Driving pet peeves

[Jennings]

Use of turn signals, commendable as it may be, does NOT automatically confer universal, unlimited right of way to you...

[Diamondback Six]

Use of turn signals, commendable as it may be, does NOT automatically confer universal, unlimited right of way to you...

But their non-use should be an automatic and immediate Gibbs-slap offense.

[Joe Hegedus]

Conversely, what about antiquated speed limits? vehicle technology (tires, suspension, brakes, etc) has moved forward in leaps and bounds, yet the speeds our roads are limited too are the same as ever, or even slower than a couple of decades ago. Why?

Because human reaction times haven't changed? Barring interstates (or the equivalent in your area), speed limits do not necessarily reflect the safe speed that a road can be negotiated - sometimes it just might be because of something that you can't see around the next bend...

[Raceaddict]

Because human reaction times haven't changed?

But vehicular abilities have. If 3 decades ago it takes 1 second to react and 6 seconds to stop, a modern car would be 1 second to react and 3 seconds to stop. That's 4 seconds instead of 7. Pretty significant. A modern economy car comes equipped with tires and brakes that would outperform a Ferrari fresh from the factory 25 or 30 years ago.

[chomper]

But vehicular abilities have. If 3 decades ago it takes 1 second to react and 6 seconds to stop, a modern car would be 1 second to react and 3 seconds to stop. That's 4 seconds instead of 7. Pretty significant. A modern economy car comes equipped with tires and brakes that would outperform a Ferrari fresh from the factory 25 or 30 years ago.

Thats all fine and well, providing the driver is doing what he is supposed to be. And not on the phone or texting or having a drink or got his kid in his lap.

Vehicles may have changed a whole lot, but as long as they are driven by humans, some things won't change.

[Diamondback Six]

Assistive technologies have also come a long way, like systems that'll automatically throttle back until you've reopened safe distance from the guy ahead of you. Granted, technology can only do so much to work around the idiot behind the wheel, but...

[rm20886]

But their non-use should be an automatic and immediate Gibbs-slap offense.

I second that!

I am starting to think manufactures are not making signals in cars anymore. Few use them anyway.

[C-130CrewChief]

How about people who speed up when you turn your signal on? I see that all to much around here!

[WymanV]

... but as long as they are driven by humans, some things won't change.

Which is all-too-true in more things than driving cars.

Ken

[Jennings]

How about people who speed up when you turn your signal on? I see that all to much around here!

Or those who slow down in the left lane when they're ahead of you, then when the finally DO get back into the right lane, speed up (it's almost universal), requiring you to add another 3-5 mph to pass them.

Apparently people aren't aware that the vast majority of vehicles on the road nowadays have a device called a "cruise control" on them...

[Edgar]

Conversely, what about antiquated speed limits? vehicle technology (tires, suspension, brakes, etc) has moved forward in leaps and bounds, yet the speeds our roads are limited too are the same as ever, or even slower than a couple of decades ago. Why?

Because the human body has advanced in leaps and bounds; as a policeman told me, years ago, hit a child at 20, he'll bounce off, hit him at 30 and he'll come up onto your bonnet, injured, hit him at 40, and he'll go over the top of your car, and under the wheels of the car following.

Mind you, I have to laugh at the latest furore over government plans to increase motorway speeds to 80, from 70. Have an accident at 80, instead of 70, and about the only difference will be the amount of space you occupy in the coffin.

Edgar

[barkin mad]

Forgot to add 6)People who don't acknowledge/thank you when you let them out/in etc

--------------------

[HOLMES]

Forgot to add 6)People who don't acknowledge/thank you when you let them out/in etc

--------------------

Juts plain bad manners...

[Raceaddict]

Because the human body has advanced in leaps and bounds; as a policeman told me, years ago, hit a child at 20, he'll bounce off, hit him at 30 and he'll come up onto your bonnet, injured, hit him at 40, and he'll go over the top of your car, and under the wheels of the car following.

