Lamo Leaf driver doing 50 mph in 2nd lane in heavy traffic

[smkettner]

Never seen a minimum speed above 45 mph. Anyone else?

 

[Nubo]

Then some people quote the "adjust your speed to the flow of traffic" suggestion, as if they don't realize the people going 80 in a 65 are 1) breaking the law 2) ALSO not following the suggestions of adjusting their speed to the drivers LEGALLY going 55-65. The suggestion goes both ways, but it never means it is okay to break the speed limit.

Yeah, I said, that, and I'll stick by it. Sorry, but I'd much rather avoid getting rear ended than avoid a ticket, and honestly, if you're going slightly below the flow of traffic your chances of getting a speeding ticket for that alone might be slightly above zero, but not much. If the speed limit is 65 and traffic is doing 80, doing 55 is downright dangerous. I'm not advocating 80, but 70-75 is enough to keep you safe from both tickets and rear-endings.

A lot of people see it that way but to me it just seems like saying "you better speed, or they'll kill you". But I don't think it's as desperate as people make it out to be. The really dangerous tailgaters I've run across really don't target someone at 55 preferentially to one at 65 or even 75. They are flying, weaving, tailgating, cutting people off regardless. In fact, you're safer from them in the far right lane, as it's kind of like Kryptonite to them. Yes they'll ocassional pull a 4-lanes-right / 4-lanes-left move if they see a hole, but your speed at that point is probably irrelevant.

 

[TNleaf]

Then some people quote the "adjust your speed to the flow of traffic" suggestion, as if they don't realize the people going 80 in a 65 are 1) breaking the law 2) ALSO not following the suggestions of adjusting their speed to the drivers LEGALLY going 55-65. The suggestion goes both ways, but it never means it is okay to break the speed limit.

Yeah, I said, that, and I'll stick by it. Sorry, but I'd much rather avoid getting rear ended than avoid a ticket, and honestly, if you're going slightly below the flow of traffic your chances of getting a speeding ticket for that alone might be slightly above zero, but not much. If the speed limit is 65 and traffic is doing 80, doing 55 is downright dangerous. I'm not advocating 80, but 70-75 is enough to keep you safe from both tickets and rear-endings.

The thing is, YOU may FEEL like you are being a safer driver by adjusting to the reckless speeders, but in fact, taking on that mentality only creates more dangerous driving conditions. No one should ever have to adjust their speed above a posted speed limit in order to be with the flow of traffic or to have a false sense of "feeling" safer.

Also, try using that one when you get pulled over for a ticket. "But officer, I was only adjusting my speed to the flow of traffic." I image it would get you the same response as "But that red sports car was driving faster than me, why didn't you pull THEM over?!?"

 

[padamson1]

Pfffff... You scarred me. I almost tough it was me. Only after I read the post and found it was not my color and not the same time I was on 880. But in my case, I was in the slowest lane all the time, not during rush hour and I had a excuse: I was doing my first attempt (failed) to do 100 miles on a single charge.

A quick glance at the range/speed table should tell you you're not going to make 100mi on the highway unless you drive dangerously slow compared to normal traffic speeds. If you want to go 100 miles you're going to drive 45-50mph, so drive on 45-50mph speed limit roads.

In many situations, the law is irrelevant as to how slow one should drive, it is social issues that one has to contend with. It doesn't matter what kind of car you drive, if you drive the speed limit or less there are too many impatient nut jobs out there that will get pissed off and drive dangerously to get past you. In a worst case scenario you could induce some sort of road rage incident. I've experienced one personally because I inconvenienced someone by making a turn where I had right of way.

Sure, everyone can legally drive below the speed limit, but in today's 'I've got to get there now' society it's not about the law, it's about the other people on the road. Unless there is something physically forcing me to drive that slow (e.g. towing something), driving 15mph below the speed limit just isn't a smart thing to do.

 

[TNleaf]

<snip> Unless there is something physically forcing me to drive that slow (e.g. towing something), driving 15mph below the speed limit just isn't a smart thing to do.

And driving 15mph above the speed limit is even LESS smart... however it seems to be the status quo. I guess that seems to be the state of the general public these days. The reckless choices are the ones taken most often. /shrug

 

[planet4ever]

In California, at least, the speed limit on freeways is 55 mph -- for trucks. That applies even on freeways with automobile speed limits of 70 mph. There is absolutely nothing wrong, or inherently dangerous, about traveling the legal truck speed limit in any lane where trucks can legally travel, or traveling 5 mph under that legal limit, no matter what the "prevailing speed" is. The people traveling more than the speed limit are breaking the law, and they are the ones creating a dangerous situation.

