See, Number Six?
Yeah, blow up my statement out of proportion. I am arguing about assholes that tailgate at 1 foot or less. People beside me don’t matter because if I have to stop suddenly they are not going to have to stop as well. Moron.
Perhaps “Injected” should be replaced with “dejected my frontal lobe”.
Err, Ejected I mean, having a sad frontal lobe is not what I meant. 
Let’s define some terms for this thread. After 5.5 pages, it seems belated.
Too fast: Only applies to vehicles following you.
Too slow: Only applies to vehicles ahead of you.
Idiot: Someone who drives too slow
Jerk: Someone who drives too fast
Prick: Someone who won’t let you change lanes
Asshole: Someone who waits until the last possible moment to merge
Ranger, you forgot one.
Excellent Driver: Blown & Injected
:rolleyes:
Drive friendly, it’s “the cowboy way”.
unclviny
Advice to tailgaters: If you want me to get to the right as soon as I have an opportunity, do not turn on your brights and leave them on while you are close behind me. Tonight I was in the left lane because I had made a left turn onto the road. I wanted to get right, but could not see well enough to change lanes because an SUV had his brights on far to close to my back bumper.
No argument to add here, just wanted to say “Thank you ever so much left-lane-slow-driver who wouldn’t obey traffic law and move to the right so I could pass tonight. I wasn’t speeding or ass-riding, I just wanted to pass the slow-pokes. I know you didn’t realize that I had just drank a large Diet Coke at the movies and had to drive 45 miles home. I damn near pissed my pants, but thanks for playing self-appointed State Trooper. :rolleyes:”
I constantly get tailgated when I’m in the RIGHT lane…even when there is plenty of room on the left for the person behind me to pass. I don’t understand why they still insist on doing that to me, but whatever…I just keep going at the same speed. I don’t slow down because the jackass might not slam on his/her brakes fast enough and slam into me. I don’t want that.
I’m not one to tailgate (because I’m never in a hurry), but there are times when there is a VERY elderly person driving in front of me…usually going about 20 under the speed limit, and I get the urge. However, I don’t because it could freak them out. So, after learning that honking doesn’t work (okay, that REALLY freaks them out), I either pass or just deal with their slowness…it really isn’t a big deal…I suppose.
In honor of many replies that say something to the effect of you are rude, one chump even said I called myself rude??? and many others that say: fucking unbelievable, or that is stupid… and do not go on to include BECAUSE and here is the support for my comment, I have included an appropriate signature just for… well you know who you are. Maybe not, there does seem to be some disconnected posters here.
Many "Because"s have been posted here; the main one is: Because tailgating is dangerous.
Earlier you also said:
Missing the entire point that it was a test of your reaction time.
Let’s do some simple calculations. Suppose you’re travelling down the road at 60 mph behind some other car, and for some reason the driver of the car ahead slams on the brakes in a panic stop.
Typical human reaction time (the time it takes the signal to travel from your eyes to your brain to your foot) is about 0.47 seconds. Some amount of time is also needed for your foot to get moving and press down on the brake pedal. Let’s give you the benefit of the doubt and say that it takes you one second between seeing the brake lights of the car ahead and getting your foot fully down on your own brake pedal. (Typically, as mentioned by another poster, it takes at least twice that time).
A good braking rate for a car is 28 ft/sec/sec, so let’s say that’s what the car ahead of you will do. But your Explorer is souped up, so let’s say it can do 50% better than that, or 42 ft/sec/sec.
Now, 60 mph is 88 ft/sec. So at “time 0” both vehicles are travelling at 88 ft/sec when the car ahead hits the brakes.
At the end of the first second after “time 0”, the car ahead has slowed to 60 ft/sec. It’s average speed during that second was 74 ft/sec, so after one second it has travelled 74 feet. The Explorer, meanwhile, has yet to hit the brakes, so it has travelled 88 feet.
Ok, now the Explorer’s brakes come fully on. So at the end of the second second, the Explorer has slowed to 46 ft/sec and has travelled (since “time 0”) 155 feet. The car in front has now slowed to 32 ft/sec and has travelled 120 feet.
By the end of the third second, the Explorer has almost stopped, it’s down to only 4 ft/sec. And it’s travelled a total of 201 feet. The car in front, too, has slowed to 4 ft/sec, and has travelled 138 feet.
But what do we have here? After only three seconds, both cars have almost stopped, but the Explorer has travelled 63 feet further than the car in front of it!
This means that unless there were 63 feet between the front bumper of the Explorer and the back bumper of the car in front at the moment the car in front hit the brakes, the two cars have now collided! 63 feet is about four car lengths.
Does the reality get through to you? Even with super-human reaction time and souped-up brakes on your vehicle, you still need at least four car lengths of following distance at 60 mph in order to avoid crashing into the car in front. And it takes only three seconds for it all to happen.
Now, explain to me again about “safe tailgating,” I clearly don’t understand it.
…Now, explain to me again about “safe tailgating,” I clearly don’t understand it
I don’t follow at 60’ even at 45mph. I spend plenty of time looking at the 60’ timing mark at the track so I know what 60’ looks like from the passenger seat - 60’ is closer than many might think!
