Since brake/change lanes/do both options have been thouroughly discussed, I want to present one of my fantasies that I entertain in these kinds of driving situations…
The option to plow right through the fuckers in a big red PowerWagon with great big fuck-off bumper.
It’s one of the few rare occasions I wish I had a truck.
I change lanes the instant I see the person ahead of me’s brake lights, if there is a clear lane. This allows me time to brake as well, if necessary, like if they have stopped for an obstruction that affects other lanes. If there are three or more lanes, I tend to drive in a middle one, to maximize my escape routes. I have definitely avoided rear-ending people this way on numerous occasions.
In your example, If you do signal right, I would expect you to be exiting south. If a turn signal is part of your procedure for an east exit, that what do you do to unambiguously indicate to other drivers that you will exiting south? Remember, that clusterfuck is signed as one single four-way intersection, not a pair of independent three-way intersections.
Checking your mirrors frequently will keep you from plowing into a car to your left or in your blind spot. It won’t prevent you from getting hit from a car coming up fast on your left. I don’t care how often you check your mirrors - you have to do it again before changing lanes, and in your example you might not have time to.
BTW - if your wife is opposed to braking on the highway, I assume she has never driven on one in rush hour traffic.
In case anyone thinks this is theoretical, my office mate in college and her husband were driving down a country road when someone hit the brakes in front of them. They changed lanes - and slammed right into a cow lying on the road. Not only did they have immense amounts of body damage, and a car stuck there, they had to pay the farmer for the cow. I don’t think they even got steaks out of the deal.
BTW I used to drive through a deer infested area, and you are absolutely right. There is no way of predicting what they will do.
True. But I like a driving approach that is both safe (first), and comfortable and graceful.
I’ve noticed a pretty big increase lately in people braking on interstate highways without any kind of good reason. I think a lot of times they’re using the brake pedal just to cancel their cruise control…which is probably really convenient for them, but indicates DANGER to the person behind and often causes a chain-reaction braking situation. If I use cruise control (which I usually only do in low-traffic situations), I use the CANCEL button, not the brake, unless I actually want to slow down rapidly.
As someone mentioned upthread, it’s a “boy who cried wolf” scenario. Hit the brakes to cancel cruise or to slow down just a tiny bit (when you could just let off the gas) over and over again, and the people around you won’t respond properly when you are actually panic braking.
I try not to stay behind these people…not only do they annoy me, but it’s a dangerous place to be.
Maybe. I have no history of riding with a drunk driver myself. To be clear, I do change speeds on the highway for various circumstances, and I try to always let off the gas and begin deceleration before touching the brakes, because that’s a much gentler transition than moving the foot directly from one pedal to the other. Very often, with awareness and appropriate following distances, letting off the gas is all the deceleration needed, and I don’t touch the brake at all.
ETA: Good point about the cruise control, Speedway (heh). As a corollary to the deceleration method I just mention–depending on circumstances I may also use the DECEL button as an intermediate step between maintaining CCed speed and cutting off the function entirely. Look way down the road.
Not a highway situation, but just a couple of weeks ago, the person in front of me stopped for a family in the cross walk. I stopped, too. The person behind us apparently thought we we stopping in the middle of the road for no reason, swung into the other lane and just about creamed a family walking across the road.
Braking is best. Even if you’re positive no one is beside you, you shouldn’t be making a lane change decision in a split second. As long as you were following at a safe distance, everything should be fine.
She had to for several months a few years ago. It turned her into the most amazingly foul-mouthed sailor I have ever personally known. Like literally I didn’t know she had it in her, and we’d been married for years by that point.
She eventually decided to take a much, much much longer route through some nice trees and wealthy houses it was stressing her out so badly.
I think probably she was stressed out by all the braking. 
I don’t think there is a way to unambiguously signal things at that intersection. That’s the problem.
I guess you’re saying there are stop signs that say four-way at this spot. But the failure of this description to fit with the actual configuration of the intersection only serves to confuse someone unfamiliar with the place, not clarify. You’re simply not “going straight” from west to east, no matter what the signs say.
Neither! You shouldn’t be in that situation in the first place.
If a car slows down in front of you and you’re only faced with two decisions, braking or switching lanes, you following them way to closely! You’re tailgating.
For every 10 mph you drive, there’s supposed to be one car length between you and the car in front of you. At least that’s what they taught me in driver’s ed, in Missouri, in the late 90’s. So, if you’re going 20 mph, you’re supposed to be two car lengths behind the car ahead. If you going 70 mph, then it’s seven car lengths. And so on. If someone ahead stops, you can just slow down or softly apply your brakes. In this situation, you probably won’t be faced with the choice of slamming your brakes or suddenly changing lanes.
Ah, the SBI! I call these “Spontaneous Braking Incidents.”
Sounds plausible.
