70 is the new 55
#21
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ou818,Mar 17 2010, 04:30 PM
I really wish there were some system in which drivers had to be approved to go certain speeds.
Let's avoid so much focus on minor things (in this high speed test) like "when you parallel parked on the hill you didn't turn your wheel to ensure the car rolls toward the curb if the automatic transmission let go."
#22
Community Organizer
Originally Posted by MikeyCB,Mar 18 2010, 07:20 AM
We have carpool lanes, why can't we have high speed lanes??
Sounds familiar already
#25
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vtec9,Mar 18 2010, 09:17 AM
Accident rate on Autobahn sections with unrestricted speed limits is the SAME as that on sections with speed limits.
I'm sad to say I don't know if north americans could handle that
#26
Originally Posted by MikeyCB,Mar 18 2010, 07:29 AM
I visited my cousin a few years back in Germany, and we used a couple "autobahns" to get from the airport to her house. She said it's not difficult to handle, you drive what feels right. If you see someone in your mirror getting bigger and you're in the left lane, move to the right. if you see someone getting bigger quickly with their left turn signal on in the left lane, move to the right FAST because the turn signal means they're booking it fast.
I'm sad to say I don't know if north americans could handle that
I'm sad to say I don't know if north americans could handle that
#27
Originally Posted by MikeyCB,Mar 18 2010, 10:29 AM
I'm sad to say I don't know if north americans could handle that
If that were ever to be solved, then we could potentially see some progress with variable lane speeds or similar.
I realize its a sample of people who voluntarily participated via their GPS. Do you think 'speeders' avoided participation because they were worried about their rights/freedom/privacy? Perhaps anonymous aggregate data from EZ-Pass (and similar) would be a good complimentary data source in areas where it is available?
I think the VA comment could be misleading. It says nothing about radar detectors being illegal there, and penalties for speeding being much higher. That's probably more of a deterrent to going 70 in a 65, than the comfort of cruising at 65 in a 65.
Raptor - I don't know if they are better drivers. They are taught differently and have graduated licenses (IIRC). Its not a rite of passage for a 16,17,18 year old like it is here.
#28
Originally Posted by Heyitsgary,Mar 18 2010, 08:00 AM
Raptor - I don't know if they are better drivers. They are taught differently and have graduated licenses (IIRC). Its not a rite of passage for a 16,17,18 year old like it is here.
#29
In Germany they also ticket you for not moving into the right lane if you block traffic. I think that's really great and wish we would do that here.
I think we could have a fair bit of an increase in speed limits without compromising safety if we segmented the lanes and had "move over" enforced heavily. Maybe travel speeds are 65mph in the right lane but ~85-90mph in the far left on a large freeway, and smaller differences in smaller freeways. (And make the huge trucks stay out of the leftmost lanes, PLEASE! They don't always in Utah.) Unlimited speeds probably won't work in America--at least not until a decade of better driving so people learn how to do it safely.
But in a 4-lane per direction freeway, a 20mph speed difference across the lanes is certainly reasonable--we get that pretty regularly now with slow cars and speeders. IMO somewhere around 15-20 mph of speed difference across one lane is where I would start to question the safety level of our cars--meaning I don't know if our cars are safe enough for that to be the US's common practice given today's sloppy driving, even if people would move over.
==
I would love to see safety and efficiency take a more dominant role in driving laws, not one-size-fits-all speed limits and stop signs that should say Yield @ 10mph, not STOP.
A 92 dodge caravan or a semi with gravel can NOT safely travel at the same speed as my S2000 under good conditions. Right now, the law pretends we are exactly the same. We just aren't. And it's probably unsafe for me to drive 90 next to somebody going 50 too, regardless of the capabilities of the cars--people don't always look.
We could use a better system.
I think we could have a fair bit of an increase in speed limits without compromising safety if we segmented the lanes and had "move over" enforced heavily. Maybe travel speeds are 65mph in the right lane but ~85-90mph in the far left on a large freeway, and smaller differences in smaller freeways. (And make the huge trucks stay out of the leftmost lanes, PLEASE! They don't always in Utah.) Unlimited speeds probably won't work in America--at least not until a decade of better driving so people learn how to do it safely.
But in a 4-lane per direction freeway, a 20mph speed difference across the lanes is certainly reasonable--we get that pretty regularly now with slow cars and speeders. IMO somewhere around 15-20 mph of speed difference across one lane is where I would start to question the safety level of our cars--meaning I don't know if our cars are safe enough for that to be the US's common practice given today's sloppy driving, even if people would move over.
==
I would love to see safety and efficiency take a more dominant role in driving laws, not one-size-fits-all speed limits and stop signs that should say Yield @ 10mph, not STOP.
A 92 dodge caravan or a semi with gravel can NOT safely travel at the same speed as my S2000 under good conditions. Right now, the law pretends we are exactly the same. We just aren't. And it's probably unsafe for me to drive 90 next to somebody going 50 too, regardless of the capabilities of the cars--people don't always look.
We could use a better system.