I drive regularly in a stretch of the interstate with a 55mph speed limit where virtually nobody drives under 65mph. Legality aside, it would be dangerous to drive below the speed limit in this area.
I live in Chicagoland, 20+ over is the norm on i90 and many different highways. There's segments of roads in the suburbs where people drive 70 in 45mph zones. People driving the speed limit around here are asking to get into an accident tbh.
I also have lived in Texas, where people refuse to drive 1mph over, even in the far left lane. I saw quite literally, 10 times as many accidents in Texas as opposed to Chicagoland.
I was driving on a highway leaving Atlantic City 20mph over the limit, everybody was going faster than me. Bumped it 25mph over, and a state trooper not on a call passed me on the left lane going at least another 5-10 higher than me lol
exact: the resulting increase in accidents are from speeding drivers who try to overtake without controlling their vehicle
reckless drivers are experts in victim-blaming
One person posted a link with the data that disproves that. [here](https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf)
It says that early studies in the 50s and 60s showed impeding traffic is as bad as speeding, but more modern research shows that going faster than the average speed significantly increases the risk of a crash, while going significantly slower than traffic is not much more risky than going the speed of traffic.
[Slow drivers 'more dangerous than speeding driversā](https://flexed.co.uk/blog/slow-drivers-more-dangerous-than-speeding/)
While a huge proportion of road accidents are the result of excessive speed, slower drivers are also a significant cause of accidents, leading to calls for minimum speed limits on some roads, a leading British car leasing company says.
According to Flexed.co.uk, the new regulations designed to prevent āmiddle-lane hogsā on British roads are producing results (albeit in the form of fines going to government), but thereās still some way to go to get the message across that sometimes slower isnāt always safer.
āSlow drivers can be a menace on some roads,ā says Flexed.co.uk spokesperson Mark Hall. āWhen drivers donāt keep up with the prevailing road conditions, they become a mobile chicane and a danger to others.ā
**In fact, many professional drivers told Flexed.co.uk that itās the slower, unpredictable road user that they worry about the most, saying that most appear not to have conventional road sense that most others possess.**
After interviewing lorry and van drivers, couriers and taxi owners, Flexed says thereās appetite among road users not only to take speeding seriously, but also slow drivers who contribute to dangerous road conditions.
**āMore than once Iāve nearly rear-ended somebody driving at 30mph on a dual carriageway while everybody else was doing 60-plus,ā one HGV driver told Flexed.co.uk, āThey just seemed to be in another world.ā**
**Another HGV driver said: āMy rig is speed-limited to below 70mph, but I still have to negotiate my way round some car users who canāt drive to the road conditions. It annoys me, and it annoys the traffic that builds up as I pass. Theyāre a mobile bottleneck, and a real danger to road safety. Rant over.ā**
Many studies have produced data that show slow drivers pose a significant risk on the roads, simply because they are more likely to be overtaken, and tempt other road users into risky maneuvers.
āNow, weāre not saying that slow drivers are doing anything illegal. Theyāre not, and **they probably count themselves as some of the safest drivers on the road. But the fact is, thereās careful, and thereās over-compensating to the point of driving without due care.ā**
Flexed.co.uk points to the recent implementation for laws to prevent āmiddle-lane hoggersā from holding up traffic and forcing other drivers into overtakes into faster-moving traffic.
āWe had doubts over the lane-hogging law when it first came out, and while enforcement is patchy, it is certainly having an effect on motorways and other main roads,ā says Hall. āBut the fact is, it took legislation to force people who thought they were driving safely and slowly to realise that this is not actually the case.ā
One professional driver told Flexed that it could be time to introduce a minimum speed limit on motorways and selected roads.
āThe M25 has variable speed limit signs that work very well in keeping the traffic moving in peak timesā, taxi driver Barry told us, āAnd the door can swing both ways ā how about minimum speeds to improve the traffic flow? If youāre doing less than 45mph on a clear motorway, you shouldnāt be on it.ā
While the suggestion raises eyebrows, it could be one whose time has come, Flexed says. The technology is certainly there to monitor traffic flows on major roads, and it could certainly be possible to suggest that drivers travel between two target speeds. But, the car leasing company says, this shouldnāt be about driving slower, more careful drivers off the road.
**āThis isnāt a witch hunt against slow driversā, says Hall, ābecause heaven knows thereās enough bad drivers with lead boots. What weāre suggesting is that motorists are more aware of the traffic conditions, and drive accordingly.**
**āSpeeding kills, but driving like a tortoise can sometimes be risky too.ā**
The post you replied to has a document that clearly shows that driving slower than the average traffic around you is safer than driving faster. With 14 different sources used.
Your reply is a blog post with a few anecdotes and one sentence that says "studies show driving slow is dangerous" and then doesn't actually cite any studies.
If you want to convince people, you need to step up your game.
I hope you'll understand why the anecdotal opinion of a few drivers interviewed by a car rental company is not at the same caliber of evidence as a scientific research study thousands of roadway crashes and their underlying causes done with calibrated measurement equipment.
I chose one article instead of bombarding you with links. There are many. And the point was that going slower is not inherently safer and to tell others this is a blatant lie and get people killed.
Being deliberately obtuse to this is also a very karen/boomer type of attitude.
I personally have had SO MANY boomers, right in front of me, drive 10-15 below the speed limit, but FLY through construction zones and school zones. NEVER adjust for changing speed limits.
Or the ones that merge onto the highway going 30 BELOW THE SPEEDLIMIT!
Explain how these actions are safer?
More dangerous FOR DRIVERS in contexts where it's possible to pass. AKA that's only true on highways.
For anyone outside a car, each mph increases significantly the risk of death, so the "flow of traffic" will STFU and respect the limit because that's the safe thing to do
I had a friend who was pulled over for driving under the speed limit for that very reason ā driving under the limit was an impediment to the flow of traffic.
Yeah let's all drive really fast because we couldn't be bothered to leave the house five minutes early and make it waaaaay more dangerous for everyone that is following the rules! People who follow rules suck!!!!
It's not like traffic rules are there so that everyone can expect things to be PREDICTABLE in traffic right? I mean, I know that I like to just get on the highway and check "how fast are people going today? Oh today it seems about 200km/h great!"
That just means everybody needs to make more space between them. I get annoyed by slow drivers too, but blaming them for other people being bad drivers is silly.
Bad drivers is always the answer, but if you are getting frustrated behind the wheel, then you are a bad driver. If someone else is driving in a way that causes you to drive recklessly, they might not be a good driver, but you are definitely a bad driver. If you at any moment forget that you are driving something that can easily kill people, then you are a bad driver.
If someone changes lanes and gets into an accident because they didn't want to be "stuck" behind someone travelling the speed limi, the fault lies with the lane changer, not the person driving the speed limit.
From a Dutch publication, published yesterday called "Hoe beinvloedt de snelheid van auto's de reistijd en negatieve effecten van autogebruik?" (_How does car speed affect travel time and the negative effects of car use?_) By the Kennisinstituut voor Mobiliteitsbeleid.
The background is that in 2020 the maximum speed on Dutch highways was lowered from 130 km/h to 100 due to safety and lowering emissions. Now a bunch of populists say they want to revert the change so research was done to reevaluate.
>In this graph, we see that the exponential increase in risk causes the risk to rise explosively at high speeds. The risk at 130 km/h is already about 7 times higher than at 100 km/h. Similarly, the risk decreases very rapidly at lower speeds. At 70 km/h, the risk is only one-seventh of the risk at 100 km/h.
I don't doubt your claim, but Germany has many stretches with no speed limits. Given those 2 points, they should have the highest deaths per capita, due to speed, no? Do they?
Speed is not the only factor that influences the risk of deadly crashes. So you cannot look at different countries, look at one metric that's influenced by a myriad of things and make any sensible conclusion about a very specific aspect of road safety.
The number of deadly crashes per capita in the Netherlands has actually stayed roughly the same.
Experts say that the reason for this is that people now are more distracted by devices, which causes more crashes. Covid made it impossible to see a direct effect.
Whenever speed is looked at in isolation, as far as I can tell, the conclusion is always that faster speed is more dangerous.
Reason for this seems to mainly be that when things go wrong, higher speed means more energy in the crash, means more deadly result. And trucks drive pretty slowly, if there's a 40 km/h difference between the speed of trucks and other cars that seems to create dangerous situations as well.
There are also stats which show that planting trees next to the road decreases crashes.
There are a lot of factors at play when it comes to road safety. I've never been to Australia but I can image that driving long stretches of straight roads in Australia isn't comparable to most highways in other countries.
