 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / April 2008If you don't always use your turn signals...
...there's no way you can call yourself a good driver. True or False? TRUE. TRUE. TRUE. TRUE. Along with this, add ANYTHING that doesn't help in keeping the traffic flowing smoothly, confuses other drivers in any way and basically everything else that falls into the ever-growing MFFY category. And none of this "But what if I'm on a deserted country road and I'm taking a left - do I need to use my turn signal if no one is around?" If you even need to ASK that, you're disqualified. In that case, I'll use the directional simply by habit --- the way it SHOULD be. And who knows - there may be some twisted cow nearby that totally gets INTO flashing lights. Hell, I just made his day! Anyway, being a good driver isn't simply how well you can physically operate a vehicle. Discuss?... John B. >Discuss?... I've signaled emergency lane changes... it's that much of a habbit. I've also had the wire to windshield washer button in the multi-function switch break twice now from fatigue caused by using the turn signal lever. This time I made the solder for the new segment of wire a good ways down the stalk of the turn signal lever so none of the old wire is even close to the bending area. Also did one of the windshield wiper switch wires as the insulation was cracked at it would probably break soon. Why don't I buy a new switch? Because I don't want some cheap replacement and I don't want to pay dealer prices ;) Now if only junk yards would stop sequestering SN95 mustangs in the full-serve areas... On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <1206644669.267...@nfs-db1.segnet.com>, John B. wrote: > >Discuss?... > > I've signaled emergency lane changes... it's that much of a habbit. Me too. Gets quite the reaction from the passengers. Here's a spin on the question though - say one of your signals is broken. Of course, you'll fix it, but not right away. I need to get to a yard and get a new assembly, and/or look into some proper lighting for the beast. I figure I'll be driving my truck with a broken front driver side signal for a week or so. In that case, do you signal left turns? My concerns are: 1) It'll call attention to the broken lamp assembly, since it'll be white instead of yellow, and as such may give the cops a reason to stop me and write me a ticket. Not signaling is so common it'll probably fly under the radar. 2) Could the flashing pulse of electricity sent to the bulb now that it's unprotected (broken lense/cover) cause me other electrical issues? What if it's wet out? Raining? I also considered that semi-transparent tape people use to patch up broken lights, but that stuff is a little too ghetto. I'd rather just run it broken until I get the parts and time to fix it. >On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >broken front driver side signal for a week or so. In that case, do >you signal left turns? My concerns are: Been there... when that teenager turned left a few feet in front of me resulting in the destruction of my car's right headlamp and right front turnsignal I went through my parts on hand... I put the original passenger headlamp on (I saved it after had replacing the the headlamps with '98 cobra knock offs) and then I found a spare maverick front turn signal lamp I had laying around. Sure enough ford had not changed how the bulb holders locked into the lamps in the years between the lamps. The '97 mustang's bulb holder fit right into the 1975 lamp. I found a bulb laying around to replace the broken one. I had a headlamp and a turn signal. Sure it didn't look great but it was functional. In the rear I've just swaped bulbs around for short term operation. Or in the case on the mustang long term. All 6 bulbs are the same, but only 4 use the turnsignal/brake filment. When the turn signal one burned out on one of them I just swaped it to the position that didn't use it. On Mar 27, 3:33 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > broken lights, but that stuff is a little too ghetto. I'd rather just > run it broken until I get the parts and time to fix it. why not just temporarily replace the bulb with the NA version so it's less conspicuous? nate > On Mar 27, 3:33 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > - Show quoted text - NA - normally amber? Sodium? Total shot in the dark, but not sure what else you could mean. If so, that could be a good idea. I'm still worried about damage from water against the bulb and plug while they're exposed and turned on. I'm a mechanical CAD guy that can draw electricals, but this is a little out of my experience set. Am I being concerned about nothing? Maybe an amber bulb and some clear tape for now, and just allow the hack factor to encourage me to replace the real repair. Funny, where it's a "toy truck" that I bought more for play than anything, the dent in the bed and the crease by the light don't bother me at all. "Tree and rock shaped body modifications", so to speak. However, broken plastic/glass and exposed wires rub me the wrong way in a big way. I'll have to look into aftermarket ranger lights. I was going to get a bull bar and KC lights for wheeling, but if I can get a set of good lights for the road and woods and simple covers that may be worth exploring. Problem is those brush guards don't protect the radiator and front diff. like a bull bar. >>On Mar 27, 3:33 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > exploring. Problem is those brush guards don't protect the radiator > and front diff. like a bull bar. NA = Natural Amber. As in, if the bulb in there now is a 1034, the same bulb with an amber coating is a 1034NA. If you're worried about corrosion, Sil-Glyde is my goo of choice for bulb sockets. I use the stuff like I use hot sauce on my omelettes. I use it even if the light assembly is in perfect shape; of course most of my cars are decades old and have steel light sockets... nate  Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > DanK...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Thanks. Stuff is like dielectric grease I assume? I'll grab a bulb and a tube of that stuff tomorrow, I don't plan to drive the truck again until the weekend anyway. >>DanK...@gmail.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 75 lines] > and a tube of that stuff tomorrow, I don't plan to drive the truck > again until the weekend anyway. I'm pretty sure that the stuff *is* exactly the same as dielectric grease, but instead of paying $5 for a single serving tube you pay $10 for one that is simply small and will last you a couple years. I also like using it on silicone spark plug wires and boots, and to wipe down weatherstrips in the fall so they don't freeze shut over the winter. I've only found it at my independent FLAPS though, not at Advance, Crap Boys, etc. White lithium would probably also work for your app. but I always have some Sil-Glyde in my toolbox because it's so goshdarn useful. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Me too. Gets quite the reaction from the passengers. LOL. The last emergency lane change I did I didn't have time to signal, but otherwise I'm strict about it. The only exception is driving my Camaro, signaling in traffic circles can be a bit confusing with the DRLs. > Here's a spin on the question though - say one of your signals is > broken. Of course, you'll fix it, but not right away. I need to get [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > it's unprotected (broken lense/cover) cause me other electrical > issues? What if it's wet out? Raining? I've driven several weeks with a broken turn signal lens on my Jeep, no problem except it is much brighter than normal, and it isn't just due to the color. It also has an intermittent problem with the front left turn signal bulb not working. Fortunately the rear and side signal works, which is good enough for around town driving. My Camaro has white turn signals up front which has never drawn attention from the cops, of course, that might be because they're legal... :-) > I also considered that semi-transparent tape people use to patch up > broken lights, but that stuff is a little too ghetto. I'd rather just > run it broken until I get the parts and time to fix it. Ulf >> On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >> just run it broken until I get the parts and time to fix it. > Ulf DanKMTB should fix his broken turn signal,or at least install a working bulb,even if he has to buy a yellow bulb in addition to the normal clear bulb. Bulbs don't cost that much,and it's far better to have a WORKING turn signal. It might mean the difference between a collision and a normal day. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net >>> On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) >>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > It might mean the difference between a collision and a normal day. First, depending on jurisdiction and/or the MY of his vehicle white front turn signals may be legal. Second, having the right intensity is just as important as the color, maybe more. Third, having a non-working or defective front turn signal is not nearly as dangerous as having broken rear one. Ulf >>>> On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) >>>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >>>> stop me and write me a ticket. Not signaling is so common it'll >>>> probably fly under the radar. >>>> 2) Could the flashing pulse of electricity sent to the bulb now >>>> that it's unprotected (broken lense/cover) cause me other >>>> electrical issues? What if it's wet out? Raining? Not going to hurt it,IF you get it repaired in a timely manner. NOT driving it like that for "several weeks". >>> I've driven several weeks with a broken turn signal lens on my Jeep, >>> no problem except it is much brighter than normal, and it isn't just [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > First, depending on jurisdiction and/or the MY of his vehicle white > front turn signals may be legal. > Second, having the right intensity is > just as important as the color, maybe more. Sorry,no.Intensity of a front turn signal doesn't indicate anything different than the stock undamaged TS. I also doubt any officer is going to even bother to pull over someone with a too-bright TS bulb in a busted front TS. (Unless it's a DUI checkpoint where they look for ANY excuse to pull you over and question you.) > Third, having a > non-working or defective front turn signal is not nearly as dangerous > as having broken rear one. It STILL should work. Knowing that it doesn't and still driving deserves a ticket.The guy has driven SEVERAL WEEKS knowing the TS is dead. He's gotta put a bulb in it anyways,why not do it immediately? I was just suggesting he use a yellow bulb if he's really worried about the color. I'd be more worried that the TS DIDN'T WORK at all. Besides,most tickets for such things get dismissed once you show the repair was made. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > >>> DanK...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>> On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Not going to hurt it,IF you get it repaired in a timely manner. > NOT driving it like that for "several weeks". Where did "several weeks" come from? Even if I intended to leave it damaged for "several weeks" (something I have no intention of doing) the chances are still decent it will see less road time than many other cars do in one normal work week. This is an occasional use vehicle, as I normally carpool and ride. It's the beater pickup, the one I romp with in the woods and use to haul myself and my toys. > >>> I've driven several weeks with a broken turn signal lens on my Jeep, > >>> no problem except it is much brighter than normal, and it isn't just [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > (Unless it's a DUI checkpoint where they look for ANY excuse to pull you > over and question you.) Or unless you're passing through a small town late at night, not something uncommon for me. > > Third, having a > > non-working or defective front turn signal is not nearly as dangerous [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Knowing that it doesn't and still driving deserves a ticket.The guy has > driven SEVERAL WEEKS knowing the TS is dead. Who are you talking about? My TS is not dead, the plastic lens cover is merely broken. The light itself still works fine. Also, it's been broken less than a week and will likely be repaired today. In fact, it's been driven... wait for it... once since the lens cover broke. > He's gotta put a bulb in it anyways,why not do it immediately? > I was just suggesting he use a yellow bulb if he's really worried about the > color. I don't need a bulb anyway, I need a lens cover anyway. If I can't find a decent unit at a boneyard and I have to wait for something mail order to arrive I will put an amber bulb in while I wait for my new lens. > I'd be more worried that the TS DIDN'T WORK at all. Who and what vehicle are you talking about? > Besides,most tickets for such things get dismissed once you show the repair > was made. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > - Show quoted text - On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <1206644669.267...@nfs-db1.segnet.com>, John B. wrote: > >Discuss?... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > replacement and I don't want to pay dealer prices ;) Now if only junk > yards would stop sequestering SN95 mustangs in the full-serve areas... next time you patch it up, use the wire from some old Fluke leads. nate >On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >next time you patch it up, use the wire from some old Fluke leads. too thick. but I did think about it as I scrounged for wire. On Mar 27, 11:23 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <1206644669.267...@nfs-db1.segnet.com>, John B. wrote: > >Discuss?... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > replacement and I don't want to pay dealer prices ;) Now if only junk > yards would stop sequestering SN95 mustangs in the full-serve areas... If you have the full lamp current going through that switch (Early Civic for example) install a relay under the hood with the juice from the arm switch being just a signal current to it.) >On Mar 27, 11:23 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Civic for example) install a relay under the hood with the juice from >the arm switch being just a signal current to it.) It's mechanical fatigue that's doing it, not current. the wires are such a small gage it must be using a relay. I didn't bother checking the wiring diagrams. It's one of those parts where I have to take a lot apart just to get it out of the car and then it's got cams and springs etc inside it when I take it apart. Once I got it all back together I was testing each function with the multimeter I found the hazard switch wasn't working (it had did an intermittent thing a while back) so I had to open all back up and lightly sand all the contacts and put some fresh dielectric (sp?) grease on them. Works well so far. On Mar 27, 1:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <1206644669.267...