driving in California/California drivers, the end of the myth : a French driver's experience (Freedom: news)

[motoman]

Based on your comments, you appear to be a very cautious driver, which in and of itself is very dangerous, because you get frightened by everything that happens around you and overreact, causing a dangerous situation for drivers around you.

If you want to drive at the speed limit, or more slowly than the general flow of traffic, then you need to stay in the far right lane. I doubt you did this and likely impeded the flow of traffic, causing everyone to have to drive around you. Again, a very unsafe situation.

I could go on and on, but I think others have said it adequately. Just as you were not accustomed to driving in the areas you traveled, others would not be accustomed to the laws and ways of the French, thank goodness.

Perhaps I could say that Americans have places to go and things to do, unlike the French that complain of long 35 hour work weeks, overly long vacations/holidays, blah, blah, blah.

It's easy to complain about the things you don't like, but have you ever considered you were part of the problem?

[Lovehound]

There's so many presumptuous posts here. Too many IMO.

The one I hate the most is the presumption that it's okay to travel whatever speed you like even if it is far in excess of the speed limit and common sense. Some believe that it is their right to have the freedom to drive any speed they want to, and they disdain any drivers who drive reasonably and legally.

I think it's unreasonable to expect to travel any more than 10-12 mph over the speed limit, and not even that in 25 mph zones which should not be exceeded at all. It's made even worse by drivers who weave and cut between lanes.

Anything more than 15 mph over the limit may cause accidents even if the speeding driver is not involved in the accident he caused.

[BRinSM]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

Anything more than 15 mph over the limit may cause accidents even if the speeding driver is not involved in the accident he caused.

I always thought that accidents could happen at any speed

[motoman]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

There's so many presumptuous posts here. Too many IMO.

The one I hate the most is the presumption that it's okay to travel whatever speed you like even if it is far in excess of the speed limit and common sense. Some believe that it is their right to have the freedom to drive any speed they want to, and they disdain any drivers who drive reasonably and legally.

I think it's unreasonable to expect to travel any more than 10-12 mph over the speed limit, and not even that in 25 mph zones which should not be exceeded at all. It's made even worse by drivers who weave and cut between lanes.

Anything more than 15 mph over the limit may cause accidents even if the speeding driver is not involved in the accident he caused.

Slow, overly cautious drivers are just as likely to be involved in/be the cause of an accident as are faster, aggressive drivers. In fact, it is typically the meeting of these two drivers that cause accidents, excluding those simply not paying attention, like those talking on cell phones, doing their make-up, reading, etc. -- also excluding alcohol related accidents and such.

Speed has little to do with it. Rather, one's ability to handle a vehicle given the conditions, one's attentiveness to their surroundings, etc., are the primary determinants of whether one will be involved in, or be the cause of, an accident. Just as you believe it is unreasonable not to travel 10-12 mph over the speed limit, I equally argue that no one should be driving 10-12 mph under the speed limit. Both are equally dangerous.

We are also making the assumption that speed limits are properly set. Given that speed limits vary by location, despite similar area characteristics, I would argue in many cases speed limits are set arbitrarily, balancing safety and tax revenue generation through the issuance of speeding tickets. I would also argue that speed limits are set using a lowest common denomiator, such that at the posted speed limits even the least skilled driver can operate a vehicle relatively safely.

As an example of arbitrary speed limit setting, in Dallas, where I am originally from, school zones are set at 20 mph and residential streets at 30 mph. In California they are 25 mph for both. Which is safest? Which is arbitrary? But I agree, school zone speed limits should be STRICTLY obeyed, whatever they may be set at.

Do you know why the Autobahn, which has no speed limit at certain times, has significantly fewer accidents per mile traveled than the average US highway? Because faster drivers stay in the left lane, slower drivers in the right lane, people obey these laws, and those that do not are heavily fined. Americans do not abide by these laws, even though they actually are laws already on the books, even in California. Nor are these laws enforced in the US, except in rare circumstances. Speed, by itself, is not a primary factor in accidents.

There have even been studies done in the UK to determine the causes of accidents on rural roads. The percentage of accidents determined to be caused by speeding were......wait for it......4%.

It has been proven that drivers that "weave", as you call it, between cars on surface streets actually improve the flow of traffic because people typically leave far too great a distance between them and the car in front of them. By filling in these gaps, the flow of traffic improves. But on highways, at highway speeds, yes, weaving in and out, assuming you are actually cutting someone off, does hurt traffic flow, because it causes a chain reaction of everyone putting on their brakes. But in LA's stop-and-go traffic, highways are many times nothing more than surface streets with no lights, so I would argue filling in the gap in front of someone that is not paying attention actually improves traffic flow.

Remember, the slower you drive and the larger the following distance you leave, the lower the capacity of a given road.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by motoman

Just as you believe it is unreasonable not to travel 10-12 mph over the speed limit, I equally argue that no one should be driving 10-12 mph under the speed limit. Both are equally dangerous.

You'll get no argument from me on that. BTW for the record, I usually drive several mph above the speed limit provided the traffic permits. And when I feel like driving just at the limit I keep to the right lane as much as possible. It's the only polite thing to do.

