Fast Drivers Versus Slow Drivers

"But I have to admit, that as a lifelong fisherman, I have occasionally "played" a member just to get my own back on some uncouth loudmouth!! I am not perfect either!!!"

--Surely, sir, you jest! I would never suspect you of such tomfoolery. Other tomfoolery, but not that one.

LOL! Cheers! Happy 4th July to all our British cousins, and bastard siblings.

Many thanks. We Brits wish our "Revolting Colony" the same.......

Just remember that even Baba Yaga has a nemesis.

You cannot and should not argue with a fence post, as rotten as it may seem.

Sometimes the fence post has roots that wrap around boulders, and they will not be moved. Just be glad you two do not drive the same road every day, and argue over lane changes, etc.

One further point: When arguing with someone in the first circle of hell, do not go off-balance, and even up in an even deeper circle of hell. Let it go.

Some people in hell do not realize they are already there.

Ok, gotta jump in here. There is plenty of “evidence” that fast drivers are safer. It’s called racing.+

The caveat is, Professionally trained fast drivers. A 20 yo who just finished binge watching the Fast and the Furious is not a professionally trained driver even though his juvenile mind might equate watching a movie to having training just like we seem to have a nation full of folks who skim Facebook and think they have knowledge of everything that is somehow infallible.

Suffice it to say, people are stupid at time, and some people are dangerously stupid. Being stupid doesn’t prevent you from pressing the pedal to the floor and thinking your Mario Andretti. The sad part is it usually hurts someone else.

Now on a different but related topic, The city of Madison Wi. Is considering having plain clothes officers with their “stingray” ride our city busses with cameras to phototicket people using cell phones while driving. The position in the bus is actually ideal for seeing into SUV’s and Vans’s and cars of all types and makes perfect sense. (well, it makes perfect sense if your serious about distracted driving) The liberal elites of this towns heads just exploded. LoL

Ahh,.. come on now, Madistan, Wisconsin isn't that bad...

Is considering having plain clothes officers with their “stingray” ride our city busses with cameras to phototicket people using cell phones while driving.

In all seriousness, I'm all for that, this not only protects against drivers, it then damn college students walking.

The Green Bay Packers had a pre-game exhibition at Camp Randal, (Home of the Wisconsin Badgers.)

I went with friend there, parked and rode the bus. I sat right in front by the door. Not traffic was brisk, the bus would stop, puck-up/unload people, and take off, and it moved.

I was watch out the front, and I saw, what looked like a student, (looked like he was in a daze, and preoccupied with his dam phone, on a curb, and I saw him lift his leg up and was about to step in front of the bus... never this kid looked up. The Right hand mirror just missed his head what looked like a fraction of an inch.

I cringed, and must have gasped or something quite loud, that the driver looked at me in his rear view mirror after we past. I asked him "does that happen often", The bus driver shook his head and said, "Every Day".

"The liberal elites of this towns heads just exploded. LoL"

Well, yeah, if you're going to bust me for 'texting while driving' when my dash-mounted, phone-based GPS just notified my of an alternate route and you snap the picture when I am reaching out to touch the 'accept new route' button while I am stopped at a red light and my foot (which you cannot see from that angle) is firmly on the brake.

This 'photo-enforcing' is a lot like the 'Red Light Safety cameras' that are actually there to extort money from people who do not rock back fully when coming to a stop for a right turn on red at 2:00AM on a road that has no other vehicles in sight for a half mile down any street.

This 'photo-enforcing' is a lot like the 'Red Light Safety cameras' that are actually there to extort money from people

Chicago right?, because they're paying the price for it, with money they already spent years ago.

Actually the worst ones are in the suburbs that directly border Chicago, where there are limited avenues of approach to the city on surface streets due to highways/railroad lines/rivers/forest preserves that run along and through the City's Western border.

When you realize that, statistically speaking, a 'rolling right turn on red' is the LEAST dangerous of the potential vehicle collisions at an intersection, since both vehicles are traveling in the same direction and the interaction is a mere 'sideswipe, seeing it as the MOST often fined action, even above "entering the intersection a millisecond after the light turned red" or "making a left turn when the left turn arrow is red," makes you wonder if the motive behind the cameras is Safety or Profit. (Hint: it's Profit.)

NYC has 'em as well, I imagine most jurisdictions do.

