|
The truck was following the jeep by around 3/4 of a second, judging by my calibrated "one one thou". If I recall correctly, the Driver's Ed Approved Following Time is something like 2 - 4 seconds. Obviously ridiculous for heavy traffic, but maybe 3/4 S is a little close.
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 18:47 |
|
|
Disgruntled Bovine posted:Did you watch the video clip that spurred this conversation? I watched it, and that's the rare situation where you can't do poo poo because you'd have to be hundreds of feet away to stop in time. It's almost like you didn't read my post and just want to be hyperbolic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
I think the armchair traffic cops are the lovely people I share a road with.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
i was driving on a country road and saw a dude up ahead and i immediately pulled over and had a picnic to ensure we had a safe distance between our vehicles
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
go3 posted:i was driving on a country road and saw a dude up ahead and i immediately pulled over and had a picnic to ensure we had a safe distance between our vehicles This is proper driving at its best, remember to maintain at least a single county's length between you and all other object be they stationary or moving.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
dee eight posted:Piss in my gas tank if I'm wrong, but shouldn't safe following distance be a function of time rather than distance once you get out of town and on the highway? Yes. This is what we teach now. However the problem is that it will take a while for new training to filter in. Old driver ed films are saying one car length per ten MPH. We say 3-5 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Ringo Star Get posted:Yes. This is what we teach now. However the problem is that it will take a while for new training to filter in. Old driver ed films are saying one car length per ten MPH. We say 3-5 seconds. ~4s is a good average for time to go from 60 mph to 0 mph from what I saw in research, and I think I read some article saying 1s - 2s is a good number for average reaction time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
The other problem is that this is a zero sum game, if everyone obeyed that rule, life would be grand. Except no one does, because everyone is a self absorbed rear end in a top hat and me-firsts in front of you even if you're following far too closely by the rules. The 3-5 second rule and all other following distance rules are a great way to end up being a rolling roadblock doing 15 under the speed of traffic in the right lane as everyone passes you and cuts you off. I live in Massachusetts, I'd get murdered if I tried to do that. So guess what? I don't, I follow about the same distance out as everyone else, except I watch the car in front of me and the one in front of them (actually, I generally watch every car within eyeshot) so I have a better than average chance of avoiding an accident.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
Precisely, keep an eye on conditions ahead of you, at least to the point where you would stop if you had to panic brake. It's easy in a lifted jeep; it's also saved my rear end a few times this year.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
EightBit posted:Precisely, keep an eye on conditions ahead of you, at least to the point where you would stop if you had to panic brake. It's easy in a lifted jeep; it's also saved my rear end a few times this year. It drives me nuts when people are oblivious to traffic stopping up ahead. My sister will not touch the brakes until she sees the brake lights on the car immediately in front of her and then has to brake way harder than if she'd starting slowing down earlier. Just look ahead and you'll see the wall of brake lights on all the cars up there and know that you need to start slowing down, it's not complicated and it means that I don't have to think you're going to plow into the rear end of the car ahead of you and stomp on the imaginary brake pedal under the passenger seat like an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
What's really fun is anticipating a panic stop like that, slowing down gradually, and getting roadrage passed, honked at, and then brake checked by the stupid inattentive motherfucker who was behind you. I really hate people. That hasn't happened to me in quite a while but god drat did I ever want to curbstomp that idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
...but people are generally poo poo at driving and this is why you have cars hitting metal things and bouncing back into traffic... If people weren't poo poo at driving this thread wouldn't exist. Not that it would be a bad thing if that were the case.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
kastein posted:The other problem is that this is a zero sum game, if everyone obeyed that rule, life would be grand. Except no one does, because everyone is a self absorbed rear end in a top hat and me-firsts in front of you even if you're following far too closely by the rules. The 3-5 second rule and all other following distance rules are a great way to end up being a rolling roadblock doing 15 under the speed of traffic in the right lane as everyone passes you and cuts you off. But research and internet so you're wrong  Yeah if I did that in Tampa I'd get shot at for sure, so 3/4 of a second it is!