Front car brakes , .50 seconds later my brakes come on. Perhaps 40’ of closure occurs and the cars are now brakeing about the same and maintaining distance. AND if you are paying attention, you are mentally driving for the person in the surrounding cars. That means that you are anticipating the other drivers intentions.
Now do you understand?
:: sheesh :::: You don’t follow at 60’? You do or don’t tailgate? You do or don’t move up to within 15’ of the car in from even momentarily? You get to decide when and where the panic braking is going to happen? yeah, :: sheesh:::
Okay, you have the best reflexes, the best magic truck and brakes and a federal license to tailgate because you are good.
If you can do , I can do it. <-- seems to be the theory most drivers follow. So, you are tailgating and me and my old ramchager are wanting to go fast too. So I can get up on your bumper also, because I SAY my reaction time, race track time, brakes, alertness, ability to drive for the other guy, my situational awareness is as good as yours.
:::oops::: could circumstances have been not quite as I figured. Nahhhhh never happen ::: I am so good that all the studies, all the years, all the deaths, all the other times this has happened, has nothing to do with me… I AM good… I can defy the odds and get away with it, just look at me and my VAST experience.
(Yepper --above was totally sarcastic and with malice of fore thought. I am saying you are a danger to those around you. I hope you never find it out because you will probably be the cause but not the one to suffer.) Unless it is me tailgating you… Bwahahahaha ß now this was rude…
No. You say “I don’t follow at 60’”. Does that mean that you follow at greater than 60 feet or less than 60 feet? If you follow at greater than 60 feet, then you’re not tailgating, so I don’t understand why you even started in this discussion, getting so bent out of shape about people saying that tailgating is dangerous and stupid. If you follow at significantly less than 60 feet, then you’re tailgating.
You say: "Front car brakes , .50 seconds later my brakes come on. " I say: “bull.” I do not believe that you can react and get your brakes fully applied in less than a second. Remember, human reaction time alone is about that half a second that you’re claiming. This is the time that it takes for the signal to get from your eyes to your brain and out to your foot. In other words, it’s the time it takes for your foot to start moving. Even with your foot hovering over the brake pedal and you being alert and ready to stomp, there is just no way that you could react and get the pedal fully depressed in half a second. If you believe that, you’re living in a dangerous fantasy world.
Anticipating the other driver’s intentions does not mean that you’ll be able to see what he sees, or know what’s in his mind, or know what he may or may not decide to react to. What if the car in front of him skips up a rock that he sees but you don’t? He slams on the brakes to avoid it. I laid out the inescapable physics of the situation in my previous post, giving you an accelerated reaction and super quality brakes. At less than 63 feet following distance, you hit him, period, end of story.
If you tailgate, you’re dangerous. If you believe that you’re so much better than a normal human that you can get your brakes on in half a second, you’re a fool.
Jumping back into this mess…
How many people in Roadfood’s example would have lost their lives? By the time both cars hit, both cars are at a fraction of the original speed. (so lets stay away from how fatal rear ending is, I’m sure people die, but I’m also sure more people die by guns everyday yet America is content to keep guns legal [and no, I’m not against guns, I’m using that as an example]).
And can you say 60’ is not tailgating? At certain speeds (and by your example) 80 feet is the distance traveled in 1 second at 55…lets do some math…that means to be “safe” I need to trail you at 160+ feet (2.3 seconds reaction time? Who was tested? My science center near my house has reaction time testing mock cars, I can react without hovering my foot at 1.1 second if I’m prepared).
So that means everyone here, in every road I’ve ever been on is tailgating!
Hypocrites.
And my car (Toyota Matrix) can stop in 105 feet at 60 mph. Stock everything. Yet that means if I need to brake, I’ll still smash into the vehicle in front if they’re within 175-ish feet? I don’t think so. Someone’s “facts” don’t work in RL.
And yes, I can also understand the car in front doesn’t immediately stop…but it can happen if THAT car smashes into something first.
Ah, now I understand. Crashing into the car in front of you is ok, as long as the collision is at a low enough speed so that no one actually dies. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
And you are always prepared… right… ::: sheesh :::
Only a very few have said they never tailgate.
Only a very few say that is okay to do so.
Just because 50,000 French men do it don’t make it right. <-- old saying, prolly way before your time…
We are hypocrites? he he he
:: Untested virtue is meaningless. ::
One factor the tailgators have not taken into account is the fact that Brake lights are not an analog system. The are on or they are off, no matter how hard a car is breaking. The only other clues are visual: how the cars in front of the car you are tailgating are reacting, etc. A large vehicle removes a lot of this, and tailgating also removes your field of view around the tailgatee
That means you either have to add time to judge the change of speed to your superdupermegabreaking reaction time, or you must slam on the brakes every time the brake lights turn on, a reaction that will result in more traffic jams than the slowest driver on the road.
Roadfood, I was only replying to the folks that keep saying how “dangerous” (ie life threatening) tailgating is. I didn’t say anything about crashing is GOOD, only that in the grand scheme of things, I’d rather get rear ended/crash into a braking vehicle than getting t-boned or crashing into a parked car on the side of the road.
