radar detector

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, snoopunit said:

IMO, it's one thing to do those speeds with congested traffic. it's a different story entirely if you're on an open road not putting anyone else's life in danger. Not everyone can afford $250+ for 1 day at the track, never mind all the pre-req's for safety and all that. I don't see a problem with doing 80+ in a 65 at 1-2AM when nobody else is on the road. Albeit, it's still illegal, and should be penalized. I wouldn't necessarily say they're a "terrible" driver just because they like to use their vehicle the way it was designed.

If you swapped out 1-2 AM for 1-2 PM, I would agree with you.

 

But you definitely shouldn't be driving 80+ MPH in the middle of pitch black night. A deer or other animal could easily jump out at you unawares before you had time to react. And yes, that could happen at slower speeds, but you have longer to react and the animal also has longer to jump out of the way.

 

But in the middle of the afternoon if no one is on the road, and it's full daylight and you can see for miles? Sure, I don't care if someone drives fast, as long as they're still using the proper safe distances for the speed they're at, and they're not driving aggressively or recklessly.

[Mira Yurizaki]

6 minutes ago, snoopunit said:

IMO, it's one thing to do those speeds with congested traffic. it's a different story entirely if you're on an open road not putting anyone else's life in danger. Not everyone can afford $250+ for 1 day at the track, never mind all the pre-req's for safety and all that. I don't see a problem with doing 80+ in a 65 at 1-2AM when nobody else is on the road. Albeit, it's still illegal, and should be penalized. I wouldn't necessarily say they're a "terrible" driver just because they like to use their vehicle the way it was designed.

The terrible part comes into play that most of those drivers don't really know the limits of their cars or their skill. Any idiot can put the pedal to the metal and to do that on public roads where the conditions are not as safely controlled as possible is asking for trouble.

[snoopunit]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

But you definitely shouldn't be driving 80+ MPH in the middle of pitch black night.

 not sure where you drive, but my highways are illuminated enough. the impact from hitting an animal such as a deer is equally as threatening at 50mph as it is at 80mph. the slower speed has milliseconds of extra time to react, but if the driver is unable to react in a manner that will keep control of the vehicle while avoiding the obstruction, they're gonna have a bad day regardless of exactly how fast they were going.

[snoopunit]

4 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

The terrible part comes into play that most of those drivers don't really know the limits of their cars or their skill. Any idiot can put the pedal to the metal and to do that on public roads where the conditions are not as safely controlled as possible is asking for trouble.

yea, we (my country) needs to invest in better driver's education. like actually learning physics and stuff, but w/e

[Mira Yurizaki]

4 minutes ago, snoopunit said:

yea, we (my country) needs to invest in better driver's education. like actually learning physics and stuff, but w/e

Oh yeah that's another point, the US hands out licenses like candy.

 

4 minutes ago, snoopunit said:

 not sure where you drive, but my highways are illuminated enough. the impact from hitting an animal such as a deer is equally as threatening at 50mph as it is at 80mph. the slower speed has milliseconds of extra time to react, but if the driver is unable to react in a manner that will keep control of the vehicle while avoiding the obstruction, they're gonna have a bad day regardless of exactly how fast they were going.

Most back roads in the US, where animal impacts happen, aren't illuminated.

 

Actually even highways along the country side aren't for the most part. They're only brightly illuminated near rest stops. But you also have to ask yourself if lighting up literally 47,000+ miles of road is practical.

[dalekphalm]

7 minutes ago, snoopunit said:

 not sure where you drive, but my highways are illuminated enough. the impact from hitting an animal such as a deer is equally as threatening at 50mph as it is at 80mph. the slower speed has milliseconds of extra time to react, but if the driver is unable to react in a manner that will keep control of the vehicle while avoiding the obstruction, they're gonna have a bad day regardless of exactly how fast they were going.

Agreed with @M.Yurizaki, basically only when a highway crosses or nears a city is where it'll be illuminated. The government isn't going to string up streetlamps for literally hundreds of KM for just a single highway.

 

And yes, it's only milliseconds of difference. But that can be all the difference in the world. If it's clear and you have good visibility, driving faster isn't really dangerous. But in the middle of the dark, where visibility is limited to your headlights, that's a much bigger danger.

5 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Oh yeah that's another point, the US hands out licenses like candy.

 

Most back roads in the US, where animal impacts happen, aren't illuminated.

 

Actually even highways along the country side aren't for the most part. They're only brightly illuminated near rest stops. But you also have to ask yourself if lighting up literally 47,000+ miles of road is practical.

 

[Mira Yurizaki]

Also one other point about lighting up highways: it can royally screw up the local ecology, especially now that we're starting to deploy those godawful LED lights.

[snoopunit]

All i'm really trying to say is that there's proper ways to drive at high speeds without necessarily increasing the risk for other people on the road, however, most of the people on the road don't know how to operate their vehicles safely. Especially in MA, as you said, licenses get handed out like candy. All you really need to get one is be able to identify road signs and traffic signal colors. Just a few months ago, I renewed my license and all I had to do was identify red/green/yellow and left/right beeping noises. Not once in the process of attaining my license did I ever drive on the freeway or any busy road of more than 40mph. I think everyone could benefit from a complete overhaul of the driver's education system (at least in my state) Even the beginners course for motorcycles is more comprehensive than the entire driver's ed class in my state.