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
Automotive Insanity > If people weren't poo poo at driving this thread wouldn't exist. Amen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
kastein posted:What's really fun is anticipating a panic stop like that, slowing down gradually, and getting roadrage passed, honked at, and then brake checked by the stupid inattentive motherfucker who was behind you. Yeah this happens to me all the time. Since I'm not an idiot, and actually watch the traffic as far ahead as I can see, and therefore see/predict the traffic slowing down and slow down, I get rewarded by some retard up my rear end wondering why I decided to slow down. Basically it's the "slow down for red lights instead of racing up to it and brake hard" thing all over.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
The other advantage to watching the brake lights two cars ahead is it's a really reliable way to predict when you should let off your brakes at a stop light. So you can avoid creeping and just go when the time is right. That's the biggest advantage to the rear window brake light, you can almost always see it through the car in front of you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
leica posted:This is what he hit: It's weird to me they didn't try to terminate those jersey barriers by running them tangent to and dying into the existing barrier, so that they just meet. Then the driver, rather than hitting something straight on would have ricocheted off back into his lane, probably into the next lane, but certainly maintaining good speed. Or course it's a Jeep with a tire right on the corner and no bumper or fender to bounce off, and it would have been tossed into the air and flipped. The guy behind would have been at least better off either way. Also my way would have cost less to build, which means there must be a regulation stating that it's to be designed the way it is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
EightBit posted:Precisely, keep an eye on conditions ahead of you, at least to the point where you would stop if you had to panic brake. It's easy in a lifted jeep; it's also saved my rear end a few times this year. The problem is that vehicles precisely like yours keep ordinary car traffic from doing that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
xzzy posted:That's the biggest advantage to the rear window brake light, you can almost always see it through the car in front of you. I'd say the biggest advantage is being able to tell whether a vehicle with stupid red-only taillights is signaling a turn or braking with a lamp out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
StormDrain posted:It's weird to me they didn't try to terminate those jersey barriers by running them tangent to and dying into the existing barrier, so that they just meet. Then the driver, rather than hitting something straight on would have ricocheted off back into his lane, probably into the next lane, but certainly maintaining good speed. That's what I thought too, but I'm guessing they've tried that before and it didn't work as well. Maybe they concluded that making the car come to a dead stop is better than flinging it across three or four lanes of traffic? I dunno. Obviously it didn't work that well in this situation, still sending the car into traffic and starting a chain reaction across the lanes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
Wonder_Bread posted:The problem is that vehicles precisely like yours keep ordinary car traffic from doing that. That's why I drive an MG Midget--I can actually see under all the lifted brotrucks and mommy-crossovers!
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Wonder_Bread posted:The problem is that vehicles precisely like yours keep ordinary car traffic from doing that. I've been in a car in a sea of cars: you can't see ahead like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
EightBit posted:I've been in a car in a sea of cars: you can't see ahead like that. because there was some rear end in a top hat in a lifted jeep in front
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Anecdatally but if I drop back a couple more car lengths every time some wazzock cuts into my braking gap, I end up adding nearly 2 minutes onto my hour-long commute. Intolerable I tell you. So now I'm the wazzock that cuts everyone up, knocking nearly 2 minutes off my hour commute. Worth it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
dee eight posted:Piss in my gas tank if I'm wrong, but shouldn't safe following distance be a function of time rather than distance once you get out of town and on the highway? This is how it was always taught to me. 8 seconds of "distance" at highway speeds. But I live in bumfuck nowhere, so traffics rarely a big deal. Put me in the big city and I'll tailgate as closely as I can without someone cutting in (aka maximum allowable follow distance as dictated by rampaging assholes).
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Edit: ^^ geez at 75mph how far is 8 seconds? I feel like there's not landscape flat enough for me to even see 8 seconds in front of me here.Cakefool posted:Anecdatally but if I drop back a couple more car lengths every time some wazzock cuts into my braking gap, I end up adding nearly 2 minutes onto my hour-long commute. Intolerable I tell you. So now I'm the wazzock that cuts everyone up, knocking nearly 2 minutes off my hour commute. Worth it. Obviously there are a million factors in any hour long commute but imagine that when you choose to allow a ton of people to merge in front of you it isn't just you it's affecting, it's potentially everyone behind you too. It's this same mentality when people don't pay attention at a stop light and it takes them 5 seconds to realize it's green, then they go. They figure hey why'd that jerk have to honk at me, I woke up and we both made it through the light just fine, what's the rush? Well, that's like 4 people at the back of the line who now have to wait an entire cycle because of those 5 seconds. The guy in the initial video wouldn't have avoided the accident following at what I'd consider a reasonable follow distance, but boy howdy would it have been avoided if the guy who just kept going straight into the barrier when the road bent had just been paying attention.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
davebo posted:Edit: ^^ geez at 75mph how far is 8 seconds? I feel like there's not landscape flat enough for me to even see 8 seconds in front of me here. https://www.google.com/webhp?q=(75+mph+*+8+seconds)+in+feet I don't think there's much 75 MPH road out there where you don't have 880 feet of visibility.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
davebo posted:Edit: ^^ geez at 75mph how far is 8 seconds? I feel like there's not landscape flat enough for me to even see 8 seconds in front of me here. 880 feet, or roughly 50 car lengths. I generally try to maintain a minimum of a 4-5 car length gap at highway speeds, which is much smaller than I should. Despite the fact that I am generally going around 80 mph matching speed with the guy in front of me, I still get people regularly cutting over to the middle, or even right lane to pass me and fill that gap. I'll move over to let them pass if the guy in front of me is doing 90, but there's no point if he, and everyone else in view, is tailgating the person in front of them going as fast as they possibly can. As Kastein said, that's just how Massachusetts (and CT, and NY, and NJ) highways are a lot of the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
