 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / September 2006Hypocrisy in mandating stability control
I see some authorities are trying to make stability control or traction control systems mandatory. Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory advanced driver training, because they believe it might increase the confidence of the driver? And the same crowd who deliberately make country roads curved in order to reduce speeds? > Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory > advanced driver training, because they believe it might > increase the confidence of the driver? Yes. And the same ones who believe lane blocking is safer because it slows faster drivers down by forcing them to weave through traffic. > And the same crowd who deliberately make country > roads curved in order to reduce speeds? curves actually keep drivers from falling asleep. Never heard of them being used to reduce speed outside of residential streets. > > Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory > > advanced driver training, because they believe it might > > increase the confidence of the driver? > > Yes. And the same ones who believe lane blocking is safer because it > slows faster drivers down by forcing them to weave through traffic. BuhWaHahahaha!!! How are drivers "forced" to weave through traffic? Howcomewhyfor am I *never" so "forced"? ----- - gpsman > BuhWaHahahaha!!! How are drivers "forced" to weave through traffic? > > Howcomewhyfor am I *never" so "forced"? > ----- > > - gpsman Because you think being an asswipe is a good thing, somehow. So you blend right in with the rest of them, and are happy to do so > > > Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory > > > advanced driver training, because they believe it might [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Howcomewhyfor am I *never" so "forced"? So you just patiently sit behind the idiot doing 53 MPH in the passing lane until rush hour ends? nate > > > > Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory > > > > advanced driver training, because they believe it might [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > So you just patiently sit behind the idiot doing 53 MPH in the passing > lane until rush hour ends? f.ck no, I'm over in the R lane these days... but I am *always* patient when driving. Wanna know why? There's no benefit to wadding up my panties about anything so trivial over which I have *no* control. Here's my POV, YMMV: If a driver was "out in front" of his vehicle he could, would and should make an avoidance manuever mmmmmaybe a quarter to a half mile before encountering an LLB. What I most often notice is a backup behind the LLB of bad but faster drivers and better and more attentive drivers are passing the entire line of idjits on the R. Then, of course, the idjits, instead of paying their penance for their inattentiveness, pull out to pass too early and cause that lane to slow. MF FY. If you're caught behind an LLB I say great! Yer a shitty driver and deserve to be frustrated. If there seem to be lots n' lots of LLBs I say great, you're a shitty driver trying to go too fast for conditions and deserve to be frustrated. Frustration is a penalty for shitty driving. The bottom line, ISTM, is that the driver who has the most problems with traffic is probably a really shitty driver. I mean it's practically the exact same situation day in and day out... but many if not most drivers never seem to solve the simple puzzle of navigating traffic while avoiding being frustrated. Take a look at the other drivers as you pass. Yer all on the same highway and some drivers seem frustrated and some don't. What do you think is the secret to avoiding frustration? ----- - gpsman > What do you > think is the secret to avoiding frustration? > ----- > > - gpsman Simple. An automatic grenade launcher, and resisting the urge not to use it > > > > > Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory > > > > > advanced driver training, because they believe it might [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > when driving. Wanna know why? There's no benefit to wadding up my > panties about anything so trivial over which I have *no* control. So, then, you never change out of the right lane to pass slower traffic? nate >> > > > > Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory >> > > > > advanced driver training, because they believe it might [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > So, then, you never change out of the right lane to pass slower > traffic? Driving in the right lane at the posted limit on chicago interstates means passing just about no one. 1 vehicle maybe every few hundred miles. Although it certainly isn't a stress free experience by any means. It's rather stressful in fact, constantly watching mirrors, being cut off, etc. > >> > > > > Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory > >> > > > > advanced driver training, because they believe it might [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > rather stressful in fact, constantly watching mirrors, being cut off, > etc. Even though nobody actually *cruises* at the SL here, I find that trying to cruise at the SL in the right lane is pointless because you still end up having to change out occasionally because of slow mergers. They eventually get up to speed and pass you again, but if you do NOT change out of the right lane you won't be able to maintain the SL. nate >> Driving in the right lane at the posted limit on chicago interstates >> means passing just about no one. 1 vehicle maybe every few hundred miles. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > They eventually get up to speed and pass you again, but if you do NOT > change out of the right lane you won't be able to maintain the SL. IME by remaining at the speed limit it wasn't possible to safely change lanes to avoid a slow merger. Either had to suck it up behind them or hope that by holding course and speed they would end up merging behind. > >> Driving in the right lane at the posted limit on chicago interstates > >> means passing just about no one. 1 vehicle maybe every few hundred miles. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > lanes to avoid a slow merger. Either had to suck it up behind them or > hope that by holding course and speed they would end up merging behind. Exactly. That was the point I was trying to lead our favorite troll to. Oh, wait, which troll was that again? nate N8N wrote: <brevity snip/appended> > > IME by remaining at the speed limit it wasn't possible to safely change > > lanes to avoid a slow merger. Sometimes it isn't. > > Either had to suck it up behind them or > > hope that by holding course and speed they would end up merging behind. Hope? I think I'd just slow and let them in before resorting to hope. > Exactly. That was the point I was trying to lead our favorite troll > to. > > Oh, wait, which troll was that again? You mean me?! BuhWaHahaha... trolling the troll... "I find that trying to cruise at the SL in the right lane is pointless because you still end up having to change out occasionally because of slow mergers." No, you don't. "They eventually get up to speed and pass you again, but if you do NOT change out of the right lane you won't be able to maintain the SL." And... ...? How much difference could slowing for a few seconds make? All drivers have to slow for slower drivers, even me. That's a normal part of driving. Forwarding the ideas that one doesn't normally have to slow in normal highway traffic, but shouldn't have to, is pretty kooky... and IMO reveals neither one of you kooks actually know much about driving, you just think you do. ----- - gpsman > N8N wrote: <brevity snip/appended> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Hope? I think I'd just slow and let them in before resorting to hope. Well, that's because you're not a good driver. > > Exactly. That was the point I was trying to lead our favorite troll > > to. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > No, you don't. If you want to maintain the speed limit or close to it, you do. > "They eventually get up to speed and pass you again, but if you do NOT > change out of the right lane you won't be able to maintain the SL." > > And... ...? > > How much difference could slowing for a few seconds make? It's not "slowing for a few seconds." It's slowing to 40 MPH or so every single exit. If there's an exit every half mile, that's pretty much your whole trip at 40 MPH as opposed to 55 MPH (SL) or 70 MPH (main flow of traffic.) The difference between 40 and 70, or even 55, makes a big difference in travel time. not to mention that I'm a "claustrophobic" driver, I don't like being trapped in a lane, I prefer to keep my options open. > All drivers have to slow for slower drivers, even me. That's a normal > part of driving. Forwarding the ideas that one doesn't normally have > to slow in normal highway traffic, but shouldn't have to, is pretty > kooky... and IMO reveals neither one of you kooks actually know much > about driving, you just think you do. In an ideal world, only the very fastest drivers would actually have to slow for other traffic, and even then only when traffic was heavy enough for the passing lane to already be legally in use. nate "N8N" <njnagel@hotmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving: >Even though nobody actually *cruises* at the SL here, I find that >trying to cruise at the SL in the right lane is pointless because you >still end up having to change out occasionally because of slow mergers. You don't HAVE to change lanes - you could slow down to 40 MPH and just let 'em do it. > They eventually get up to speed and pass you again Not always. The other day I was stuck behind an elderly asian male driver who merged into 75 MPH freeway traffic at 40 MPH. I was pinned down in the right lane behind him briefly due to heavy (and much faster) traffic in the lanes to my left, and his speed never went above 40 MPH during the minute or so that I was stuck behind him. In my rear view mirror I could see the traffic piling up behind him. Hey Bev - did you hear in the news recently about any elderly asian drivers who died in a firey rear-end collision on the westbound 210 in the Pasadena area? :)  SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! "N8N" <njnagel@hotmail.com> said to gpstroll: >So, then, you never change out of the right lane to pass slower >traffic? Didn't you see the video he posted? THERE IS NO SLOWER TRAFFIC. SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! >> > > Are these the same authorities who oppose mandatory >> > > advanced driver training, because they believe it might [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > So you just patiently sit behind the idiot doing 53 MPH in the passing > lane until rush hour ends? Nate, you have it wrong, he is the idiot doing 53 MPH in the passing lane. > I see some authorities are trying to make stability control or > traction control systems mandatory. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > And the same crowd who deliberately make country > roads curved in order to reduce speeds? LOL. I hope they never straighten out all the back roads, I'll be bored as hell! nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel > LOL. I hope they never straighten out all the back roads, I'll be bored > as hell! > > nate Not to mention, straight roads flatten out motorcycle tires, and that sucks |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.