 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / June 2008Driving 45 mph on interstates
Is there anything unsafe about driving 45 on interstates ( exception being congested freeways ). I am a cyclist and find it perfectly safe to cycle in traffic much faster than me. So I dont see how going 45 on the interstate would be any less safe. Even if someone hits you doing 70, that is only a 25 mph differential which is nothing. > Is there anything unsafe about driving 45 on interstates ( exception > being congested freeways ). I am a cyclist and find it perfectly safe > to cycle in traffic much faster than me. So I dont see how going 45 > on the interstate would be any less safe. Even if someone hits you > doing 70, that is only a 25 mph differential which is nothing. A bicycle is small and easily passed. A car is not. 45mph on an interstate in otherwise free-flowing traffic is a hazard. 25mph differential in a crash with another car will probably total both of them. > A bicycle is small and easily passed. A car is not. 45mph on an > interstate in otherwise free-flowing traffic is a hazard. Experienced cyclists agree the safest way to bicycle is to 'take the lane'. In this case passing the cyclist requires the motorists to properly overtake them as they would overtake a car. The only hazard to driving 45 mph is to too the impatient multi-tasking drivers who dont pass you with diligence. >> A bicycle is small and easily passed. A car is not. 45mph on an >> interstate in otherwise free-flowing traffic is a hazard. > > Experienced cyclists agree the safest way to bicycle is to 'take the > lane'. In this case passing the cyclist requires the motorists to > properly overtake them as they would overtake a car. As an experienced cyclist I will tell you that is false. 1) you can't make a motorist *not* brush pass you. 2) taking the lane is for certain circumstances. > The only hazard to driving 45 mph is to too the impatient > multi-tasking drivers who dont pass you with diligence. So you want to troll. Well I figured that was more likely than someone asking an honest question. > As an experienced cyclist I will tell you that is false. > > 1) you can't make a motorist *not* brush pass you. > 2) taking the lane is for certain circumstances. Go to any online bike forum and the consensus is that taking the lane is the safest way to ride. People brush pass because riders like you let them by riding too far to the right. When you take the lane, nobody can pass you without overtaking you like a car. It seems your response to any sensible question is to label it a troll and spew out your conspiracy theory wack ideas.. Are you not capable of discussing facts and data ? >> As an experienced cyclist I will tell you that is false. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Go to any online bike forum and the consensus is that taking the lane > is the safest way to ride. Um, the bicycling newsgroups are filled with car-hating a.sholes. It used to be the right tire track... But I wouldn't be surprised if they are 24-7 lane takers now. > People brush pass because riders like you > let them by riding too far to the right. Cyclists like me? I'm not a gutter rider... WTF? You really are trolling hard. I ride where one is supposed to, in the right tire track. > When you take the lane, > nobody can pass you without overtaking you like a car. Entirely false. You can ride down the middle of a lane all you want and driver can still skim his side mirror an inch from your handlebars. > It seems your response to any sensible question is to label it a > troll and spew out your conspiracy theory wack ideas.. Are you not > capable of discussing facts and data ? Again, it seems you are just trying to piss me off. You aren't asking honest or sensible questions. You already had an 'answer' before you even posted. After I treated you as someone asking an honest question you snapped out with your '45mph is fine for anyone but crappy drivers' agenda. If you were asking a question honestly you wouldn't have had this 'view' of yours already lined up and ready to go. Plus the post I am responding to now is even more inflamitory than the last one. You insult my bicycling and then insult me. You're behaving as a troll. You've offered no facts and no data BTW. > Entirely false. You can ride down the middle of a lane all you want and > driver can still skim his side mirror an inch from your handlebars. > You do ride with a mirror , Mr. Experienced Cyclist? >> Entirely false. You can ride down the middle of a lane all you want > and > driver can still skim his side mirror an inch from your > handlebars. > > > You do ride with a mirror , Mr. Experienced Cyclist? Good day, troll. On Jun 25, 9:20 am, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > multi-tasking drivers who dont pass you with diligence. > > So you want to troll. Well I figured that was more likely than someone > asking an honest question. That sems so obvious that I won't read the rest of the comments. On Jun 25, 9:20 am, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> A bicycle is small and easily passed. A car is not. 45mph on an > >> interstate in otherwise free-flowing traffic is a hazard. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > So you want to troll. Well I figured that was more likely than someone > asking an honest question. In other groups, in one message he claims to be a one man business. In another, he (she?) asks if it safe to cook food at home to sell to co- employees. (It's that damn black 'copter whirling overhead, again.) If your on Google, click on 'image' next to his name at the top and see what shows up. I didn't check to see how many names he uses, but SADDAM uses more than one, as you can find out in the same way. >> A bicycle is small and easily passed. A car is not. 45mph on an >> interstate in otherwise free-flowing traffic is a hazard. > >Experienced cyclists agree the safest way to bicycle is to 'take the >lane'. In this case passing the cyclist requires the motorists to >properly overtake them as they would overtake a car. Taking the lane is illegal, stupid, and obnoxious. And no, experienced cyclists do not "agree" it is the safest way to bicycle, though some of them "argue" that.  SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >> A bicycle is small and easily passed. A car is not. 45mph on an >> interstate in otherwise free-flowing traffic is a hazard. > Experienced cyclists agree the safest way to bicycle is to 'take the > lane'. One only takes the lane when one is approaching and riding through an intersection, when the lane is too narrow to be shared by both a cyclist and a motor vehicle, and/or when riding at the speed of traffic. Even so, when I take the lane by riding in the left tire track, I have still been brush-passed by cars with their tires still to the right of the center line. >Is there anything unsafe about driving 45 on interstates ( exception >being congested freeways ). I am a cyclist and find it perfectly safe >to cycle in traffic much faster than me. So I dont see how going 45 >on the interstate would be any less safe. Even if someone hits you >doing 70, that is only a 25 mph differential which is nothing. Then why don't you try it and get back to us with the results? If in need of an interstate to try it on, I suggest IH95 between Jacksonville and Daytona Beach in FL.... ...where the posted minimum speed is 50.... -- "Can you say 'feel like sh.t?' Yeah, maybe sometimes I do feel like sh.t. I ain't happy 'bout it, but I'd rather feel like sh.t than be full of sh.t!" --Suicidal Tendencies On Jun 25, 11:37 am, oprah.cho...@gmail.com wrote: > Is there anything unsafe about driving 45 on interstates ( exception > being congested freeways ). I am a cyclist and find it perfectly safe > to cycle in traffic much faster than me. So I dont see how going 45 > on the interstate would be any less safe. Even if someone hits you > doing 70, that is only a 25 mph differential which is nothing. Anybody does that on a 2-lane interstate and they'll form a rolling road block as some yutz will eventually come along who insists on passing at a small speed above the person they're passing. When I get close enough to read the 45mph idiots plate I'm dialling 911 and reporting them as drunk, because only a drunken idiot would do that. Dave spamTHIS...@yahoo.com wrote: > Anybody does that on a 2-lane interstate and they'll form a rolling > road block as some yutz will eventually come along who insists on > passing at a small speed above the person they're passing. > > When I get close enough to read the 45mph idiots plate I'm dialling > 911 and reporting them as drunk, because only a drunken idiot would do > that. What is the maximum rated speed of a spare tire? On Jun 25, 1:41 pm, oprah.cho...@gmail.com wrote: > spamTHIS...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > What is the maximum rated speed of a spare tire? Even the old ones you had to fill with a can were good for 50mph- and you're supposed to get the hell off the highway as soon as possible. Newer ones are perfectly good for 65mph. Dave > What is the maximum rated speed of a spare tire? My Audi's spare tire has a maximum sustained speed rating of 168 mph (W rated). Perhaps you should invest in a better vehicle that actually comes with a spare tire that can be used for normal driving. oprah.chopra@gmail.com wrote in news:7ee521a0-3261-4e8f-ad62-ada83e5514fd@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups. com: > spamTHIS...@yahoo.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > What is the maximum rated speed of a spare tire? Irrelevant. Even if the tire was rated for 25mph, it doesn't mean you go on the freeway with it. oprah.chopra@gmail.com wrote in news:8e6ccb11-1c4c-4948-a30d-2c5d3f1ce348 @d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: > Is there anything unsafe about driving 45 on interstates ( exception > being congested freeways ). I am a cyclist and find it perfectly safe > to cycle in traffic much faster than me. So I dont see how going 45 > on the interstate would be any less safe. Even if someone hits you > doing 70, that is only a 25 mph differential which is nothing. I've done 45 on interstates many times and there is no question it is safer for you, the person doing 45. It may not be safer for the idiots who want to do 80 but they are criminals and don't count. On Jun 25, 1:37 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > oprah.cho...@gmail.com wrote in news:8e6ccb11-1c4c-4948-a30d-2c5d3f1ce348 > @d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > for you, the person doing 45. It may not be safer for the idiots who want > to do 80 but they are criminals and don't count. Stay home and walk. That is even safer still. We need interstates for commerce, for food distribution, but why do you, personally, need interstates? Stay off of them! Think how safe you will be; think how much gas you will save. Jane On Jun 25, 1:37 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > oprah.cho...@gmail.com wrote in news:8e6ccb11-1c4c-4948-a30d-2c5d3f1ce348 > @d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > for you, the person doing 45. It may not be safer for the idiots who want > to do 80 but they are criminals and don't count. Then you'll get that DWI you've been avoiding all these years... Dave On Jun 25, 1:37 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > oprah.cho...