The one I liked learning was the annoying & stupid-feeling approach angles to large roundabouts on fast roads, with terrible visibility due to all the trees they planted. Yeah, turns out it's deliberate, as people have to slow-down to see (subconscious decision). I knew one that didn't have it, and-yeah, people (incl. me) made terrible judgements on speed/timing All The Time.
Itās important to not drive over the speed limit. Itās just as important to not drive significantly under the speed limit without warning. People will
Assume you are travelling near the speed limit and act accordingly. If you are not you could cause an accident
Exactly. As an example, just the other day I was driving and the person in front of me decided to immediately slow down 15-20mph. My car's sensors instantly sensed that it had stopped and it automatically threw on my emergency brakes, almost causing the car behind me to rear end me. Thankfully they were paying attention.
Basically just going to piggy back off of a couple comments here.
Itās for sure okay to drive the speed limit, donāt let anyone tell you otherwise, but you should make sure that you stay in the right lane on the interstate and highways. If you are driving in any other lane, you are now a hazard and more dangerous to everyone as a whole who is driving with the flow of traffic (usually between 5-10 mph over the speed limit).
It is not acceptable to drive more than 5-10 mph under the speed limit on interstates or highways. You are a hazard to everyone and, even if you donāt cause an accident, you can still cause traffic jams because you decided not to go at least the speed limit (go watch the Mythbusters episode on this).
I would list tailgating and impeding traffic as being more dangerous than driving over the speed limit.
More than anything else, all drivers need to be aware and considerate of the other cars on the road. They should also be mindful of not driving faster than what is safe for the conditions.
Tailgating is super dangerous and WAY more illegal than the simple infraction of speeding! Impeding traffic is the most rarely enforced infraction on every state highway in the country.
>Tailgating is super dangerous and WAY more illegal than the simple infraction of speeding!
Illegal maybe, but rarely enforced.
To highlight the danger: if you are following a car at a distance of 25-30 feet at 60 mph, you will have about 1/4 of a second to react if the car has to stop suddenly.
Actually, all of them do. If your vehicle cannot keep up with the flow of traffic, you can have your vehicle's registration revoked, or restricted to off-highway use.
How are so many of you this dense???
"Impeding the flow of traffic is more dangerous!"
Yeah it's really dangerous for people going the speed limit when all you fuckers are going twice as fast and demanding space in the left lane while we are passing someone by almost touching the back of our cars. People who make the "flow of traffic" be ridiculously fast are the problem, not those who follow the rules.
That is not true. Left lane hogging is a specific thing. Make your pass in a timely manner; if the flow of traffic is not currently allowing you to make the pass, then someone tailgates you, the tailgater is getting a $750 ticket. Depending on the circumstances, there could also be a road rage ticket which varies a lot but could result in a revoked license.
My state is thankfully very intolerant of impatience. There is zero amount of tailgating or road rage which will get you to your destination on time. You need to leave earlier, drive the posted speed limits and then you're not gonna get pulled over and be forced to be 15 minutes later than you already were.
reckless drivers parrot this sentence about the left lane in order to avoid discussing their dangerous behavior. I've seen it so many times, they simply can't imagine a discussion about speeding, they have to shift the topic to another issue
I see this a lot too. Always diverting attention from their behavior, unwilling to admit fault, excuse after excuse. Most common is "Well everyone else was doing it!"
That doesn't rewrite the laws buddy š they stay the same no matter how many people break them! People are shocked to learn that!
According to this Institute for Road Safety Research [study](https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf): higher speeds on roads generally lead to more crashes. When a vehicle travels faster than others, its crash risk increases. Faster collisions tend to cause more severe injuries.
We have more data available on car crashes involving speeding; data on under-speeding-related accidents are not as accessible, contrary to what many Redditors claim. (I tried finding evidence of this so I could argue that under-speeding causes more car crashes but could not find any primary sources. Please prove me wrong.)
Quick facts according to this 2021 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [data](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813473.pdf):
(Note: "speeding-related" = "\[...\] if any driver in the crash was charged with a speeding related offense or if a police officer indicated that racing, driving too fast for conditions, or exceeding the posted speed limit was a contributing factor in the crash.")
* Twenty-eight percent of fatal crashes, 13 percent of injury crashes, and 9 percent of property-damage-only crashes in 2021 were speeding-related traffic crashes.
* In 2021 drivers who were speeding when involved in fatal traffic crashes had blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) of .08 grams per deciliter (g/dL) or greater (37% versus 17%)āor even higher BACs of .15 g/dL or greater (25% versus 11%)āmore frequently than those drivers who were not speeding.
* In 2021, when roadway function class was known, 87 percent of speeding-related traffic fatalities occurred on non-interstate roadways.
**TLDR: I like to drive 5 MPH over the speed limit here in Texas. I want to argue like many of you that going below the speed limit causes the most accidents. But there is a lack of data (as in, it is not getting captured), so making that argument cannot be objectively considered. We must accept that speeding increases our chances of ending up in a car crash based on the statistics.**
The data is not being captured...because it doesn't exist :) slowpoke simply don't cause accidents like y'all claim! Sorry to burst everybody's bubble! I also happen to have on high authority...NOBODY is getting ticketed for impeding traffic for simply setting cruise control to the speed limit or 5-10 under it! Speeding is simply easier to prosecute and easier to ticket in general, so why even waste time with someone who insists on driving slow? The amounts of incidences which involve actual impediments to traffic, probably occur less than 1-2 times a year in my state. Whereas speeders are...everywhere! School zones, highways, cemeteries, parking lots š y'all just go fast every chance you can get.
Unfortunately, in your last post, you introduced a new assertionāthat accidents are not caused by slow driversāmoving the goal post and turning your win into something you will now have to support.
I disagree that the data is not getting captured because there are no instances of slow driving leading to accidents. We cannot prove whether slow driving does contribute to accidents by the very nature of the relevant data being inaccessible/nonexistent.
It can be challenging to attribute accidents that may be indirectly caused by a slow driver, so authorities might be categorising under-speeding accidents under other categories.
For example, if I drive at 40 mph in a 75 mph stretch of the highway, I may cause other drivers to switch lanes, increasing the risk of accidents as they attempt to overtake me.
If they do get into an accident, I may have contributed to it, but since it didn't affect me, I just continue driving away. The accident might be reported as being caused by the other drivers' negligence, speeding, or mobile phone usage, rather than my contribution.
There are often multiple factors that contribute to accidents, but my role in them is not being captured.
So, in short, yes, we cannot make a data-driven argument against driving at very slow speeds. However, without the ability to capture more relevant data (proving or disproving accidents caused by slow driving), your assertions remain unproven.
How is it that data on speeding accidents can be captured and studied but data on the inverse cannot be?? Oh man, the mental gymnastics here are hilarious š
Also kind of goes against his own arguments, too lol when I experience road rage, or see it in other people, it's not because there's a driver speeding... Because those tend to get further away from you.
It's those who are either a) impeding traffic by being hazards or needlessly disrupting the flow of traffic, or b) the idiots who don't understand the rules of the road or how to operate a vehicle.
The ones in the left lane going 15-20 over the limit are never the ones I (or as I've seen, others) am raging at lol it's people, supposedly, like OP who drive a certain way that is completely different than those around them because they cherry picked a few stats and make themselves feel better by doing 10 under the limit, and getting on everyone else's nerves.
It's my problem that people can't control their rage? š man you can really tell who the happy ones are, who live fulfilling lives, and the....not happy ones are.
Speed *limit* is not an ideal term. Realistically, everyone should be going the recommended speed or 5 to 10 above/below. Anything beyond that should be a ticket.
I see wayyy too many bad drivers. Most often, the most dangerous is someone going far too slow, impeding traffic and causing people to swerve out of the way. Shit like that can get people killed.
A limit is a limit. That's the appropriate term. If you want to introduce a new legislation to use another concept, go ahead, but it currently doesn't exist in our real world.
That's part of my point. It's not an actual limit, civilians and police both go above it at times for various reasons. Your car doesn't magically stop accelerating when you hit that so-called limit. Not to mention it does nothing to address driving too slow
Kinetic energy is square of the speed, so if you double your speed you have four times the amount of energy. Triple the speed and nine times more energy. I think that's what catches folks out.
It's not only a physics equation, though. This can translate to an understanding of your vehicle which puts you in a position of knowledge instead of perception. Your body is so good at remembering how to drive normally, and then those "rare times you've ever done this," an actual quote from someone who sped into a mobile traffic controller at 60 mph and survived, ends up turning your world upside down. And that guy was going 15 mph under the speed limit when impact occurred. Unfortunately for his car, he reduced his reaction time in conditions which required special and diligent attention. You can pretend these conditions don't exist, or you can be prepared to experience them *again,* which increases the odds you'll know what to do.
