Driving over the speed limit

[Frosted_Glass]

@Keeve

I drive the Garden State Parkway (New Jersey) several times a day, and it is routine for most other drivers to be going ten miles over the limit – 65 mph in the 55 areas, 75 in the 65 areas. I am particularly annoyed by drivers over the Driscoll Bridge (between exits 125 and 127), which is subject to very high winds, who drive over it at 65 mph, despite the posted limit of 45 mph. Even the areas before and after it are only 55 mph. (The 65 mph area begins at Cheesequake, about 3 miles south of the bridge.)

I find that other drivers have annoyed looks on their faces when they pass me, even though I always stay in one of the two rightmost lanes. This gives them plenty of space on my left in which to pass me if they want, yet they curse me out anyway.

I avoid the Dricoll Bridge like the plague but I have spent a considerable amount of time commuting on the Parkway between exits 129 and 145. One thing that I noticed is when people come off the Turnpike and onto the Parkway, they tend to resume Turnpike speed (65 mph) despite the fact that the Parkway is 55 mph in this area.

When I was learning to drive I always found the Parkway to be particularly unsettling because of the tendency of the drivers to exceed the speed limit by 10-15 mph in such a small space.

[Keeve]

@Frosted Glass

I avoid the Dricoll Bridge like the plague but I have spent a considerable amount of time commuting on the Parkway between exits 129 and 145. One thing that I noticed is when people come off the Turnpike and onto the Parkway, they tend to resume Turnpike speed (65 mph) despite the fact that the Parkway is 55 mph in this area.

Here are some interesting tidbits that I’ve discovered:

When driving southbound on the Parkway, and approaching the Driscoll Bridge from the north, there is a very large sign on the first overpass that says “Bridge Speed 45 MPH”. And when driving northbound on the Parkway, approaching the bridge from the north, there are two smaller signs on each side of the road (near where the lights begin) that say the same thing.

BUT if you are coming from the Outerbridge Crossing / Route 440, going onto the Parkway Southbound, that brings you all the way to the very beginning of the bridge, in the far right lanes, and there are no speed limit signs of any kind until you get to the other side of the bridge, near the tolls. I think that drivers coming from the Turnpike might end up on those same ramps. In such cases, they would be truly unaware of the correct speed limit. I wonder if this ever came up in a court case.

(Ooops! On rereading your post, I see that you’re talking about those who go from the Turnpike to the Parkway northbound, away from the bridge. Oh, well, I’m not going to let all that typing go to waste…)

[gonzomax]

If you assume you can drive up to 10 mph more than the speed limit,don’t be surprised if you get a ticket. When it gets close to the end of the month around here enforcement gets much tougher. I can drive a couple miles and see 4 or 5 cars pulled over.

[RTFirefly]

@DSYoungEsq

Anyone who is driving faster than the posted limit is breaking the law. They are as much law breakers as anyone else violating any other law.

So? If I fail to get my registration sticker by the renewal date, the same can be said about me while I’m driving for a day or two with an expired registration.

Sounds impressive, but really BFD.

[Who_me_1]

@MrDibble

This is all too weird - I have never knowingly broken the speed limit, nor would I ever outside of an emergency. I just stick to the left lane and drive my way.

On the other hand, I break the speed limit more often than not. Yeah, I’ve gotten tickets in the past… I still speed.

[RTFirefly]

@Critical1

Germany (no I don’t know who exactly, I am quoting from memory) did a study with 2 drivers
1000 mile drive
driver A is told to get there yesterday, go, drive like the wind
driver B is told to take it easy, go with the flow and stay safe.

Driver A passed almost 1200 cars along the way and was passed by 13, he had to hit the brakes around 1400 times and arrived after 20 hours and 15 minutes. (from memory)
Driver B passed around 400 cars, was passed byt 150 cars and had to brake about 700 times and got there after 20 hours and 45 minutes.

driver A burned over 15 gallons more gas to save a total of 30 minutes on a 20 hour plus drive the fuel alone doesnt justify the speed, nevermind the extra risk for everyone.