Ray

 

[smkettner]

+1 on that Ray

 

[derkraut]

In California, at least, the speed limit on freeways is 55 mph -- for trucks. That applies even on freeways with automobile speed limits of 70 mph. There is absolutely nothing wrong, or inherently dangerous, about traveling the legal truck speed limit in any lane where trucks can legally travel, or traveling 5 mph under that legal limit, no matter what the "prevailing speed" is. The people traveling more than the speed limit are breaking the law, and they are the ones creating a dangerous situation.

Ray

+1 :!:

 

[LEAFfan]

In California, at least, the speed limit on freeways is 55 mph -- for trucks. That applies even on freeways with automobile speed limits of 70 mph. There is absolutely nothing wrong, or inherently dangerous, about traveling the legal truck speed limit in any lane where trucks can legally travel, or traveling 5 mph under that legal limit, no matter what the "prevailing speed" is. The people traveling more than the speed limit are breaking the law, and they are the ones creating a dangerous situation.
Ray

+3!
I recently saw on the news that CA was considering a 55mph speed limit on the freeways/interstates. :shock:

 

[GRA]

In California, at least, the speed limit on freeways is 55 mph -- for trucks. That applies even on freeways with automobile speed limits of 70 mph. There is absolutely nothing wrong, or inherently dangerous, about traveling the legal truck speed limit in any lane where trucks can legally travel, or traveling 5 mph under that legal limit, no matter what the "prevailing speed" is. The people traveling more than the speed limit are breaking the law, and they are the ones creating a dangerous situation.
Ray

+3!
I recently saw on the news that CA was considering a 55mph speed limit on the freeways/interstates. :shock:

That would only happen if every California politician voting for it really wants to get back into the private sector, and/or has a death wish. Social Security may be the 3rd rail for national politics, but a 55mph freeway limit is the same for California politics. I think it's fair to say that the national 55mph freeway limit was probably the only law that was more widely execrated and violated than Prohibition, at least out west. Even the CHP hated it (maybe not officially, but whenever I talked to officers they were pretty candid that it was ridiculous on rural interstates). What may work for dinky little states in New England just doesn't cut it here. I've already wasted enough years of my life with a 55mph freeway limit; never again. Not that we typically _drove_ 55, but 59-62 if there were CHP around, or 65-70 if we were sure we couldn't be ambushed from an overpass (CHP didn't have radar; Ca. politicians refused to give them the money for it).

If someone wants to drive 55 (in the right hand lane) on the freeway, more power to them. But the overwhelming majority of us want the option to choose the speed that makes sense for us, not be forced to drive far slower than our cars can comfortably travel. Most people have a car because it allows them to get where they're going in the quickest, most convenient way, not to see how inefficiently they can use their time. If you're worried about wasting resources, then why stop at 55mph - why not 35 mph, or 15? Better yet, get out of your single-occupant car and take public transit, or ride a bike - I do both for my local trips. 55mph freeways? Ptui!

 

[TNleaf]

In California, at least, the speed limit on freeways is 55 mph -- for trucks. That applies even on freeways with automobile speed limits of 70 mph. There is absolutely nothing wrong, or inherently dangerous, about traveling the legal truck speed limit in any lane where trucks can legally travel, or traveling 5 mph under that legal limit, no matter what the "prevailing speed" is. The people traveling more than the speed limit are breaking the law, and they are the ones creating a dangerous situation.

Ray

Well put. Better than I could say it.

 

[thankyouOB]

In California, at least, the speed limit on freeways is 55 mph -- for trucks. That applies even on freeways with automobile speed limits of 70 mph. There is absolutely nothing wrong, or inherently dangerous, about traveling the legal truck speed limit in any lane where trucks can legally travel, or traveling 5 mph under that legal limit, no matter what the "prevailing speed" is. The people traveling more than the speed limit are breaking the law, and they are the ones creating a dangerous situation.

Ray

Well put. Better than I could say it.

Bravo TNleaf, though I am not sure driving five miles under the truck limit is going to work very well.
That said, this board has way too much we-are-ambassadors-on-the-highway-so-drive-above-the-speed-limit for my taste. You need to drive safely and legally. There will always be a fool pulling up behind people and demanding they get out of the way. Prudence should prevail in that situation. If you can move over, do so. In the HOV lane that may not be possible. The CHP says going 65 in the HOV lane is lawful and going faster is not. I called them up and asked.

 

[ericsf]

A quick glance at the range/speed table should tell you you're not going to make 100mi on the highway unless you drive dangerously slow compared to normal traffic speeds. If you want to go 100 miles you're going to drive 45-50mph, so drive on 45-50mph speed limit roads.

Well, I'm not sure it's 1) possible, 2) a good idea.