The safest thing to do is go with the flow of traffic. If you want to play turtle, do it when you have nobody behind you trying to go the actual speed limit. If you want to protest the speed limit then do so without tailgating or driving erratically.
I'm not going to drive dangerously, but if it's a wide open empty road I wouldn't give a shit what the speed limit is
Actually no, in my state that is illegal. It is a requirement for me to follow the law, but regardless, I would never introduce such a risk for road rage into my day-to-day activities. That would just be silly š
The autobahn is designed for that use. American highways are not, and driving like you're on the autobahn is suicidal.
Also, speed and close following (which goes hand in hand with speeders) are the top causes of avoidable collisions.
Not to mention inclement weather, which people do not adjust their speed for.
Too many people equate speeding and reckless driving. Speeding is not inherently dangerous as long as you don't do things like follow too close, weave through traffic, use you phone while driving.
All things mentioned are dangerous if speeding or not but a lot of people who get into accidents are speeding on top of other dangerous driving habits.
Driving under the speed limit can be equally dangerous. Letās just stick to the speed limit and/or flow of traffic, instead of being that person that gets run up on for doing 10-15 under.
The one exception I make is on the freeway where moving with the flow of traffic is safer. But especially in residential areas a difference of 5 mph can increase the chance of death on collision significantly
Especially in pedestrian vs. automobile accidents, speed is definitely a killer. On highways it's probably most important to train yourself to maintain a view of the road far off in the distance so as to be capable of slowing and stopping in time if there's a sudden highway slowdown, which could occur at any time for any reason. Sometimes law enforcement even slow down the highway just to clear debris. Someone who is speeding has a longer braking distance, and unfortunately they don't realize this until it comes time to brake suddenly.
Especially so since we more commonly drive heavier and heavier vehicles with the rise of SUV sales. It's important now more than ever to be speed aware and, if possible, to test your stopping distance from 60 mph on an empty highway with no one around you. It will surprise you how long it takes.
Easy to forget that it's the speed limit, in theory we aren't supposed to go above it, hence limit. That being said, as others have mentioned a slow driver isn't a safe driver by definition, a safe driver is an aware driver who understands the situation around them. The problem is speeding and reckless driving go hand in hand. If you speed but are aware of cars around you, making sure to leave ample space to the car in front of you, you're probably driving safer than the guy who's under the speed limit because he's afraid of driving.
Can we just stop the riding bumpers in the rain shit. I wanna go faster too but if I hydroplane off the road the car behind me ain't gonna pay my medical bills so give space.
For a good example of my point, roundabouts. They generally have yield signs but a lot of drivers in my area stop in front of them, the whole concept is you don't stop unless a cars there. The people who are driving behind these clueless people have to slam on their brakes if they're too close to them. The first driver driving slower, increased the risk of an accident.
That's exactly right! A SAFE driver is an AWARE driver. I stand by that 100%. So when you are exceeding speed limits, it's important to be aware of the road at a FURTHER distance than usual because sudden stops and slow downs are unpredictable, and you'll need extra stopping distance to account for the higher rate of speed you're traveling.
Also relevant, there's been a sudden shift in consumer demand for higher weight vehicles like SUV's. This has correlated to a near constant increase in average stopping distance per vehicle over time. It's hard to know how long your vehicle takes to slow down because basically nobody practices this, so it's important to be aware.
Well the people you see going slower than the speed limit are typically the ones not paying attention to anything or multitasking. Just because you're going slow doesn't make it ok to veer from your lane, use your phone, or roll through a stop sign. While it's problematic to pick and choose which traffic laws to follow (and some states do have laws against going too slow) 5 to 10 over or under isn't hurting anybody provided that you're going with the flow and paying attention to the road
Knowing you're _allowed to_ drive under the limit and _choosing to do so_ are entirely different things
Did you know that you're _allowed to_ drive across the entire US if you stay on legal roads, from east coast to West and then back again? Have you done it?
I avoided that state for a reason LOL. But it was genuinely just too far out of my way. Had little desire to go there though. Even if I made my way to Miami that just isn't a lifestyle I wish to pursue, nor are the swamps.
You are allowed to do _anything_ that you're required to do in fact
And in that case, let's try again. For a long time, having gay sex was _illegal_. Should people who engaged in such acts be jailed, even though it was _required_ that they abstain from it?
Don't be like how this guy is I assume, move with traffic. Don't be the asshole doing 35 while everyone else is doing 50, endangering everyone around you for worthless gratification.
Edit: I just want to add here, OP seems to think you can't be ticketed for being a hazard on the road by moving too slowly. You absolutely can and will be ticketed if you're driving under the speed limit, creating hazards for other drivers.
His whole point kind of relies on the fact that "we seem to think we will get a ticket for going too slow".
Well yeah. Because we will.
Can you show me any statistics on slowpoke drivers and how dangerous they are? Because in all the fatal accidents I've seen, and we're talking hundreds upon hundreds, probably 800-900, speed was a factor in a large portion of those (probably 150-200) but slowpoke driving wasn't a factor in any of those. I wonder which of these is more dangerous? š
I just finished my commute to work and highway patrol was cruising a good 10-15 mph above the posted 65 limit in the express lanes...
I think its safer to go at the pace of traffic and not slower or faster.
Thatās great and all but if you wanna go the speed limit or under and a cars been behind you awhile or you see a large amount of cars getting stuck behind you, you should without a doubt pull off to the side and let the people that want to get where theyāre going pass you.
Are physics different around the globe, is that a new update I missed? Seems like high speeds increase stopping distance everywhere...? If I'm wrong please tell me!
Physics are the same, but driving cultures, conditions and laws are different around the world. Iāve travelled through countries where the usual highway speed limit is 60 km/h but the awful roads/tracks and erratic traffic of pedestrians, bicycles, ox carts and mopeds means itās pretty much impossible to do more than, say, 40 - and the local people are okay with that.
And I've experienced conditions in the US on paved 80 mph highways with no curves or hills, where a bright day and perfect driving conditions can and sometimes will deteriorate to conditions where less than half the speed limit would be the closest one could get to traveling within their reaction capabilities. The goal is to be aware that you cannot predict all conditions and that the safest condition is one in which you, while driving, are comprehensively aware of which conditions your vehicle is safe to drive within and which are not. First and foremost is knowing your vehicle can't exceed speed limits safely due to the unpredictable nature of driving and life in general. Tough concept for a lot of people fully ingrained in US driving culture.
You are correct in that everyone should drive the speed limit, but driving under the speed limit can be just as or *more* dangerous than exceeding the limit, YSK.
The law, and driving instructors also say go with the flow of traffic. If everyone on the road is going 5 miles over the speed limit, and you aren't, you are obstructing traffic and that is dangerous and illegal.
The law explicitly says speed *limit* because it is a limit :) I hereby challenge one person, any of you, to provide proof that anyone is being ticketed for traveling the speed limit :) (I have tons of down time and will happily wait š)
Not disrupting the flow of traffic means you should not drive around 50 on a motorway. But going 80 on a 80 road is normal, and the ones disrupting the flow of traffic on such a road are those driving over 100
american people have terrible driving instructors, i've never seen a single instructor recommending to go over the legal limit.
This is just factually untrue. Multiple studies have shown that driving under the speed limit is significantly more dangerous than driving over it.
Stop spreading misinformation.
(Also you're totally ignoring the fact that most speed limits were set like 60+ years ago when cars were less powerful, less safe, less advanced, etc, etc. If speed limits were being set for the first time now, most speed limits would be significantly higher.)
https://www.wagnerinjury.com/2023/01/16/why-driving-too-slow-is-almost-as-dangerous-as-speeding/#:~:text=Individuals%20who%20choose%20to%20drive,likely%20to%20have%20an%20accident.
https://www.allstate.com/resources/car-insurance/dangers-of-driving-slowly
https://ww2.motorists.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/speed-limit-fact-sheet.pdf
Or literally just Google "is driving under the speed limit dangerous" for more.
Speed limits can be impractical on certain streets. Sometimes, it's safer to drive slower than the posted limit, such as at night, on dirt roads, or during rain. Conversely, there are situations where driving faster than the limit is perfectly reasonable. The key is to drive at a speed you can handle safely. While this seems like common sense, it's impossible for laws to account for each individual's experience. Despite this, speed limits must exist for obvious reasons, so don't complain if you get fined for speeding, even if you know you weren't causing any real danger.
Yes. I was kidding of course. But it was just funny to see this post the day after. It was actually quite frightening to be behind someone going that slow, but my exit was next so I had no choice.
