|
General » rec.autos.driving » Saw an intelligent bicyclist today
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797167 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 18:48 |
|
On Mar 5, 12:33 am, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
> On Mar 4, 7:41 pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
>
> > frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
>
> > >>Your post calls for no real addressing. The data, almost ALL of it,
> > >>shows speeds going up, and fatalities going down.
>
> > > False. Stephen has posted over a dozen counterexamples.
>
> > There *are* no reliable sources that support your assertion.
>
> For counterexamples to disprove your "no reliable sources," here's
> what Stephen Harding found and posted. I quote: <>
>
> That's quite a bit different from your claim that there are "no
> reliable studies." Is it possible that a study's reliability depends
> on whether you like its outcome?
>
> I'll note that the general run of argument from the driving fans has
> been: Speed has no bearing on safety - because we want to drive
> faster. Speed limits are set too low - because we want to drive
> faster. There are too many stop signs - because we want to drive
> faster. Speed humps should not be used in residential neighborhoods -
> because we want to drive faster. We'll refuse to shop in your area -
> because we want to drive faster.
>
> If, at any time, one of you were to say "Well, here's an instance
> where drivers should be made to drive slower," it would indicate a
> _little_ less bias. But in the several years we've had these repeated
> discussions, that's never happened.
>
> Slow down, boys. You're just making yourself agitated by always
> trying to go faster, and you're not accomplishing anything productive
> with the time you save, if any.
Lol. Think ya used enough dynamite there, Butch?
-----
- gpsman
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797168 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 18:50 |
|
On Mar 5, 6:38=A0am, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
> DanK... [at] gmail.com wrote:
> > On Mar 4, 1:04 pm, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
>
> >>I can only dream of a 5 mpg advantage!
>
> > Drive 45 with your tailgate down.
>
> Hey what's the r.a.d. position on tailgates down?
>
> Don't do it! =A0It doesn't help and may hurt mpg.
>
> Putting a tonneau cover is about the best you can
> do or leave it stock and hope the air bubble in
> the bed helps keep air flow laminar as much as some
> automotive engineers claim.
>
> SMH
That squares with what I've heard as well; apparently the air in the
bed is "dead air" anyway so whether you have a tonneau or not makes
little difference. The tailgate apparently gives something of a Kamm
effect so it is actually beneficial.
I have a camper shell on my pickup so that I can carry car parts,
machine tools, etc. without worry about weather or sticky fingers, so
the decision has already been made for me in my case.
nate
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797169 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 18:51 |
|
On Mar 5, 9:52=A0am, "DanK... [at] gmail.com" <DanK... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> In the suburbs you get the yuppies who consider you a lower life form
Heh. I love yuppies, I really do.
nate
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797170 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 18:53 |
|
On Mar 5, 12:51=A0pm, N8N <njna... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 5, 9:52=A0am, "DanK... [at] gmail.com" <DanK... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In the suburbs you get the yuppies who consider you a lower life form
>
> Heh. =A0I love yuppies, I really do.
>
> nate
I love lots of yuppies. Some of them are my family. What can ya do...
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797172 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 18:57 |
|
On Mar 5, 12:53=A0pm, "DanK... [at] gmail.com" <DanK... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 5, 12:51=A0pm, N8N <njna... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 5, 9:52=A0am, "DanK... [at] gmail.com" <DanK... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > In the suburbs you get the yuppies who consider you a lower life form
>
> > Heh. =A0I love yuppies, I really do.
>
> > nate
>
> I love lots of yuppies. =A0Some of them are my family. =A0What can ya do..=
..
Show up at their house in jeans and a wifebeater carrying a six of
PBR? Cans, of course.
nate
(why yes, I *am* available to give advice on a whole range of awkward
social situations.)
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797175 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 19:49 |
|
On Mar 5, 12:57=A0pm, N8N <njna... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 5, 12:53=A0pm, "DanK... [at] gmail.com" <DanK... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 5, 12:51=A0pm, N8N <njna... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 5, 9:52=A0am, "DanK... [at] gmail.com" <DanK... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > In the suburbs you get the yuppies who consider you a lower life for=
m
>
> > > Heh. =A0I love yuppies, I really do.
>
> > > nate
>
> > I love lots of yuppies. =A0Some of them are my family. =A0What can ya do=
....
>
> Show up at their house in jeans and a wifebeater carrying a six of
> PBR? =A0Cans, of course.
>
> nate
>
> (why yes, I *am* available to give advice on a whole range of awkward
> social situations.)
Oh, I have and do. Well, less the wifebeater - I'm a jeans & T-shirt
guy. I'm the one that moved to NH, drives a dented & scratched pickup
truck (often through the woods), and considers a beer or bourbon by an
outdoor fire the epitome of relaxation. I grew up partying in the
woods at keggers that people got to by truck, ATV or walking. People
rarely walked - that's why pickup trucks have beds!! Then again, I
have been called a yuppie and I do meet the definition at times. Oh
well...
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797177 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 19:56 |
|
On Mar 4, 10:02=A0pm, Zoot Katz <zootk... [at] operamail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:51:47 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
>
> <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Mar 3, 7:19=A0pm, Zoot Katz <zootk... [at] operamail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:18:36 -0600, Tom Sherman
>
> >> Many drivers wish to project their self-worth through the car they
> >> drive. I've no problem with that. It helps me regard them as
> >> something less than human. =A0They're just plain "squishy turds in a
> >> can" when considering them collectively and caged.
>
> >Which, of course, you never say aloud in public.
>
> >It's easy to be a usenet hero. =A0It's harder IRL.
>
> The sticker clearly visible on my rear fender sums it up:
> CARS SUCK
>
> Another bike says: ANY IDIOT CAN DRIVE
>
> I've another that says: FUKENKARZ.
>
> I'm no Usenet hero so have probably disappointed at least seven
> posters and probably a few lurkers in <r.b.m> I've had the pleasure
> to meet, IRL.*
And we'd hear the refrain from them, I'm sure, "He's a nice guy."
Which means that you are indeed a usenet hero. Q.E.D.
> When I simply looked at a driver like an overflowing toilet and they
> give me the finger I know they got the message. My initial response
> was to grab my crotch. Fool pulls over, gets out and runs into the
> street. When he punched me in the back after I'd avoided hitting him,
> I had a feeling he might like to talk. After turning around and
> slowly coasting back along the sidewalk I started reciting his plate
> number aloud when within earshot. At twenty feet he bolted, got back
> into his coffin and fuktoff.
