not named Virginia, I would probably continue at 55-60 mph unless warned to slow down.

Smart move probably. I'm not saying it happens all the time, but certain localities will indeed snag out of state drivers because the chances of them coming back to appear in court to fight off the ticket are way lower than if they are in state. Emporia has been called out for this in particular. I'm not so familiar with the I-81 corridor, though having driven it before, I've counted handfuls of cops waiting in the medians running radar. It's certainly not worth risking.

That sounds unfounded.  I've seen countless out-of-state vehicles on Virginia Interstates going around that fast over the years and I can't think of one I saw yet getting stopped for that.

That's a lie. 

Besides, you are an out-of-state driver in every state other than yours.

Wait, seriously? I never knew that.

But all jokes aside, I think his point is that A) you can have a radar detector, which all 49 states permit, except Virginia. Wonder why? It's revenue from police enforcement. There's literally no other reason why they haven't allowed them. B) Virginia has a rep for heavy police enforcement, and is unpopular among many people. Which interestingly, goes with the fact again, it's the o-n-l-y state a radar detector is illegal. It can be risky speeding in certain areas, where in other states, you may feel more comfortable.

Waze has been extremely helpful, and they can't ban that 

No it is not, that is entirely under your control, and modern cruise control will maintain an exact or nearly exact speed.

His point is that if you're not on cruise control and just cruising with traffic using the gas petal, it's very easy to reach 85 mph or even higher, and not even feel like you're going that fast. I would 100% agree with this statement.

Driving the speed limit strictly on I-81 is extreme.  Only time I got pulled over for speeding in VA was due to a speed trap in Waverly.  Driven down I-81 many times at 8 or 9 above the speed limit with no problem.

No, remember, no speed traps exist in Virginia or any state for that matter according to Beltway and jeffandnicole. Can't say that, it's a lie, you were speeding, you get pulled.

But seriously, while you can go 8 or 9 over, it still carries a chance of being pulled, especially with the heavy enforcement of interstates in Virginia.

[LM117]

But all jokes aside, I think his point is that A) you can have a radar detector, which all 49 states permit, except Virginia. Wonder why? It's revenue from police enforcement. There's literally no other reason why they haven't allowed them.

https://www.dailypress.com/glad-you-asked/dp-nws-radar-detectors-illegal-virginia-gya-20180927-story.html

[Alps]

"82 - 83 MPH is NOT the ideal speed for most", that is exaggerated.

Then why when I go on 3,000 miles of interstate driving, traffic is usually moving at 79 - 83 MPH?

Because your perceptions are not necessarily reality.

Your perceptions are not necessarily reality. Pot, kettle.
Will also note that with traffic routinely moving at 74-77 mph, accidentally going 81-82 MPH is very believable. Would be nice to have a slight bit of leeway.

[Beltway]

Smart move probably. I'm not saying it happens all the time, but certain localities will indeed snag out of state drivers because the chances of them coming back to appear in court to fight off the ticket are way lower than if they are in state.

A moving violation with points and fine?  There is a -high- likelihood that it will be challenged in court unless it is a real violation such as 15+ over.  Especially on a road like US-58 with high instate percentages.

That sounds unfounded.  I've seen countless out-of-state vehicles on Virginia Interstates going around that fast over the years and I can't think of one I saw yet getting stopped for that.

That's a lie. 

The poster who hides his identity is accusing me of "lying".

I think his point is that A) you can have a radar detector, which all 49 states permit, except Virginia. Wonder why?

Some states prohibit them for commercial vehicles, and the federal government prohibits for all.

Why should any state permit a device that exists solely for breaking the law?

Besides, the point is moot, as there are several effective methods of speed enforcement that do not involve radio transmissions.

His point is that if you're not on cruise control and just cruising with traffic using the gas petal, it's very easy to reach 85 mph or even higher, and not even feel like you're going that fast. I would 100% agree with this statement.

I've never had the problem, where the speed just jumps up by 10 mph without my noticing what is on the speedometer. 

Some folks need remedial driver improvement training …

But seriously, while you can go 8 or 9 over, it still carries a chance of being pulled, especially with the heavy enforcement of interstates in Virginia.

How come speeders like Sprjus4 always claim to getting stopped for going a few miles over the limit but never admit getting stopped for 15 or 20 or more over?

How many times have you been "pulled" by cops for 15+ over and what were the speeds?

[Alps]

The poster who hides his identity is accusing me of "lying".

Scott "Savage" Kozel

[jeffandnicole]

Personally, radar detectors are useless. When they are used, people wind up doing the fast-slow-fast-slow thing.  You can usually tell someone has a radar detector when they're going a prudent speed in the left lane, then suddenly slow down to the limit or something even lower.  Maybe there was a cop...maybe there was an electronic sign with radar to display one's speed.  Either way, there's a jackass in the left lane that drives an inconsistent speed.