I’m not sure I believe that.

First of all, on the Autobahns of Germany, the term “go with the flow” doesn’t even make much sense. People stay in the right lane, driving whatever speed suits them, and they only use the left lane to pass - which they do in a blinding hurry by American standards, so as to not slow down anyone else who might want to pass. As a result, the “packs” that tend to collect on American highways don’t tend to form on European highways, so there generally is no “flow” to go with. There’s just whatever speed you want to do, unless you’re on a stretch of highway with a speed limit. So, barring accidents or road work to slow you down, if you choose to go 125 kph rather than 100 kph on the Autobahn, you’ll cut 20% off your travel time.

It’s possible that the 1000 miles was almost exclusively over local roads, but they seem to have a lot less in the way of multi-lane local roads in Europe than we do in America. Which means passing opportunities are limited, and don’t get you very far when you have them. But that would be a silly test to do: if you’re going to drive 1000 miles in Germany, you’re going to take a limited-access road, i.e. an autobahn, just the way we take the interstates here.

Back here in America, how I drive makes a difference of several minutes just in the 28-mile, 35-40 minute commute (for me) between work and home. And I’m not talking about stressful differences - just going faster, looking ahead to anticipate which lane has the slowpokes, and being willing to make a few lane changes to get around them.

[Cryptoderk]

@RTFirefly

I’m not sure I believe that.

First of all, on the Autobahns of Germany, the term “go with the flow” doesn’t even make much sense. People stay in the right lane, driving whatever speed suits them, and they only use the left lane to pass - which they do in a blinding hurry by American standards, so as to not slow down anyone else who might want to pass. As a result, the “packs” that tend to collect on American highways don’t tend to form on European highways, so there generally is no “flow” to go with. There’s just whatever speed you want to do, unless you’re on a stretch of highway with a speed limit. So, barring accidents or road work to slow you down, if you choose to go 125 kph rather than 100 kph on the Autobahn, you’ll cut 20% off your travel time.

It’s possible that the 1000 miles was almost exclusively over local roads, but they seem to have a lot less in the way of multi-lane local roads in Europe than we do in America. Which means passing opportunities are limited, and don’t get you very far when you have them. But that would be a silly test to do: if you’re going to drive 1000 miles in Germany, you’re going to take a limited-access road, i.e. an autobahn, just the way we take the interstates here.

Back here in America, how I drive makes a difference of several minutes just in the 28-mile, 35-40 minute commute (for me) between work and home. And I’m not talking about stressful differences - just going faster, looking ahead to anticipate which lane has the slowpokes, and being willing to make a few lane changes to get around them.

Exactly. Trip computer also refutes these preposterous claims. I also challenge anyone to find a genuine German driving a car at 100kph on an autobahn.

[Voyager]

@MrDibble

This is all too weird - I have never knowingly broken the speed limit, nor would I ever outside of an emergency. I just stick to the left lane and drive my way.

There are people just like you in the US. Unfortunately, here the left lane is the fast lane.

I speed, but only with the pack, and I haven’t gotten a speeding ticket in over 30 years. Unless there is a trap, if you don’t stick out you’re okay.

[DrDeth]

@DSYoungEsq

First of all, what part of “breaking the law” do you equate with “criminal?” As you yourself point out, breaking a law doesn’t necessarily make you a “criminal,” but you are still breaking the law. Don’t put words in my mouth I don’t say.

And I challenge you to prove that a person, moving at the speed limit, in the right hand lane, can be charged with impeding traffic in California. In researching this, you may wish to make reference to §21654a of the California Vehicle Code.

“21654. (a) Notwithstanding the prima facie speed limits, any
vehicle proceeding upon a highway at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time shall be
driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable
to the right-hand edge or curb, except when overtaking and passing
another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing
for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or
driveway.
(b) If a vehicle is being driven at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time, and is
not being driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as
practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, it shall constitute prima
facie evidence that the driver is operating the vehicle in violation
of subdivision (a) of this section.
(c) The Department of Transportation, with respect to state
highways, and local authorities, with respect to highways under their
jurisdiction, may place and maintain upon highways official signs
directing slow-moving traffic to use the right-hand traffic lane
except when overtaking and passing another vehicle or preparing for a
left turn.”

