Posted on 08/12/2015 4:45:02 AM PDT by rickmichaels
A cruddy driver squeezes between you and the car in front of you and then slams on the brakes because he thought the distance between the two cars was due to the car in front moving much faster than you: he wasn't assuming you were keeping an appropriate distance because he himself would never do that.
Having folks fill in the safety gap in front used to bother me too -- until I realized that it was because you feel like you're going backwards! And of course, and of course, you aren't.
I subscribe to the “Don’t Swerve for Bambi” rule.
Yet, I certainly will attempt -within all human endeavor- to avoid 1-ton of Detroit steel at any opportunity.
YMMV
Mmmmmmmmm, venison burgers!
A very sad story...I don’t know if “don’t put your feet on the dashboard” is the lesson I would take from it...but still, very sad.
:: Studies have shown that in accidents involving sudden deceleration crashes, front seat passengers, despite wearing seatbelts and having airbags around them, are often killed ( broken necks) by the bodies of unsecured rear seat passengers coming over the tops of the front seats ::
Not to be a kill-joy but, if this happens to you and your family, do you believe you can litigate damage against the “studies show” group?
Most cars today have brakes that pulsate, yet allow steering around obstructions: "slam and swerve" is today's key to avoiding collisions.
That is a concern. My way of dealing with that is to try to stay in the slower lanes as much as possible. I'm not a naturally slow driver, and have to watch my speed, which means I do a lot of careful and prudent lane changing to pass on the left and then move back over to the right. I don't tail-gate and for the most part don't get tail-gated.
No system is perfect, however, and there are going to be accidents, which brings me to my second pet peeve:
WTF with the airbags???
If we all wear seatbelts, why do we need to ride around with explosive devices installed in front of our faces???
It's not just what happened to this poor girl (and my heart goes out to her)... even properly belted and seated passengers (like a friend of mine) can be permanently injured (hearing) in a low-impact crash by those stupid f-ing airbags.
Once again we are all victims of the Liberal Nanny State and no one is even talking about this.
You are correct. What I should have said is that the 402 serves as an alternative to the 401, whose western terminus is Detroit. the 402 western terminus is Port Huron, which links up to both I -69 and I-94. My comment about the traffic volumes and automotive related truck traffic stands
my only concern was stopping slow enough to not get rear-ended
That is a concern. My way of dealing with that is to try to stay in the slower lanes as much as possible. I’m not a naturally slow driver, and have to watch my speed, which means I do a lot of careful and prudent lane changing to pass on the left and then move back over to the right. I don’t tail-gate and for the most part don’t get tail-gated.
No system is perfect, however, and there are going to be accidents, which brings me to my second pet peeve:
WTF with the airbags???
If we all wear seatbelts, why do we need to ride around with explosive devices installed in front of our faces???
It’s not just what happened to this poor girl (and my heart goes out to her)... even properly belted and seated passengers (like a friend of mine) can be permanently injured (hearing) in a low-impact crash by those stupid f-ing airbags.
Once again we are all victims of the Liberal Nanny State and no one is even talking about this.
excuse post 28
copy-paste error from another thread
Exactly. This calls for extreme patience and a philosophical outlook...something that I pray God will give me more of.
Yup. I owned a 1999 Sunfire GT. If you can't get one of those stopped behind a truck, you're following way too close. The little suckers handled like go-karts. They weren't muscle cars, but they were quick, turned quickly, and stopped very quickly.
Regarding “WTF with the airbags?”, I owe them my life. I was involved in a head-on crash at about 45 MPH. Seeing the car the next day, I have little doubt I would be dead if it wasn’t for the seat belt/airbag combo. I’ve always worn my seat belt (thanks to a great driver ed teacher in HS), but I am the poster boy for airbags nowadays. The more, the better!
I’m glad you are ok but I’m not sure I understand. Obviously the airbag stopped you from hitting the steering wheel. The seatbelt wouldn’t have done that?
(Just curious, not arguing with you.)
If I can see past the car in front of me I ignore the “car lengths” rule. This only applies to multi line roads, though, where there is a minimum speed limit.
The only thing I really worry about is aggressive brake checkers. I had one guy try it on my and I just kept getting closer and closer to his bumper. He chickened out and sped up.
He was on a major two lane highway with a 55 mph speed limit and was averaging 45. And there were no places to pass.
When I brake check people, I VERY BRIEFLY slam on the brakes so hard that my nose dives and my tail raises - but only for a split second. I’ve seen more than one guy almost put his car in the ditch trying to avoid me, even though it is so brief that it is not nearly as dangerous as it looks. It just makes them panic. And that is the point.
But I’ve probably done that five times in 41 years of driving. The tailgater has to be grossly belligerent AND unjustified.
I had a cavalier Z-24 the same year as your sunfire. I loved that car.
CC
Based on the damage, It is pretty clear that the driver was not focused on the back of the truck when it hit the brakes. He may have looked away for a second, or been texting, or who knows what else, but the damage is too severe for a “following too close” explanation. If he was following too close and didn’t even bother to hit the brakes it would not be that serious. The reason is that the relative speed difference is not that great.
Imagine you are one foot off the bumper of a truck and it slams on the brakes and you don’t brake. The speed difference as you make up that one foot is not enough to do that kind of damage. More than likely there was enough distance between them for the trucks speed to scrub off significantly and the car plowed into him pretty much at full speed.
i.e. the evidence suggests that this was not a following distance problem, but a speed difference problem, created by ample distance between the vehicles to increase the speed differential.
Good rant, though. :-)
Oh, and the 1.5 second thing was kinda funny. I drive 80 miles to my workplace every day on two lane highways. I pass at least 5 people a day - sometimes lots more. On some stretches I see the guy I passed a few minutes ago is already 30 seconds behind me. It adds up.
But more importantly, it’s not always about saving time. It’s about stress. Following a guy doing 54 in a 55 for 30 miles is not emotionally healthy, especially since the “real” speed limit is 69.
Hopefully this incident causes a few of them to stop doing that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.