Mind you, I have to laugh at the latest furore over government plans to increase motorway speeds to 80, from 70. Have an accident at 80, instead of 70, and about the only difference will be the amount of space you occupy in the coffin.

I'm perfectly fine with ultra slow speed limits in residential areas. 30km/h down my street where kids are playing, past the school, park, etc makes sense.

But why am I limited to 100km/h (62mph) on the highway? I don't consider myself a fast driver... a couple of km/h over the limit to keep up with right lane traffic and I set my cruise control. But every car I've owned for the past 14 years could easily and comfortably do 160-180 without much effort. And these are all 4 cylinder, small displacement cars.

Plenty of places in the world get along perfectly fine with speed limits much higher than 100 km/h.

Edited October 4, 2011 by Raceaddict

[Patrick_Nevin]

But why am I limited to 100km/h (62mph) on the highway? I don't consider myself a fast driver... a couple of km/h over the limit to keep up with right lane traffic and I set my cruise control. But every car I've owned for the past 14 years could easily and comfortably do 160-180 without much effort. And these are all 4 cylinder, small displacement cars.

Obviously local conditions apply (for a start, I've no idea how congested the highways are your locale.)

So, we reset the speed limit up to, say 170 mph. Freedom at last! Not a few people advocate doing exactly this.

It's rarely just the speed itself that causes issues, it's far more usually the speed delta multiplied by the mass. You wouldn't advocate lorries doing that same high speed, would you? I mean, one of those gets caught in a side wind doing 150+ and on the F=mv side, there'd be a LOT of damage. No disrespect to lorry drivers, who are very cool, but you'd likely end up with the stray behemoth squishing things like flies - game over. So keep them at 70, tops. Same for caravans, people moving houses (seen this), tank transporters, old people etc.

We tool down the road at newly legal warp speed cos our car or bike can do it. As you say, it proves precisely nothing on the hero stakes, as we can get something that'll do 190mph for about the cost of a good PC and the kind of roads most of us can keep control on at those speeds are rather straight and boring anyway. It does however cost us a lot more money (even in the US) as the increasing importance of aerodynamics with speed start draining our petrol (etc) tank faster. (Thinking about this, if one lives in a country that mandates vehicle insurance the ins bill probably went up an order of magnitude too, when they delimited the main road. After all, when have ins companies ever REDUCED premiums?) Meh - it's only money.

Let's assume everyone has well maintained vehicles and total concentration. Neither of which is the case on my daily travel. We still have to contend with a bunch of people carving each other up, proving points and tailgating at 100. Such is 21st century life.

The lorries are now potentially approaching at 100mph relative toward us (I've done this a couple of times and it's quite entertaining - but you have to have concentration and you really wouldn't want to do it 5 days a week. Or sneeze while doing so.) Of course, at that speed if we hit the central reservation (or local equivalent) we're going to be right over it, and then it doesn't matter how fancy our brakes are because we're aerial and may well end up in a 340mph collision. Which we MIGHT just survive, at least technically - stranger things have happened. But while we might personally be prepared to entertain this possibility on a fatalistic Friday night, I think there's fairly few of us who'd like wife/girlfriend/mother/child etc pulped that way (IIRC anything over 80mph collision and we start talking about the flesh liquidising against the bones on impact.)

So - from my understanding it's mainly for other people's benefit to keep the speeds down. Most often the ones who get caught in the secondary crashes, rather than the actual loons. The old saw about going out at 2 a.m. and nailing it on a big empty bit of road still attracts (I believe) less ire from the Law, though some of them will still hate you as if it goes wrong they will have to scrape up your remains and tell your next of kin when it all goes pear shaped - even if you're on your own. But the radar cameras are, alas, more judgmental so another bit of concentration is diverted elsewhere.... Still, there's always track days or (wow, on topic!) aircraft if you really want to go fast :)