That's a nice fairy tale. I've heard those before.
On the internet, anyone can be tough AND good-looking.
> *IRL, lots of people know me as =A0Zoot Katz but mostly call me the
> same name as my mother did.
You're still anonymous, and still wrong about nym-shifting. But you
can attempt to PROVE that I nym-shifted. Go ahead, big talker.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797204 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 04:29 |
|
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:56:43 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
<gcmschemist [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>> When I simply looked at a driver like an overflowing toilet and they
>> give me the finger I know they got the message. My initial response
>> was to grab my crotch. Fool pulls over, gets out and runs into the
>> street. When he punched me in the back after I'd avoided hitting him,
>> I had a feeling he might like to talk. After turning around and
>> slowly coasting back along the sidewalk I started reciting his plate
>> number aloud when within earshot. At twenty feet he bolted, got back
>> into his coffin and fuktoff.
>
>That's a nice fairy tale. I've heard those before.
Maybe you previously read an account of the incident.
Message-ID: <2np3a11ghf8vfg5i6k58acuetdhslr2li6 [at] 4ax.com>
Use your hacking skills to dig up the police report. I live in
Vancouver, BC.
>
>> *IRL, lots of people know me as Zoot Katz but mostly call me the
>> same name as my mother did.
>
>You're still anonymous, and still wrong about nym-shifting. But you
>can attempt to PROVE that I nym-shifted. Go ahead, big talker.
Here, read my lips: GO FIST YOURSELF
I have no interest in exposing your sock puppets.
The nym Zoot Katz has been unchanged since I started posting to this
group in August 2000. I dropped the X-No_Archive field in October of
that year. My legal name isn't in the phone book either.
--
zk
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797217 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 05:45 |
|
On Mar 5, 7:29 pm, Zoot Katz <zootk... [at] operamail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:56:43 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
>
> Use your hacking skills to dig up the police report. I live in
> Vancouver, BC.
Hmm, that's not all that far away. I may have to come and pay you a
visit.
> >> *IRL, lots of people know me as Zoot Katz but mostly call me the
> >> same name as my mother did.
>
> >You're still anonymous, and still wrong about nym-shifting. But you
> >can attempt to PROVE that I nym-shifted. Go ahead, big talker.
>
> Here, read my lips: GO FIST YOURSELF
I can't wait until I there in person so I can here that come directly
from you piehole. It will be amusing.
> I have no interest in exposing your sock puppets.
That's because you can't. ROTFL!
I'll be in contact about the meet. I have relatives less than 90
miles from you, and I can't wait to see what kind of a really tough
guy you are in person.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797223 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 06:17 |
|
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 20:45:00 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
<gcmschemist [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>> Here, read my lips: GO FIST YOURSELF
>
>I can't wait until I there in person so I can here that come directly
>from you piehole. It will be amusing.
>
Be sure to use a good lube and maybe a latex glove.
>> I have no interest in exposing your sock puppets.
>
>That's because you can't. ROTFL!
>
>I'll be in contact about the meet. I have relatives less than 90
>miles from you, and I can't wait to see what kind of a really tough
>guy you are in person.
Traditionally, <van.general> twits like you are told to meet at Red
Robin's except they never show up.
Probably because mommy won't let them out of the house after dark.
It's just past nine. How's eleven sound?
--
zk
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797224 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 07:29 |
|
On Mar 5, 9:17 pm, Zoot Katz <zootk... [at] operamail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 20:45:00 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
>
> <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Here, read my lips: GO FIST YOURSELF
>
> >I can't wait until I there in person so I can here that come directly
> >from you piehole. It will be amusing.
>
> Be sure to use a good lube and maybe a latex glove.
Uh, I don't swing that way. But thanks for the "offer".
Like I said, I'll be in contact.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797225 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 07:38 |
|
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:29:20 -0800 (PST), Ed Pirrero
<gcmschemist [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>Like I said, I'll be in contact.
I'll hold my bladder.
--
zk
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797228 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 12:05 |
|
In article <512ae926-5efd-4bde-93c7-190212373131 [at] e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
N8N <njnagel [at] hotmail.com> writes:
>> I guess nothing gets resolved on Usenet.
>>
>> Oh, well.
> It won't get resolved IRL either until BOTH groups start actually
> playing by the rules.
I only play by the basic, Common Law RoW rules. And that's
just when there are other street users around who might be
affected by my deviation from them.
You know the basic RoW rules, dont'cha:
1) don't unsafely impinge on anyone else's line of
travel/safety zone
2) at major/minor street intersections, the street
with majority has the RoW
3) at intersections, the first one in gets to go first
(first come, first served)
4) when vehicles simultaneously approach an intersection,
the one on the right gets to go first (in North America)
RoW is always given, not taken at liberty.
> I get a definite vibe from the cycling group that their shit don't
> stink - oooh, cagers break the law all the time but most cyclists are
> responsible alert riders. BS! The average cyclist doesn't have a
> clue, much like the average driver.
I get a definite vibe from you drivers, too.
I have /never/ stolen the RoW from a driver.
If I did, I'd get pasted.
But I've had it stolen innumerable times from
me from drivers who think I don't matter simply
because I'm riding a bike instead of pointing a
car in some general direction. (Fortunately for
me, I'm alert to when they do that.)
Go figure.
Anyways, a lot of riders also drive cars. I guess the
attitudes of some of those folks are merely their
car-driving attitudes, carried over.
I don't drive, and never have. My attitude is simply
about letting people go kill themselves if they wanna.
As long as they don't kill me. And if they have to
pretend I'm in their way, that's an issue they'll have
to deal with. None o' my beeswax.
Actually, I do deeply feel the needless, thoughtless
loss of lives at the hands of stupido torpedoes.
I'm glad I'm not one of 'em.
Bikes are safer than cars. At least, when ridden
with a non-driving, bicycle-specific approach,
and the expectancy that you drivers won't respect
the basic RoW rules.
Drivers can be such a self-serving, self-centred
bunch of crybabies. It's most distasteful and
pathetic.
Cyclists can be such a self-serving, self-centred
bunch of crybabies. It's most distasteful and
pathetic.
Drivers can be cyclists, and vice verso.
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797229 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 12:28 |
|
In article <8c7431d5-f85a-44b6-a2cb-8d5f90710420 [at] u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
Ed Pirrero <gcmschemist [at] gmail.com> writes:
>> The difference, which seems to confuse the r.a.d. boys, is that
>> cyclist stupidity only rarely damages anyone else's person or
>> vehicle. Motorist stupidity kills over 100 people per day in the US,
>> and keeps over 200,000 auto body repairmen employed full-time, fixing
>> the cars that aren't totaled.