Here you can be charged with impeding traffic unless you are in the far right lane- which is different than “stay to the right”.

However, we also have this “21656. On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of
traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow-moving
vehicle, including a passenger vehicle, behind which five or more
vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway at the
nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the
authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever
sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the
vehicles following it to proceed. As used in this section a
slow-moving vehicle is one which is proceeding at a rate of speed
less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and
place.”

Thus, if you are driving in the (only) right hand lane, but you have 5+ veheicles backed up behind you, and you are " proceeding at a rate of speed
less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and
place" then you can be charged with Impeding traffic.
Mr Roadshow has covered this debate before in his column and both the CHP and Traffic Comm. have stated you can get a ticket for impeding traffig even if you are going the speed limit. True, if you are in the *far *right lane, you are almost immune, with the exception shown above.

[meara]

Hmm. I grew up in the Cheesequake area and don’t find the Driscoll bridge to be the slightest bit scary, especially since it’s been redone. We’re talking about a freshly-paved, 6+ lane highway. 65MPH is no big deal there if you’re continuing straight on the Parkway or are aware of the general traffic patterns. Even 70-80 would be fine in the off-peak hours if not for the speed differential vs. the folks doing the speed limit.

Of course, people in the 3rd or 4th lane from the right are wise to slow down on the descent and watch out for clueless drivers (who often dive over 3 lanes at 10MPH to get into or out of the 9/440/287 exit).

(What kind of vehicle do you drive that has so much trouble with crosswinds on the Driscoll bridge? I drive sedans and have never run into that.)

[Sam_Stone]

It’s very simplistic to say, “It’s the law, therefore follow it to the letter or you’re a reckless criminal.” There are plenty of laws that only work because they are selectively enforced and/or people intelligently choose to deviate from them some of the time. Speed limits are a classic example of such laws.

First, let’s get this out of the way: Truly dangerous driving is aggressive driving through traffic; cut-and-thrust driving, tailgating, cutting people off, ignoring stop signs and yield signs, that sort of thing. No matter what speed you’re going, if you drive like this you are dangerous.

Speeding per se isn’t dangerous. It’s all about the context in which you do it. Consider the reasons speed limits are set the way they are:

• Road conditions.
• Noise abatement.
• The need to be able to stop quickly (pedestrians, wildlife)
• Fuel savings (the 55 mph speed limit was a fuel-saving measure)
• Banked curve design on high-speed roads
• To lower impact energy in case of a collision
• To match driver reaction time with the driving environment

Note that speed limits are set to accomodate the worst-handling vehicles - trucks, SUVs, older cars. They’re also set to keep the roads safe in varying conditions; darkness, rain, dew in the morning on the road, etc.

Not all of these conditions apply to all vehicles equally. If a sign says that a curve must be taken at 35mph, but you’re driving by yourself on a sunny dry day in a sports car, you can take the curve somewhat faster. If it’s a banked curve, the bank of the curve was set so that at the speed limit the force vector is down through the wheels and not to the sides of the vehicle. That means if you go into the curve faster OR slower than the design speed, your car will experience side loads it wouldn’t get if you hit the curve at the right speed. Whether this is important or not depends on the vehicle and the road conditions.

Speed limits that are set because of reaction time should absolutely be adhered to. School zones are a perfect example. The speed limit is set low enough that if a child should dart out from behind an obstacle you’ll have time to brake and stop. Residential neighborhoods are not the place to speed, not are areas where there are a lot of blind intersections (alleyways on business streets, for example).

