begin quoting DJA as of Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:04:31PM -0800: > Paul G. Allen wrote: > >On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 14:37 -0800, Ralph Shumaker wrote: > > > >>That would suggest that unless you were moving at around 5mph, you were > >>tailgating. No? :-\ > > > >I don't think my car will go that slow without slipping the clutch like > >hell or coasting down hill. :)
Clutches are comparitively cheap. And coasting is easy, just shift into neutral! > >In rush hour traffic, have you ever tried to leave a 3 sec. space > >between you and the car in front of you? I often leave more than that In rush hour traffic, why are you measuring gaps? > >when traffic is moving really slow because my clutch is a killer and my > >car will only go so slow at idle in first gear. If there is a space This is a mustang, right? Been there, drove that, got the cramp in the left calf... > >large enough, it is inevitable that another car will fill it (or two, or > >three, or,...), forcing you to decelerate to provide the 3 sec. space > >again. The cycle will continue forever. So, if you want to avoid coming > >to a stop just to leave that safety zone, the best you can hope for is a > >compromise between that 3 sec. space and something less safe but not 2 seconds was the "recommended" distance way back when I was learning to drive (so was 10-and-2, even though I did 9-and-3 for preference then and now). The buffer zone isn't firm. It's soft. And the slower you go, the squishier it should get. > >dangerous. That's one reason I always leave myself an out - somewhere I > >can go when something happens in front of me (something I learned from > >many years riding a motorcycle). The problem of playing dodge'em is that if you screw up and hit something or someone, or lose control, it's now your fault. Legally (IANAL), I believe that it's better to have the guy coming into your lane to hit you than for you to dodge and hit someone else. The appropriate response is probably to hit the horn and slam on the brakes, especially if you have nowhere to dodge to. Ideally, you'd let 'em crunch your mirror before you take drastic action -- but that's a hard sort of precision and confidence to master. And it's not like there's much chance to practice. :-/ [snip] > > I call Bullshit. That's the common excuse given by people who have never > really tried it before for more than ten seconds. If you don't believe > me, try riding with me sometime in rush hour traffic. Next time I go somewhere with you at rush hour, you're driving! > It's really easy to keep a safe distance at any speed. The trick, as > mentioned by someone else, is to maintain as _consistent_ a speed as > possible. Use only the engine for braking whenever possible - usually > meaning running in at least one gear lower than optimal for that speed - > and use the brakes as little as possible. Well, it's sometimes nice to use the brakes to _indicate_ that you're slowing down, without actually applying them, or applying them very hard... > Anyone pulling in front of you is almost always wanting to go *faster* > than you and will soon enough either open the distance in front of you, > or move to another temporarily faster lane (another rule is to never > stay in the number one lane). You can gradually adjust the distance as > needed in very little time. Letting people who want to go faster get by you BEFORE the traffic locks up is a good thing. The annoyance are those people who don't want to go /faster/ than you, but who merely want to be AHEAD of you. They'll speed up, pull in front, and then slow down. This is where I begin to think rocket-launchers might be appropriate armament for cars. Of course, turning this around... if I end up passing/pulling in front of someone, it behooves me to ensure that I *don't* consequently slow down... this is why I really like driving with cruise control (sometimes to the detriment of nominal 'buffer zones') -- it's not MY speed that is varying all over the map, and if I pass you, it's not that I am temporarily zooming along. Like most things, working out "if our roles were reversed, what would I want the other guy to do" is a really good start. This sort of thinking is apparently quite alien to some people; smart, capable, moral, friendly people, who just can't look at the world that way. > Sure, at points the gap'll close up some. It just takes more patience > than most drivers have. I agree that it's hard. Something about just > being on the freeway screams "Hurry up! Go faster!". Nice, wide, smooth lanes, gentle curves, and another 4,000 RPM left on the tach... Yeah. > I've also observed that most 18-wheelers, especially owner-operator > rigs, will keep as steady a speed as possible - probably something about > inertia of a large mass. In fact they generally do exactly as I've > described above - use the engine for braking. In fact, I don't mind > being right behind one a slow speeds because I know they're consistent. Indeed. Of course, it helps that they can *see* farther. It helps with patience and forward planning when you can see five times as far.... > I find that when I use these tactics, that I leap frog other cars which > radically change lanes and speed at about the same frequency as if I > were driving faster and closer (like the other idiots). I also get to > where I'm going in about the same time. And I'm contributing to keeping > the flow behind me steady because those following me don't need to brake > either (unless they're idiots too). You don't have to keep the flow behind you steady, just steadier than what's in front of you. Trying to smooth out traffic _all_ by yourself is apt to make it worse. > I also use the same tactic in long on-ramp lines. I usually keep the > speed just low enough so that I never stop moving even when I hit the light. Smoothness is key. -- Then again, I really like having excess horsepower at my disposal. Stewart Stremler -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