I think, perhaps, you missed the statement about the "stingray" or perhaps you are not familiar with it. It is a suitcase device that acts as a cell tower so phones that are in range and active show up on it as being in use and the phones location. This information is included in the picture of the driver/car and license plate.

(two photos are taken, one of you on the phone and one of your car with plate)

I can't say for sure, but I hazard an informed guess that it doesn't monitor your GPS.

The difference between racing drivers on a track and speeding drivers on the road is like the difference between chalk and cheese. The professional racing driver needs a licence which very few can qualify for and a standard of self-control which few on the road aspire to.

I will not argue with you there, I took my SCCA qualifying laps with Hurley Heywood in the passengers seat. No pressure, right? But the point is valid as you have be so kind to prove for me. A properly educated and trained "fast" driver is far superior to any other driver on the road. That is all I have said. That is all Ron, the starter of all this was contending.

Anyone can push the pedal down, very few have the slightest grasp of the necessary knowledge of physics to actually drive safely at those speeds. I do, I was trained, Held my license until the wife, responding to a nasty track mishap, said she couldn't do this anymore. Those skills have served me well over the years because I can do things with a car that most would not even believe possible.

A quick example, A car partially ran the light. in other words the moron stopped in the intersection. (if he had kept going it would have been no problem) Being in my lane of travel and stopped, I threw the car into a left reverse spin and literally spun my 86 Dodge Lancer around the front of his car, waved as we went around and completing the 360 kept right on going and only lost about 5mph. The wife was in shock and the kids in the back wanted dad to do it again. LoL

The mechanics of this move are pretty simple, but it takes a knowledge of friction, inertia, and the ability to do on the fly TSD (time speed distance) computation in your head while driving. Oh, and excellent timing and balls.

You throw the car into neutral, grab the parking brake level locking the rear momentarily so the back of the car is no longer tracking. Then you tweek the wheel to the right and tap the front brakes. This throws the car into a nice frontheavy unbalanced state that makes the rear very light and it will move to the left and actually pull the vehicle with it. as the car spins backward away from the car in the intersection you re-engage the drive in the lowest gear you can while stomping the pedal so the front wheels break loose and not stall the engine. Now you lock the rears again and countersteer to the rotation so the car completes the spin for the full 360. Half way around you return the steering wheel to the direction you want to exit and floor it. back off the power as soon as the front tires re connect and start pulling again. So the car comes back to normal direction of travel, under power and under control. and you just keep on driving.

As you can tell from that brief description, not something the "average slow driver" would even have the slightest possiblity of pulling off. For that person the best and safest bet would be to hit the vehicle. I wish you all a happy holiday. I'm Out!

I would have to disagree with your "evidence" that racing proves that fast drivers are safer.

You essentially state that in your next two paragraphs.

Racing involves not only the skill of the driver, but also the design and construction of the vehicles, and the conditions of the track.

You just can't take a car off a dealer's lot and expect to compete in the Daytona 500.

About the only part of an everyday vehicle that is common to a stock car is the body appearance.

Once again we seem to be totally overshooting the point. Where did I ever state a stock car from the dealership would be competetive in the Daytona 500? Dude, what are you reading?

My point is professionally trained drivers can and do drive better. They are more aware, they are more knowledgable about how cars work, how physics are applied and how to properly handle a vehicle in a crisis situation. ANY VEHICLE. These are facts, not opinions. Well, unless you are intending to argue that your time in college and experience did not make you an engineer and somehow you were simply born with all the knowledge and skills.

Here is yet another big difference between a vehicle operator and a trained driver.

In my time on the track With Hurley Heywood for my competition license he said nothing and just watched. He told me at the end of the laps that if had I touched the brake pedal he would have failed me.

According to professional drivers the brake is only used to stop in the pits, a tool to reset the balance of the vehicle or, as a last resort when all attempts to "DRIVE" around or through have failed. This is why rookies have special identifying marks or lights on their cars, so professional drivers with experience can be aware that this particular car might do something unexpected and unprofessional.

OK dokey then, this topic is officially Hitlered.

You got to respec myee Authoritah!

So much for accident prevention.

"Note that general aviation, with the private pilot determining his own progress, is littered with more fatalities than general aviation."

Would you care to rephrase that nonsequeter. How can general aviation have more fatalities than general aviation. Statistics 101 review of selection of a the population under study.

I agree, however, that a private pilot (who is actually a part of general aviation, not commercial aviation) that is not watching his flying while he is attempting to plot course, or spin his flight slide rule, or pay attention to navigation instruments he is apparently not up to speed with, is a danger to general aviation, and possibly to commercial aviation, depending on the flight space, altitude, and proximity to commercial airport(s).