If you're using a radar detector and going within 10 of the limit, again, they're useless.  The cop probably has already noticed you before the detector notices the cop.  Chances are, the cop isn't going to bother with you at less than 10 over, regardless of what state you're from.  I have NJ tags on the front my vehicle and a cop has yet to care outside the state.  Since most cops will give that 10 mph leeway on a highway (except for sprjus4, as he will call me a liar due to his and his friend's experiences), the majority of people won't have any issue, with or without a radar detector.

If you want to drive 15-20 mph above the limit with a detector, then you're probably the right person for that equipment.  Except, you're constantly being slowed by slower traffic going a normal speed above the limit, then you're speeding up, then you're slowing way down when the detector goes off, then you're speeding up again when its safe.  The only thing that is missing from someone thinking you're driving drunk is some swerving action. And I bet most people with radar detectors still have received a ticket.

Smart move probably. I'm not saying it happens all the time, but certain localities will indeed snag out of state drivers because the chances of them coming back to appear in court to fight off the ticket are way lower than if they are in state.

A moving violation with points and fine?  There is a -high- likelihood that it will be challenged in court unless it is a real violation such as 15+ over.  Especially on a road like US-58 with high instate percentages.

Reread what sprjus wrote.  That said, I don't necessarily agree that police departments intentionally snag out-of-state drivers.  Referrring to VA, reckless driving probably requires a court appearance by everyone.  In that case, let's accuse the police department is trying to help the local economy because a court appearance will be necessary, and someone will probably have to eat and stay in a local hotel.  There's also been a lot of conflicting statements said in the last few dozen posts.  If the cops are specifically looking for 10+ mph over the limit violators for the revenue, why would they care what state the person is in? Also, the cop has no idea if the instater lives nearby, or across the state.  It's way faster for me to get to Fairfax County, VA from NJ than someone from Abingdon, VA, for example.

[Beltway]

If you're using a radar detector and going within 10 of the limit, again, they're useless.  The cop probably has already noticed you before the detector notices the cop.  Chances are, the cop isn't going to bother with you at less than 10 over, regardless of what state you're from.  I have NJ tags on the front my vehicle and a cop has yet to care outside the state.  Since most cops will give that 10 mph leeway on a highway (except for sprjus4, as he will call me a liar due to his and his friend's experiences), the majority of people won't have any issue, with or without a radar detector.

PDs are quite creative in the variety of unmarked vehicles they have, as I have seen at the local PD where I do volunteer work.  Anything imaginable from sub-compacts to fullsize cars, pickups, SUVs, minivans, foreign cars, sports cars, business markings, old cars and new cars, etc.  Plenty of blue lights hidden on the vehicle.

The officer in an unmarked vehicle can simply follow a speeding vehicle and pace their speed and then pull them over, no radar needed.  Doesn't take much time with the engine and equipment packages they have.  Repeat the process.

There's also been a lot of conflicting statements said in the last few dozen posts.  If the cops are specifically looking for 10+ mph over the limit violators for the revenue, why would they care what state the person is in? Also, the cop has no idea if the instater lives nearby, or across the state.  It's way faster for me to get to Fairfax County, VA from NJ than someone from Abingdon, VA, for example.

There are all kinds of conflicting statements said in the last few dozen posts among speeders, and who is the guy whose stage name is a mountain (he recently got upset at me for criticizing pot on another forum)?

A highway like I-81 carries about 1/2 out of state vehicles, so many that they wouldn't care what state they were from, and if traffic was moving as fast as the speeders claim then you would be non-descript at 10 miles over.
 

[froggie]

^^ On top of that, it's not a given that an out-of-state plate means an out-of-state driver, especially in areas with military bases.  Military personnel on orders are allowed to use their home-of-record (usually where they lived when they joined) for vehicle registration, or when they transfer they can keep their existing plates until they expire.

[Beltway]

^^ On top of that, it's not a given that an out-of-state plate means an out-of-state driver, especially in areas with military bases.  Military personnel on orders are allowed to use their home-of-record (usually where they lived when they joined) for vehicle registration, or when they transfer they can keep their existing plates until they expire.

Rental vehicles.  Usually out of state tags that are different from the renter as well as the last base of the car.

[webny99]

*On I-81, with the amount of traffic and the terrain, sometimes it's necessary to speed up a little more to pass a vehicle. It's easy to look down and find yourself doing 85 and it not seem appreciably faster than the 70-75 you were doing just a minute or so ago.

No it is not, that is entirely under your control, and modern cruise control will maintain an exact or nearly exact speed.

No, I agree with HB. It is extremely easy to accidentally exceed 80 mph, and for three reasons:

* Cruise control is often not a possibility on I-81 in Virginia, due to trucks and trucks passing.
* It is wise to keep up with traffic in front of you while passing. Their speed -- and the speed of everyone ahead of them -- is subject to vary. It quite often goes in waves of 70-85-70. When I've been stuck behind other traffic for a while and finally get a clear stretch of road, my number one priority is speeding up to prevent further delaying those behind me, not setting the cruise control.
* On the downhill stretches, you can start out going under 80 and if you're not paying close attention to your speedometer, soon be going 85 or better. I, for one, have a lot more important things to be aware of while driving than the exact number on the speedometer.

