5 ms·

I would argue that general population disagrees with this. +/- 20% tolerance is completely acceptable.

by genman 3y ago

Arrath 3y ago
Much like Doctors having a rather different definition of 'binge drinking' or 'heavy drinking' than most of the public, general (dis)agreement may not mean terribly much in the end.
- genman 3y ago
  Quite the opposite. Doctors can think what ever they want until some kind of social behavior in generally accepted by the society. Any amount of alcohol is bad and likewise any travel is dangerous. It's only about acceptable degree.
LeoPanthera 3y ago
20% means you drive at 80 in a 65. That is in no way acceptable.
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  Keep right except to pass and you won't have a problem.
  - amatecha 3y ago
    Seriously. Why can't people in NA follow this basic, simple protocol? It makes driving so much easier in every way. Need to slow down because your turn is coming? No problem, move over to the right. Want to actually get somewhere sometime today? Pass and then return to the lane you were in. It's so easy! Imagine actually having protocols around traffic flow, and following them! Just wait until you hear about roundabouts, which allow traffic to continue moving (rather than waiting at a red light for minutes on end when there's no one else there!)
    - orangepurple 3y ago
      > Why can't people in NA follow this basic, simple protocol? In Germany you get fined and ticketed for it. In NA you don't. It's that simple.
    - trelane 3y ago
      > Need to slow down because your turn is coming? No problem, move over to the right. That's the wrong approach for a left turn. > Imagine actually having protocols around traffic flow, and following them! Like limits on the magnitude of vehicular velocity?
      - amatecha 3y ago
        I knew someone would respond to the "move over to the right". Yes, it doesn't apply to every single situation. In general, though, particularly for highway driving, it's a system that works well.
        trelane 3y ago
        > In general, though, particularly for highway driving, it's a system that works well. That depends on the highway. If it's a limited access motorway, like the interstates, Autobahn, or M-class then sure. Perhaps not coincidentally, that is where the right lane rule you propose is mandated. Otherwise, it fails often. Reality is messy. If you truly want to make the roads safer, follow the posted speed limits. (Energy follows the square of the speed.) Also, always ensure you leave enough room to stop (the "2 second rule").
        amatecha 3y ago
        I've driven many tens of thousands of kilometers throughout close to 20 countries in Europe, and multiple hundred thousand kilometers here in Canada, and have yet to find a multi-lane highway where "keep right except to pass" doesn't make total sense and work well. As traffic gets congested everyone naturally relaxes adherence to that policy since it's not realistic to uphold in all conditions. I mean, if you have citations that support the argument that it "fails often" I'm all ears, but my lived experience with this highway protocol has been universally positive. I observed that it especially works best in concert with a rule that people entering/merging from the right have the right-of-way, since this reduces uncertainty around "who will go?" that I often witness here in NA (where "keep right to except to pass" is merely a suggestion, or not enforced even if enshrined in law). Regarding speed limit, I'm not arguing against speed limits or adhering to them, and indeed the more consistent the speed of traffic, the safer it is. On that note, my observation is that simply adhering to the speed limit (and attempting to stay at that speed) means regularly passing vehicles -- that is, in most cases, people are indeed following speed limits and a "keep right except to pass" policy correlates well with maintaining consistent speed and flow of traffic. People who want to drive slower can stick to the right lane without any hassle or problem (it's accepted and normal for them to drive slow there), and those who are driving faster can safely pass and then return to that right lane. If there are deep flaws in this process, I'm absolutely not seeing them and have not observed them. (yes, of course, the "two-second" rule makes sense and is a minimum IMO - I imagine if more people followed this, crashes would be massively reduced)
- repiret 3y ago
  There is a lightly trafficked, mostly straight, 2 lane highway between where I live and the closest city large enough to need 5 digits on its population signs. The speed limit is 65. I drive 75 on it. Most people drive 85. In fair weather, with the right vehicle, 95 would be safe for most of it. A few years ago, the limit was 55, and at that time, a sheriffs deputy told me they don’t bother anybody going under 70. I don’t know what you really mean by acceptable, but there are plenty of roads with a 65 mph speed limit where 80 miles an hour is perfectly safe, and there are of course plenty of roads with a 65 mph speed limit where 70 mph is and unsafely fast. And there are road conditions in all of those roads where 45 mph would be on unsafe. It is difficult to make blanket statements about what a safe speed is knowing nothing other than the posted speed limit. To put the same point in a different context, remember that it wasn’t really that long ago that there was a national 55 mph speed limit, and many of the same interstates that used to have a 55 mph speed limit now have an 80 mph speed limit.
  - oceanplexian 3y ago
    Depends on what state you’re in. In Montana, Texas, Florida, you can do 85 in a 65 and a cop won’t blink an eye. In some cases if you’re the one doing 65 you are a hazard and an unsafe driver. IMO roads with 80 MPH speed limits are much safer. Even the crazy folks don’t go much over, so you don’t get a huge delta in speed, which is a lot more dangerous than any absolute number.
- lotsoweiners 3y ago
  Found the guy the rest of us are swerving around unsafely because he’s driving too slow.
  - LeoPanthera 3y ago
    Found the guy who's going to kill someone's kid and blame anyone but himself.
    - Cyphase 3y ago
      Found two people who could have made their reasonable points in more productive ways.
- commandersaki 3y ago
  This is the standard in California.
- whichfawkes 3y ago
  For sure it is. Have you never been outside your city? There's stretches of flat, straight-ish interstate in the US that continue for dozens of miles with near-perfect visibility. Sometimes, there's no traffic. Go 120 for all I care, just slow down when you're near something.
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    Let's hope your car can handle that. Or the road is in good condition. Or that your tires are rated for that speed (T or higher).
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

I would argue that general population disagrees with this. +/- 20% tolerance is completely acceptable.

by genman 3y ago

I would argue that general population disagrees with this. +/- 20% tolerance is completely acceptable.