I think it's not realistic to make the 100 miles on a charge on the 40-55miles roads in the Bay Area because those are usually surface streets with lots of stop signs and traffic lights. The range drops dramatically in stop and go type of traffic. If you want to make it, then you'll have to go even slower.

But since those roads are likely to be 2 lanes highway with no way to easily pass, then this is really going to PO other drivers. On 880, there are at least 5 lanes in each direction between San Jose and Oakland. As long as you're not in the fast lane in heavy traffic (which was my case), that leaves plenty of space for others to pass you.

 

[Drivesolo]

Regarding this thread and those that have posted their opinions of what they do on the highway it seems that it is not really an issue of what is legal or not. When working w/ people in a controlled environment for performance driving (track, runway, autocross) there is something referred to as a "Speed Threshold". This is essentially the speed that an individual feels comfortable in (given the situation and condition). Some people will have a speed threshold of over 130mph while another will be less than 100mph in the same vehicle under the same exact conditions. For those that choose to drive below a certain speed it really comes down to that; they do not feel comfortable going any faster. Their speed threshold is lower than most drivers on the road. In most cases attempting to encourage them to drive faster will not be effective nor is it fair since it could put them in a situation that they can not handle. As much as it pains me seeing a Leaf slowly moving down the freeway, slowing down traffic, reinforcing a stereo-type. I would much rather see that than a wreck involving a Leaf driver because he/she was incapable of driving as fast as everyone else. On the flip-side, if you are aware that you can not handle highway speeds that the traffic moves at, you should attempt to avoid using the freeway when your limitations will inconvenience others.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

If the speed limit on the interstate/highway is 65, it is 100% acceptable for someone to be in the far right lane doing 55, no matter how many cars are "impatient" behind them.

I disagree with your statement as it all depends on situation and conditions, but for the most part I wouldn't say it should be acceptable.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.425" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RCW 46.61.425
Minimum speed regulation — Passing slow moving vehicle.

(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law: PROVIDED, That a person following a vehicle driving at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle may exceed the speed limit, subject to the provisions of RCW 46.61.120 on highways having only one lane of traffic in each direction, at only such a speed and for only such a distance as is necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety.

(2) Whenever the secretary of transportation or local authorities within their respective jurisdictions determine on the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that slow speeds on any part of a highway unreasonably impede the normal movement of traffic, the secretary or such local authority may determine and declare a minimum speed limit thereat which shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected. No person shall drive a vehicle slower than such minimum speed limit except when necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.

and that is why we have passing lanes. it is FULLY ACCEPTABLE and LEGAL to drive what "we" would consider pathetically slow on a road that has passing lanes.

this includes EVERY single lane highway in the State of WA provided either by designated passing areas or by slow vehicle turnouts or multiple lanes of travel.

so therefore, the 50 MPH driver in CA would have been completely within his legal rights.

what we really need to do is triple the fines for speeding and either get the CHP to do their job or get someone who can

the other thing is tail gaiting. i find that the speed of the "lead" vehicle is not a factor. so the slower the speed, the safer since the following vehicle is too close to be able to stop safely in most situations so the slower the speed, the less likely severe injuries will happen.

EVERY day i see vehicles moving UNDER 50 mph on I-5. sure part of it is the Nisqually Valley and overloaded trucks but i also see those same overloaded trucks passing slower vehicles and its usually older people or new drivers.

as for me, i drive between 53-60 most of the time and speed limit runs between 60 to 70 mph. i have never had a feeling i would be rear ended although their times i wanted to be in some of the cars i have driven since even if i was doing 45 mph in a 70 mph zone i would NEVER be the driver at fault. never ever.

 

[defiancecp]

Then some people quote the "adjust your speed to the flow of traffic" suggestion, as if they don't realize the people going 80 in a 65 are 1) breaking the law 2) ALSO not following the suggestions of adjusting their speed to the drivers LEGALLY going 55-65. The suggestion goes both ways, but it never means it is okay to break the speed limit.

Yeah, I said, that, and I'll stick by it. Sorry, but I'd much rather avoid getting rear ended than avoid a ticket, and honestly, if you're going slightly below the flow of traffic your chances of getting a speeding ticket for that alone might be slightly above zero, but not much. If the speed limit is 65 and traffic is doing 80, doing 55 is downright dangerous. I'm not advocating 80, but 70-75 is enough to keep you safe from both tickets and rear-endings.

The thing is, YOU may FEEL like you are being a safer driver by adjusting to the reckless speeders, but in fact, taking on that mentality only creates more dangerous driving conditions. No one should ever have to adjust their speed above a posted speed limit in order to be with the flow of traffic or to have a false sense of "feeling" safer.

Also, try using that one when you get pulled over for a ticket. "But officer, I was only adjusting my speed to the flow of traffic." I image it would get you the same response as "But that red sports car was driving faster than me, why didn't you pull THEM over?!?"