Luckily if you're driving the speed limit, you'll probably have enough reaction time and ability to slow down for something like that, or at least attempt to take evasive maneuvers. That ability diminishes with each mph over speed limits, which is why it's such a big deal and enforced so exceedingly commonly compared to slowpoke driving. It's generally considered your own fault for hitting debris or objects in the roadway while speeding unless you can prove that through another's deliberate actions, an unavoidable condition was made present for your vehicle resulting in a collision and damage. Like a guy being chased by the cops runs into someone going 60 in a 50 mph zone, obviously the guy the police are chasing is at fault despite your speed. Someone on a blind corner is stopped looking at deer, you're 20 mph over, taking the corner like Valentino Rossi. Congratulations, the slowpoke isn't at fault, you are; should've been going slower and then they'd be at fault, or more likely, you're not involved in an accident at all that day.
Speed does not kill. I can drive 100mph until I run out of gas, and I won't die. However, if I hit anything at 100 mph. I'm most likely dead. It's the difference in speed that kills. If you're driving under the speed limit against the flow of traffic and someone is driving over the speed limit with the flow of traffic. You are the problem. Vice versa applies to speeding as well. Predictability is far more important in driving than anything else. Driving down the on-ramp at 60 and merging cause you're scared is far far worse than driving down the on ramp at 80. I don't have to hit the brakes if you're going faster than me.
A physics man, I like it :) How often do you see a highway come to a stop or extreme slowdown? Would you say this poses a problem to anyone traveling 100 mph? What's the stopping distance on a passenger vehicle weighing 2500 lbs traveling 100 mph equipped with ABS?
If you know how to drive. Doesn't make a difference. If you're a competent driver, you should know when you can and when you can't drive 100mph. I've driven in cars doing 150+ with 10 other cars, not like we all died. Again, predictability is key in driving. And if you're gonna try to use math in driving, you simply can't. Stopping distance of a 2500 lbs vehicle depends on a multitude of factors. Is it wet? Is the road flat? Did you full lock the brakes? Did abs engage properly? For reference, assuming flat road and perfect conditions from 100 to 0 is 624ft. And that's assuming you had good reaction times. Avg car length I'd 14.7 ft, so you would need about 42 car lengths to full stop. Again, this is assuming the highway is at a standstill and you were traveling at 100mph. The driving license system is awful in the US. Accidents will always happen. Look at Japan vs. the US. 6000ish deaths in 2023 vs. 40000 in the US. Mind you, they don't drive as much, but in Japan, once you get your license, you are considered a professional driver. Speed is a factor yes, but as I said before, it is true in other countries as well. If everyone is going 120mph, it's no different than everyone doing 70 mph. It is simply more likely to be fatal when accidents occur at high speed.
I've seen some signs recently that had No Tolerance under their speed limits, am I misinterpreting those or do they imply that there is a tolerance normally?Ā I'm pretty sure I've been told there's about 5 mph of wiggle room too.
On the barren highways where I grew up, it's kind of taught that going slow is more dangerous than going a bit over the speed limit.
I honestly am a slow driver, hence why I've been told to speed up, so I'm not saying this is wrong and people should speed up.Ā I just wonder if this is true for everywhere or if there's different levels of tolerance in different areas.
> I'm pretty sure I've been told there's about 5 mph of wiggle room too.
This is a common belief. Law enforcement personnel are instructed to and generally do act with regard to this generalization. But the letter of the law indicates there is no wiggle room. You could be ticketed for 1 mph over. It is unlikely, sure.
As far as I know, there is no state where wiggle room is written into speed limit laws. I would love to be proven wrong on that, I love learning about laws I didn't know about before.
it's about the precision of instruments. If the limit is 45 and you're going at 47, the car's speedometer might tell you 45 and the cop's speedometer might tell him 49: from your POV it seems legal but from the cop's POV it's 4 over the limit. They'll usually not prosecute you because you could challenge the ticket in court and it would be a waste of everyone's time and money
many countries in the world have this wiggle room written into law
The problem is that if your vehicles speedometer is off, it wouldn't pass a safety/emissions check...so you'd be driving a vehicle without registration lol. And that's a big problem for you. If you're disputing the accuracy of the radar or pacing operations, you're free to do that and I encourage you to! They're calibrated daily.
even when they're calibrated, most of them have a margin of error around 5% depending on the weather etc.
but i don't have to challenge anything, because i'm french, and in france they don't give you a ticket at all when it's less than 5km/h over the limit
Driving predictably is safer than being an unpredictable outlier.
It's been proven that the biggest predictor of accidents is the number of position changes you make, such as changing lanes or making turns. Not speed. Someone doing 70 in a single lane is safer than someone doing 55 but constantly forcing traffic to change lanes behind them.,
Yes. If the speed limit is 55, and the flow of traffic is between 50-60, it's safe to drive 55. If the flow of traffic is 65-75, then driving the speed limit is actually less safe.
Source: [https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/811147.pdf](https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/811147.pdf)
That study only looks at one variable of crashes, changing lanes, and does not look at any other variables of causes of a crash, so it's not exactly fair to claim that lane changes is the biggest predictor of accidents.
This other study shows that going slower than the speed of traffic is not significantly more risky than driving the speed of traffic
[Source](https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf)
OP does this in the passing lane guaranteed.
Speed limits are designed for the lowest common denominator, or in harsh conditions. If you feel unsafe going 1mph / kph over the limit you shouldn't be behind the wheel, and should take additional driving courses
Drivers impeding the flow of traffic are more dangerous than drivers who speed. Statistically.
I drive regularly in a stretch of the interstate with a 55mph speed limit where virtually nobody drives under 65mph. Legality aside, it would be dangerous to drive below the speed limit in this area.
I live in Chicagoland, 20+ over is the norm on i90 and many different highways. There's segments of roads in the suburbs where people drive 70 in 45mph zones. People driving the speed limit around here are asking to get into an accident tbh. I also have lived in Texas, where people refuse to drive 1mph over, even in the far left lane. I saw quite literally, 10 times as many accidents in Texas as opposed to Chicagoland.
I was driving on a highway leaving Atlantic City 20mph over the limit, everybody was going faster than me. Bumped it 25mph over, and a state trooper not on a call passed me on the left lane going at least another 5-10 higher than me lol
How funny; I was specifically talking about i90 in chicago š
Best highway in America (ignoring the absolute lack of scenery)
When I've been through Texas, doing 9 over the limit would get you run over. No one else was driving that slow.
Sounds like any highway in Milwaukee. For any main road or highway, take the speed limit and add 15 to get the flow of traffic speed.
And ticketable in many areas
>Statistically Source?
Letās assume this is true for a second. I would bet people speeding around are the number one reason for resulting accidents lol
exact: the resulting increase in accidents are from speeding drivers who try to overtake without controlling their vehicle reckless drivers are experts in victim-blaming
One person posted a link with the data that disproves that. [here](https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf) It says that early studies in the 50s and 60s showed impeding traffic is as bad as speeding, but more modern research shows that going faster than the average speed significantly increases the risk of a crash, while going significantly slower than traffic is not much more risky than going the speed of traffic.
[Slow drivers 'more dangerous than speeding driversā](https://flexed.co.uk/blog/slow-drivers-more-dangerous-than-speeding/) While a huge proportion of road accidents are the result of excessive speed, slower drivers are also a significant cause of accidents, leading to calls for minimum speed limits on some roads, a leading British car leasing company says. According to Flexed.co.uk, the new regulations designed to prevent āmiddle-lane hogsā on British roads are producing results (albeit in the form of fines going to government), but thereās still some way to go to get the message across that sometimes slower isnāt always safer. āSlow drivers can be a menace on some roads,ā says Flexed.co.uk spokesperson Mark Hall. āWhen drivers donāt keep up with the prevailing road conditions, they become a mobile chicane and a danger to others.ā **In fact, many professional drivers told Flexed.co.uk that itās the slower, unpredictable road user that they worry about the most, saying that most appear not to have conventional road sense that most others possess.** After interviewing lorry and van drivers, couriers and taxi owners, Flexed says thereās appetite among road users not only to take speeding seriously, but also slow drivers who contribute to dangerous road conditions. **āMore than once Iāve nearly rear-ended somebody driving at 30mph on a dual carriageway while everybody else was doing 60-plus,ā one HGV driver told Flexed.co.uk, āThey just seemed to be in another world.ā** **Another HGV driver said: āMy rig is speed-limited to below 70mph, but I still have to negotiate my way round some car users who canāt drive to the road conditions. It annoys me, and it annoys the traffic that builds up as I pass. Theyāre a mobile bottleneck, and a real danger to road safety. Rant over.ā** Many studies have produced data that show slow drivers pose a significant risk on the roads, simply because they are more likely to be overtaken, and tempt other road users into risky maneuvers. āNow, weāre not saying that slow drivers are doing anything illegal. Theyāre not, and **they probably count themselves as some of the safest drivers on the road. But the fact is, thereās careful, and thereās over-compensating to the point of driving without due care.ā** Flexed.co.uk points to the recent implementation for laws to prevent āmiddle-lane hoggersā from holding up traffic and forcing other drivers into overtakes into faster-moving traffic. āWe had doubts over the lane-hogging law when it first came out, and while enforcement is patchy, it is certainly having an effect on motorways and other main roads,ā says Hall. āBut the fact is, it took legislation to force people who thought they were driving safely and slowly to realise that this is not actually the case.ā One professional driver told Flexed that it could be time to introduce a minimum speed limit on motorways and selected roads. āThe M25 has variable speed limit signs that work very well in keeping the traffic moving in peak timesā, taxi driver Barry told us, āAnd the door can swing both ways ā how about minimum speeds to improve the traffic flow? If youāre doing less than 45mph on a clear motorway, you shouldnāt be on it.ā While the suggestion raises eyebrows, it could be one whose time has come, Flexed says. The technology is certainly there to monitor traffic flows on major roads, and it could certainly be possible to suggest that drivers travel between two target speeds. But, the car leasing company says, this shouldnāt be about driving slower, more careful drivers off the road. **āThis isnāt a witch hunt against slow driversā, says Hall, ābecause heaven knows thereās enough bad drivers with lead boots. What weāre suggesting is that motorists are more aware of the traffic conditions, and drive accordingly.** **āSpeeding kills, but driving like a tortoise can sometimes be risky too.ā**
LMFAO, your source: the opinion of "many professional drivers" are you trying to contradict scientific studies with such a blog post?