I think what you were shooting for is Combined Situational Awareness (surroundings, present environment, and operational envelope of the vehicle). For example, there are moves you can safely undertake with a low CG sports car, that you would never try in a Land Rover or Jeep.

Apologies; try instead "Note that general aviation, with the private pilot determining his own progress, is littered with more fatalities than commercial aviation."

I liked your post!!

I could not agree with you more, I've been driving for 54 years and understand where you are coming from. I can only speak from personal experience without ties to any statistics. With 5 members in our family (wife and 3 children), I consider myself a fast driver as well as one of my children, my wife and the other 2 children are slow drivers. For me is not a matter of being in a hurry, is just that I am not comfortable driving slow, I have gotten plenty of speeding tickets (about 1 every 4 years) but have never hit anything/anyone with my car, the same with my fast driver kid, on the other hand the slow drivers in the family have been involved several times in fender-benders. Right after getting a ticket I have tried driving slow but find that my attention to traffic drifts and is not as focused as when driving fast, when driving fast I am aware of traffic all around me, when driving slow I am not. My biggest pet-peeve when driving is: a person in the left lane traveling side by side with a car in the right lane, "at the same speed" and a line of cars right behind him/her.

I felt safe on autobahn but German drivers are very courteous always letting you merge and use turn signals. They don't really drive that fast because fuel is so expensive and the average car there is not equipped to go +200kph. I think I-94 between Detroit and Chicago has a faster average speed than autobahn. I don't think it is a difference between fast and slow drivers but rather fast enough for conditions and vehicle capabilities. My dad taught me when I was learning to drive that you can violate man made laws and be ok but if you try to violate laws of physics you will most definitely have a problem.

Laws have nothing to do with ability,...

True, The problem is, most (or some?...) people overestimate their actual ability. While a few others, realize, (because their ability is so poor),... they are just getting by usually by others watching out for them.

With the advent of real time GPS devices in most vehicles and the physical data and real time environmental conditions of roadways, especially so called controlled access highways, there are potential Big Data-based algorithm opportunities to define the optimum speed for all vehicles operating in the same direction between interchanges/intersections, including those most conflicting features at highway exits and entries.

The best and safest presentation of this guidance for the drivers would be a heads up presentation in the individual vehicles, but some real time roadway signage could also be employed. Still, we will always have the speed demons, drunks, texters, passive-aggressive types and mothers driving a load of screaming kids that will frustrate such a system, but, at least, we have to try.

A drinking buddy volunteered his offering for the system name: Road Warrior. We believe the broader economy of higher efficiency (higher average vehicular speeds) and fewer mental health problems could justify the expense of devising and administering such a system, both overall and in individual vehicles.

Fast versus slow,,, it is all relative. Personally I just "go with the flow". The general speed of other drivers dictates the speed I drive to "blend" in and to try not to be a hazard to other drivers. In any case, there are always people who pass me and others that I pass, on domestic roads and even the autobahns of Europe.

Not really mentioned anywhere are reaction times. Fast or slow, I don't think reaction times change that much, hence, driving faster - even if you are more focused - means you travel further during your reaction time even if it is a little quicker (there have studies done on this I am sure) and if you do not adjust for that you are more likely to get into trouble or have an accident.

In either case of fast or slow, we are always subject to being ticketed. One may not see any rhyme or reason for the speed limits, both maximum and minimum, but they are there for a reason other than just to get your money.

The old defensive driver instructor at the Texas DPS Academy comes to mind:

"What good does going really fast do you when you are Dead on Arrival?"

"Drive the speed limit, and arrive alive at the destination, or not".

If drivers 'go with the flow' in the UK they all get speeding tickets because the clever buggers who knew full well what they were at before the speed cams came in realised through surveys that the average speed is 37 miles per hour and therefore millions of drivers have been screwed for doing that speed in a 30 limit. There are even 40 MPH limits on three lane carriageways which is ludicrous as it is impossible for a pedestrian to get any where near that road.

That section of road is a favourite of the mobile van who is raking in money so it pays to tow the line even though the limit is stupid. Many drivers are now a bloody nuisance because most of them are now driving at 5 MPH below the speed limit which is frustrating to normal drivers.

Drivers are now being brainwashed into being people with the reactions of a slug. Money money money.