> Don't pretend the consequences are equal.
??
Nobody's making such a pretension. The consequences of a
car/bike collision are certainly unequal, and not in
favour of the cyclist.
> And don't fall for your logical fallacy of the two wrongs.
> Wrong is wrong, no matter what the vehicle.
Yeah, bicycle riders are so prolifically & willingly
splattering themselves over the front-ends of motor cars.
We /want/ you to hit us, destroy our lives, and maybe
even kill us. We mindfully hurl our bikes against your
S-series Mercedes's and Lexus's and Porche Boxters, with
a mind to make life inconvenient for youse.
Bicycling is a conspiracy, to make you suckers buy more
cars, and waste more money & time.
Let's go car hunting. I know just the dogs to bring along.
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797249 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 17:34 |
|
On Mar 6, 3:28=A0am, tkeats2... [at] hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article <8c7431d5-f85a-44b6-a2cb-8d5f90710... [at] u10g2000prn.googlegroups.=
com>,
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> The difference, which seems to confuse the r.a.d. boys, is that
> >> cyclist stupidity only rarely damages anyone else's person or
> >> vehicle. =A0Motorist stupidity kills over 100 people per day in the US,=
> >> and keeps over 200,000 auto body repairmen employed full-time, fixing
> >> the cars that aren't totaled.
> > Don't pretend the consequences are equal.
>
> ??
I didn't write that. Frank wrote that.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797258 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 18:58 |
|
N8N wrote:
> On Mar 5, 6:38 am, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
>>Putting a tonneau cover is about the best you can
>>do or leave it stock and hope the air bubble in
>>the bed helps keep air flow laminar as much as some
>>automotive engineers claim.
>
> That squares with what I've heard as well; apparently the air in the
> bed is "dead air" anyway so whether you have a tonneau or not makes
> little difference. The tailgate apparently gives something of a Kamm
> effect so it is actually beneficial.
>
> I have a camper shell on my pickup so that I can carry car parts,
> machine tools, etc. without worry about weather or sticky fingers, so
> the decision has already been made for me in my case.
I put caps on my trucks. At one time I thought it helped
with fuel economy, but I've now read it probably doesn't
do much of anything.
Except for a cap specifically designed by the University of
??? engineering class to maximize fuel efficiency via minimal
drag.
Unfortunately, the cap sloped down towards the rear bumper
leading to a late 40's Hudson kind of look.
And of course, having a small opening in the back makes it
rather awkward actually using the bed to carry anything.
But as an engineering exercise, I guess it was a success.
SMH
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797301 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 04:56 |
|
Nate Nagel wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But in any case, you have admitted to *slowing down* in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the process of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passing a truck because a following driver offended you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> somehow. That ought to be illegal... oh wait, it is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It ought to be illegal to use a vehicle in such an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> offensive and aggressive manner.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I agree, deliberately blocking traffic is offensive
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and aggressive. Your driver's license, please?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (seriously. start driving like a reasonable person or stay
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the fuck off the road. There's enough assholes on the road
>>>>>>>>>>>>> already.)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So are you one of those people who weaves back and forth
>>>>>>>>>>>> through traffic thinking everyone should get the hell out of
>>>>>>>>>>>> their way? That is who you are defending here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No, I'm one of those people who simply expects others to
>>>>>>>>>>> follow the rules of the road. I'm actually one of the slower
>>>>>>>>>>> drivers in my area, not that it really matters. People are
>>>>>>>>>>> going to drive at speeds different from one another; that's a
>>>>>>>>>>> fact of life and you can't do anything about it. What you
>>>>>>>>>>> *can* do is be courteous and accomodating, so everyone gets
>>>>>>>>>>> where they're going with a minimum of hassle and frustration.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, I am referring to driver's whose expectation is that
>>>>>>>>>> everyone else get the hell out of their way.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's a reasonable expectation, if they are driving faster
>>>>>>>>> than the main flow and traffic isn't jammed up.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And how often does that apply to the right lane of an urban
>>>>>>>> interstate? Should people get out of the right (i.e. slow) lane
>>>>>>>> to let faster traffic by? Should not the faster traffic be
>>>>>>>> passing on the left?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> These people are invariably driving vehicles that cost 2 to 3
>>>>>>>>>> times the mean vehicle price.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Envy much?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, people of a certain class believe that they have special
>>>>>>>> privileges that lower classes do not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's not up to you to make a judgement call as to the
>>>>>>>>>>> reasonableness of another vehicle operator's speed. If you
>>>>>>>>>>> misjudge and inadvertantly hold someone up for a few seconds
>>>>>>>>>>> while passing, that's an honest mistake.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> If it is a honest mistake, does that allow for the driver
>>>>>>>>>> being delayed one or two seconds the right to act like an
>>>>>>>>>> asshole?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If it's only one or two seconds, they probably won't act like
>>>>>>>>> an asshole. If it's "as long as possible," well, people are
>>>>>>>>> human.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My experience is that they act like jerks if they have to slow
>>>>>>>> down say 5 mph for one of two seconds.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But if you deliberately hold them up, that's
>>>>>>>>>>> "passive-aggressive driving" in my book and just as
>>>>>>>>>>> unacceptable as tailgating, cutting someone off, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When someone else acts like an asshole first without
>>>>>>>>>> provocation, should one give in and let the MFFY bastards win?
>>>>>>>>>> In the passing the semi-truck situation, if the third driver
>>>>>>>>>> stays back a couple of vehicle lengths, I will speed up and
>>>>>>>>>> return to the right lane as soon as possible. If they try to
>>>>>>>>>> intimidate me off the road, to hell with them. They can sit
>>>>>>>>>> and stew.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So you're as much of an asshole as anyone else on the road.
>>>>>>>>> Got it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And you are one of the people that acts like a jerk? Got it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think this is where the thread denigrates to IKYABWAI, isn't it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Except in this instance, I *am* a courteous driver and you *are*
>>>>>>> the asshole.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Opinion stated as fact.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, it may be my *opinion* that I am a courteous driver, but you
>>>>> have yet to accuse me of one discourteous behaviour that I actually
>>>>> exhibit.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> No, according to your postings you think everyone should get the
>>>> hell our of YOUR road.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, I said slower traffic should yield to faster traffic. I am
>>> usually "slower traffic." Where in the world did you get the idea
>>> this was all about me? We're talking basic courtesy and first day
>>> behind the wheel Driver's Ed stuff, here.