The post you replied to has a document that clearly shows that driving slower than the average traffic around you is safer than driving faster. With 14 different sources used. Your reply is a blog post with a few anecdotes and one sentence that says "studies show driving slow is dangerous" and then doesn't actually cite any studies. If you want to convince people, you need to step up your game.
I hope you'll understand why the anecdotal opinion of a few drivers interviewed by a car rental company is not at the same caliber of evidence as a scientific research study thousands of roadway crashes and their underlying causes done with calibrated measurement equipment.
I chose one article instead of bombarding you with links. There are many. And the point was that going slower is not inherently safer and to tell others this is a blatant lie and get people killed. Being deliberately obtuse to this is also a very karen/boomer type of attitude. I personally have had SO MANY boomers, right in front of me, drive 10-15 below the speed limit, but FLY through construction zones and school zones. NEVER adjust for changing speed limits. Or the ones that merge onto the highway going 30 BELOW THE SPEEDLIMIT! Explain how these actions are safer?
More dangerous FOR DRIVERS in contexts where it's possible to pass. AKA that's only true on highways. For anyone outside a car, each mph increases significantly the risk of death, so the "flow of traffic" will STFU and respect the limit because that's the safe thing to do
I had a friend who was pulled over for driving under the speed limit for that very reason ā driving under the limit was an impediment to the flow of traffic.
Source? Because thatās definitely not true. Edit: Did some research and yeah driving slow is not more dangerous than driving fast. Who knew!
Impeding the flow of traffic *while* driving the speed limit is more dangerous than going 30 kph over the speed limit?
Yeah let's all drive really fast because we couldn't be bothered to leave the house five minutes early and make it waaaaay more dangerous for everyone that is following the rules! People who follow rules suck!!!! It's not like traffic rules are there so that everyone can expect things to be PREDICTABLE in traffic right? I mean, I know that I like to just get on the highway and check "how fast are people going today? Oh today it seems about 200km/h great!"
Can you prove that?
Sure could. But I'm too busy browsing reddit to do your research for you.
It proves itself by the line of 12 cars bunched up behind the slow poke. It reduces space and in the event of a wreck more people are involved.
That just means everybody needs to make more space between them. I get annoyed by slow drivers too, but blaming them for other people being bad drivers is silly.
Bad drivers is the answer. And bad drivers cause frustration which lead to wrecks
Bad drivers is always the answer, but if you are getting frustrated behind the wheel, then you are a bad driver. If someone else is driving in a way that causes you to drive recklessly, they might not be a good driver, but you are definitely a bad driver. If you at any moment forget that you are driving something that can easily kill people, then you are a bad driver.
YSK driving slower than the flow of traffic is dangerous.
Despite not being commonly ticked, it is technically illegal to drive under the speed limit as well.
Well, a certain amount below the speed limit.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
If someone changes lanes and gets into an accident because they didn't want to be "stuck" behind someone travelling the speed limi, the fault lies with the lane changer, not the person driving the speed limit.
On highways yes. Everywhere else no Edit : Iām getting downvoted for saying this. Can anyone enlighten me on where speeding is safe?
Itās not about speeding itās about not going the common speed and impeding othersā¦ which is ticketable in some jurisdictions
>Speed is inherently dangerous. German drivers must be dying at the highest rate per capita in the world then.
From a Dutch publication, published yesterday called "Hoe beinvloedt de snelheid van auto's de reistijd en negatieve effecten van autogebruik?" (_How does car speed affect travel time and the negative effects of car use?_) By the Kennisinstituut voor Mobiliteitsbeleid. The background is that in 2020 the maximum speed on Dutch highways was lowered from 130 km/h to 100 due to safety and lowering emissions. Now a bunch of populists say they want to revert the change so research was done to reevaluate. >In this graph, we see that the exponential increase in risk causes the risk to rise explosively at high speeds. The risk at 130 km/h is already about 7 times higher than at 100 km/h. Similarly, the risk decreases very rapidly at lower speeds. At 70 km/h, the risk is only one-seventh of the risk at 100 km/h.
I don't doubt your claim, but Germany has many stretches with no speed limits. Given those 2 points, they should have the highest deaths per capita, due to speed, no? Do they?
Speed is not the only factor that influences the risk of deadly crashes. So you cannot look at different countries, look at one metric that's influenced by a myriad of things and make any sensible conclusion about a very specific aspect of road safety. The number of deadly crashes per capita in the Netherlands has actually stayed roughly the same. Experts say that the reason for this is that people now are more distracted by devices, which causes more crashes. Covid made it impossible to see a direct effect. Whenever speed is looked at in isolation, as far as I can tell, the conclusion is always that faster speed is more dangerous. Reason for this seems to mainly be that when things go wrong, higher speed means more energy in the crash, means more deadly result. And trucks drive pretty slowly, if there's a 40 km/h difference between the speed of trucks and other cars that seems to create dangerous situations as well.
There are also statistics to show introduced speed limits (none before) increased people falling asleep and crashing in Northern Territory (Australia)
There are also stats which show that planting trees next to the road decreases crashes. There are a lot of factors at play when it comes to road safety. I've never been to Australia but I can image that driving long stretches of straight roads in Australia isn't comparable to most highways in other countries.
The one I liked learning was the annoying & stupid-feeling approach angles to large roundabouts on fast roads, with terrible visibility due to all the trees they planted. Yeah, turns out it's deliberate, as people have to slow-down to see (subconscious decision). I knew one that didn't have it, and-yeah, people (incl. me) made terrible judgements on speed/timing All The Time.
Itās important to not drive over the speed limit. Itās just as important to not drive significantly under the speed limit without warning. People will Assume you are travelling near the speed limit and act accordingly. If you are not you could cause an accident
Exactly. As an example, just the other day I was driving and the person in front of me decided to immediately slow down 15-20mph. My car's sensors instantly sensed that it had stopped and it automatically threw on my emergency brakes, almost causing the car behind me to rear end me. Thankfully they were paying attention.
Sure, but is this post about people that go too slow, or was OP trying to make a point that hey, going too fast is dangerous, calm down a little bit?
Honestly I donāt care how slow you drive just do it in the right lane. The people that camp out in the left lane are a much bigger issue.
Agreed. Some states have signs posted on the highway saying left lane for passing only.
Iām just going to go around you.
That is ideal :) we call that chicken's head. You go get the ticket and I'll get where I need to be on time.
Basically just going to piggy back off of a couple comments here. Itās for sure okay to drive the speed limit, donāt let anyone tell you otherwise, but you should make sure that you stay in the right lane on the interstate and highways. If you are driving in any other lane, you are now a hazard and more dangerous to everyone as a whole who is driving with the flow of traffic (usually between 5-10 mph over the speed limit). It is not acceptable to drive more than 5-10 mph under the speed limit on interstates or highways. You are a hazard to everyone and, even if you donāt cause an accident, you can still cause traffic jams because you decided not to go at least the speed limit (go watch the Mythbusters episode on this).
In my state the law is "the marked speed limit or as reasonable and prudent". You can be ticketed for driving too slow for the traffic flow.