Point taken. However, speed cams are do not exist in my area and just about anywhere I drive. They were tried in large urban areas, but were taken out of service as it turns out they were "an invasion of citizens privacy".

This is the kind of idiotic thinking that makes me long for the self driving car. If you have ever watched auto racing you would realize that very few of these expert drivers actually complete the race, most wreck or cause their car to fail prematurely. Most of these races are less than 500 miles. The winner usually has a great deal of luck to get to the winners circle. The same thing is happening with the "fast" drivers on the road, they cause others to have wrecks by cutting them off, running yellow lights, and many other things that increase the accident rate. From an "engineering" point of view, the safety advantage of a "high performance" car is lost once it is driven outside the legal speed limits. If your auto has better braking you lose the advantage in stopping distance by driving faster. If the driver has better reaction times but drives closer to the performance limits of his auto, exceeding the posted speeds, chances of an accident increase greatly when the unexpected happens such as a piece of debris on the road or a pothole that needs to be dodged. The slow driver, paying attention to the roads including the speed limit, will always be the safer driver, ask your insurance company, they have the statistics. Just because some car salesman told you that buying an expensive high performance car would make you an expert driver and the speed limits wouldn't apply to you doesn't make it true. Most likely the opposite, if you are that dumb you shouldn't be driving at all!

In engineering there is "NO SUCH THING AS AN ACCIDENT" reminded me that this is correct, there are only things that are "UNPLANNED EVENTS".

So an accident waiting to happen, is what? An uncoordinated, unscheduled unplanned event, that is going to require a break-in work order?

OR is it an unscheduled outage that looms large on the horizon?

Or is it a blunder, a career ending oversight, an event that only providence has heretofore prevented from being a fact?

Can someone here help me translate that "accident waiting to happen", just a bit better, as I don't speak Somnambulese.

IMO “an accident waiting to happen” is a phrase used by people who love to imagine they’re in some dreadful danger, which somebody must protect them from. Maybe in some cases the road in their locality is more hazardous than average, but mostly it’s a case of locals wanting to have something to make a fuss about.

And when they complain about traffic speed on their patch - “drivers use it like a race track etc” - I wonder how scrupulous they are about keeping to speed limits in other people’s areas.

I don’t know whether you have speed awareness courses over there, but in UK they’re offered as an alternative to points on your licence (still costs same as a fine). I’ve not been on one, but I understand they tell you you should stick to the limit (say 30mph) as 35mph is more dangerous than 30, and they probably bring kinetic energy proportional to speed² into it. The trouble is that on that logic 30mph is more dangerous than 25, and 25 more dangerous than 20, all the way down to zero, and no normal person suggests that. Of course there must be speed limits, which should be enforced (though in UK there’s a strong belief it’s more about raising revenue than road safety) but not on that basis.

IMO “an accident waiting to happen” is a phrase used by people who love to imagine they’re in some dreadful danger,

The fines and "points" vary here as well, but,,, we have one more step - more than 50 KPH over the limit (AKA "stunt driving") and you loose your car and drivers license for 7 days, on the spot. When you get your license back depends on what the judge or JP says.

According to Merriam-Webster's online dictionary the definition of accident is:

an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance

Therefore there are such things as accidents.

However, OSHA has expunged the word 'accident' from their vocabulary.

Anything unexpected that happens in a factory/worksite is either:

• an INJURY, if someone got hurt and required medical attention or first aid,
• or an INCIDENT, if there was property damage with nobody getting injured -or- if there was a 'near miss' that COULD have resulted in an injury or property damage.

If you don't let people know when their bad habits are causing near misses, then the near misses could keep getting 'nearer' until they're no longer misses

Today's bad habits are tomorrow's injuries.

In Wisconsin, we are At-Fault state when it comes to an accident as opposed to the No-Fault accident. At-Fault is when you are at least partially to blame just being involved in an accident cause by someone else, just being there.

in other words,...

The state of Wisconsin operates under a tort system, meaning that in the event of a car crash, someone must be determined to have been the cause of the accident. Fault must be established.

"The state of Wisconsin operates under a tort system, meaning that in the event of a car crash, someone must be determined to have been the cause of the accident. Fault must be established."