[Syntaxvgm]

1 hour ago, snoopunit said:

honestly, as others have already stated, more often than not, the detector wont go off until after the police have already clocked you. while some of the more expensive detectors (passport/escort) will give you good chances, the cops aren't sitting there with the radar running the whole time. when they see something suspicious, they target it briefly. I've had more luck using waze to alert me of police than any detector i've ever purchased. The only REAL way to fly under the radar is with jammers, which are federally outlawed in the US, so pick your poison. If you really need to satisfy that urge to speed, make a couple passes on a stretch of highway to check for police and road congestion.

I don't have one, but another way of looking at it is a detector is a valuable tool to find problem areas and safer areas.

 

In fact the only reason I don't have one is the particular area I live doesn't have a problem with excessive speeding tickets, I've never actually got one in years of driving. But now for my new job I drive through a couple of small town where I know people have been ticketed for going less than 5 over and for going under, questionable shit like that from areas that get most of their revenue from tickets. They change the speed like from 55>45>35>25>45>55 in a mile stretch, less really, and if you say slow down to 35 in the 45 area they'll ticket you I've heard from many, so I'm considering it to figure out what times the cops down there like to speed trap. I've also heard like like to tailgate cars, like literally on the bumper, force people to speed (Like "oh, there's  a cop tailing me, I must be going too slow here on this single lane road"), then ticket them once they speed. 

[dalekphalm]

16 minutes ago, snoopunit said:

All i'm really trying to say is that there's proper ways to drive at high speeds without necessarily increasing the risk for other people on the road, however, most of the people on the road don't know how to operate their vehicles safely. Especially in MA, as you said, licenses get handed out like candy. All you really need to get one is be able to identify road signs and traffic signal colors. Just a few months ago, I renewed my license and all I had to do was identify red/green/yellow and left/right beeping noises. Not once in the process of attaining my license did I ever drive on the freeway or any busy road of more than 40mph. I think everyone could benefit from a complete overhaul of the driver's education system (at least in my state) Even the beginners course for motorcycles is more comprehensive than the entire driver's ed class in my state.

Obviously different places have different standards.

 

Ontario has decent - but not perfect - license requirements.

 

You take a written test, half of which are road signs, the other of which are about laws and common sense things. After passing that, you get your G1 learners license. This allows you to drive with a fully licensed adult (that has 5+ years experience with a full license). There are a bunch of limitations, including what time you can drive, how many passengers you can have, etc.

 

After 1 year (or 8 months if you take a certified drivers education course that includes both behind-the-wheel instruction as well as in-class instruction), you take your G1 exit test. This is a road test, where you drive around the city or local area - usually minimal or no highway driving. You're expected to be able to do 3-point turns, back ins, and parallel parks, but the instructor will generally choose one or two at random, and not make you do all three. Upon passing the test, you get your G2 learners license. This allows you to drive by yourself with one passenger (if you're under 18 - if over 18, no passenger restrictions) - you can't drive past a certain hour (midnight I think), and you can't drive on Freeway class highways (similar to big interstates). If the front passenger is a driver w/ a full license and 5+ years experience, these restrictions are lifted.

 

After another year, you can take your G2 exit test. Another road test, similar to the first. But you're expected to do highway speed driving, and/or Freeway driving if a freeway is nearby. You're expected, and will be told to do, 3-point, back in, and parallel, etc. If you pass this test, you are awarded a G-Class license, which is the standard Car drivers license.

 

Obviously not all instructors are equal and some may be more lenient or won't make you do all the things, but for the most part, it's pretty standardized.

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Oh yeah that's another point, the US hands out licenses like candy.

 

Most back roads in the US, where animal impacts happen, aren't illuminated.

 

Actually even highways along the country side aren't for the most part. They're only brightly illuminated near rest stops. But you also have to ask yourself if lighting up literally 47,000+ miles of road is practical.

For the most part, I agree entirely. On rural roads (highway 49), I tend to much closer adhere to the speed limit as the local wildlife take on the duties of enforcement. On freeways, I tend to go with the flow of traffic (whatever speed that may be in a given lane), while leaving 3-4 seconds from the next car ahead, more if speeds are higher. 

 

There is a stretch on Highway 50 between Folsom and Placerville where my remark 1.5x "rule" came from. Speeds going up that (long) hills tend to go 75-80 Mph in the fast lane due to some cars needing the speed to make it up without dropping a gear. Going down hill, speeds get pretty ridiculous on weekends (light, fast traffic) . I found myself approaching 90 mph in the middle lane at one point, and still getting passed by fast lane traffic.  

 

This particular stretch gives several miles of visibility to the roadway from an elevated angle. There are no hiding spots for speed traps, so enforcement is limited to whatever CHP happens to be driving nearby. The speed of traffic tends to drop again by the second down hill going into Folsom. 

 

This is probably the most extreme example I've personally seen of (mostly) accepted large scale speed limit violations, and is where I aimed the 1.5x "rule" in sarcasm. 

 

I took my whole lunch to write this btw... 

[yathis]

A few things of note

 

Speeding Tickets are expensive not only the fine but the increased insurance rates

Speeding endangers lives

Doing 50kph here results in automatic impound and a court date