@nfs-db1.segnet.com>, John B. wrote: > >Discuss?... > > I've signaled emergency lane changes... it's that much of a habbit. I have signaled to go through Turns Five and Twelve at Road America - while braking from 120-something to 40-something. Purely out of habit. OTOH, anyone who wants to question my *conscious decision* not to signal for the benefit of some cows in the middle of Iowa can kiss my striped a.s ... -- C.R. Krieger > On Mar 27, 1:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > -- > C.R. Krieger What's the penality with SCCA for havng a "cheater" system on your brake lights? On Mar 27, 3:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <1206644669.267...@nfs-db1.segnet.com>, John B. wrote: > >Discuss?... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > replacement and I don't want to pay dealer prices ;) Now if only junk > yards would stop sequestering SN95 mustangs in the full-serve areas... _________________ If you are making a rolling turn(not sitting at no-turn-on-red light intersection) you don't have to fully engage >click!< the signal lever for the signal to register. Just hold it before and up to 1/2way through the turn, then let go. And no - I'm a stickler for turn-sig usage, and people who sloowww down in front of me and suddenly turn off drive me KOOKOO! - but if it's the dead of night and nobody's around for miles, I don't always signal a turn into my own driveway or onto a side road familiar to me. That said, I've had to, on occasion, blare my horn at a vehicle that was just sitting in the roadway, going nowhere. The driver middle- fingered me in my r.v. mirror as I drove away, then gestured in the direction he was turning! I could almost read his lips: "I'm turning here, dumbass!".(Who's the dumbass here?) :) Heck, his hands had no cell phone, so how difficult could it have been to flick a lever 2" from his steeringwheel?! Another time I met a stationary driver facing the opposite direction - I put on my left blinker to demo what he should be doing, but as I drove past, I saw that his rear left was blinking - rapidly! Musta' had a blown bulb up front & left. -CC On Mar 27, 12:23 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <1206644669.267...@nfs-db1.segnet.com>, John B. wrote: > >Discuss?... > > I've signaled emergency lane changes... it's that much of a habbit. As you didn't have time to look arorund, that was better than not indicating. With a good chance of you being in danger, well done! > ...there's no way you can call yourself a good driver. > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > John B. I wouldn't fault someone for not using signals when there's literally nobody around. That said, I agree with you that the question isn't worth asking, because using them out of habit is far easier than putting any thought into the issue, and that way you know you're safe. nate > I wouldn't fault someone for not using signals when there's literally > nobody around. If you don't use them without thinking about it, you're not much of a driver. Signaling, and doing so properly, is as much a part of driving as steering. > That said, I agree with you that the question isn't > worth asking, because using them out of habit is far easier than > putting any thought into the issue, and that way you know you're safe. I don't know about the "safe" part, but most often when I see signals used the driver seems to think they assist in the turning movement. ----- - gpsman > > I wouldn't fault someone for not using signals when there's literally > > nobody around. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > - gpsman If you always look around to see if there are any other drivers or walkers about and find none, then I have no objection to you signaling or not doing so, even though it is pointless. > ...there's no way you can call yourself a good driver. > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > John B. I'll follow the British rule: "Indicate turns and lane changes if there is another road-user who can benefit from the information." In other words, LOOK AROUND! Don't just signal blindly. That's why just one reason why they are better drivers there. (I just assumed that the occasional arsehole I saw was a visitor.) >I'll follow the British rule: "Indicate turns and lane changes if >there is another road-user who can benefit from the information." > >In other words, LOOK AROUND! Don't just signal blindly. What possible harm could come from using your turn signal when there is nobody around to see it? AFAICT, there is NO real downside. Here's the rule I use: ALWAYS use your turn signal. It costs you nothing, it spares you a few CPU cycles trying to decide whether you need to use it or not in any given situation, and it just might save your a.s from that cop who was hiding in the bushes and who is low on his ticket quota for the month. Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > >I'll follow the British rule: "Indicate turns and lane changes if > >there is another road-user who can benefit from the information." [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > your a.s from that cop who was hiding in the bushes and who is low on > his ticket quota for the month. Yes. As there's NO shortage of driving decisions to be made, using your turn signal automatically makes it one less. OK, so the bulb or flasher may burn out earlier. Small price to pay for that little extra time to concentrate on OTHER things. John B. > > >I'll follow the British rule: "Indicate turns and lane changes if > > >there is another road-user who can benefit from the information." [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > - Show quoted text - The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get drivers to actually look around for hazards. Technically, there are reasons NOT to use signals when not needed, as thechnially-mindwed people already know and the no-need-to-look people wouldn't understand. BTW, I check all my lights are regular intervals - it's a one-man job that takes just a minute or two and includes brake light and reversing lights. >The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get >drivers to actually look around for hazards. Someone that may benefit from a signal may not be a hazard. For instance, I like to plan out what I am going to do steps in advance. signals used by other drivers greatly help this sort of thing. However many of that signaling could be determined as not needed to prevent a collision, but it is needed for smoother traffic flow. >Technically, there are reasons NOT to use signals when not needed, as >thechnially-mindwed people already know and the no-need-to-look people >wouldn't understand. The only reason I can think of not to use a turn signal is to intentionally keep other drivers unaware of your planned move to get the upper hand in a MFFY way. Using a turn signal does not replace looking. A sub-set of the optional singaling group are those who feel the signal means other drivers need to make way for them. On Mar 28, 1:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > The only reason I can think of not to use a turn signal is to > intentionally keep other drivers unaware of your planned move to get the > upper hand in a MFFY way. But, you said: "I've signaled emergency lane changes... it's that much of a habbit." Sounds like it's not really that much of a "habbit". > A sub-set of the optional > singaling group are those who feel the signal means other drivers need > to make way for them. Heh. If you're not leaving enough space, you do need to make way. I know, I know, "but they want to get in front of me" and/or "will force me to tailgate!" ----- - gpsman > On Mar 28, 1:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Heh. If you're not leaving enough space, you do need to make way. Spurious conclusion. Where did