Three faculty members from my college were killed in this exact manner. Rear ended a transport truck that was attempting to illegally make a U-turn in one of the emergency vehicle only turn-abouts. Decapitated all three of them.
So, I vote for braking.
I’d change lanes because I don’t want to drive behind someone who randomly decelerates in a way that I’d have to brake in order to avoid hitting him.
It’s a complex mental algorithm, I do either depending on the situation. I don’t voluntarily drive behind people who brake randomly if I can possibly help it, so I like to get away. But my specific reaction in this specific situation can depend on how quickly they’re stopping, whether I can see the person in front of them and whether they’re also stopping, how busy the road is, how boxed in I am, and possibly the price of tea in China. So, trying to break this down here: if the highway is absolutely not busy at all… I know I’m not boxed in… someone in front of me starts braking, but not **too **quickly… and I can see there isn’t a third person braking in front of his vehicle, nor any discernible hazards… then, I will change lanes to avoid having to brake.
Ifelse, brake.
Brake. Because:
To change lanes, you need to know exactly what’s happening in the other lanes. In this situation, you just don’t have enough time to make sure the next lane is clear and check blind spots.
I just saw a TV special about this, most injuries during accidents are caused by motorists who swerve instead of brake. They recommended that everybody try out anti-lock brakes just so they can feel what they are like, and they can truly save your life in life-and-death situations.
Between husband and wife, one will always be a terrible driver to the other. Regardless of whether you swerved or braked, she would criticize you.
One more for the pile-on. Program yourself to brake in an emergency, not swerve. You don’t know why the car is slowing down - it may be something you really don’t want to charge into. (Worst case scenario is that there’s a person on foot. Whom you will plow down if you try to go around the car.) And a high-speed swerve is a great way to roll a car.
If you have enough time to check around you before changing lanes exactly as you usually would, sure. But except for icy conditions, the ‘oh crap’ reflexive response needs to be brakes.
How icy? Because changing direction, even a little, at high speed on ice could be as catastrophic as trying to brake. Maybe worse.
Well there’s swerving, and there’s changing lanes. Obviously, if someone brakes suddenly in front of you, you don’t just turn the wheel and hope there’s not a semi next to you. You put on your blinkers, check your mirrors, glance at your blind spot, then charge on. It takes more effort to do this than to simply brake, sure, but I would be too annoyed to drive behind someone to brakes this way to put up with that crap. I make sure the coast is clear, then I drive in a different lane. If the person brakes really fast and hard, then yeah, you gotta brake, but after that, I’m changing lanes. Not driving behind that dude.
I know a car is assumed, but on a bike, swerving may be the go - any collision tends to hurt, particularly if you get sandwiched from behind as well.
Needless to say, following distance on a bike become even more important for that reason.
Otara
All else being equal, I agree. It’s easy to glance at the rearview mirror and hit the brakes, it’s far more difficult to check blindspots and mirrors, signal and change lanes and it’s more likely that some of those steps will be skipped, making for a more dangerous maneuver.
There are a lot more things that could go wrong with changing lanes in a hurry too, since you could not only pull out in front of a speeding car in the other lane but also collide side to side with another driver trying to get into the same lane from the other side or even hit whatever made the car in front of you stop so suddenly (maybe there was a wreck ahead of him or a deer in the roadway or something.)
If you are driving back east, you do not do this, ever, if you actually want to change lanes. Drivers seem to be very territorial about the road in front of them, if they see you making a threat like that, they will get right up into that space you thought was clear and lay on the horn when you try to merge into them.
At least, that has been my experience, limited as it is.
Again, it depends on the circumstances.
I learned in Driving School that changing lanes takes only one-third as much time as stopping.
The thing is, there’s nothing in the OP about it being an emergency, about the car stopping suddenly, or about the car in front even applying his brakes. Maybe the car did suddenly hit his brakes, but there’s no indication of that in the OP.
Which is why you’re supposed to already know who and what is around you before the need arises.
On a related note: some people go on and on about how important seatbelts are. But 80+ % of all accidents are avoidable. Which means that by far the most effective safety practice is to be a genuinely good driver.
I’m curious what ‘‘back east’’ is to you. I live in New Jersey and the default here is to yield to anyone with a blinker on.
It wasn’t like that in Michigan. In Michigan, a blinker is asking permission. In New Jersey, a blinker is signalling intent. I think it’s because we have a fuckload of cars on the road here. If people waited for permission to change lanes they’d never change lanes, ever.
Of course, I’ve never witnessed driving so terrible, in general, as I have in New Jersey. People pretty much just do whatever the hell they want to, legal or not. Ironically I think the terrible driving in New Jersey has made me a better, more assertive driver.
ETA: Oh, and to answer the OP. Braking on the highway should be a rare occurrence. If I am coming up on a car, I take my foot off the accelerator. If that doesn’t work fast enough, I change lanes if it’s safe to do so, otherwise I will resort to braking. But I try very hard to leave a good distance between myself and the car in front of me, because a whole traffic jam can be caused by one asshole stepping on the brakes because he’s following too close or, more commonly, he’s driving too fast and waits til the last goddamn second to brake.
(New Jersey has also given me road rage.)
31% of all traffic fatalities are due to impaired driving. Clearly the 69% of sober drivers are our main concern.
I confess, I exaggerate. One of those it happened to me twice in the DC area, so it must be like that all over kind of things. Sorry.
I’m trying to figure out what’s going on with the 20% of accidents that aren’t avoidable. Aren’t all accidents avoidable?
Really? I’m from LA, and if you signal there, there is a 100% chance the driver in the lane next to you will speed up.
Hey, it could very well be. Traffic norms vary dramatically from location to location. That’s one thing I’ve learned living in a different state - when we’re talking about whether to brake or not brake or change lanes or pretty much anything, it all depends on where you live, because if everybody does one thing by default, you’ll cause all sorts of problems by trying to do it differently.
In DC we signal intent by steering the car right into the side of the person you want to get in front of.