Much like Doctors having a rather different definition of 'binge drinking' or 'heavy drinking' than most of the public, general (dis)agreement may not mean terribly much in the end.

genman 3y ago
Quite the opposite. Doctors can think what ever they want until some kind of social behavior in generally accepted by the society. Any amount of alcohol is bad and likewise any travel is dangerous. It's only about acceptable degree.

LeoPanthera 3y ago

20% means you drive at 80 in a 65. That is in no way acceptable.

CamperBob2 3y ago
Keep right except to pass and you won't have a problem.
- amatecha 3y ago
  Seriously. Why can't people in NA follow this basic, simple protocol? It makes driving so much easier in every way. Need to slow down because your turn is coming? No problem, move over to the right. Want to actually get somewhere sometime today? Pass and then return to the lane you were in. It's so easy! Imagine actually having protocols around traffic flow, and following them! Just wait until you hear about roundabouts, which allow traffic to continue moving (rather than waiting at a red light for minutes on end when there's no one else there!)
  - orangepurple 3y ago
    > Why can't people in NA follow this basic, simple protocol? In Germany you get fined and ticketed for it. In NA you don't. It's that simple.
  - trelane 3y ago
    > Need to slow down because your turn is coming? No problem, move over to the right. That's the wrong approach for a left turn. > Imagine actually having protocols around traffic flow, and following them! Like limits on the magnitude of vehicular velocity?
    - amatecha 3y ago
      I knew someone would respond to the "move over to the right". Yes, it doesn't apply to every single situation. In general, though, particularly for highway driving, it's a system that works well.
      - trelane 3y ago
        > In general, though, particularly for highway driving, it's a system that works well. That depends on the highway. If it's a limited access motorway, like the interstates, Autobahn, or M-class then sure. Perhaps not coincidentally, that is where the right lane rule you propose is mandated. Otherwise, it fails often. Reality is messy. If you truly want to make the roads safer, follow the posted speed limits. (Energy follows the square of the speed.) Also, always ensure you leave enough room to stop (the "2 second rule").
        amatecha 3y ago
        I've driven many tens of thousands of kilometers throughout close to 20 countries in Europe, and multiple hundred thousand kilometers here in Canada, and have yet to find a multi-lane highway where "keep right except to pass" doesn't make total sense and work well. As traffic gets congested everyone naturally relaxes adherence to that policy since it's not realistic to uphold in all conditions. I mean, if you have citations that support the argument that it "fails often" I'm all ears, but my lived experience with this highway protocol has been universally positive. I observed that it especially works best in concert with a rule that people entering/merging from the right have the right-of-way, since this reduces uncertainty around "who will go?" that I often witness here in NA (where "keep right to except to pass" is merely a suggestion, or not enforced even if enshrined in law). Regarding speed limit, I'm not arguing against speed limits or adhering to them, and indeed the more consistent the speed of traffic, the safer it is. On that note, my observation is that simply adhering to the speed limit (and attempting to stay at that speed) means regularly passing vehicles -- that is, in most cases, people are indeed following speed limits and a "keep right except to pass" policy correlates well with maintaining consistent speed and flow of traffic. People who want to drive slower can stick to the right lane without any hassle or problem (it's accepted and normal for them to drive slow there), and those who are driving faster can safely pass and then return to that right lane. If there are deep flaws in this process, I'm absolutely not seeing them and have not observed them. (yes, of course, the "two-second" rule makes sense and is a minimum IMO - I imagine if more people followed this, crashes would be massively reduced)
repiret 3y ago
There is a lightly trafficked, mostly straight, 2 lane highway between where I live and the closest city large enough to need 5 digits on its population signs. The speed limit is 65. I drive 75 on it. Most people drive 85. In fair weather, with the right vehicle, 95 would be safe for most of it. A few years ago, the limit was 55, and at that time, a sheriffs deputy told me they don’t bother anybody going under 70. I don’t know what you really mean by acceptable, but there are plenty of roads with a 65 mph speed limit where 80 miles an hour is perfectly safe, and there are of course plenty of roads with a 65 mph speed limit where 70 mph is and unsafely fast. And there are road conditions in all of those roads where 45 mph would be on unsafe. It is difficult to make blanket statements about what a safe speed is knowing nothing other than the posted speed limit. To put the same point in a different context, remember that it wasn’t really that long ago that there was a national 55 mph speed limit, and many of the same interstates that used to have a 55 mph speed limit now have an 80 mph speed limit.
- oceanplexian 3y ago
  Depends on what state you’re in. In Montana, Texas, Florida, you can do 85 in a 65 and a cop won’t blink an eye. In some cases if you’re the one doing 65 you are a hazard and an unsafe driver. IMO roads with 80 MPH speed limits are much safer. Even the crazy folks don’t go much over, so you don’t get a huge delta in speed, which is a lot more dangerous than any absolute number.
lotsoweiners 3y ago
Found the guy the rest of us are swerving around unsafely because he’s driving too slow.
- LeoPanthera 3y ago
  Found the guy who's going to kill someone's kid and blame anyone but himself.
  - Cyphase 3y ago
    Found two people who could have made their reasonable points in more productive ways.
commandersaki 3y ago
This is the standard in California.
whichfawkes 3y ago
For sure it is. Have you never been outside your city? There's stretches of flat, straight-ish interstate in the US that continue for dozens of miles with near-perfect visibility. Sometimes, there's no traffic. Go 120 for all I care, just slow down when you're near something.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  Let's hope your car can handle that. Or the road is in good condition. Or that your tires are rated for that speed (T or higher).
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]