he say there wasn't enough space? Let me guess - you have NEVER had some 'tard come down an on-ramp, pace you to your right, then flip on their signal expecting you to somehow yield to them? Never? Or, if you are in bumper to bumper traffic, someone who is in an adjacent lane signals a lane change while everyone is essentially at a standstill, expecting you to remain stationary while they occupy some space to your front? (IOW, you yield to them.) They make it known at some later time, via hand or horn signalling that they expected you to yield to them - which is how it is separated from plain incompetance about not finding a suitable merge gap. These things have never happened to you, huh? I question whether you actually have any the driving experience you claim to. Maybe you could clear up how you've never once experienced such a thing on the highways, after all those hundreds of thousands of driving miles... E.P. > > On Mar 28, 1:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Spurious conclusion. Where did he say there wasn't enough space? Well, he didn't, but why else would he need to make way? > Let me guess - you have NEVER had some 'tard come down an on-ramp, > pace you to your right, then flip on their signal expecting you to > somehow yield to them? > > Never? Lots of times, when I drove like a dumbass. Now, I don't let them pace me, usually by identifying the potential conflict early enough to easily avoid it. And there's always plenty of room to my front... for anyone who wants it. And if they should deem it insufficient, it doesn't bother me one bit to make even more. Whatever it takes to operate legally and safely seems to me to be in my best interest. > Or, if you are in bumper to bumper traffic, someone who is in an > adjacent lane signals a lane change while everyone is essentially at a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > yield to them - which is how it is separated from plain incompetance > about not finding a suitable merge gap. Never found yourself on the other side of those (relatively "special" or irrelevant) circumstances, with all your driving experience? Never been in the "wrong" lane, say, for a lane closure? Better drivers make allowances for drivers who are lesser equipped, and don't take their demonstrations of poor driving or breeding personally. There's no payoff in allowing other drivers to affect your emotional stability, and I think it's usually detrimental. > These things have never happened to you, huh? I question whether you > actually have any the driving experience you claim to. Maybe you > could clear up how you've never once experienced such a thing on the > highways, after all those hundreds of thousands of driving miles... Eh... spurious conclusion, based on false assumptions. ----- - gpsman > > > On Mar 28, 1:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) > > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Well, he didn't, but why else would he need to make way? Because some folks mistakenly think that a turn signal gives them the ROW? > > Let me guess - you have NEVER had some 'tard come down an on-ramp, > > pace you to your right, then flip on their signal expecting you to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Lots of times, when I drove like a dumbass. Wait a minute - *you* driving like a dumbass *caused* their behavior? That's a good one! > Now, I don't let them > pace me, usually by identifying the potential conflict early enough to > easily avoid it. You say that like you you only have one thing to pay attention to when you drive. I'm not buying what you're trying to sell, here. > And there's always plenty of room to my front... for anyone who wants > it. And if they should deem it insufficient, it doesn't bother me one > bit to make even more. Whatever it takes to operate legally and > safely seems to me to be in my best interest. So, even though you have the ROW, you yield to anyone who flips on a signal? No wonder folks are confused about what a turn signal means. Too many asshats like yourself condition them to think that a turn signal means "Make way for me!!!" > > Or, if you are in bumper to bumper traffic, someone who is in an > > adjacent lane signals a lane change while everyone is essentially at a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Never found yourself on the other side of those (relatively "special" > or irrelevant) circumstances, with all your driving experience? Special? You've never driven anywhere with bumper-to-bumper traffic??? Wow. Dude, you haven't driven, unless you've had to navigate big-city traffic. It's a real eye-opener. Try it sometime, and get back to me. > Never been in the "wrong" lane, say, for a lane closure? Sure. But I don't just flip on my signal and start moving like the Red Sea is going to part on my say-so. I figure out a way to fix my mistake without ASSuming ROW where I have none. > Better drivers make allowances for drivers who are lesser equipped, > and don't take their demonstrations of poor driving or breeding > personally. Non sequitur. > There's no payoff in allowing other drivers to affect your emotional > stability, and I think it's usually detrimental. Non sequitur. > > These things have never happened to you, huh? I question whether you > > actually have any the driving experience you claim to. Maybe you > > could clear up how you've never once experienced such a thing on the > > highways, after all those hundreds of thousands of driving miles... > > Eh... spurious conclusion, based on false assumptions. You seem to think very heavy traffic is somehow a "special" condition. Let me tell you something - the conditions I describe and the actions I've discussed will happen to you several times per day if you live and commute in a big city. Let's say Seattle. Or San Diego. Not so much in Portland, OR - but it does happen there. I only make judgements based on what you write. And what you write shows me you don't have nearly the experience you pretend to have on the internet. E.P. > > > > On Mar 28, 1:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) > > > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Because some folks mistakenly think that a turn signal gives them the > ROW? Well, what are the choices in that case, and which is in your best interest? > > > Let me guess - you have NEVER had some 'tard come down an on-ramp, > > > pace you to your right, then flip on their signal expecting you to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Wait a minute - *you* driving like a dumbass *caused* their > behavior? That's a good one! You can misinterpret better than that, I've seen you do it. > > Now, I don't let them > > pace me, usually by identifying the potential conflict early enough to > > easily avoid it. > > You say that like you you only have one thing to pay attention to when > you drive. Well, one of them is on-ramp traffic, since I spend so much time in the R lane. > I'm not buying what you're trying to sell, here. Well, you can't beat the price. > > And there's always plenty of room to my front... for anyone who wants > > it. And if they should deem it insufficient, it doesn't bother me one [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > So, even though you have the ROW, you yield to anyone who flips on a > signal? Usually, not always. > No wonder folks are confused about what a turn signal means. Too many > asshats like yourself condition them to think that a turn signal means > "Make way for me!!!" (Wait a minute - *my* driving *causes* their behavior? That's a good one! Usually it's best not to use the same argument you've ridiculed in the same post.) Well, that's your interpretation. I see a signal as a request, although I do prefer they don't flash it as they make their move. But if they do, it's no sweat off my a.s. > > > Or, if you are in bumper to bumper traffic, someone who is in an > > > adjacent lane signals a lane change while everyone is essentially at a [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Try it sometime, and get back to me. Heh. I've driven most of them in 48 states, in a truck. > > Never been in the "wrong" lane, say, for a lane closure? > > Sure. But I don't just flip on my signal and start moving like the > Red Sea is going to part on my say-so. I figure out a way to fix my > mistake without ASSuming ROW where I have none. Well, you seem to have felt a need, Nate-style, to add circumstances not included in the original post: bumper to bumper traffic, while everyone is essentially at a standstill. That's why I considered them "special" or irrelevant.