I kind of wish we had two levels..or better yet, two SETS, of brakelights – a normal brakelight for “tapping” and a muck larger, brighter, differently-located display for “holy crap I am pressing the brake hard and stopping NOW.” Maybe it would be technically simple – activate Case 2 brakelights in any situation that engages the anti-lock brakes?
This way, people behind you would be prompted to differentiate between “hey, brakelights ahead, slowing down” and “MUST TAKE ACTION IMMEDIATELY” situations.
I also want front brakelights, so I can tell whether the person approaching me as I wait to turn into traffic is actually braking to turn (since he or she usually has failed to signal the turn).
It’s too situational and depends on whether or not a car is next to me. I try to execute the option which provides me with the most control over the vehicle and “post-situation”. The more disruptive the course of action, the less likely I am to do it. That said, I try to avoid threshold braking on the highway, but based on whether or not someone is behind me (and how far), I’ll do so if it avoids a lateral collision.
If I can’t change lanes or brake in time, it’s probably a slim chance that the situation is avoidable, at which point I’d consider dodging into the hazard lane (I typically drive in the left lane)…or brace and try to control the impact…because that’s also a possible outcome (and has happened, unfortunately (89 yr old lady turns on red into oncoming traffic, terrible)).
Again, too many variables to really give a black/white answer…plus, I can’t help but get back to the fact that I really do maintain a fair following distance, so this is really talking about a unique hypothetical situation, in which slight details could alter the argument.
I’d disagree with her. Brake if the situation best calls for it.
I’d argue that it takes no more than necessary, for what should already be happening when paying proper attention. I constantly check my mirrors, so I usually know what I intend to do, followed by confirmation and execution. As something ingrained in my driving process over years, it’s secondary.
And in examples of a mattress laying in the highway, as someone stated earlier, objects like that typically create somewhat predictable, slower moving stop situations, across multiple lanes. Something more sudden, such as a truck spilling its contents into the roadway, creates a more reactionary situation (but then I try not to drive behind trucks, either).
I think what she means to say, is that you want to be as predictable as possible, and avoid sudden changes in action that would upset your control of the car. I pretty much agree with that, but that still allows for braking when necessary.
Otherwise, yes, I try to avoid braking. I’ll often downshift to briefly slow, instead of creating a reactionary situation, or I’ll coast to more gradually reduce speed.
I don’t take that to mean I’m omniscient of the situation, but I do significantly try to limit what I don’t know.
[ul]
[li]I always scan multiple cars ahead of me, as well as to the sides and behind, pretty often. I will do this more or less often, depending on conditions, speed, congestion, etc. and I have peripheral vision, so no need to stare at the back of the car in front of me[/li][li]If an SUV, Minivan, truck, etc. is in front of me, and obstructing my view of the vehicles ahead, I make my way around them when possible (this includes people who constantly brake for no reason[/li][li]My mirrors are big and adjusted properly, so that I’m not seeing the side of my car when looking at them. This eliminates blind-spots, in tandem with my constant scanning[/li][li]I observe the general flow and behavior of traffic. Sometimes it’s more aggressive, other times it’s more relaxed and smooth. This includes being mindful of merge points where drivers may try to make a last-second change.[/li][/ul]
A fair portion of what happens on the road can be preempted, and even after a situation, reflection usually reveals a better course of action (learning is the important part).
I agree with your other reasons for using the signal, but not this one. In fact, it’s funny, because I’ve seen people do this on a closed autox course. They’re so accustomed to signaling when turning on the street, that it’s hilarious when you see them do this.
I’ve never understood how it is possible to follow this principle. The moment I slow down enough to put more than a few car lengths between me and the guy in front, someone slips in. So I have to slow down some more. Rinse repeat.
AFAICT it’s literally impossible to follow this advice without moving dangerously slow.
If someone moves in front of you, when you are slowing below your desired cruising speed to allow appropriate following distance, you should move left and accelerate, pass both vehicles, and move right again.
If the highway has such traffic volume that the number of vehicles literally can’t fit with appropriate distances at your desired speed, or the posted speed limit, then appropriate cruising speed comes down. Which means following distances can shrink too.
That advice is, of course, ridiculous. Have you ever been on any freeway anywhere on the planet where vehicles moving at 60 mph were traveling 6 car lengths apart? Silliness.
When I was a kid, I thought about a system that would either vary the intensity of brake lights or a wide brake light that would light only in the center for light braking, and further out toward the sides as brake pressure increased. A flashing (strobe-style) brake light when high levels of braking are detected wouldn’t be a bad idea either. The current system of the indicator being either on or off for something that can vary as much as braking level is not really a great solution. I will say that on dry pavement, you can hit the brakes pretty darn hard without ABS kicking in, so the threshold might be a bit lower than that.
BTW does anyone know of research which shows how often good drivers (however the study measures this) check their mirrors?
I see a 5-8 second rule repeated here and there online, but I’m not seeing where this number comes from.