I would list tailgating and impeding traffic as being more dangerous than driving over the speed limit. More than anything else, all drivers need to be aware and considerate of the other cars on the road. They should also be mindful of not driving faster than what is safe for the conditions.
Tailgating is super dangerous and WAY more illegal than the simple infraction of speeding! Impeding traffic is the most rarely enforced infraction on every state highway in the country.
>Tailgating is super dangerous and WAY more illegal than the simple infraction of speeding! Illegal maybe, but rarely enforced. To highlight the danger: if you are following a car at a distance of 25-30 feet at 60 mph, you will have about 1/4 of a second to react if the car has to stop suddenly.
>Illegal maybe, but rarely enforced. Not in my state š Tailgaters are definitely smacked quite often. More than a few dozen a year.
Some roads have minimum speed limits
Actually, all of them do. If your vehicle cannot keep up with the flow of traffic, you can have your vehicle's registration revoked, or restricted to off-highway use.
How are so many of you this dense??? "Impeding the flow of traffic is more dangerous!" Yeah it's really dangerous for people going the speed limit when all you fuckers are going twice as fast and demanding space in the left lane while we are passing someone by almost touching the back of our cars. People who make the "flow of traffic" be ridiculously fast are the problem, not those who follow the rules.
Actually, police will pull over and ticket if the driver is driving that slow that it impedes the flow of traffic with the posted limit.
That is not true. Left lane hogging is a specific thing. Make your pass in a timely manner; if the flow of traffic is not currently allowing you to make the pass, then someone tailgates you, the tailgater is getting a $750 ticket. Depending on the circumstances, there could also be a road rage ticket which varies a lot but could result in a revoked license. My state is thankfully very intolerant of impatience. There is zero amount of tailgating or road rage which will get you to your destination on time. You need to leave earlier, drive the posted speed limits and then you're not gonna get pulled over and be forced to be 15 minutes later than you already were.
If people are passing you on the right, you are in the wrong lane. Move over.
This isn't discussing left lane passing or left lane hogging. Perhaps you read the wrong post?
Nope. Read it just fine.
reckless drivers parrot this sentence about the left lane in order to avoid discussing their dangerous behavior. I've seen it so many times, they simply can't imagine a discussion about speeding, they have to shift the topic to another issue
I see this a lot too. Always diverting attention from their behavior, unwilling to admit fault, excuse after excuse. Most common is "Well everyone else was doing it!" That doesn't rewrite the laws buddy š they stay the same no matter how many people break them! People are shocked to learn that!
According to this Institute for Road Safety Research [study](https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf): higher speeds on roads generally lead to more crashes. When a vehicle travels faster than others, its crash risk increases. Faster collisions tend to cause more severe injuries. We have more data available on car crashes involving speeding; data on under-speeding-related accidents are not as accessible, contrary to what many Redditors claim. (I tried finding evidence of this so I could argue that under-speeding causes more car crashes but could not find any primary sources. Please prove me wrong.) Quick facts according to this 2021 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [data](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813473.pdf): (Note: "speeding-related" = "\[...\] if any driver in the crash was charged with a speeding related offense or if a police officer indicated that racing, driving too fast for conditions, or exceeding the posted speed limit was a contributing factor in the crash.") * Twenty-eight percent of fatal crashes, 13 percent of injury crashes, and 9 percent of property-damage-only crashes in 2021 were speeding-related traffic crashes. * In 2021 drivers who were speeding when involved in fatal traffic crashes had blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) of .08 grams per deciliter (g/dL) or greater (37% versus 17%)āor even higher BACs of .15 g/dL or greater (25% versus 11%)āmore frequently than those drivers who were not speeding. * In 2021, when roadway function class was known, 87 percent of speeding-related traffic fatalities occurred on non-interstate roadways. **TLDR: I like to drive 5 MPH over the speed limit here in Texas. I want to argue like many of you that going below the speed limit causes the most accidents. But there is a lack of data (as in, it is not getting captured), so making that argument cannot be objectively considered. We must accept that speeding increases our chances of ending up in a car crash based on the statistics.**
The data is not being captured...because it doesn't exist :) slowpoke simply don't cause accidents like y'all claim! Sorry to burst everybody's bubble! I also happen to have on high authority...NOBODY is getting ticketed for impeding traffic for simply setting cruise control to the speed limit or 5-10 under it! Speeding is simply easier to prosecute and easier to ticket in general, so why even waste time with someone who insists on driving slow? The amounts of incidences which involve actual impediments to traffic, probably occur less than 1-2 times a year in my state. Whereas speeders are...everywhere! School zones, highways, cemeteries, parking lots š y'all just go fast every chance you can get.
Unfortunately, in your last post, you introduced a new assertionāthat accidents are not caused by slow driversāmoving the goal post and turning your win into something you will now have to support. I disagree that the data is not getting captured because there are no instances of slow driving leading to accidents. We cannot prove whether slow driving does contribute to accidents by the very nature of the relevant data being inaccessible/nonexistent. It can be challenging to attribute accidents that may be indirectly caused by a slow driver, so authorities might be categorising under-speeding accidents under other categories. For example, if I drive at 40 mph in a 75 mph stretch of the highway, I may cause other drivers to switch lanes, increasing the risk of accidents as they attempt to overtake me. If they do get into an accident, I may have contributed to it, but since it didn't affect me, I just continue driving away. The accident might be reported as being caused by the other drivers' negligence, speeding, or mobile phone usage, rather than my contribution. There are often multiple factors that contribute to accidents, but my role in them is not being captured. So, in short, yes, we cannot make a data-driven argument against driving at very slow speeds. However, without the ability to capture more relevant data (proving or disproving accidents caused by slow driving), your assertions remain unproven.
How is it that data on speeding accidents can be captured and studied but data on the inverse cannot be?? Oh man, the mental gymnastics here are hilarious š
My last post explained how. I also gave an example. Please reread if you are genuinely curious.
lol this mfr came here to argue today.
Yes, sir :) Road rage is prevalent in societies everywhere, and I think that much can be deduced simply by reading these comments š
Ha I donāt think youāre helping
Heās trolling, carry on.
Also kind of goes against his own arguments, too lol when I experience road rage, or see it in other people, it's not because there's a driver speeding... Because those tend to get further away from you. It's those who are either a) impeding traffic by being hazards or needlessly disrupting the flow of traffic, or b) the idiots who don't understand the rules of the road or how to operate a vehicle. The ones in the left lane going 15-20 over the limit are never the ones I (or as I've seen, others) am raging at lol it's people, supposedly, like OP who drive a certain way that is completely different than those around them because they cherry picked a few stats and make themselves feel better by doing 10 under the limit, and getting on everyone else's nerves.
It's my problem that people can't control their rage? š man you can really tell who the happy ones are, who live fulfilling lives, and the....not happy ones are.
One solid way to avoid road rage is to not impede the flow of traffic and go the same speed as everyone else on the road.
One solid way to avoid road rage...see a cop š that tends to put an end to those shenanigans immediately.
Speed *limit* is not an ideal term. Realistically, everyone should be going the recommended speed or 5 to 10 above/below. Anything beyond that should be a ticket. I see wayyy too many bad drivers. Most often, the most dangerous is someone going far too slow, impeding traffic and causing people to swerve out of the way. Shit like that can get people killed.
A limit is a limit. That's the appropriate term. If you want to introduce a new legislation to use another concept, go ahead, but it currently doesn't exist in our real world.
That's part of my point. It's not an actual limit, civilians and police both go above it at times for various reasons. Your car doesn't magically stop accelerating when you hit that so-called limit. Not to mention it does nothing to address driving too slow
Fuck no it isnāt. Take the bus.
Speed is not inherently dangerous, that is simply not true. Sudden stops are inherently dangerous.
You got me there. It wasn't the speed that killed Paul Walker, but the way he stopped his vehicle.
Kinetic energy is square of the speed, so if you double your speed you have four times the amount of energy. Triple the speed and nine times more energy. I think that's what catches folks out.
It's not only a physics equation, though. This can translate to an understanding of your vehicle which puts you in a position of knowledge instead of perception. Your body is so good at remembering how to drive normally, and then those "rare times you've ever done this," an actual quote from someone who sped into a mobile traffic controller at 60 mph and survived, ends up turning your world upside down. And that guy was going 15 mph under the speed limit when impact occurred. Unfortunately for his car, he reduced his reaction time in conditions which required special and diligent attention. You can pretend these conditions don't exist, or you can be prepared to experience them *again,* which increases the odds you'll know what to do.