>>>
>> It is not practical to yield to faster traffic when the passing of the
>> truck has already started, and someone suddenly cuts over from the
>> right lane and speeds way up just to tailgate.
>
> Where did all that come from? I'm simply talking about passing in an
> expedient manner. You shouldn't take more than 10 seconds to pass ANY
> vehicle. If it's going to take you longer than that, you should just
> stay behind the slower driver because you're not going faster enough
> (yes, I know that's grammatically awkward) to make it worth anyone's
> while for you to pass.
>
I have had people do exactly that - whip over from the right lane
through the center to the left (without signaling, of course), and then
close up to 5 feet or less with the high beams on. The message they are
sending is obvious "get the fuck out of my road". Equally obvious is
that these people have no respect for right-of-way; their minds are
fixed on "ME ME ME!".
>>
>>>>> You however have admitted to being an asshole on the road.
>>>>>
>>>> When did not giving into a bully turn into assholic behavior?
>>>
>>>
>>> Slowing down to "let someone stew" is definitely assaholic.
>>> Especially when you can't possibly know what he's thinking; he may
>>> have no ill intent toward you at all, just crept up a little closer
>>> than you'd like.
>>>
>> Proper following distance is basic. Following a 5 feet or less with
>> high beams on is not just creeping up a little.
>
> If you're regularly experiencing that, you're doing it wrong. I don't
> ever get that, and I live in DC-land, AKA asshole driver capital of the
> USA.
>
I had a jerk do that just a couple of hours ago on a two lane street,
where my speed was limited by vehicles in front of me. I hope he acts
like that outside the car some day and gets his facial features
rearranged for his troubles.
>>>>> One would think that someone (presumably) posting from a biking
>>>>> group would be a little more concerned about road safety and
>>>>> driving correctly, but I guess not.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, someone zig-zagging through traffic at speeds significantly
>>>> higher then the general flow, cutting people off, and aggressively
>>>> tailgating is being a safe driver?
>>>
>>>
>>> Where did I advocate any of that? Please post cites.
>>>
>> Those are the people who are usually found to aggressively tailgate
>> someone who is passing a truck at a reasonable speed differential, or
>> is being slowed by another vehicle ahead in the passing lane.
>
> So I didn't say that. Thanks.
>
>>>> And you are upset that someone does not speed up to an unsafe speed
>>>> to avoid delaying someone who behaves this way a second or two?
>>>
>>>
>>> I am upset that you admit to slowing down to apparently teach other
>>> drivers a lesson. Grow the fuck up already.
>>>
>> However, you believe that aggressive tailgating with the high beams on
>> is just fine to teach someone a lesson.
>
> Cite?
>
Apparent by implication - please clarify if you meant something else.
>> Grow up already.
>
> Stop using troll logic.
>
Yes, indeed, please do so.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797302 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 04:58 |
|
Ed Pirrero wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:51 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0... [at] REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> Brent P? wrote:
>>> In article <8d1ff144-be8d-409e-b119-6e99257d4... [at] e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Mar 2, 11:12 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> In article <7265865b-1c02-4f9b-9efd-9ae702b0c... [at] i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Mar 1, 9:09 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <fqd056$rs... [at] registered.motzarella.org>, Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>>>>> I don't know where trucks actually go 55mph...
>>>>>> Up hills.
>>>>>> (Sheesh.)
>>>>> Not any of the hills around here.
>>>> :-) Well THAT clears things up! The hills in Chicago don't slow
>>>> trucks, therefore there are no hills anywhere that slow trucks!
>>> Holy jump battman. I never said any such thing, but you know that.
>>>> I don't know why the highway departments around here wasted all the
>>>> money on those "7% grade" signs! They should have checked with racer-
>>>> boy!
>>> I dunno. The times I've driven through the hills and mountains on the way
>>> to and from NC and WV I don't recall the trucks dropping to 55mph...
>>> maybe my memory is off, that could be, but I think they kept it above
>>> 55mph for the most part. They certainly do through the hills of WI. Now
>>> they do slow, but 55mph seems to be a floor speed. I suppose there are
>>> some mountain roads out there where they slow to 45mph or something but
>>> that is still the limit of their vehicles, I have rarely seen truckers
>>> restrict themselves to 55mph.
>> In Colorado on I-70, I have passed trucks that were doing 15-20 mph
>> uphill. (I was doing about 40-45 mph, full throttle in 3rd gear, in a
>> Rabbit (Golf I).
>
> Brent lives in the flatlands and has no idea what mountains are like.
>
> Out here in the west, 18-wheelers often climb mt. passes at half the
> SL or less. Mostly, they are nice about restricting themselves to the
> right lane only.
>
> Sometimes, they are jerks and micropass at 25 mph in the right lane,
> and 27 mph in the left lane.
> [...]
And sometimes one truck drives on the shoulder to let a slightly faster
truck go by in the right lane.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797303 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 05:00 |
|
N8N aka Nate Nagel wrote:
> On Mar 5, 9:52 am, "DanK... [at] gmail.com" <DanK... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In the suburbs you get the yuppies who consider you a lower life form
>
> Heh. I love yuppies, I really do.
>
Baked, boiled, grilled, deep fried...its all good.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797304 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 05:02 |
|
Stephen Harding wrote:
> DanKMTB [at] gmail.com wrote:
>> On Mar 4, 1:04 pm, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I can only dream of a 5 mpg advantage!
>>>
>>
>> Drive 45 with your tailgate down.
>
> Hey what's the r.a.d. position on tailgates down?
>
> Don't do it! It doesn't help and may hurt mpg.
>
> Putting a tonneau cover is about the best you can
> do or leave it stock and hope the air bubble in
> the bed helps keep air flow laminar as much as some
> automotive engineers claim.
>
However, with the tailgate down, no one sees the "How's My Driving"
sticker. ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797305 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 05:03 |
|
N8N aka Nate Nagel wrote:
> On Mar 5, 6:38 am, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
>> DanK... [at] gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Mar 4, 1:04 pm, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
>>>> I can only dream of a 5 mpg advantage!
>>> Drive 45 with your tailgate down.
>> Hey what's the r.a.d. position on tailgates down?
>>
>> Don't do it! It doesn't help and may hurt mpg.
>>
>> Putting a tonneau cover is about the best you can
>> do or leave it stock and hope the air bubble in
>> the bed helps keep air flow laminar as much as some
>> automotive engineers claim.
