THE NEED FOR SPEED . . .

If you are speeding to get somewhere quicker, on a relatively short trip over even moderately congested roads with traffic control devices, the amount of time saved is very minimal and not worth the risk (in terms of accidents or tickets).

If, however, you are making a long trip on relatively straight highways without traffic control devices, speeding, obviously, can save you time and without significant risk of accidents, and if you stay alert, tickets.

Max is right that on a highway where the majority of cars are travelling 10 mph or more over the speed limit those who are driving at or below the speed limit can present a hazard, if they are not driving in the far right lane.

Here in Texas, there are, unfortunately, no shortage of cantankerous old cowboys in old pickups sticking strictly to the speed limit while driving in the left lane. One can imagine them thinking "I'm driving the speed limit damn it, and I'm not moving out of this lane" as those wishing to drive faster line up behind them and start to make risky moves to get around them.

I used to fairly regularly drive from Charlotte to Atlanta which would take me 4.5 to 5 hours if I maintained the speed limits. I never did and was able to reduce the length of the trip to 3.5 to 4 hours. The roughly one hour I saved was actually of real benefit (in terms of meeting a schedule) probably only once, but one less hour in a car has benefit.

I admit though that I speed on highways not because I want to arrive at my destination that much sooner but because I like it. If I have been driving at 85 mph for a period of time and then, for whatever reason, have to reduce my speed to 65 mph, even if there is no traffic, it makes me uncomfortable.

We have a highway here that I took to South Padre Island last year that has an 85 mph speed limit. It was the perfect highway for speed: flat, straight, and without any place for cops to hide. I drove at 100 mph for about an hour and it was grand.

Some years ago driving through the Mohave in early summer and perfect conditions, another driver and I, without any communication, took turns driving up front separated by about an 1/8th of a mile. We were both going very fast and this cooperative strategy cut our chances of a ticket in half.

A bit more recently, also in summer, I drove down to San Diego from Portland to pick up my daughter who was visiting a friend. Took 17 hours. Returned the next day with a stop in Santa Barbara. That took 20. I won't do that again as driving steady for that long is not safe. But I love highway driving in good weather and I was in a new 3 series bmw so it was a trip I jumped at doing.

Ok, ok, here it is again, not all about speed -

Driving 101
http://able2know.org/topic/28171-1

I've driven ninety in some places to catch up, as on highway 5.

I've driven somewhat over limit where the road is long, no soul around, and when moving to New Mexico, trying to beat the clock, just to get there before the sun went down, re my eyes. Relatively easy with not many on the highway that day.

In the land I was describing, what they call north bay area up to northern california, I went slow, mostly. The forest get's rushed through, but I like it quiet, except for my cds once in a while.

re zen of driving...

Yup. There are different driving experiences. I love driving in the mountains in winter, for example, where I don't speed. I almost never have music or radio on in the car and prefer to have my window open (I want to smell where I am). I prefer a minimum of conversation (that is, involving me - others can talk) particularly if I'm going somewhere I haven't been before or if I haven't been on that road for a long while. But I do also love to go quickly where conditions permit the extravagance. In the last decade or so, I've been from BC down to Texas twice, across the continent from New York to Portland, from BC to southern California a bunch of times plus two dozen trips from Portland to BC and back and in all of that, I got one ticket. I deserved thousands.

Aside the usefulness of gaining or losing some seconds one ought to consider the development in car security, active suspension, brake systems, quality of the pavement to provide a relative frame of reference to make a case for increasing the speed while maintaining the same degree of security. On the other hand the best case against it can be framed regarding human perceptual limits and reaction time which does not increase. In any case I agree that upping the speed limit given the marginal gain seams to have very little to do with a more efficient use of our available time.

Yes. Just the factor of modern tires alone provides a significant increase in safety at any speed.

But your final sentence is important, I think. If a driver saves 30 minutes one could inquire as to what he'll do with that 30 minutes.

Whatever it is, it probably beats driving hands down.

Gotcha.

Depends on if after you pass Scotia you see an ice cream store.



You won't.

Of course having the right car makes a huge difference. I couldn't have driven at 100 mph for an hour straight in a ten year old, 4 cyl, Corolla with 150,000 miles on the odometer.

I like fast cars and I buy fast cars. What's the point of buying a car with a 400 + hp engine if you're not going to drive it fast? In 1974, my father bought a Pontiac Firebird Trans Am with a V8 engine that produced something like 375 hp. Eight years earlier he had "settled" on a Pontiac LeMans when he really wanted a GTO, because my mother insisted "You don't own a car like that when you have three kids." In 1974, my sister, the last of the three kids, left the house and gave me the LeMans (metallic gold with black interior and a black landau roof -which was by no means a pig) and bought the Firebird. It was bright red with a white interior. I thought the color scheme was tacky but he had taken to wearing white belts and shoes and thought they were hip as hell. Tacky or not, it was faster than lightning.

My mother still never approved (the harpy never wanted him to have any fun) and gave him grief all the time, but he would always answer, "You have to drive this car fast honey, it hurts the engine if you don't. The car's in pain if I don't drive her fast, and you know I love her." It always infuriated my mother and we would both have a good laugh when we later drove very fast in the car.

You sound like you don't have fun driving, let alone driving fast.

I'm with him on this. But only if accompanied by pastel blue or yellow slacks. Girls go crazy for a sharp dressed man.

You've left me somewhere back on the road with that one, girl.

For your safety and the safety of others, Speed King is followed by Highway Star and Burn, live.

Oh, that was obscure, sorry, mulling to myself again.

Thing is, while driving through something like 150 miles of forest, much of it quite tall, with little traffic, one gets in a zone, whether it's fast or slowish - me driving slowish there - but once one passes Scotia (an old lumber company town), the trees start to yield to green fields and some nice towns with possibilities for stopping for snacks, perhaps for ice cream, or slowing down to look at the cows, or turning off to see the alpacas, or, or, or. In other words, the world of more people and visible animals as you fast approach the Pacific Ocean is a neat transition out of "the zone". In my case, it was then only a few more miles to the town of my daily life, wholly different scene than forest driving with symphony of choice turned up nice and loud.

For him it was pastel blue.

You've filled in the blanks beautifully.

georgeob is probably laughing his tochis off.

There's a guy I miss. Normally I don't get on very well with certain sorts like Republicans who've palled around with Dick Cheney or who set up meth labs but if they have a sense of humor, I can take a couple of steps in their direction.