But assuming you are on a road that doesn’t have blind intersections, and you are not surrounded by other traffic, and you are familiar with the road conditions, I see no safety reason why you can’t choose to drive at whatever speed your car is capable of driving safely and you feel comfortable with. This means you have tires that are in good shape, your car is mechanically sound, etc.

Likewise, if I’m at an intersection in a deserted area and there’s a stop light, I’ll stop, but if the light doesn’t change immediately I’ll proceed though the intersection if all lanes are completely visible and I’m sure there’s no traffic. Traffic lights are meant to control the flow of traffic. If there’s no traffic but me, I don’t see much point to just sitting there for three minutes because ‘that’s the law’. By the same token, a ‘Stop’ sign means come to a full stop, with brakes locked up. However, if I’m at an intersection behind another car, and I’ve come to a full stop, when he goes and I can clearly see there is no other traffic, I’m following him right through the intersection. I see no need to creep forward another 15 feet and come to another dead stop. It’s hard on the brakes, it’s annoying, and serves no purpose whatsoever. It’s also technically a violation of the law. I don’t care. It’s all about using sound judgement and knowing your capabilities and those of your vehicle.

When I drive in traffic, I practice serious defensive driving. I never stay in people’s blind spots, I watch the people in other vehicles to get clues as to what they’re doing, I routinely shoulder-check to get a sense of what vehicles are around me, etc. None of this is required by law - again, it’s just good driving judgement.

As far as I’m concerned the most dangerous people to drive around are the ones who do unexpected things. That means reckless, aggressive drivers, but it also means drivers who follow the letter of the law in areas where other people wouldn’t. Hammering on the brakes unexpectedly as soon as a light goes yellow rather than proceeding through if there’s time, for example.

The other day I was following someone when the light turned yellow. There was plenty of time to clear the intersection, and proceeding through was clearly the correct thing to do, since it would require hard braking to stop in time. Had I been in front, I would have made a quick judgement to continue through the intersection (maybe speeding up just slightly to increase the margin between my passage and the red light), or I would have immediately begun braking to stop. The person in front of me didn’t want to speed, so she just kept on toodling along at the limit (the absence of braking being a signal to the vehicle behind that she intended to proceed through the intersection). Then, near the intersection she was worried that the light might go red while she was in it, so suddenly she hammered on the brakes. She was doing her best to follow the strict letter of the law, but in so doing she drove erratically and if I hadn’t been paying attention I could have gone straight into the back of her. That’s dangerous driving on her part, yet she probably congratulated herself on being ‘safe’ and stopping.
Safe != Legal
Legal != Safe

[E-Sabbath]

@Sam Stone

If it’s a banked curve, the bank of the curve was set so that at the speed limit the force vector is down through the wheels and not to the sides of the vehicle. That means if you go into the curve faster OR slower than the design speed, your car will experience side loads it wouldn’t get if you hit the curve at the right speed.

Possibly not strictly true. As I recall, speed limits were set by finding the 95th percentile speed on a road, and then reducing it by 10 MPH. This generally plays havoc with banked curves.

[Darryl_Lict]

@DrDeth

"21654. (a) Notwithstanding the prima facie speed limits, any
vehicle proceeding upon a highway at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time shall be
driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable
to the right-hand edge or curb, except when overtaking and passing
another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing
for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
<SNIP>
Mr Roadshow has covered this debate before in his column and both the CHP and Traffic Comm. have stated you can get a ticket for impeding traffig even if you are going the speed limit. True, if you are in the *far *right lane, you are almost immune, with the exception shown above.

Thanks for posting that. I was all set to write to my state senator and try to get the practice of “clogging” made illegal in the California Vehicle Code. This is a huge pet peeve of mine and I notice that it is really only a very small percentage of people who actually drive slowly in the fast lane. Unfortunately, they are immediately noticed by everyone who they are inconveniencing. On a recent drive back from Mammoth, I drove about 150 miles, and I only noticed about 6 “cloggers” but the amount of grief they cause is tremendous. Please, just be considerate, accelerate when overtaking and let people pass. It will make the world a much better place.