>>
>> SMH
>
> That squares with what I've heard as well; apparently the air in the
> bed is "dead air" anyway so whether you have a tonneau or not makes
> little difference. The tailgate apparently gives something of a Kamm
> effect so it is actually beneficial.
>
> I have a camper shell on my pickup so that I can carry car parts,
> machine tools, etc. without worry about weather or sticky fingers, so
> the decision has already been made for me in my case.
>
The best part of topper is that you do not have to worry about your crap
flying out and hitting someone.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797306 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 05:17 |
|
DanKMTB [at] gmail.com wrote:
> On Mar 3, 10:24 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0... [at] REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> DanK... [at] gmail.com wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> I commute a minimum of 62 miles per day. Most of it is highway. I
>>> don't exceed the posted limit by more than 5-7mph, and am usually 3-5
>>> over. I often flash-to-pass. It means "please don't block this lane,
>>> I intend to overtake you". People, however, interpret it as "Get the
>>> hell out of my way", which is a mistake on their part. It's not
>>> uncommon for someone I flash-to-pass to slam on the brakes and come
>>> down to 20MPH under the limit in response to my polite double flash,
>>> i.e. flash to pass. This can be problematic when I'm driving a pickup
>>> truck with rear drum brakes and the car in front of me has 4 wheel
>>> disks, ABS, and low-profile shoes that give great highway traction. I
>>> am always at a safe distance when I flash, and yet I've had to
>>> negotiate out of the highway and onto the shoulder on one occasion
>>> fairly recently because my truck is simply no match for a new A4 in a
>>> 65-0MPH deceleration race. So back to the analogy, I said "please let
>>> me by" and the thug said "What? F*** you! You want a f***ing
>>> problem? This is MY sidewalk. I ain't excusing sh**!!!
>>> Unfortunately we were not on a sidewalk and I didn't have a chance to
>>> exchange views face to face with that particular thug.
>> If you can not stop when they do, you are not following at a safe
>> distance. What if they were braking hard for a legitimate reason, e.g.
>> part of a load falling off a truck, deer running into the road, another
>> slower vehicle cutting them off?
>
> In traffic it is impossible to leave enough distance for a drum-brake
> pickup to stop in the same distance as a high-performance sports car.
> If that large of a gap is left, it will be filled. If I manage to
> avoid the collision the following distance was sufficient. When we're
> coming down from 70ish to zero at absolute pedal-to-the-floor
> deceleration there is going to be a variable in stopping distances.
> Part of calculating the following distance in traffic is taking into
> consideration the generous shoulder. I watch far ahead into traffic.
> I've NEVER had any issue with stopping in time, regardless of my
> vehicle, with the rare exception of some a-hole in a high-performance
> car doing a 70-0 check in the middle of the passing lane for no reason
> but to try to attempt to cause a collision.
>
A while back I was being followed by a Dodge Ram at a distance of less
than 50 feet. I was driving about 45 mph in the left lane, when someone
cut in front of me from the middle lane, which was going about 25 mph
(the right lane was practically stopped). Fortunately, I was aware of
the Ram behind me and the left shoulder was open, so I cut over as far
as possible. The Ram went past me with its brakes locked and almost hit
the car that cut me off. Needless to say, I was not amused at this idiot
almost taking me out.
I have been rear ended three times in the last two years on urban
freeways when I was able to stop in an unstable traffic flow, but the
vehicle behind me could not. Now I ride the brakes more than necessary,
speed and slow down, and whatever else it takes to get people to back
the hell off.
>> When I drive a one-ton pickup with a loaded trailer, or a 10 ton
> medium
>> duty truck, I leave a LOT more following space than I do when driving my
>> car, and I drive a lot slower in traffic.
>
> And when I drive a one-ton box truck, tow a trailer, or even drive my
> compact truck in traffic I do the same. That's not what we're talking
> about, we're talking about an a-hole with a high-performance sedan
> attempting to cause a collision on purpose. I avoided the collision,
> I did my part.
>
Get a bigger truck with a big jack, winch and PTO on the front, and they
will NOT try that.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797327 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 14:19 |
|
In article <fqqfl0$cc$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org>, Tom Sherman wrote:
> A while back I was being followed by a Dodge Ram at a distance of less
> than 50 feet.
That's considered a large following distance around here... I'm lucky if
they are far enough back that I can see their tires in the mirror.
> I was driving about 45 mph in the left lane, when someone
> cut in front of me from the middle lane, which was going about 25 mph
> (the right lane was practically stopped). Fortunately, I was aware of
> the Ram behind me and the left shoulder was open, so I cut over as far
> as possible. The Ram went past me with its brakes locked and almost hit
> the car that cut me off. Needless to say, I was not amused at this idiot
> almost taking me out.
I was on a mini expressway a few months ago... light traffic.... as I
start to pass the LLB to my left he speeds up... fine whatever I wasn't
moving left anyway. Pickup moves from behind the LLB to behind me...
tailgating... over a rise a slow moving SUV in the right lane. Lots of
time for me to slow LOTS of time for me.... asshole however nearly hits
me flashing his brights and sounding the horn as I slow gently to avoid
hitting the SUV and giving this moron as much space to slow down as
possible. There are no shoulders on this road. Just as the
LLB passes by pickup boy swerves into the left lane and passes... WTF is
wrong with these people?
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797347 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 17:54 |
|
On Mar 6, 7:58=A0pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0... [at] REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote:
> Ed Pirrero wrote:
> > On Mar 3, 6:51 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0... [at] REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >> Brent P? wrote:
> >>> In article <8d1ff144-be8d-409e-b119-6e99257d4... [at] e25g2000prg.googlegro=
ups.com>, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Mar 2, 11:12 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P)
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> In article <7265865b-1c02-4f9b-9efd-9ae702b0c... [at] i7g2000prf.googlegr=
oups.com>, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Mar 1, 9:09 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wro=
te:
> >>>>>>> In article <fqd056$rs... [at] registered.motzarella.org>, Tom Sherman w=
rote:
> >>>>>>> I don't know where trucks actually go 55mph...
> >>>>>> Up hills.
> >>>>>> (Sheesh.)
> >>>>> Not any of the hills around here.
> >>>> :-) =A0Well THAT clears things up! =A0The hills in Chicago don't slow=
> >>>> trucks, therefore there are no hills anywhere that slow trucks!
> >>> Holy jump battman. I never said any such thing, but you know that.