* > > Better drivers make allowances for drivers who are lesser equipped, > > and don't take their demonstrations of poor driving or breeding > > personally. > > Non sequitur. Where did I lose you? > > There's no payoff in allowing other drivers to affect your emotional > > stability, and I think it's usually detrimental. > > Non sequitur. Where did I lose you? > > > These things have never happened to you, huh? I question whether you > > > actually have any the driving experience you claim to. Maybe you [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > you live and commute in a big city. Let's say Seattle. Or San > Diego. Not so much in Portland, OR - but it does happen there. *See above. (That reminds me, I have an unpaid parking ticket in Portland, and I hope they're holding their breath.) Yeah, when that I-5 bridge over the Columbia goes up for 30 minutes at rush hour it does tend to back traffic up a tad, but you haven't really driven in the worst traffic until you've driven in The Bay area (or NYC) during rush hour. SLC, the traffic isn't so bad, but the drivers are especially stupid. I think you'd like it there. > I only make judgements based on what you write. And what you write > shows me you don't have nearly the experience you pretend to have on > the internet. Well, I don't have any problems negotiating traffic, and I never had any in a truck, so I must know something you don't. Hell, I've even told you, and you still don't know it. Maybe it is you who, if not lesser experienced, hasn't learned much from it? I know from my own that if you hit the highway looking for adversaries, you're going to find plenty, and if you don't look for them, they aren't nearly as plentiful... except maybe in Salt Lake. Those f.ckers are vicious. ----- - gpsman > > > > > On Mar 28, 1:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) > > > > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Well, what are the choices in that case, and which is in your best > interest? It would be in my best interest to have everyone obey the same ROW rules. Not have some folks make up their own as they go along. It makes *my* driving task more predictable. Which makes it easier, and allows me to pay more attention to those things that could really put me in a world of hurt. > > > > Let me guess - you have NEVER had some 'tard come down an on-ramp, > > > > pace you to your right, then flip on their signal expecting you to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You can misinterpret better than that, I've seen you do it. Your reply to my original question said explicitly that somehow the other drivers' behavior was different when you "drove like a dumbass". This implies a causal relationship. Now, if that's not what you meant, maybe you should clarify, yes? > > > Now, I don't let them > > > pace me, usually by identifying the potential conflict early enough to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Well, one of them is on-ramp traffic, since I spend so much time in > the R lane. In the Real World, where the rest of us drive, we often have more than one thing to pay attention to. Having someone making up ROW conventions on-the-fly is not conducive to health or sheetmetal integrity. > > I'm not buying what you're trying to sell, here. > > Well, you can't beat the price. Oh, I'm sure it's almost worth every penny of the price I would have paid, too. > > > And there's always plenty of room to my front... for anyone who wants > > > it. And if they should deem it insufficient, it doesn't bother me one [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Usually, not always. So, you *are* conditioning folks to invent their own ROW rules, huh? > > No wonder folks are confused about what a turn signal means. Too many > > asshats like yourself condition them to think that a turn signal means [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > one! Usually it's best not to use the same argument you've ridiculed > in the same post.) Uh, no. But that's some nice spin. Here's some reading for you... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning Now, if you don't like the source, you can look it up in a textbook - the wiki entry is close enough for our discussion here. > > > > Or, if you are in bumper to bumper traffic, someone who is in an > > > > adjacent lane signals a lane change while everyone is essentially at a [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Heh. I've driven most of them in 48 states, in a truck. Let's just say I'm becoming more and more dubious about that claim. > > > Never been in the "wrong" lane, say, for a lane closure? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > not included in the original post: bumper to bumper traffic, while > everyone is essentially at a standstill. I am using the conditions the OP sees on a day-to-day basis. The wide- open Montana I-90 scenario is the "special condition" to most drivers, when it comes right down to it. If you do the demographics on where most people live, that is. Want to try and dismiss the conditions again? LOL. > > > Better drivers make allowances for drivers who are lesser equipped, > > > and don't take their demonstrations of poor driving or breeding [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Where did I lose you? You didn't. What you wrote "doesn't follow" from that to which you are relying. > > > There's no payoff in allowing other drivers to affect your emotional > > > stability, and I think it's usually detrimental. > > > Non sequitur. > > Where did I lose you? You didn't. See above. > > > > These things have never happened to you, huh? I question whether you > > > > actually have any the driving experience you claim to. Maybe you [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > *See above. Ditto. Just because you wish to ignore reality doesn't mean that it ceases to exist in those places where signalling with the expectation of ROW yield happens all the time. Which is the original condition discussed, that I responded to. Trying to change the conditions, "Nate-like", in the middle of the discussion, huh? LOL. > ... until you've driven in The Bay area > (or NYC) during rush hour... SLC, the traffic... I don't believe you've driven in anything heavier than Spokane/Coeur d'Alene traffic. > > I only make judgements based on what you write. And what you write > > shows me you don't have nearly the experience you pretend to have on > > the internet. > > Well, I don't have any problems negotiating traffic... I believe that. If you drive in mostly rural MT/ID/WA, the traffic isn't enough to worry about. Drive on the West Side of WA sometime. Do it at rush hour twice a day for ten years like I did. You'll get the picture in a hurry. I imagine that Chicago is worse - the last time I was there, I was only 20 years old. That was decades ago. > Maybe it is you who, if not lesser experienced, hasn't learned much > from it? LOL@U for describing anyone else's "learning". E.P. On Mar 28, 1:01 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <59718218-b594-4b24-9998-5c60523be...