[Beltway]

No it is not, that is entirely under your control, and modern cruise control will maintain an exact or nearly exact speed.

No, I agree with HB. It is extremely easy to accidentally exceed 80 mph, and for three reasons:

No, I disagree with yet another of his whines.  I -never- have any problem keeping under XX speed, whether on cruise control or using the accelerator pedal. 

* Cruise control is often not a possibility on I-81 in Virginia, due to trucks and trucks passing.

This is internally inconsistent, as large trucks, especially when blocking both lanes, rarely go more than 75, and often are less than 70.

* It is wise to keep up with traffic in front of you while passing. Their speed -- and the speed of everyone ahead of them -- is subject to vary. It quite often goes in waves of 70-85-70. When I've been stuck behind other traffic for a while and finally get a clear stretch of road, my number one priority is speeding up to prevent further delaying those behind me, not setting the cruise control.

This is internally inconsistent, as if both lanes are loaded with traffic, you rarely see fluctuations in that speed span range.

If the traffic is light then you can easily use cruise control, and even in heavy traffic I find it easy to increment up and down as needed in 1 mph increments, or disengage and later reengage; sometimes you need to disengage and use the accelerator pedal.

* On the downhill stretches, you can start out going under 80 and if you're not paying close attention to your speedometer, soon be going 85 or better. I, for one, have a lot more important things to be aware of while driving than the exact number on the speedometer.

Baloney, any way you slice it.  It's not like flying an aircraft where you have an array of instruments on the control panel.  You only have a few important things to be aware of while driving and the number on the speedometer is important.  In Driver's Ed they taught a quick glance every 5 seconds or so.  Some folks need remedial driver improvement training …

[hbelkins]

Waze has been extremely helpful, and they can't ban that 

There have been several instances of police agencies asking (demanding) that Waze remove the police presence reporting function, saying it puts officers in danger by revealing their location to the public. These demands have become more common as reports of police officers being shot while on duty have increased.

And if that fails, don't be surprised if they don't pull a "distracted driving" rabbit out of their hat because you were looking at a phone screen to determine the presence of the police.

[sprjus4]

There have been several instances of police agencies asking (demanding) that Waze remove the police presence reporting function, saying it puts officers in danger by revealing their location to the public.

Trust me, if they removed it, there would be a public outcry, and a lot less usage. A lot of people use Waze solely for that function, so if that's gone, they'd loose a lot of people.

I'd hope they'd be wise and ignore the requests. It's just police departments trying to make more revenue so people can't see where they are radaring unaware speeders.

And if that fails, don't be surprised if they don't pull a "distracted driving" rabbit out of their hat because you were looking at a phone screen to determine the presence of the police.

I use a phone mount, so I'd love to see them try me. I never actually hold my phone, it's essentially like being on my car's console - which is actually advised over a phone.

And even better - CarPlay supports Waze, so I amon my car's console if I'm doing that.

[froggie]

I'm with Scott regarding cruise control on I-81.  Except where you have to slow down for trucks or heavier traffic, it's not hard to maintain a consistent cruise control speed on 81.  If it is hard, it's probably because the "cruise control" in your vehicle is horrid.

[MNHighwayMan]

These demands have become more common as reports of police officers being shot while on duty have increased.

Not appreciably. Number of police officers killed by firearms while on duty:

2014: 51
2015: 43
2016: 67
2017: 46
2018: 53

Source: https://nleomf.org/facts-figures/causes-of-law-enforcement-deaths

The stats on that page go back even further, and fluctuate quite a bit year-to-year. I would hardly call what we're seeing "a trend."

[Beltway]

I'm with Scott regarding cruise control on I-81.  Except where you have to slow down for trucks or heavier traffic, it's not hard to maintain a consistent cruise control speed on 81.  If it is hard, it's probably because the "cruise control" in your vehicle is horrid.

I added after market cruise control to the 1988 Chevrolet Celebrity that I had, and it was a major improvement over not having cruise control, but it did vary significantly on major upgrades and downgrades.

The cars I have had since then starting with a 1994 Buick LeSabre, have all had spot-on cruise controls.

[LM117]

My only experience with cruise control was during a trip in August 2007 when I drove a 2007 Chevy Silverado (4.3L V6) to Michigan. Cruise control was worthless in the mountains.

[Beltway]

My only experience with cruise control was during a trip in August 2007 when I drove a 2007 Chevy Silverado (4.3L V6) to Michigan. Cruise control was worthless in the mountains.

What sort of mountains and what elevations?  I can't say that I have driven at 10,000 feet or more anywhere, but at least up to 4,000 feet and 5.0% grades for Interstate highways.

[LM117]

My only experience with cruise control was during a trip in August 2007 when I drove a 2007 Chevy Silverado (4.3L V6) to Michigan. Cruise control was worthless in the mountains.

What sort of mountains and what elevations?  I can't say that I have driven at 10,000 feet or more anywhere, but at least up to 4,000 feet and 5.0% grades for Interstate highways.

I forget the exact spot, but it was somewhere in WV on I-77 between Beckley and Charleston.