> >>>> I don't know why the highway departments around here wasted all the
> >>>> money on those "7% grade" signs! =A0They should have checked with rac=
er-
> >>>> boy!
> >>> I dunno. The times I've driven through the hills and mountains on the =
way
> >>> to and from NC and WV I don't recall the trucks dropping to 55mph...
> >>> maybe my memory is off, that could be, but I think they kept it above
> >>> 55mph for the most part. They certainly do through the hills of WI. No=
w
> >>> they do slow, but 55mph seems to be a floor speed. I suppose there are=
> >>> some mountain roads out there where they slow to 45mph or something bu=
t
> >>> that is still the limit of their vehicles, I have rarely seen truckers=
> >>> restrict themselves to 55mph.
> >> In Colorado on I-70, I have passed trucks that were doing 15-20 mph
> >> uphill. (I was doing about 40-45 mph, full throttle in 3rd gear, in a
> >> Rabbit (Golf I).
>
> > Brent lives in the flatlands and has no idea what mountains are like.
>
> > Out here in the west, 18-wheelers often climb mt. passes at half the
> > SL or less. =A0Mostly, they are nice about restricting themselves to the=
> > right lane only.
>
> > Sometimes, they are jerks and micropass at 25 mph in the right lane,
> > and 27 mph in the left lane.
> > [...]
>
> And sometimes one truck drives on the shoulder to let a slightly faster
> truck go by in the right lane.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful- Hide quoted text -
I've seen that ONCE. A lot fewer times than the micropassing I
described before.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797354 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 18:12 |
|
On Mar 4, 12:00 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:51 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0... [at] REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Brent P? wrote:
> > > In article <8d1ff144-be8d-409e-b119-6e99257d4... [at] e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
> > >> On Mar 2, 11:12 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P)
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> In article <7265865b-1c02-4f9b-9efd-9ae702b0c... [at] i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
>
> > >>>> On Mar 1, 9:09 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> > >>>>> In article <fqd056$rs... [at] registered.motzarella.org>, Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> > >>>>> I don't know where trucks actually go 55mph...
> > >>>> Up hills.
> > >>>> (Sheesh.)
> > >>> Not any of the hills around here.
> > >> :-) Well THAT clears things up! The hills in Chicago don't slow
> > >> trucks, therefore there are no hills anywhere that slow trucks!
>
> > > Holy jump battman. I never said any such thing, but you know that.
>
> > >> I don't know why the highway departments around here wasted all the
> > >> money on those "7% grade" signs! They should have checked with racer-
> > >> boy!
>
> > > I dunno. The times I've driven through the hills and mountains on the way
> > > to and from NC and WV I don't recall the trucks dropping to 55mph...
> > > maybe my memory is off, that could be, but I think they kept it above
> > > 55mph for the most part. They certainly do through the hills of WI. Now
> > > they do slow, but 55mph seems to be a floor speed. I suppose there are
> > > some mountain roads out there where they slow to 45mph or something but
> > > that is still the limit of their vehicles, I have rarely seen truckers
> > > restrict themselves to 55mph.
>
> > In Colorado on I-70, I have passed trucks that were doing 15-20 mph
> > uphill. (I was doing about 40-45 mph, full throttle in 3rd gear, in a
> > Rabbit (Golf I).
>
> Brent lives in the flatlands and has no idea what mountains are like.
>
> Out here in the west, 18-wheelers often climb mt. passes at half the
> SL or less. Mostly, they are nice about restricting themselves to the
> right lane only.
>
> Sometimes, they are jerks and micropass at 25 mph in the right lane,
> and 27 mph in the left lane.
>
> I'm sure one of those jerks used to be GPSturd.
Mmm, no, gpsman deplores micropassing and advocates, practices and
taught students not to micropass*, and to prevent being micropassed by
reducing velocity to let the micropasser by.
*Within reason. Many a mountain pass limits visibility of traffic
approaching from the rear, e.g., 4th of July, Lookout. It would be
unrealistic to expect a driver already limited to a low velocity to
adopt an even lower velocity for faster traffic that may or may not be
approaching to realize a rather minor time benefit.
-----
- gpsman
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797355 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 18:20 |
|
In article <2e3d7dab-2ac5-4fa2-bd7e-6e0866a7c923 [at] i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Ed Pirrero wrote:
> Brent lives in the flatlands and has no idea what mountains are like.
I know what mountains are like, I was just 9 years old the last time I was
on a mountain road in the west. Like I stated, I've been on them in the
east much more recently but I don't recall the truckers going slower than
55mph. Maybe that's because the interstates are graded so they can. But the
point I was making is that truckers don't go less than 55mph because
they feel like it, when they do it's because they do not have a choice.
Oh and I forgot about Maui... of course trucks of any size significant
to this exchange didn't seem to venture up those roads.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797360 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 19:30 |
|
On Mar 7, 9:20=A0am, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> In article <2e3d7dab-2ac5-4fa2-bd7e-6e0866a7c... [at] i7g2000prf.googlegroups.c=
om>, Ed Pirrero wrote:
> > Brent lives in the flatlands and has no idea what mountains are like.
>
> I know what mountains are like, I was just 9 years old the last time I was=
> on a mountain road in the west. Like I stated, I've been on them in the
> east much more recently but I don't recall the truckers going slower than
> 55mph. Maybe that's because the interstates are graded so they can.
I don't doubt that in the east, the trucks can do 55+ without any
hassle. In the rather hilly west, they can be found crawling upslope
at 20mph. Regularly.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797361 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 19:34 |
|
On Mar 7, 9:12=A0am, gpsman <gps... [at] driversmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 4, 12:00 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 3, 6:51 pm, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0... [at] REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Brent P? wrote:
> > > > In article <8d1ff144-be8d-409e-b119-6e99257d4... [at] e25g2000prg.googleg=
roups.com>, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
> > > >> On Mar 2, 11:12 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P)
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>> In article <7265865b-1c02-4f9b-9efd-9ae702b0c... [at] i7g2000prf.google=
groups.com>, frkry... [at] gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > >>>> On Mar 1, 9:09 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) w=
rote:
> > > >>>>> In article <fqd056$rs... [at] registered.motzarella.org>, Tom Sherman=
wrote:
>
> > > >>>>> I don't know where trucks actually go 55mph...
> > > >>>> Up hills.
> > > >>>> (Sheesh.)
> > > >>> Not any of the hills around here.
> > > >> :-) =A0Well THAT clears things up! =A0The hills in Chicago don't sl=
ow
> > > >> trucks, therefore there are no hills anywhere that slow trucks!