So, if my car is parked safely in my garage at the bottom of a hill, and your car is parked safely in your garage at the top of the same hill, and a passing tornado throws a John Deere tractor into your garage, knocking your car out the side and causing it to roll sideways down the hill until it smashes through the side of my garage and lands roof-to-roof on top of my car, crushing both unoccupied passenger compartments down to the hood/trunk top, the state of Wisconsin STILL needs to blame one of us? Or would they be finding fault with the owner of the flying tractor?

Wait, that might be complicating things, instead of the John Deere, let's say it was a Big Ol' Oak Tree the tornado pulled up from a nearby forest preserve. That way there's no 'third party not named' involved in this.

(When my uncle was in active service in the Marines, he was stationed in one of those tort system states, and he got fined for driving 'too fast for conditions' when the gale-force winds from a storm blew over the PARKED (engine off) Duce-and-a-half truck he was in, simply because the service road it was parked on was a 'named street.' How could 'full stop, engine off, parking brake engaged' be 'too fast' for anything? It is literally impossible to go any slower than 'stop.')

(When my uncle was in active service in the Marines, he was stationed in one of those tort system states, and he got fined for driving 'too fast for conditions' when the gale-force winds from a storm blew over the PARKED (engine off) Duce-and-a-half truck he was in, simply because the service road it was parked on was a 'named street.' How could 'full stop, engine off, parking brake engaged' be 'too fast' for anything? It is literally impossible to go any slower than 'stop.')

SILENCE!

Reminds me of a line from British Comedian Eddie Izzard...

Something about the medieval times or inquisition I can't recall.

People are lined for sentencing where the criminals brought before them get to choose their sentences...

Powers that be: "Death or Cake"

Criminal 1: "Oh, ahh, Cake please,"

Powers that be: "Next"

Powers that be: "Death or Cake"

Criminal 2: "Well I have Cake please,"

Powers that be: "Next"

Powers that be: "Death or Cake"

Criminal 3: "Yes, Cake please,"

Powers that be: "Next"

Powers that be: "Death or Cake"

Criminal 4: "Yes, Cake please,"

Powers that be: "We're out of cake"

Criminal 4: "?"

Criminal 4: "So it's just 'or Death' is it?"

PTB: "Looks like it."

Criminal 4: "Well in that case, I'll have the chicken."

HEY, you stop that right now,... there's only room for one bad comedian here, and that's James Stewart

Actually that is far better than I had in mind! You go Adreasler!

I believe I resemble that comment. As a friend told me when I picked up playing the game of LaCrosse at 40. There's nothing wrong with 'being the best, of the worst'

I was just finishing up Eddie's skit.

All credit goes to the funny man in women's clothing.

Eddie Izard: "These are NOT 'women's clothing,' they're MY clothing, I bought them!"

Also, the "Cake or Death" skit is "What if the Spanish Inquisition were handled by the Church of England?"

Eddie: The Spanish Inquisition would've never worked with the Church of England! "Talk, will you! Talk!" "But it (being tortured) really hurts!" "Right, well loosen it up a bit for him..."

NO ONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!

One can always trust the United States Federal Agencies to warp, change, or eliminate words from general use, because of their agenda. At some point, we will no longer be able to communicate with these "higher beings" (at least they think they are superior).

At that point who can say what will happen, but it does bode well for the American Joe, or Jill, much less for the bureaucracy. Those people have to come from somewhere, unless they hatch them from incubators, which I am starting to suspect.

I only ask that drivers maintain a speed consistent with the traffic flow, or move out of that lane, if possible. The biggest problem I have with "fast " (as well as slow) drivers is that they are operating outside of the "Predictability" , that is where others around them on the road are able to predict a pattern and then make bad decisions that cause problems. To wit, some motorcycle operators , who think they are making safe decisions (for themselves) by speeding around slower cars. The driver who isn't prepared for someone coming up behind them at 1 1/2 times their speed and can't predict that motion, often makes a lane change that leads to a real problem for the motorcycle operator and himself. One reason why motorcycle drivers often get clipped while splitting lanes (At least here, in California).

Taken from here to support your thoughts on motorcycle safety:-

Motorcycle_safety

According to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in 2006, 13.10 cars out of 100,000 ended up in fatal crashes. The rate for motorcycles is 72.34 per 100,000 registered motorcycles. Motorcycles also have a higher fatality rate per unit of distance travelled when compared with automobiles.

Per vehicle mile traveled, motorcyclists' risk of a fatal crash is 35 times greater than a passenger car. In 2004, figures from the UK Department for Transport indicated that motorcycles have 16 times the rate of serious injuries compared to cars.