I was making a general statement that if 2.3 seconds is correct, and 80 fps (at 55 mph) is correct then anyone shouting “tailgating is bad and I don’t do it!” is a hypocrite because they are almost always tailgating. I know tailgating is bad, like eating McDonalds day in and out.
It might never kill you, it might kill you tomorrow.
And most people here ARE shouting they don’t do it. Some are countering that sometimes they have to tailgate to get around slower cars etc. I don’t think anyone here is claiming to be a chronic tailgater just for the hell of it.
And when/if I do tailgate you don’t think most of us get “ready” to brake? I mean, I can usually see everything in front of the car I’m behind (normally) and as an experienced driver, I don’t react to the car in front of me, but to what’s in front of that car. It’s call anticipation.
That’s where that 175 feet distance, 2.3 second reaction time doesn’t take into account. I’m normally braking even before the car in front has started BECAUSE I can see that in a few seconds, he’ll need to slow down (say at a turn). 2.3 seconds might be correct if I’m checking out a girl in the car next to me, but not when I’m normally driving. If you aren’t paying attention enough to panic stop within 1.5 seconds then maybe you have no business being on the road.
Anyone have any cites on how many fatal rear ends happen in the states? I have seen quite a few accidents but rarely any rear ends (except in circumstances that have nothing to do with tailgating, i.e. drunk driving etc). Tailgating is annoying but will people stop saying how dangerous it is until someone shows up with proof? It’s like saying trucks are dangerous. They CAN be, but most of the time they aren’t.
Ok, and I’d rather win the lottery than get a tax audit. That has as much to do with this discussion as your preference stated above.
Where is it written that “dangerous” necessary means “life threatening”, as you imply in your “ie”? Tailgating is dangerous, because it increases the risk of an accident. Doesn’t matter whether that accident results in a death or not, tailgating is still dangerous, something to be avoided when reasonably possible.
I genuinely don’t understand what your “I’d rather get rear ended . . . than crashing into a parked car” has to do with ANYTHING. I mean, you’re driving down the freeway and God speaks to you and says, “If you don’t tailgate the car in front of you, I’ll make you crash into that parked car over there”? It’s just a non-sequiter to this discussion.
This is a valid point. In truth, after doing the calculations that I spelled out a few posts ago, I was surprised. And I now try to allow an even greater following distance than I used to. The other side of that coin, of course, is that it made it all the more compelling why that idiot who’s about twenty feet behind me at 65 mph is a total moron and endangering my life.
Some certainly APPEAR to have that mindset, at least in the vehemence with which they claim that tailgating is ok because, because, because . . . Or that it’s not dangerous because it’s not going to actually kill anyone.
And it’s dangerous because it gives you false sense of security. That’s the point I’ve been trying to make to Blown & Injected. He lives in a fantasy world where the laws of phyics and human reaction time are different than in the real world. He thinks he can hit the brakes faster than any other human being. You think that because you’re in “anticipation” that there’s no danger (see next paragraph).
What about the hazard that the driver of the car in front of you sees, but you don’t? What if you both see something ahead of his car, but you interpret it differently? The other driver is, as you suggest, not paying full attention, maybe looking a little to the side. Suddenly something in front of his car catches his eye. You immediately recognize that it’s not a threat so you do nothing, but in his surprised state, he slams on the brakes. Suddenly, you’re in his trunk.
In your scenerio, tailgating is not much of a problem, because you’re positing things that can be easily seen a few cars back, and that require that the car in front will only “need to slow down.” But all it takes is one little thing that failed to see, or didn’t anticipate, or interpreted differently than the driver ahead, and suddenly you’ve got two broken cars.
Cites? You want cites? This ain’t GQ, it’s the pit.
Do some searching on Google for something like “tailgating accidents”.
Here’s an interesting article:
http://www.nctimes.net/news/2001/20011229/51145.html
And here’s one where officials in Lousiana say that “Tailgating was a factor in 52 per-cent of accidents on state highways last year, up from 51 percent the previous year. The rate was 35 percent nationally in 2000.”
http://www.dps.state.la.us/tiger/Anti%20tailgating%20campaign%20may%20trim%20accidents.pdf
Another says that, “More than half of all traffic accidents are caused by tailgating or following too closely”:
http://www.snbe.com/safety/tailgatedefensive.html
Here’s the Holden, Mass. Police Department: “The most frequent contributing factor to rear end collisions has been vehicles following other vehicles at less than a safe distance, otherwise known as tailgating.”
http://www.holdenpd.com/sgt.html
It’s a problem in Singapore: "One of the leading causes of accidents is tailgating. "
http://www.aas.com.sg/features/archive/otr10011.htm
From the Dutch Institute for Traffic Care: “Apart from being a major cause of road accidents, it ranks number one in Dutch motorists’ hate list of the worst ten traffic nuisances they encounter and is a serious contributory factor to bad driver behaviour and even road rage.”
http://itctraffic.com/tailgaters.htm
More from Louisiana: “Troopers say tailgating is responsible for 60 percent of traffic accidents in the area.”
http://server.nich.edu/news/2001/247.html