>
> > > > Holy jump battman. I never said any such thing, but you know that.
>
> > > >> I don't know why the highway departments around here wasted all the=
> > > >> money on those "7% grade" signs! =A0They should have checked with r=
acer-
> > > >> boy!
>
> > > > I dunno. The times I've driven through the hills and mountains on th=
e way
> > > > to and from NC and WV I don't recall the trucks dropping to 55mph...=
> > > > maybe my memory is off, that could be, but I think they kept it abov=
e
> > > > 55mph for the most part. They certainly do through the hills of WI. =
Now
> > > > they do slow, but 55mph seems to be a floor speed. I suppose there a=
re
> > > > some mountain roads out there where they slow to 45mph or something =
but
> > > > that is still the limit of their vehicles, I have rarely seen trucke=
rs
> > > > restrict themselves to 55mph.
>
> > > In Colorado on I-70, I have passed trucks that were doing 15-20 mph
> > > uphill. (I was doing about 40-45 mph, full throttle in 3rd gear, in a
> > > Rabbit (Golf I).
>
> > Brent lives in the flatlands and has no idea what mountains are like.
>
> > Out here in the west, 18-wheelers often climb mt. passes at half the
> > SL or less. =A0Mostly, they are nice about restricting themselves to the=
> > right lane only.
>
> > Sometimes, they are jerks and micropass at 25 mph in the right lane,
> > and 27 mph in the left lane.
>
> =A0Many a mountain pass limits visibility of traffic
> approaching from the rear, e.g., 4th of July, Lookout. =A0It would be
> unrealistic to expect a driver already limited to a low velocity to
> adopt an even lower velocity for faster traffic that may or may not be
> approaching to realize a rather minor time benefit.
Wrong. If the pass is signed at 60, and you're climbing it at 35, and
come up behind a truck doing 30, it stands to reason that the "small
time" lost would be insignificant in terms of the entire trip. Slower
traffic keep right. Not slowest traffic keep right. Even in ID,
blocking traffic is illegal. Even on I-90.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797365 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 20:09 |
|
On Mar 7, 1:34 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 7, 9:12 am, gpsman <gps... [at] driversmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 4, 12:00 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Out here in the west, 18-wheelers often climb mt. passes at half the
> > > SL or less. Mostly, they are nice about restricting themselves to the
> > > right lane only.
>
> > > Sometimes, they are jerks and micropass at 25 mph in the right lane,
> > > and 27 mph in the left lane.
>
> > Many a mountain pass limits visibility of traffic
> > approaching from the rear, e.g., 4th of July, Lookout. It would be
> > unrealistic to expect a driver already limited to a low velocity to
> > adopt an even lower velocity for faster traffic that may or may not be
> > approaching to realize a rather minor time benefit.
>
> Wrong. Slower
> traffic keep right. Not slowest traffic keep right. Even in ID,
> blocking traffic is illegal. Even on I-90.
Parsed, to aid the comprehension of the comprehension impaired:
TITLE 49
MOTOR VEHICLES
CHAPTER 6
RULES OF THE ROAD
49-630. DRIVE ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY -- EXCEPTIONS. (1) Upon
all highways of sufficient width a vehicle shall be driven upon the
right half of the roadway except as follows:<>
(2) Upon all highways any vehicle proceeding at less than normal
speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then
existing, shall be driven in the right-hand lane available for
traffic, or as close as
practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the highway, except when
overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same
direction<>
http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=490060030.K
-----
- gpsman
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797370 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 20:24 |
|
On Mar 7, 11:09=A0am, gpsman <gps... [at] driversmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 7, 1:34 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 7, 9:12 am, gpsman <gps... [at] driversmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mar 4, 12:00 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Out here in the west, 18-wheelers often climb mt. passes at half the=
> > > > SL or less. =A0Mostly, they are nice about restricting themselves to=
the
> > > > right lane only.
>
> > > > Sometimes, they are jerks and micropass at 25 mph in the right lane,=
> > > > and 27 mph in the left lane.
>
> > > =A0Many a mountain pass limits visibility of traffic
> > > approaching from the rear, e.g., 4th of July, Lookout. =A0It would be
> > > unrealistic to expect a driver already limited to a low velocity to
> > > adopt an even lower velocity for faster traffic that may or may not be=
> > > approaching to realize a rather minor time benefit.
>
> > Wrong. =A0Slower
> > traffic keep right. =A0Not slowest traffic keep right. =A0Even in ID,
> > blocking traffic is illegal. =A0Even on I-90.
>
> Parsed, to aid the comprehension of the comprehension impaired:
>
> TITLE =A049
> MOTOR VEHICLES
> CHAPTER 6
> RULES OF THE ROAD
> =A0 =A0 49-630. =A0DRIVE ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY -- EXCEPTIONS. (1) Upon
> all highways of sufficient width a vehicle shall be driven upon the
> right half of the roadway except as follows:<>
> (2) =A0Upon all highways any vehicle proceeding at less than normal
> speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then
> existing, shall be driven in the right-hand lane available for
> traffic, or as close as
> practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the highway, except when
> overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same
> direction<>http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=3D490060030.K
Uhh, you forgot to include the part about impeding traffic, putz.
E.P.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797375 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 21:06 |
|
On Mar 7, 2:24 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 7, 11:09 am, gpsman <gps... [at] driversmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 7, 1:34 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 7, 9:12 am, gpsman <gps... [at] driversmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mar 4, 12:00 pm, Ed Pirrero <gcmschem... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Out here in the west, 18-wheelers often climb mt. passes at half the
> > > > > SL or less. Mostly, they are nice about restricting themselves to the
> > > > > right lane only.
>
> > > > > Sometimes, they are jerks and micropass at 25 mph in the right lane,
> > > > > and 27 mph in the left lane.
>
> > > > Many a mountain pass limits visibility of traffic
> > > > approaching from the rear, e.g., 4th of July, Lookout. It would be
> > > > unrealistic to expect a driver already limited to a low velocity to
> > > > adopt an even lower velocity for faster traffic that may or may not be
> > > > approaching to realize a rather minor time benefit.
>
> > > Wrong. Slower
> > > traffic keep right. Not slowest traffic keep right. Even in ID,
> > > blocking traffic is illegal. Even on I-90.