[Cryptoderk]

@E-Sabbath

Possibly not strictly true. As I recall, speed limits were set by finding the 95th percentile speed on a road, and then reducing it by 10 MPH. This generally plays havoc with banked curves.

Traditionally in the UK they were set at the 85th percentile.

But now, and I kid you not, because “speed kills” they are seriously considering setting them at the MEDIAN. I don’t have to explain how nuts this is!

(BTW, drivers between the 90 and 95th percentile have the least accident risk)

[Keeve]

@meara

(What kind of vehicle do you drive that has so much trouble with crosswinds on the Driscoll bridge? I drive sedans and have never run into that.)

I’d rather not be specific, but it is a smallish car. It rarely has “so much trouble”, but it does get pushed around occasionally, and I’m a nervous and careful sort of person, who worries about the occasional strong gust of wind, which does happen from time to time.

[Keeve]

@Sam Stone

But assuming you are on a road that doesn’t have blind intersections, and you are not surrounded by other traffic, and you are familiar with the road conditions, I see no safety reason why you can’t choose to drive at whatever speed your car is capable of driving safely and you feel comfortable with. This means you have tires that are in good shape, your car is mechanically sound, etc. Likewise, if I’m at an intersection in a deserted area and there’s a stop light, I’ll stop, but if the light doesn’t change immediately I’ll proceed though the intersection if all lanes are completely visible and I’m sure there’s no traffic.

According to this logic, we should not need speed limits or traffic lights at all. Just let everyone decide for himself what is safe, and let them do that.

Society cannot function safely in such a manner. There are a lot of people out there whose judgment is not as good as yours. And even your decisions may occasionally be in error. The whole concept of being a society of laws is that everyone’s safety is enhanced when firm rules are in place, and we don’t allow people to go around deciding for themselves when it’s okay to make exceptions.

@Sam Stone

When I drive in traffic, I practice serious defensive driving. I never stay in people’s blind spots, I watch the people in other vehicles to get clues as to what they’re doing, I routinely shoulder-check to get a sense of what vehicles are around me, etc. None of this is required by law - again, it’s just good driving judgement.

Yes, it is very good. And I sincerely applaud you and thank you. But it does not get you any Extra Credit points with which you can flout the law just because you think it is safe to do so.

[E-Sabbath]

@Keeve

According to this logic, we should not need speed limits or traffic lights at all. Just let everyone decide for himself what is safe, and let them do that.

The former works just fine in Germany, really. Much safer to drive there.

[scr4]

@E-Sabbath

The former works just fine in Germany, really. Much safer to drive there.

Do you have a cite? (For your second sentence, that is.)

[E-Sabbath]

Autoblog: Car News, Reviews and Buying Guides

@The article

More than half of the 11,000-kilometer (6,835-mile) German Autobahn system has no speed limit. It is perfectly legal there, for example, to pass a police car at 200 km/h (124 mph). In fact, according to Mark Rask, author of 1999’s American Autobahn, the average speed for cars is 130 km/h (81 mph); at any given moment, 15 percent are traveling 155 km/h (96 mph) or faster. Surprisingly, the Autobahn is safer than U.S. highways. In 2001, the death rate there was 27 percent lower (0.59 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled versus 0.81 per million for the U.S. interstates), according to Rask.

Y’r welcome.

[scabpicker]

To be fair, the cars are a LOT better in Germany. They have laws making them safer, such as laws specifying how much breaking power a car must have in proportion to its power to accelerate and weight. There have been many U.S. performance cars that you could not put on the road in germany for this reason.

Modified cars are not exempt either. My father had a friend that put a Porsche motor in his VW when stationed over there in the '60s. When the Gov’t found out about it, he was told to either get the motor out of the car, or the car out of the country.

Safety standards in the U.S. are a lot more lax. I used to be a state inspector. Here, if a car can stop in 35 feet from 30mph, you were good. Which is testing if the breaks work, but it is not a very difficult test to pass. I certified lots of cars that I would not have felt comfortable driving on a daily basis.