@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Studemania wrote: > >The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > singaling group are those who feel the signal means other drivers need > to make way for them. ___________ Stupid ?? of 2008: What does MFFY stand for? sorry, had to axe.. >Stupid ?? of 2008: What does MFFY stand for? http://www.geocities.com/scottenaztlan/mffy.html Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:39:48 -0700 (PDT), ChrisCoaster > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "Dave's not here, man!" > - Tommy Chong ____________ Thank you! How sweet. :D -CC On Mar 28, 9:01 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <59718218-b594-4b24-9998-5c60523be...@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Studemania wrote: > >The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > singaling group are those who feel the signal means other drivers need > to make way for them. If I saw other drivers or pedestrians around that might gain from knowing my intentions, I would signal. Read what I said again. Road users is the way the rule is written. That aplies to drivers and walkers who are planning to cross. You seem to have little technical knowledge concerning elctro- mechanical devices, so won't bother explaining why not making unneeded signals is sometimes a good idea. Of course, if you are a mechanic, you would want peop-le top signal all the time and flash their headlamps and wind their windows up and down, too. >On Mar 28, 9:01 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >If I saw other drivers or pedestrians around that might gain from >knowing my intentions, I would signal. Do you have mind reading powers that tell you if they would benefit or not? You can't tell what they are planning. What's the big deal with using a signal every time anyway? > Read what I said again. Road >users is the way the rule is written. That aplies to drivers and >walkers who are planning to cross. >You seem to have little technical knowledge concerning elctro- >mechanical devices, Bullshit. I spent six years developing consumer electonics and have done quite a bit of eletro-mechanical design work since then too. > so won't bother explaining why not making unneeded >signals is sometimes a good idea. Of course, if you are a mechanic, >you would want peop-le top signal all the time and flash their >headlamps and wind their windows up and down, too. It's not going to wear out earlier unless it was shitty design to begin with. If it's a shitty design you'll want to replace it with a better aftermarket one anyway. Seriously, you are spending all this time and effort to save a few dozen cycles off something that should last several hundred thousand or millions of cycles. At best you'll get it to fail on tuesday instead of monday. If you're so scared of putting some cycles on the things like light bulbs and turn signal levers you shouldn't even start your car. At idle alone you are wearing the parts to the tune of several hundred cycles per minute! On Mar 29, 1:14 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <53002cf3-6a01-4511-9c9c-9fd6bcaf5...@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, Studemania wrote: > >On Mar 28, 9:01 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I mentioned this in order to get drivers to look around instead of just flipping a lever and thinking that is all they need do. Can you honestly say that you have never seen some driver doing something dangerous and/or stupid yet signaling? Given the choice of the cars around you signaling with out looking or signaling only when there is someone would can use the info, which do you want? >I mentioned this in order to get drivers to look around instead of >just flipping a lever and thinking that is all they need do. Can you >honestly say that you have never seen some driver doing something >dangerous and/or stupid yet signaling? What a ridiculous argument. You assert a cause-and-effect correlation between signalling and situational awareness. One has nothing whatsoever to do with the other, yet the crux of your argument is that if one uses a turn signal that inevitably makes them less situationally aware, and that failure to signal magically makes them see everything that's going on around them. If anything, common sense suggests a correlation opposite to the one you assert, to wit: a person who is too lazy and/or careless to use a turn signal is more likely to also be to lazy/careless to pay attention to what's going on around him. Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:06:10 -0700 (PDT), Studemania > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > "Dave's not here, man!" > - Tommy Chong Theory is nice. You must also think that everyone who sets their parking brake does it with enough force to actually hold the car. >> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:06:10 -0700 (PDT), Studemania >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Theory is nice. Sure is - and you have yet to prove yours (or even provide a shred of evidence to back it up). Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:55:11 -0700 (PDT), Studemania > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Just back from a trip. One reason was the obvious: unnecessary wear and tear with no technical or safety gain. To be honest, I can't remember the other technical one, but will toss in a safety one. Should I indicate a turn into what torns out the be the wrong turn and continue straight ahead, a car wantuing to ener the road may be in a collision when I, stupidly continuing, run into him. In response to my answering just one part, I will be content if you tell me how you (alone - as stated) check your stop lights during your solitary "five second check of all lights." Two main beams Four or more) sidelights Two dipped beams (not counting interior repeater) Four/six turn indicators " " " Two (or more) stop lamps One or more lamps lighting registration plate Reversing lamp(s) Here's a thought: Just after a side street on the right meets with the divided road I'm using, there is a store where I want to get something. My intention is to drive past the street and turn a few feet beyond and park in front of the store. Do I signal or not? >One reason was the obvious: unnecessary wear and tear with no >technical or safety gain. So tell me, what is the design lifetime of a turn signal stalk? In other words, how many times can you use it before it will fail? I use my turn signals every time and I've never had the stalk fail on me. >Should I indicate a turn >into what torns out the be the wrong turn and continue straight ahead, >a car wantuing to ener the road may be in a collision when I, stupidly >continuing, run into him. So in other words, you don't want to use your turn signals in order to cover up for other mistakes you might make? Weak. REAL weak. >Just after a side street on the right meets with the divided road I'm >using, there is a store where I want to get something. >My intention is to drive past the street and turn a few feet beyond >and park in front of the store. >Do I signal or not? Yes - *after* you cross the street so as to resolve any ambiguity. Really, it's all very simple and common-sensical. Maybe if you spent less time looking for excuses NOT to signal and instead put some of that effort into finding real solutions, your objections would disappear. Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 18:03:48 -0700 (PDT), Studemania > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > "Dave's not here, man!" > - Tommy Chong I was looking for that method of checking al lights in juast a few seconds, but that poster seems to be otherwise engaged. The most I have driven one car was 240K miles, When I got back to the state eight years later, I went to the DMV to see if it was still on the road, but no luck. There is no laziness in NOT signaling. Lazy is not looking around properly to see what's happening. Having done so and finding no sign of danger, there's no reason to signal. (See why the safety boffins in Britian wrote that into the rules?) If you still don't understand, perhaps someone at school/work can help you. > >Just after a side street on the right meets with the divided road I'm > >using, there is a store where I want to get something. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Yes - *after* you cross the street so as to resolve any ambiguity. Full agreement on this - messy one time someone followed the rule. > Really, it's all very simple and common-sensical. Maybe if you spent > less time looking for excuses NOT to signal Wow, you've been missing the point all along. I'm looking for a physical / safety reason why I SHOULD signal. Life would be much easier, if less safe, if I just blindly signaled. Drive in GB, or ask a Brit who has moved here. Then you'll know which nation has the safer drivers. There's a question for you UK residents at the bottom of this post. >> >Just after a side street on the right meets with the divided road I'm >> >using, there is a store where I want to get something. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Wow, you've been missing the point all along. I must have. I could have sworn you were the one who wants to make a choice every time whether to signal or not, as opposed to just using the signal every time you turn or change lanes. >I'm looking for a physical / safety reason why I SHOULD signal. >Life would be much easier, if less safe, if I just blindly signaled. So don't signal blindly, signal intelligently - every time. >Drive in GB, or ask a Brit who has moved here. Then you'll know which >nation has the safer drivers. Yes, let's ask them if they use their turn signals selectively, as you advocate, or whether they signal every time, like the rest of us are suggesting. UK drivers: any comment? Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > There's a question for you UK residents at the bottom of this post. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >> > >> Yes - *after* you cross the street so as to resolve any ambiguity. That's what I would do too. > >Full agreement on this - messy one time someone followed the rule. > > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > UK drivers: any comment? Well ..... unlike a few sloppy drivers you see here I use my turn signal at every junction and I'd say the vast majority of UK drivers do most of the time. As for signalling when lane changing, the IAM (Institute of Advanced Motorists) used to have the advice that you don't need to signal when there's no-one there to see it. However that does beg the question whether you need to change lane if there's no-one else around ! I suppose you would where a road forks for example, so the answer to that is that if there's no other traffic in sight ahead or behind then I probably wouldn't bother signalling in that situation. Graham > Wow, you've been missing the point all along. I'm looking for a > physical / safety reason why I SHOULD signal. Using the turn signals indicates to any traffic in front of and behind you what you're doing and where your lane is going. It's scary sometimes to be coming down the street and notice a stopped car on the other side of the intersection when the signal is green and the driver isn't signalling a turn. It suggests that something is wrong with the traffic signals or there is some other hazard that I can't see. Signalling turns and lane changes enables other drivers to anticipate the changes in car positions and the location of the turn-lanes. I rely on seeing those amber flashes when scanning the road for problems and determining an efficient travel speed. I'm not sure how they pass an inspection, but I've seen some cars that have their front turn signals on constantly. There are other cars that have red rear turn signals or even turn signals that are combined with the brake lamps. They are very confusing. Failure to use turn signals also affects pedestrians and bicyclists, who may not assume that the no-signal driver approaching is suddenly going to turn into them as they are starting to cross the street. > > Wow, you've been missing the point all along. I'm looking for a > > physical / safety reason why I SHOULD signal. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > may not assume that the no-signal driver approaching is suddenly going > to turn into them as they are starting to cross the street. You did a good job of ilustrating "another road-user wh could benefit from the information." Therefore, that's why I woud be signaling. Well done - good illustration. COme up with some more like that and you will see me blinking away.. > > >Just after a side street on the right meets with the divided road I'm > > >using, there is a store where I want to get something. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Drive in GB, or ask a Brit who has moved here. Then you'll know which > nation has the safer drivers. I haven't read back into the old posts and you may have answered it but it isn't in the current ones. You are asking for people to give reasons _for_ signalling which have been answered. Now: What is a good reason for _not_ signalling? Assuming there is noone to see your signal, just what harm or labor does it cost you to signal as a matter of habit? Does it take extra time? Extra concentration? Distracts you from other driving tasks? Harry K >You are asking for people to give reasons _for_ signalling which have >been answered. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >signal as a matter of habit? Does it take extra time? Extra >concentration? Distracts you from other driving tasks? Message-ID: <vd2iv3l80i2tlbtahtit940prcu6fac1pa@4ax.com> Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > > > >Just after a side street on the right meets with the divided road I'm > > > >using, there is a store where I want to get something. [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Thia stems from the British law that states than turns and lane changes shall be indicated IF THERE IS ANOTHER ROAD-USER WHO COULD BENEFIT FROM HAVING THAT INFORMATION. In other words, if there are no other vehicles, bike riders, walkers and so on about, you need not signal. (I assume that this was to urge drivers to actually look for what's going on around them.) From my expeience, I would say the Brits are better drivers, taking everything into acount. Other laws are also wrtten as if the readers had some smarts. (I dare not mention them in fear of getting an arguement from those unwilling or unable to reason things. a.s you might guess, I would rather actually know what's going on around me than just signal blindly as some others do. >Thia stems from the British law that states than turns and lane >changes shall be indicated IF THERE IS ANOTHER ROAD-USER WHO COULD [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >From my expeience, I would say the Brits are better drivers, taking >everything into acount. So do you drive on the left side of the road, as well? Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong > > > > >Just after a side street on the right meets with the divided road I'm > > > > >using, there is a store where I want to get something. [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > - Show quoted text - That isn't a real reason not to signal automattically though. Granted that there isn't a _need_ to signal in those circumstances. As for Brits being better drivers. That is a function of far, far better driver training, not due to the way the laws are written. Harry K > The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get > drivers to actually look around for hazards. Now that's funny! > Technically, there are reasons NOT to use signals when not needed, as > thechnially-mindwed people already know and the no-need-to-look people > wouldn't understand. Lol! Well, give 'em a chance to understand it, won't you? > BTW, I check all my lights are regular intervals - it's a one-man job > that takes just a minute or two and includes brake light and reversing > lights. A minute or two?! I've never timed it, but I think it takes me less than 5 seconds. ----- - gpsman > > The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get > > drivers to actually look around for hazards. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > A minute or two?! I've never timed it, but I think it takes me less > than 5 seconds. It all depends on how thorough the check is. Here are the lights that I check every two weeks or so: * Parking lights only: set light switch to parking light position, check all parking lights are lit. * Low Beams on: check front lights, check rear lights, check license plate lights, all should be lit. * High Beams on: check front lights (should be much brighter), then turn off the lights. * Flash to pass/intermittent high-beams: pull back on the turn signal lever then release, high beams should flash on and then remain off with each pull and release of the turn signal lever. * Left turn signal: check front signal, check rear signal both should be flashing at a "normal" rate. * Right turn signal: check front signal, check rear signal... again, both should be flashing at a "normal" rate, then return the signal lever to the center position. * Hazards: check both front signals, check both rear signals... all should be flashing, then turn off the hazards. * Brake lights: use something like The Club braced against the front edge of the seat to keep the brake pedal pressed, check that left, right, and center high mount brake lights are a lit. Then remove the device keeping the brake pedal down, recheck brake lights and they should no longer be lit since the brake pedal is up. * Reverse lights: set parking brake, chock drive wheels (especially for automatic transmission since the engine may have to be running to shift to reverse), shift to reverse, check both backup lights are lit, shift out of reverse. Done with lights check. > * Brake lights: use something like The Club braced against the front edge of > the seat to keep the brake pedal pressed, check that left, right, and center [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > reverse), shift to reverse, check both backup lights are lit, shift out of > reverse. Or you could just find a reflective surface and check those lights while you're in the vehicle. > > * Brake lights: use something like The Club braced against the front edge of > > the seat to keep the brake pedal pressed, check that left, right, and center [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Or you could just find a reflective surface and check those lights while > you're in the vehicle. I back into garage (Left over from my days of 6 vt cars when I wanted access to underhood.) My eversing light sometimes stays on, so9 I catch it this way. Using external mirrors, all rearscan be checked but plate light. > > The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get > > drivers to actually look around for hazards. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > - gpsman I doubt that it takes that short a time, if you include all lights, (fourteen at a quick guess, plus turning around to checkthe brake lights.) Oh, I'm talking about just one person doing it, alone. (I didn't include the dashboard lights or repeaters.Tell me, in detail, how you do it so fast. > > The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get > > drivers to actually look around for hazards. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > - gpsman Please explain to use, in detail, how you check all your lights in 5 seconds. > > > The idea of not requiring the signal to be used blindly is to get > > > drivers to actually look around for hazards. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Please explain to use, in detail, how you check all your lights in 5 > seconds. I'll trade ya, for 2 of these- "Technically, there are reasons NOT to use signals when not needed, as thechnially-mindwed people already know and the no-need-to-look people wouldn't understand". Or just 2- "Technically, there are reasons NOT to use signals". If you can find a better deal, take it. ----- - gpsman > > > > Technically, there are reasons NOT to use signals when not needed, as > > > > thechnially-mindwed people already know and the no-need-to-look people [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Please explain to use, in detail, how you check all your lights in 5 > > seconds. [red herring snipped] Nothing like a change of subject to avoid embarrassing questions, huh? E.P. > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:57:40 -0700 (PDT), Studemania > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > "Dave's not here, man!" > - Tommy Chong _________________ I agree Tommy! And btw how's Cheech?? (Stupid joke - sorry!) But you're right - and using it even if you're the only one who sees/ hears it keeps you from forgettin' when you really need it. -CC (still smells in here from that stale joke I told....) > ...there's no way you can call yourself a good driver. > > True or False? > > TRUE. TRUE. TRUE. TRUE. True. > Along with this, add ANYTHING that doesn't help in keeping the traffic > flowing smoothly, False. People need to look at sh.t, other than the road. Signs, address numbers... > confuses other drivers in any way And how am I to know what will confuse other drivers? They often seem confused anyway. > and basically everything > else that falls into the ever-growing MFFY category. I'm guessing exceeding speed limits doesn't fall into that category... even though, as a MFFY move, it seems one of the most blatant. > And none of this "But what if I'm on a deserted country road and I'm taking > a left - do I need to use my turn signal if no one is around?" If you even > need to ASK that, you're disqualified. Agreed. > Anyway, being a good driver isn't simply how well you can physically operate > a vehicle. Absolutely true. Driving is "the" simplest appearing, most complicated thing people do, many if not most with little or no thought applied. It seems they don't think about it much beyond "everyone is in my way" and/or "I'm not the problem, it's everyone going slower than I want to". ----- - gpsman > ...there's no way you can call yourself a good driver. > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > John B. If the driver has done a good enough search to know that there is no one around, then there is no point in using the signal. It's like the tree falling in the forest - but a real-life occurance. Anyhow, it's your car so signal if you so desire. If you're really sure there is no one else around, go for sheer pleasure and signal for a right turn, then go left! WOW, what fun! <g> |
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 i