wolrah posted:https://www.google.com/webhp?q=(75+mph+*+8+seconds)+in+feet No, but outside of the middle of nowhere at 3 AM where are you going to be able to maintain an 880' buffer between you and the next car without also having to drive at half the speed limit? e: also are laser rangefinders standard equipment on new cars? How the gently caress would you visibly estimate that gap? Geoj fucked around with this message at 00:12 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
I am the guy you share a road with. I'm trying to come to terms with our new sucking loving piece of poo poo bike lanes, but today, it just got the better of me. I was first at a red light, and I had to make a right-hand turn shortly after the light, across the bike lane. The light turns green, and I accelerate slowly (no gas, just letting out clutch at first) until I realize.... all the cyclists have no interest in actually getting anywhere, so I'd probably be holding up traffic as I wait 15 seconds for them to actually reach the place I was turning. I pinned it, and turned right across that cocksucker. Probably not a responsible choice (I think the guy behind me honked at me), but it's not like I even came close to hitting or inconveniencing any of the stoned out cyclists. Why are you cycling if you want to go walking speed? You could just walk! And my other gripe: if you're on a bike, riding on the bike lane, and you come to a 4-way stop, you must observe the 4-way stop in the same manner as every single other person on the road. This means waiting your turn, but equally important, taking your turn when it is, in fact, your turn. PT6A fucked around with this message at 00:20 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
You have discovered why some cyclists don't stop at stop lights. Starting is a little slower than on a car. God forbid you are inconvienced for a few seconds. Also, you understand you are supposed to enter the bike lane before turning right? If you did that, you'd avoid these issues. Edit: some may be a little gun shy about taking thier turn because of morons in cars who think they don't need to yield to bikes that stop at a stop sign first. I'm looking at you rear end in a top hat in the 90s suburban last night. nm fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
nm posted:You have discovered why some cyclists don't stop at stop lights. Starting is a little slower than on a car. God forbid you are inconvienced for a few seconds. I've ridden a bike before. You can easily pass a pedestrian, even just starting out, which they did during the phase where all directions are red. I'm pretty sure I could never ride on the bike lanes, because slow cyclists being in front of me would piss me off even more than slow cars do. EDIT: The bike lane is not a full lane here, but no, that has never been brought up by the authorities since they were installed and at marked crossings, although there are signs indicating that cars are to yield to bikes in the bike lane when turning. I easily had enough room to safely "change lanes" in front of the cyclists, so if they're obliged to slow down (when there's enough room, obviously) to allow the turn, then I feel much less bad about what I did. PT6A fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Wonder_Bread posted:The problem is that vehicles precisely like yours keep ordinary car traffic from doing that. And so do pickups and work vans, which are usually doing 5 under the limit in the left lane while fumblefucking around with their thumb up their rear end and their brain in outer space and all the mirrors facing the wrong way from what I can tell. Your point? xzzy, glad I'm not the only one who does that... but have to watch both really because who knows if the one in front of you is even looking ahead or if they're updating their facebook status and have no idea that traffic is about to move.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Don't forget the SUV's and CUV's that make up 70% of traffic these days. The ability to see around the vehicle in front of you is a rare luxury if you're in a low car these days.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Guys, we get it, everyone follows closer than they should in highway traffic because it's practical. Just don't delude yourself by calling it safe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Geoj posted:No, but outside of the middle of nowhere at 3 AM where are you going to be able to maintain an 880' buffer between you and the next car without also having to drive at half the speed limit? Look ahead, find a "marker" (tree, sign, etc), mentally tag when the car ahead passes, and try to make it 8 seconds until you pass it. Keep your eyes ahead, glance at mirrors every few seconds, and match speed to conditions. All things which apparently most people never learn 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Siochain posted:Look ahead, find a "marker" (tree, sign, etc), mentally tag when the car ahead passes, and try to make it 8 seconds until you pass it. Keep your eyes ahead, glance at mirrors every few seconds, and match speed to conditions. All things which apparently most people never learn 880 feet: greater than 1/8 of a mile, nearly equal the length of three football fields. Yes, I'll pick out a minor landmark almost before I can even see it so I can maintain an insane 50 car length gap between myself and the next car 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Geoj posted:880 feet: greater than 1/8 of a mile, nearly equal the length of three football fields. Hey, just saying what's safe. Sorry if you can't see 880 feet, maybe get some glasses. Shits not hard. Not saying I do it all the time, not saying its possible everywhere, just sayin what's been taught to me as being safe, since it gives you a TON of time to react when the dipshit in front of you fucks up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
Siochain posted:Hey, just saying what's safe. Life outside the bubble is scary, isn't it? You should probably just park your car in the garage and throw away the keys - it's the only way to be truly safe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 18:47 |
|
|
Siochain posted:Hey, just saying what's safe. Sorry if you can't see 880 feet, maybe get some glasses. Shits not hard. Not saying I do it all the time, not saying its possible everywhere, just sayin what's been taught to me as being safe, since it gives you a TON of time to react when the dipshit in front of you fucks up. 800 feet isn't nearly enough to really be safe. Sure, you have some time, but not nearly as much time as if you're a mile behind the car in front of you. If you can see the car in front of you, you're too close. Sorry if you don't agree but that's what I've been taught.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 03:48
|
|