>
> > Parsed, to aid the comprehension of the comprehension impaired:
>
> > TITLE 49
> > MOTOR VEHICLES
> > CHAPTER 6
> > RULES OF THE ROAD
> > 49-630. DRIVE ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY -- EXCEPTIONS. (1) Upon
> > all highways of sufficient width a vehicle shall be driven upon the
> > right half of the roadway except as follows:<>
> > (2) Upon all highways any vehicle proceeding at less than normal
> > speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then
> > existing, shall be driven in the right-hand lane available for
> > traffic, or as close as
> > practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the highway, except when
> > overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same
> > direction<>http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=490060030.K
>
> Uhh, you forgot to include the part about impeding traffic, putz.
Now that's funny!
-----
- gpsman
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797400 ] |
Sat, 08 March 2008 07:50 |
|
Ed Pirrero wrote:
> On Mar 7, 9:20 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>> In article <2e3d7dab-2ac5-4fa2-bd7e-6e0866a7c... [at] i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Ed Pirrero wrote:
>>> Brent lives in the flatlands and has no idea what mountains are like.
>> I know what mountains are like, I was just 9 years old the last time I was
>> on a mountain road in the west. Like I stated, I've been on them in the
>> east much more recently but I don't recall the truckers going slower than
>> 55mph. Maybe that's because the interstates are graded so they can.
>
> I don't doubt that in the east, the trucks can do 55+ without any
> hassle. In the rather hilly west, they can be found crawling upslope
> at 20mph. Regularly.
>
We had a guy drive 60 miles at 35-40 mph in a truck, because he did not
understand about shifting from low-range to high range. ;)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797402 ] |
Sat, 08 March 2008 07:57 |
|
Brent P? wrote:
> In article <fqqfl0$cc$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org>, Tom Sherman wrote:
>
>> A while back I was being followed by a Dodge Ram at a distance of less
>> than 50 feet.
>
> That's considered a large following distance around here... I'm lucky if
> they are far enough back that I can see their tires in the mirror.
>
I had about 10 people follow me on my evening commute so closely that I
could not see their lights in my mirrors. That puts them at less than a
10-foot following distance.
>> I was driving about 45 mph in the left lane, when someone
>> cut in front of me from the middle lane, which was going about 25 mph
>> (the right lane was practically stopped). Fortunately, I was aware of
>> the Ram behind me and the left shoulder was open, so I cut over as far
>> as possible. The Ram went past me with its brakes locked and almost hit
>> the car that cut me off. Needless to say, I was not amused at this idiot
>> almost taking me out.
>
> I was on a mini expressway a few months ago... light traffic.... as I
> start to pass the LLB to my left he speeds up... fine whatever I wasn't
> moving left anyway. Pickup moves from behind the LLB to behind me...
> tailgating... over a rise a slow moving SUV in the right lane. Lots of
> time for me to slow LOTS of time for me.... asshole however nearly hits
> me flashing his brights and sounding the horn as I slow gently to avoid
> hitting the SUV and giving this moron as much space to slow down as
> possible. There are no shoulders on this road. Just as the
> LLB passes by pickup boy swerves into the left lane and passes... WTF is
> wrong with these people?
>
Which road in Chicagoland is a "mini-expressway" or was this somewhere else?
As for the last question, it is a mixture of ignorance, arrogance and
general jerkitude.
Of course, if we took 40% of the vehicles off the roads it would help,
as that would return traffic to conditions of the 1970's. As a general
rule, the lower the population density and traffic density, the less
idiotic the drivers are.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797403 ] |
Sat, 08 March 2008 08:12 |
|
In article <fqtdcr$n0s$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org>, Tom Sherman wrote:
>Brent P? wrote:
>> In article <fqqfl0$cc$1 [at] registered.motzarella.org>, Tom Sherman wrote:
>>
>>> A while back I was being followed by a Dodge Ram at a distance of less
>>> than 50 feet.
>>
>> That's considered a large following distance around here... I'm lucky if
>> they are far enough back that I can see their tires in the mirror.
>>
>I had about 10 people follow me on my evening commute so closely that I
>could not see their lights in my mirrors. That puts them at less than a
>10-foot following distance.
And so? If I drive the posted 55mph speed limit on any local expressway
and I could top that.
>>> I was driving about 45 mph in the left lane, when someone
>>> cut in front of me from the middle lane, which was going about 25 mph
>>> (the right lane was practically stopped). Fortunately, I was aware of
>>> the Ram behind me and the left shoulder was open, so I cut over as far
>>> as possible. The Ram went past me with its brakes locked and almost hit
>>> the car that cut me off. Needless to say, I was not amused at this idiot
>>> almost taking me out.
>>
>> I was on a mini expressway a few months ago... light traffic.... as I
>> start to pass the LLB to my left he speeds up... fine whatever I wasn't
>> moving left anyway. Pickup moves from behind the LLB to behind me...
>> tailgating... over a rise a slow moving SUV in the right lane. Lots of
>> time for me to slow LOTS of time for me.... asshole however nearly hits
>> me flashing his brights and sounding the horn as I slow gently to avoid
>> hitting the SUV and giving this moron as much space to slow down as
>> possible. There are no shoulders on this road. Just as the
>> LLB passes by pickup boy swerves into the left lane and passes... WTF is
>> wrong with these people?
>>
>Which road in Chicagoland is a "mini-expressway" or was this somewhere else?
Willow/palatine road express in this case. 41 a fair distance north of
where it splits from the spur is another then there are some e-w roads
up north, 120 I think is one as I recall... its been some time since
I've been up that way... US 14 turns into one far enough north for
awhile.... quite a few of them in WI. 83 in the westmont area is
another. There aren't too many of these south of chicago, IL394
degrades from interstate standard to something slightly less
than a mini-expressway south of US30... Basically they are limited
or very infrequent access roads that don't meet interstate standards.
>As for the last question, it is a mixture of ignorance, arrogance and
>general jerkitude.
>Of course, if we took 40% of the vehicles off the roads it would help,
>as that would return traffic to conditions of the 1970's. As a general
>rule, the lower the population density and traffic density, the less
>idiotic the drivers are.
The problem was the 1970s, the NMSL and all the other BS that started in
that decade.
|
|
|
| Re: Saw an intelligent bicyclist today [message #797811 ] |
Wed, 12 March 2008 21:56 |
|
In article <1n9ss313omk2iq9s1un021530ril9cdrrg [at] 4ax.com>,
Zoot Katz <zootkatz [at] operamail.com> wrote:
>
>The sticker clearly visible on my rear fender sums it up:
>CARS SUCK
Fenders suck.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Tue Jan 6 10:39:52 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.30634 Sekunden |