A national study by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATS) found that:

• Motorcycle rider death rates increased among all rider age groups between 1998 and 2000
• Motorcycle rider deaths were nearly 30 times more than drivers of other vehicles
• Motorcycle riders aged below 40 are 36 times more likely to be killed than other vehicle operators of the same age.
• Motorcycle riders aged 40 years and over are around 20 times more likely to be killed than other drivers of that same age.

According to 2005 data from the NHTSA, 4,008 motorcycle riders were killed on United States roads in 2004, an 8% increase from 2003.

During that same period, drivers of automobiles showed a 10% increase in fatalities, while cyclists showed an 8% increase in fatalities. Pedestrians also showed a 10% increase in fatalities. A total of 37,304 automobile occupants were killed on U.S. roads in 2004.

Additional data from the United States reveals that there are over four million motorcycles registered in the United States. Motorcycle fatalities represent approximately five percent of all highway fatalities each year, yet motorcycles represent just two percent of all registered vehicles in the United States. One of the main reasons motorcyclists are killed in crashes is because the motorcycle itself provides virtually no protection in a crash. For example, approximately 80 percent of reported motorcycle crashes result in injury or death; a comparable figure for automobiles is about 20 percent.

I am sure that its basically the same everywhere.......

Hard to argue with that. I used to own and ride a 650cc Kawasaki bike, and went through three "near miss accidents" in one evening ride out north of Amarillo, TX.

First was a large rattlesnake that was about 6" diameter at the fattest part (well-fed I suppose), but length was to the middle stripes of a two-lane highway from the shoulder. He/she was a big one, and I feared would be going for a ride with me on the bike, I locked down right after going over the snake, from 65 mph, then sped away as soon as I realized the snake was "un-phased" by being run over, and was calmly toodling right on over the highway.

Second was a small sedan that backed out within 50 yds of my approach, again I was doing at least 55 mph on a freeway access road. I had to emergency brake once again. This was on the way back to my in-laws' home after the snake episode.

Third was after my turn onto the street leading to my in-laws' neighborhood. By this time it was only a few minutes before sunset, I was west-bound, and was nearly abreast to the local junk car yard (a spare parts dealer), and the junk yard guard dog came out for a relaxing stretch on the street. He stopped in my lane with less than 30 yards separation, so I totally had to lock down the brakes once again to ensure avoidance.

I sold the bike only a few months later.

I think you are over-generalizing. Many would call me a slow driver, but after getting up to the speed limit plus a little more, there are still those who want to drive up my tailpipe! Admittedly I don't put my foot in the carb (or fuel injection) during acceleration, partly because I have left on time and don't need to. But I do look farther down the road and observe potential problems early, including anticipating when traffic lights are going to change (Others don't seem to understand what "anticipate" means!)

"But I do look farther down the road and observe potential problems early, including anticipating when traffic lights are going to change (Others don't seem to understand what "anticipate" means!)"

What you do used to be called "Defensive Driving," or as I describe it to people today (since the term 'defensive driving' has been warped by Public Opinion to mean 'driving in a passive-agressive style, either 5-20mph below the limit, or deliberately pacing the car in the next lane, forming a 'rolling roadblock.'), "driving like an Engineer."

One thing I find very useful at stoplights are the crosswalk signals that provide the countdown. I can get an estimation of when the yellow light will start (since it's usually synced to the zero of the countdown) so I can determine whether I'm going to cross the intersection this light or the next, while still half a block away.

People drive fast because it is exhilarating.

NO, what is exhilarating, and not in a good way, is driving to work in a snowstorm when you should have stayed home.

Where you're not sure where the road is and you go along by gaging the between the high falls poles, that is if you can see them. if you're lucky, you have some type of track to follow, keeping in mind, you don't want to follow anyone into the ditch.

On top of that, if you pass through a 'white out' as your driving, and not sure if that's from the storm or if the snow plow is just ahead of you, if you stop, your screwed if anyone is behind you.

25+ years ago, when I worked at the shipyard, I use to do that driving to work, 45 miles one way... when you get to work, you have a hard time releasing your grip on the steering wheel from the literal 'white knuckle driving' and thinking, you should have stayed home. Which I have since done.

"NO, what is exhilarating, and not in a good way, is driving to work in a snowstorm when you should have stayed home."

I can top that, driving HOME from work, in a snowstorm, at night, on the highway, where it's coming down so fast and thick that it has formed a layer of snowpack over the asphalt. You could not even SEE the lane markings.