Almost 20 years of driving and I've never been nor seen anyone pulled over for speeding while driving just below traffic flow speed, and I *have* seen people driving below the flow of traffic rear ended in any lane (though the routes I drive usually have 2-3 lanes per direction, none of these 4+ lane things). Speed differential above 20mph is very dangerous- a fact that is well researched and documented, not based on some impression or "feeling" as you put it. Would a highway be a safer place if traffic enforcement was universal? Heck yeah, absolutely, sign me up! but it's not, and as long as that's the case I'm not letting the differential between the majority of traffic and myself approach 20mph (though I certainly will choose different routes in many circumstances).

 

[amtoro]

I still do not understand how someone gets rear-ended while both vehicles are traveling in the same direction. Rear ending a car that brakes suddenly, does not have brake lights, does not use hazard lights in low-visibility conditions is one thing, but in the case of two vehicles moving in the same direction on an open road, it is the responsibility (and a pretty easy job) of the vehicle that follows, to maintain a safe distance with the vehicle ahead.

Now, tailgaters... I do not change my speed (up or down), just keep an eye on them on the mirror until they get tired and move away. My logic is that if I speed up, they get the feedback that if they get close enough, I will increase my speed and continue doing so; when I, inevitably stop accelerating, they will not react, continue accelerating and hit me.

Being predictable is the safest attitude on the road; other drivers will make better decisions if they can predict your movements, time their maneuvers and stay out of your way.

I have driven for almost 20 years; 11 of them in very chaotic streets and roads in South America where most americans would never drive but hire a cab and maybe, even close their eyes and think of their happy place.

 

[SmilingWhenSailing]

Well, we don't have freeways here in Norway, but almost everybody drives faster than the speed limits. I don't, and I don't care how many cars are behind me. I usually adjust the speed exactly to the speed limit and just roll. The speeding tickets here start somewhere around 500 $ for 7 km/h over the speed limit and I am not willing to pay any speeding ticket in Norway. The majority might have no problem with paying a speeding ticket every one and so often in addition to the fuel bills or just gambles. I am perfectly happy with the speed limits and not willing to pay a few thousand crowns for a few minutes less in the car. I don't know what the speeding tickets are in the US, but e.g. in Germany they are ridiculously low. In Finland again you might end up paying all between a few thousands and a few hundred thousand bucks depending on your income and speed. If I ever get to drive in the US I will drive exactly the speed limit but of course I will do so on the slowest lane if necessary/possible. On the other hand, even in Germany you are allowed to use the left lanes on the autobahn when driving 20 km/h faster than the traffic on the right lane and people coming from behind with 250 km/h will have to brake since they will always get the fault in an accident when driving more than 130 km/h even when there are no speed limits. Usually they are coming in packs of 3-7 BMW,Audi,Mercedes with maybe 1 meter bumper to bumper distance flying by ectronically limited to 250 km/h. It looks like en express train to hell. But I guess you find those brainless drivers everywhere, not only in Germany... Fortunately here in Norway only very few are driving faster then 200 km/h, and they usually do that only once...
The reason I drive a Leaf is that I like the gliding motion and the silence and I like to listen to music while driving to work and back. When sitting in there I don't care about the world behind me... so I fully understand how it might happen that someone ends up on the middle lane of a freeway not exactly speeding. What I can't understand either is people who are rear ending others, since human faces are made with the eyes oriented forward and that is where the face should be looking while driving, but it probably won't help if the human's CPU is on energy saving mode to compensate for the cars enormous fuel consumption.
And yes, here in Norway police will pull out everybody speeding indifferent of the traffic flow that's why it is called speed limit! And we have a lot of photo boxes and recently also average speed measurements here especially in tunnels. Very effective, since you really cant evade a system measuring the time it takes you to drive a certain distance. Usually you see the people suddenly driving well under the speed limit to make sure they won't "get caught"... I like those average speed boxes ;-)

 

[Nubo]

... In Finland again you might end up paying all between a few thousands and a few hundred thousand bucks depending on your income and speed...

Ah, so they index the fines to your income? I've always thought that they should do that here. The point of the fine is to discourage recklessness, yes? Yet, a $200 fine may be very difficult for someone with low income, and totally insignificant to a wealthy person. So it doesn't achieve the goal and somehow we treat the fine as paying for a commodity. It's very weird when you think of it. It's almost as if our law enforcement is in the business of selling speed.

 

[Herm]

is a 20mph differential enough to get rear ended?.. really?.. you are driving down a street at 20mph and suddenly you notice there is a car stopped on the middle of the road, I think you will stop before hitting that car. Unless you are distracted texting your GF, but that is a different issue and why I recommend everyone get their cars painted in international orange.