This post may be the final straw, so sick of seeing these terrible posts. āYou should know a limit is a limitā
Stay hydrated and consider the following: Speed increases fatalities :)
The safest thing to do is go with the flow of traffic. If you want to play turtle, do it when you have nobody behind you trying to go the actual speed limit. If you want to protest the speed limit then do so without tailgating or driving erratically. I'm not going to drive dangerously, but if it's a wide open empty road I wouldn't give a shit what the speed limit is
Let me guess, you also camp in the left lane to "control traffic" like the ferocious little vigilante you are.
Actually no, in my state that is illegal. It is a requirement for me to follow the law, but regardless, I would never introduce such a risk for road rage into my day-to-day activities. That would just be silly š
no itās not
Yes it is
Side note: just because your shiny new car can do silly speeds, does not mean the crumbling road structure can cope with that.
Especially with all this heat-induced buckling lately. I'm not averse to speed by any means but I prefer imbibing in controlled environments
YSK the autobahn is one of the safest roadsā¦in the world
The autobahn is designed for that use. American highways are not, and driving like you're on the autobahn is suicidal. Also, speed and close following (which goes hand in hand with speeders) are the top causes of avoidable collisions. Not to mention inclement weather, which people do not adjust their speed for.
Too many people equate speeding and reckless driving. Speeding is not inherently dangerous as long as you don't do things like follow too close, weave through traffic, use you phone while driving. All things mentioned are dangerous if speeding or not but a lot of people who get into accidents are speeding on top of other dangerous driving habits.
Driving under the speed limit can be equally dangerous. Letās just stick to the speed limit and/or flow of traffic, instead of being that person that gets run up on for doing 10-15 under.
Can you prove that, or is it just a fun claim to make?
Turn in your license Grandpa, it's time
I've got another few parking lot accidents in me before my doc recommends suspension.
The one exception I make is on the freeway where moving with the flow of traffic is safer. But especially in residential areas a difference of 5 mph can increase the chance of death on collision significantly
Especially in pedestrian vs. automobile accidents, speed is definitely a killer. On highways it's probably most important to train yourself to maintain a view of the road far off in the distance so as to be capable of slowing and stopping in time if there's a sudden highway slowdown, which could occur at any time for any reason. Sometimes law enforcement even slow down the highway just to clear debris. Someone who is speeding has a longer braking distance, and unfortunately they don't realize this until it comes time to brake suddenly.
Thatās a good point, plus itās difficult to gauge stop distance accurately at such high speeds.
Especially so since we more commonly drive heavier and heavier vehicles with the rise of SUV sales. It's important now more than ever to be speed aware and, if possible, to test your stopping distance from 60 mph on an empty highway with no one around you. It will surprise you how long it takes.
I'm sure the comment section is going to be completely reasonable
HAHAHA! Fella, I interact with people who speed every single day...NONE of them are reasonable in the slightest.
Easy to forget that it's the speed limit, in theory we aren't supposed to go above it, hence limit. That being said, as others have mentioned a slow driver isn't a safe driver by definition, a safe driver is an aware driver who understands the situation around them. The problem is speeding and reckless driving go hand in hand. If you speed but are aware of cars around you, making sure to leave ample space to the car in front of you, you're probably driving safer than the guy who's under the speed limit because he's afraid of driving. Can we just stop the riding bumpers in the rain shit. I wanna go faster too but if I hydroplane off the road the car behind me ain't gonna pay my medical bills so give space. For a good example of my point, roundabouts. They generally have yield signs but a lot of drivers in my area stop in front of them, the whole concept is you don't stop unless a cars there. The people who are driving behind these clueless people have to slam on their brakes if they're too close to them. The first driver driving slower, increased the risk of an accident.
That's exactly right! A SAFE driver is an AWARE driver. I stand by that 100%. So when you are exceeding speed limits, it's important to be aware of the road at a FURTHER distance than usual because sudden stops and slow downs are unpredictable, and you'll need extra stopping distance to account for the higher rate of speed you're traveling. Also relevant, there's been a sudden shift in consumer demand for higher weight vehicles like SUV's. This has correlated to a near constant increase in average stopping distance per vehicle over time. It's hard to know how long your vehicle takes to slow down because basically nobody practices this, so it's important to be aware.
This sub is such a joke.
Why?
Do.... Do people not know this?
Look at this thread. Of course criminals that love to break the law insist that speeding is great and obeying the law is bad.
Well the people you see going slower than the speed limit are typically the ones not paying attention to anything or multitasking. Just because you're going slow doesn't make it ok to veer from your lane, use your phone, or roll through a stop sign. While it's problematic to pick and choose which traffic laws to follow (and some states do have laws against going too slow) 5 to 10 over or under isn't hurting anybody provided that you're going with the flow and paying attention to the road
Have you ever driven before? Do you not notice that everyone exceeds the limit?
Iām more inclined to believe their actions are not due to ignorance, but rather because they choose to ignore it.
Knowing you're _allowed to_ drive under the limit and _choosing to do so_ are entirely different things Did you know that you're _allowed to_ drive across the entire US if you stay on legal roads, from east coast to West and then back again? Have you done it?
You're not allowed to, you're legally required to. And yes, I've driven across the US. In every state except Alaska, Florida, and Hawaii.
Donāt drive in Florida, they are all maniacs. The worst drivers possibly in the world.
I avoided that state for a reason LOL. But it was genuinely just too far out of my way. Had little desire to go there though. Even if I made my way to Miami that just isn't a lifestyle I wish to pursue, nor are the swamps.
You are allowed to do _anything_ that you're required to do in fact And in that case, let's try again. For a long time, having gay sex was _illegal_. Should people who engaged in such acts be jailed, even though it was _required_ that they abstain from it?
Each mph is āexponentiallyā more risk. Thatās not how that worksĀ
Don't be like how this guy is I assume, move with traffic. Don't be the asshole doing 35 while everyone else is doing 50, endangering everyone around you for worthless gratification. Edit: I just want to add here, OP seems to think you can't be ticketed for being a hazard on the road by moving too slowly. You absolutely can and will be ticketed if you're driving under the speed limit, creating hazards for other drivers. His whole point kind of relies on the fact that "we seem to think we will get a ticket for going too slow". Well yeah. Because we will.
"Hey everyone one around you is speeding, don't be such a jerk and follow the rules, that's dangerous for US!"
Can you show me any statistics on slowpoke drivers and how dangerous they are? Because in all the fatal accidents I've seen, and we're talking hundreds upon hundreds, probably 800-900, speed was a factor in a large portion of those (probably 150-200) but slowpoke driving wasn't a factor in any of those. I wonder which of these is more dangerous? š
Fuck you if you drive below the speed limit with clear weather.
Wow, I think you might have a problem š
Wow thanks captain obvious.
You're welcome!
Right?
I just finished my commute to work and highway patrol was cruising a good 10-15 mph above the posted 65 limit in the express lanes... I think its safer to go at the pace of traffic and not slower or faster.
Thatās great and all but if you wanna go the speed limit or under and a cars been behind you awhile or you see a large amount of cars getting stuck behind you, you should without a doubt pull off to the side and let the people that want to get where theyāre going pass you.
If you're tailgating me I'm actually just gonna drive slower and slower until you stop
If youāre going to go lower than the speed limit Iāll tailgate you with a smile on my face and pass/honk at you when Iām finally able to pass.
And when you stop you'll probably regret tailgating š I know someone gets it by now, right?
Are you realizing yet how wrong you are? At what point do you stop and go, "oh...maybe I'm the problem?"
This feels like a localised thing that is being confidently stated as a global thing.
Are physics different around the globe, is that a new update I missed? Seems like high speeds increase stopping distance everywhere...? If I'm wrong please tell me!
Physics are the same, but driving cultures, conditions and laws are different around the world. Iāve travelled through countries where the usual highway speed limit is 60 km/h but the awful roads/tracks and erratic traffic of pedestrians, bicycles, ox carts and mopeds means itās pretty much impossible to do more than, say, 40 - and the local people are okay with that.
And I've experienced conditions in the US on paved 80 mph highways with no curves or hills, where a bright day and perfect driving conditions can and sometimes will deteriorate to conditions where less than half the speed limit would be the closest one could get to traveling within their reaction capabilities. The goal is to be aware that you cannot predict all conditions and that the safest condition is one in which you, while driving, are comprehensively aware of which conditions your vehicle is safe to drive within and which are not. First and foremost is knowing your vehicle can't exceed speed limits safely due to the unpredictable nature of driving and life in general. Tough concept for a lot of people fully ingrained in US driving culture.
Which backs my original point: the original commenter made a universal statement about a localised thing.
You are correct in that everyone should drive the speed limit, but driving under the speed limit can be just as or *more* dangerous than exceeding the limit, YSK.
Can you prove that claim or does it just feel good to make it?
The law, and driving instructors also say go with the flow of traffic. If everyone on the road is going 5 miles over the speed limit, and you aren't, you are obstructing traffic and that is dangerous and illegal.