I agree with you about overly cautious drivers. Friday afternoon I was westbound on Roscoe Blvd. approaching Reseda Blvd. when a pedestrian started jaywalking crossing Roscoe from the Northridge Hospital. The car in front of me braked to an abrupt stop and I noticed this rather late and had to slam on my brakes to avoid rear ending her. Then the car behind me almost rear ended me! And the pedestrian blithely jaywalked across Rosco while two lanes of cars waited for her, risking not only her life but also risking receiving a ticket had a police officer been in the vicinity.

Then the traffic proceeded to stop at a red light at Roscoe and I pulled up next to the car who had braked for the jaywalker. I wasn't going to say anything but I did give the driver a nasty look, and she rolled down her window so I did too, and she said, "What did you want me to do, hit her?" I replied, "You almost caused a three car accident and the jaywalker would have waited to pass before continuing across the street." Well she said something nasty and I said "f---" something nasty and she replied in kind and I gave her the universal driving disapproval hand gesture and the light turned green so we went along our separate business. Stupid b****. Both of them.

People should understand the rules of right of way and they should use them. Anybody who gives up their right of way just confuses everybody else and may cause an accident. Right of way rules are designed to expedite traffic and avoid uncertainty and confusion. Anybody who yields right of way just risks harm and damage for everybody around them.

Actually there are quite a few drivers who don't understand the rules and regulations at all, and even worse, many who don't even care.

[InXTransition]

I have nothing against the French, but... maybe you'd like driving in New Mexico better.
Being from L.A., I can't stand driving anywhere else!

[JTGJR]

Originally Posted by motoman

It has been proven that drivers that "weave", as you call it, between cars on surface streets actually improve the flow of traffic because people typically leave far too great a distance between them and the car in front of them. By filling in these gaps, the flow of traffic improves. But on highways, at highway speeds, yes, weaving in and out, assuming you are actually cutting someone off, does hurt traffic flow, because it causes a chain reaction of everyone putting on their brakes. But in LA's stop-and-go traffic, highways are many times nothing more than surface streets with no lights, so I would argue filling in the gap in front of someone that is not paying attention actually improves traffic flow.

Generally, I agree with this. Technically the rule of thumb is one car length per 10 mph of speed. Unfortunately, when was the last time you saw traffic moving at 70 mph with cars at a safe 7-car length between them?

[BRinSM]

Originally Posted by gildossantos

it's too sad to comment but I would give you 3 pieces of advice :

-relax
-strongly reduce your consumption of FREEDOM fries
-I'm sure there are other channels in american TV than Fox news : try to switch over, it could help you towards more tolerance

I will apologize for the that guys' comments, there's a sour grape in every bunch as they say. Anyways, I can't believe this thread is still going. Hopefully you understand the rules of the road here in California a little better now!

[motoman]

Originally Posted by JTGJR

Generally, I agree with this. Technically the rule of thumb is one car length per 10 mph of speed. Unfortunately, when was the last time you saw traffic moving at 70 mph with cars at a safe 7-car length between them?

You don't see it because it isn't possible. I wrote about this a while back. I'll summarize.

I've seen stats that show 300,000 or so cars travel both directions on the 405 each day (at the measuring point of the study I read). The number of lanes vary depending on where on the 405 you are, but for argument's sake let's say it's 6 lanes all the way.

300,000 cars / 6 lanes = 50,000 cars per day per lane.

The rule of thumb is to keep a 3 second following distance, at any speed. The greater the speed, the greater the following distance, but the same 3 seconds of following time.

50,000 cars x 3 seconds = 150,000 seconds worth of following distance.

150,000 seconds / 60 seconds = 2,500 minutes.

2,500 minutes / 60 minutes = 41.67 hours.

Assuming a rule of thumb following distance of 3 seconds, it would take over 40 hours for a single day's worth of traffic on the 405 to pass through. Obviously that isn't possible. So what happens? The following "time" shrinks.

The maximum average following time, given the volume of traffic on the 405, is:

(24 hours x 60 minutes x 60 seconds) / 50,000 cars = 1.73 seconds.

Obviously this is a rough, average calculation and the following distance by car varies greatly. But at least you can see some of the limitations of road capacity given a particular following distance.

Put another way, were everyone to maintain a 3 second following distance, the maximum traffic flow on the 405 would be about 29,000 cars per lane per day, or just 58% of current traffic levels.

Also keep in mind that these calculations exclude the distance occupied by the length of the cars themselves. I am being conservative and implying that the length of each car is 0. Given actual lengths, you would have to figure another 1 second or so of total time per vehicle, which would indicate an even lower actual following distance.

[gildossantos]

Originally Posted by BRinSM

I will apologize for the that guys' comments, there's a sour grape in every bunch as they say. Anyways, I can't believe this thread is still going. Hopefully you understand the rules of the road here in California a little better now!

i appreciate your message, thanks. You don't need to apologize for his comment, you are not responsible and most of the comments were polite and informative to understand better the driving habits in your beautiful state. When I'm back visiting California (be sure I will be back, there's so many places to visit), I'll keep all that in mind!