@gmail.com wrote in news:8e6ccb11-1c4c-4948-a30d-2c5d3f1ce348 > @d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > for you, the person doing 45. It may not be safer for the idiots who want > to do 80 but they are criminals and don't count. When I drive 45 the police want to stick their tax sucking heads in my car to smell and see if I am smoking marijuana. you know the substance our Bill of Rights was written on. >oprah.chopra@gmail.com wrote in news:8e6ccb11-1c4c-4948-a30d-2c5d3f1ce348 >@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >for you, the person doing 45. It may not be safer for the idiots who want >to do 80 but they are criminals and don't count. yo smartboy. Did ya know ya can be cited for driving too slow? Oh sure. I've seen bunches of people drive below 50 in a 70. Most of them are mexicans and I'll bet ya not one has a license. Of course their are reasons for driving slow, but just because YOU think it is safer, you're only an accident waiting to happen. > yo smartboy. Did ya know ya can be cited for driving too slow? So your fear of being pulled over for doing something legal exceeds the benefits of 20+% better gas mileage and safer drive? In my neck of the woods, 45 mph is the minimum posted speed limit. > Oh sure. I've seen bunches of people drive below 50 in a 70. Most of > them are mexicans and I'll bet ya not one has a license. I dont drive a beater and neither do I drive erratically, so why would a cop pull me over for driving a legal speed?? > Of course their are reasons for driving slow, but just because YOU > think it is safer, you're only an accident waiting to happen. The only accident waiting to happen are with the impatient spedyots trying to pass me unsafely . >So your fear of being pulled over for doing something legal exceeds >the benefits of 20+% better gas mileage and safer drive? In my neck of >the woods, 45 mph is the minimum posted speed limit. If what you are doing is safe (and hence legal in the absence of a sign saying otherwise) you won't be pulled over. If what you are doing is dangerous (and therefore illegal) you will be pulled over. And while we are on the subject of arbitrary speeds, WTF is so wonderful about 45MPH? Why not 35MPH and save even more fuel? >> Oh sure. I've seen bunches of people drive below 50 in a 70. Most of >> them are mexicans and I'll bet ya not one has a license. > >I dont drive a beater and neither do I drive erratically, so why would >a cop pull me over for driving a legal speed?? Because you are disrupting the flow of traffic (what part of, "obstructing traffic," escapes you?) with your selfish behavior. >> Of course their are reasons for driving slow, but just because YOU >> think it is safer, you're only an accident waiting to happen. > >The only accident waiting to happen are with the impatient spedyots STFU, CARL!! O,BTW, howz the wife? Is she still turning to worm sh.t because of your shitty driving? >trying to pass me unsafely . If you were driving with the flow of traffic, they would not be trying to pass you. -- "And if I offended you, oh I'm sorry... But maybe you need to be offended But here's my apology and one more thing...f.ck YOU!! Cos you...can't...bring...me...down!" --Suicidal Tendencies >>oprah.chopra@gmail.com wrote in news:8e6ccb11-1c4c-4948-a30d-2c5d3f1ce348 >>@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Oh sure. I've seen bunches of people drive below 50 in a 70. Most of > them are mexicans and I'll bet ya not one has a license. Your bigotry and ignorance aside, I would like to see the "radar gun" that you used to determine their exact driving speeds. > Of course their are reasons for driving slow, but just because YOU > think it is safer, you're only an accident waiting to happen. That's what people have said about you for years, and what they'll say until the day you somehow kill yourself, Bullis. >oprah.chopra@gmail.com wrote in news:8e6ccb11-1c4c-4948-a30d-2c5d3f1ce348 >@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >for you, the person doing 45. It may not be safer for the idiots who want >to do 80 but they are criminals and don't count. Amazing you've never been squashed by an 18-wheeler driven by a sleep-deprived amphetamine-hyped Mexican ... On Jun 25, 8:37 am, oprah.cho...@gmail.com wrote: > Is there anything unsafe about driving 45 on interstates ( exception > being congested freeways ). I am a cyclist and find it perfectly safe > to cycle in traffic much faster than me. So I dont see how going 45 > on the interstate would be any less safe. Even if someone hits you > doing 70, that is only a 25 mph differential which is nothing. Driving at about 20 (or more) mph under the prevailing speed is hazard as no one is expecting it. It also causes congestion and a slow down of traffic waiting to pass the retard if traffic is even half way dense. Riding a bicycle down the middle of a lane on a freeway could only be condisered a death wish. Used to be that freeway entrances had signs banning bicycles and sometimes posting a minimum speed also. Haven't seen one of them in years. IMO both should be standard. I have no problem with bike riders as long as they are not a hazard. They are on a freeway if in the middle of a lane. Harry K > Is there anything unsafe about driving 45 on interstates ( exception > being congested freeways ). I am a cyclist and find it perfectly safe > to cycle in traffic much faster than me. So I dont see how going 45 > on the interstate would be any less safe. Even if someone hits you > doing 70, that is only a 25 mph differential which is nothing. Actually a 25 mph differential is significant. For instance, I don't typically ride on roads where I'm not able to keep the speed differential 15 mph or less. |
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.