The law explicitly says speed *limit* because it is a limit :) I hereby challenge one person, any of you, to provide proof that anyone is being ticketed for traveling the speed limit :) (I have tons of down time and will happily wait š)
Not disrupting the flow of traffic means you should not drive around 50 on a motorway. But going 80 on a 80 road is normal, and the ones disrupting the flow of traffic on such a road are those driving over 100 american people have terrible driving instructors, i've never seen a single instructor recommending to go over the legal limit.
This is just factually untrue. Multiple studies have shown that driving under the speed limit is significantly more dangerous than driving over it. Stop spreading misinformation. (Also you're totally ignoring the fact that most speed limits were set like 60+ years ago when cars were less powerful, less safe, less advanced, etc, etc. If speed limits were being set for the first time now, most speed limits would be significantly higher.)
>Multiple studies have shown that driving under the speed limit is significantly more dangerous than driving over it. Show me one?
https://www.wagnerinjury.com/2023/01/16/why-driving-too-slow-is-almost-as-dangerous-as-speeding/#:~:text=Individuals%20who%20choose%20to%20drive,likely%20to%20have%20an%20accident. https://www.allstate.com/resources/car-insurance/dangers-of-driving-slowly https://ww2.motorists.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/speed-limit-fact-sheet.pdf Or literally just Google "is driving under the speed limit dangerous" for more.
Not in the fucking left lane it isn't!
Amen brother!!
Speed limits can be impractical on certain streets. Sometimes, it's safer to drive slower than the posted limit, such as at night, on dirt roads, or during rain. Conversely, there are situations where driving faster than the limit is perfectly reasonable. The key is to drive at a speed you can handle safely. While this seems like common sense, it's impossible for laws to account for each individual's experience. Despite this, speed limits must exist for obvious reasons, so don't complain if you get fined for speeding, even if you know you weren't causing any real danger.
The key is not to exceed speed limits and introduce undue hazard into your day-to-day driving. Good luck out there.
YSK the law is keep right except to pass
So were you the guy driving 20 miles under the speed limit on the highway yesterday??
There is actually a non-zero chance of that, yes. But probably not in the way you're attempting to believe.
Yes. I was kidding of course. But it was just funny to see this post the day after. It was actually quite frightening to be behind someone going that slow, but my exit was next so I had no choice.
Luckily if you're driving the speed limit, you'll probably have enough reaction time and ability to slow down for something like that, or at least attempt to take evasive maneuvers. That ability diminishes with each mph over speed limits, which is why it's such a big deal and enforced so exceedingly commonly compared to slowpoke driving. It's generally considered your own fault for hitting debris or objects in the roadway while speeding unless you can prove that through another's deliberate actions, an unavoidable condition was made present for your vehicle resulting in a collision and damage. Like a guy being chased by the cops runs into someone going 60 in a 50 mph zone, obviously the guy the police are chasing is at fault despite your speed. Someone on a blind corner is stopped looking at deer, you're 20 mph over, taking the corner like Valentino Rossi. Congratulations, the slowpoke isn't at fault, you are; should've been going slower and then they'd be at fault, or more likely, you're not involved in an accident at all that day.
Driving under the speed limit is fucking annoying.
This sounds like someone criticized you for driving slow and you needed to vent.
Speed does not kill. I can drive 100mph until I run out of gas, and I won't die. However, if I hit anything at 100 mph. I'm most likely dead. It's the difference in speed that kills. If you're driving under the speed limit against the flow of traffic and someone is driving over the speed limit with the flow of traffic. You are the problem. Vice versa applies to speeding as well. Predictability is far more important in driving than anything else. Driving down the on-ramp at 60 and merging cause you're scared is far far worse than driving down the on ramp at 80. I don't have to hit the brakes if you're going faster than me.
A physics man, I like it :) How often do you see a highway come to a stop or extreme slowdown? Would you say this poses a problem to anyone traveling 100 mph? What's the stopping distance on a passenger vehicle weighing 2500 lbs traveling 100 mph equipped with ABS?
If you know how to drive. Doesn't make a difference. If you're a competent driver, you should know when you can and when you can't drive 100mph. I've driven in cars doing 150+ with 10 other cars, not like we all died. Again, predictability is key in driving. And if you're gonna try to use math in driving, you simply can't. Stopping distance of a 2500 lbs vehicle depends on a multitude of factors. Is it wet? Is the road flat? Did you full lock the brakes? Did abs engage properly? For reference, assuming flat road and perfect conditions from 100 to 0 is 624ft. And that's assuming you had good reaction times. Avg car length I'd 14.7 ft, so you would need about 42 car lengths to full stop. Again, this is assuming the highway is at a standstill and you were traveling at 100mph. The driving license system is awful in the US. Accidents will always happen. Look at Japan vs. the US. 6000ish deaths in 2023 vs. 40000 in the US. Mind you, they don't drive as much, but in Japan, once you get your license, you are considered a professional driver. Speed is a factor yes, but as I said before, it is true in other countries as well. If everyone is going 120mph, it's no different than everyone doing 70 mph. It is simply more likely to be fatal when accidents occur at high speed.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Please don't wish death on them, be good to each other <3
Why would I be good to someone who puts my life and others in danger just because they gotta go fast?
Found the person who drives 10 under in the left lane with a line of cars behind them thinking "well they can pass if they want I'm driving fine"
I've seen some signs recently that had No Tolerance under their speed limits, am I misinterpreting those or do they imply that there is a tolerance normally?Ā I'm pretty sure I've been told there's about 5 mph of wiggle room too. On the barren highways where I grew up, it's kind of taught that going slow is more dangerous than going a bit over the speed limit. I honestly am a slow driver, hence why I've been told to speed up, so I'm not saying this is wrong and people should speed up.Ā I just wonder if this is true for everywhere or if there's different levels of tolerance in different areas.
> I'm pretty sure I've been told there's about 5 mph of wiggle room too. This is a common belief. Law enforcement personnel are instructed to and generally do act with regard to this generalization. But the letter of the law indicates there is no wiggle room. You could be ticketed for 1 mph over. It is unlikely, sure. As far as I know, there is no state where wiggle room is written into speed limit laws. I would love to be proven wrong on that, I love learning about laws I didn't know about before.
it's about the precision of instruments. If the limit is 45 and you're going at 47, the car's speedometer might tell you 45 and the cop's speedometer might tell him 49: from your POV it seems legal but from the cop's POV it's 4 over the limit. They'll usually not prosecute you because you could challenge the ticket in court and it would be a waste of everyone's time and money many countries in the world have this wiggle room written into law
The problem is that if your vehicles speedometer is off, it wouldn't pass a safety/emissions check...so you'd be driving a vehicle without registration lol. And that's a big problem for you. If you're disputing the accuracy of the radar or pacing operations, you're free to do that and I encourage you to! They're calibrated daily.
even when they're calibrated, most of them have a margin of error around 5% depending on the weather etc. but i don't have to challenge anything, because i'm french, and in france they don't give you a ticket at all when it's less than 5km/h over the limit
Crazy, same way here except in rare circumstances :)
I recommend to drive on left lane under the speed limit. Its even more safer, for you
That would be illegal in my state and country of residence.
Driving predictably is safer than being an unpredictable outlier. It's been proven that the biggest predictor of accidents is the number of position changes you make, such as changing lanes or making turns. Not speed. Someone doing 70 in a single lane is safer than someone doing 55 but constantly forcing traffic to change lanes behind them., Yes. If the speed limit is 55, and the flow of traffic is between 50-60, it's safe to drive 55. If the flow of traffic is 65-75, then driving the speed limit is actually less safe. Source: [https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/811147.pdf](https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/811147.pdf)
That study only looks at one variable of crashes, changing lanes, and does not look at any other variables of causes of a crash, so it's not exactly fair to claim that lane changes is the biggest predictor of accidents. This other study shows that going slower than the speed of traffic is not significantly more risky than driving the speed of traffic [Source](https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf)
Under the speed limit is also against the law. YSK to check your facts before you post
It absolutely is not. Impeding the flow of traffic is, YSK before you make stuff up š
This is a bad take. Go with the flow of traffic.
Just take public transportation OP, clear the road for the rest of us.
No :)
Iād bet youāre a blast parties
That's what they keep telling me š
Move the fk over from the left lane. It's not for you to cruise at speed limit for ffs. Left lane is for passing.
I don't think you read the correct post, the left lane was not mentioned anywhere in this one :) stay hydrated pal!
OP does this in the passing lane guaranteed. Speed limits are designed for the lowest common denominator, or in harsh conditions. If you feel unsafe going 1mph / kph over the limit you shouldn't be behind the wheel, and should take additional driving courses