Due to the horrid conditions, and the fact that NOBODY wanted to be standing outside in that mess exchanging insurance information, everyone was giving everyone else a WIDE berth, full 3-5 second gap between vehicles in the same lane, the 4-lane highway had become 3 lanes from the extra elbow room everyone gave each other, everyone was driving at 40MPH, and people were not only using signals to announce lane changes ahead of time, but actually YIELDING to each other so the lane changes went smoothly with nobody cutting anyone else off.

Who says that Chicagoans can't be good drivers, we just need the weather equivalent of Godzilla looming over is to remember our manners.

Kinda hard to recreate those conditions across the entire nation on a daily if not hourly basis, though, but it does reveal a truth.

Driving in Chicago land is kin to a diabetic eating 3-4 Chicago dogs from Weinerschnitzel (delicious by the way), and topping it off with a banana split. It tastes good at the time, but you will pay for it later.

By the way, has anyone tried the new chicken schnitzel sandwiches there? They remind me of Middle East Schnitzel, and the owner of my neighborhood franchise is from Kuwait, and is a really nice fellow, so we made fast friends. He has done a lot to improve the quality of their food at that location, and somehow the menu expanded and improved by a lot.

I yield to your story, based on having Driven through the loop in good weather during rush hour can be pretty stressful.

That was the first time I had driven on the highway with the 4WD engaged on my jeep the whole way. Stressful? I felt like I was moments from Operation Brown Trousers the entire time. I could not have been more stressed if I was driving a truck full of lit dynamite down a narrow mountain road⁽¹⁾.

Notes:

1. For those who don't get it: drive too fast, you lose control and you die; drive too slow, the truck blows up and you die; get too distracted by your impending death, you lose control and you die; try to jump out, you fall down the cliff and you die.

I get the linkage to whatever action you take, you die. That would be most unpleasant.

My worst was driving back to Salt Lake City from up in Wyoming where a friend and I picked up a car in Riverton to transport back. I was driving his vehicle.

On the way up, the highway over the Continental Divide was clear, and the sun was out with "spring-like" weather, but going back, a blow was stirring up powder snow, and the highway over the Divide was in total white out conditions. That was white knuckle all the way, with 200-300' drop-offs just past the shoulder, all that was visible was a road reflector every so many yards, and once in a while you would see a snow plow coming the other way (just in time to duck back to your lane if you were too far over). Never again.

Owen Wilson summed it up pretty good in Armageddon.... and quite fitting

I would say the post throws a wide net. There are so many facets to driving, age, amount of traffic, road conditions, night or day, drivers familiarity with the road, I could go on and on. I am sure every situation is different and your estimate of the situation may appear different from the driver next to you. So in answer to the post fast and slow can be safer or not and I dont see how you could go one way or another with all the variables to be considered.

Ethical machine behaviour....

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170705123229.htm

For open roads, with many different cars, trucks and other vehicles, very varied braking distances, with all their different drivers, with their varied competency, anyone here who feels that a race driver or his race style of driving brings anything useful to this blog, is basically off his rocker....we are talking about open roads, not the race track.

BUT, I will agree that a good road driver, who has race experience, but who stays law abiding, is probably one of the best road users around.....Though I have no proof either way.....

Furthermore, I sincerely believe that normal road users, who are keeping to the posted speed limits, following the laws of the country where they are, is the only proper way to drive. All the time.....

Though I usually drive at the correct limit as shown on my GPS (accurate to Plus/minus 1 unit of the display), not that necessarily of the speedometer, as they generally show a higher than actual speed!!

I have driven all over the world, on both sides of the road (following local laws of course) in both Left and Right hand drive cars.

Other than 5 speed limit infractions (of the "slowest" grade each time = no points on my license), and a red light infraction, with no other traffic at 3 AM, I have managed to drive for 58 years problem free.....

(That could change of course as I get older......!)

Over these years, I have had other motorists ram my car, all from behind, I do believe around 16 times in all, just because they were following far too close....

Which I have apparently mostly "fixed" (over the last 25 years or so) by leaving alfar large gap between myself and the vehicle in front.

(But not proven!)

But then I can brake at a slower rate, allowing the following vehicle(s) more time to react......

Only one "ramming" since then, it happened to be a race driver in a brand new Sierra Cosworth, what a surprise! A long time ago...(between 1986 -92 apparently according to Wiki......)