man, they love to tailgate a prius

I used to be heavy on the pedal and would pass slower cars up just to slam on brakes at stoplight. The minimal amount of pleasure that I got by driving like this has been erased by the joy I now get by letting other cars pas me and then g l i d i n g up to stoplight 30 sec after they've been sitting there.

 

No, what he is saying is that you can drive up to the maximum speed limit but you can't impede traffic in a passing lane.

Thus, if the posted speed limit is 65 mph and you are driving 65 mph in the passing lane (#1 lane) you can be cited for impeding traffic, despite the fact that you are traveling at the maximum posted speed limit. You will not be cited for impeding traffic if you are in the #2, #3, etc lane.

 

You know, you had some great points, but your aggressive potty mouth undermines their value.

If one is in the passing lane, despite going 10+ mph faster than the posted speed limit, and another driver wants to pass, the "slower" driver should try to merge over to let the faster driver by. This isn't always possible. It is also complicated if you are pacing the guy in front of you (and he the car in front of him, etc) because where is the "faster" guy going to go? You may also be passing the slower cars in the #2 lane by 5 - 10 mph as well.

Where is the line?

When does the speedier car just need to chill out and realize that the highway is congested and he can't drive as fast as he would like? Caug1 doesn't address this issue.

 

This is exactly one of the things I was referring. Half the time people are so interested in getting by you (for whatever reason) that they fail to realize they are going to stop at the same light as everyone they are passing.

I don't drive necessarily drive fast, or nearly as fast as the people I see around me, but sometimes the difference in time is acceptable (although not nearly as important as people who are "in a hurry" all the time).

I looked up information for my state in my DMV regs and it doesn't say anything about the predisposition of the left-most lane. This doesn't mean I don't believe you, because what you are saying makes perfect sense, but I think the designation for the leftmost lane depends on the situation - especially when dealing with surface streets. The more cars on the road the more those lanes just become other usable lanes and faster traffic always keeps to the left. Like I briefly said before, though, I do agree that people going 70 or under in the leftmost lane on the freeway are a big problem.

At the same time, I don't think 75 MPH is unsafe on a non-crowded freeway. Especially if you are a good driver who doesn't tailgate and is aware of your surroundings.

While I agree that getting the idiots in front of you is the safe thing to do, I don't think moving over is always the best option. I do what the DMV manual here instructed ever since I first started driving (and I started my driving on a Motorcyce, not a car), which is to slow down and maintain that speed until they pass you themselves. It has worked great for me, especially when I'm not even in the far left lane.

Plug.

 

With the caveat that you were responding to someone from California, the law in Massachusetts is that, although you *may* pass on the right under certain circumstances, you *must* yield the left lane to faster traffic. The applicable law is Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 89, section 2:

"Except as herein otherwise provided, the driver of a vehicle passing another vehicle traveling in the same direction shall drive a safe distance to the left of such other vehicle and shall not return to the right until safely clear of the overtaken vehicle; and, if the way is of sufficient width for the two vehicles to pass, the driver of the leading one shall not unnecessarily obstruct the other. If it is not possible to overtake a bicycle or other vehicle at a safe distance in the same lane, the overtaking vehicle shall use all or part of an adjacent lane if it is safe to do so or wait for a safe opportunity to overtake. Except when overtaking and passing on the right is permitted, the driver of an overtaken vehicle shall give way to the right in favor of the overtaking vehicle on visible signal and shall not increase the speed of his vehicle until completely passed by the overtaking vehicle.

"The driver of a vehicle may, if the roadway is free from obstruction and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving vehicles, overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle when the vehicle overtaken is (a) making or about to make a left turn, (b) upon a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which traffic is restricted to one direction of movement."

There is no provision in Massachusetts general laws allowing for driving faster than the posted or prima facie limit while passing.

 

If there's one topic calcuated to push my buttons, this is it.

If every speed limit in the US were posted pursuant to a traffic engineering study and set at the 85th percentile of free-flowing traffic, as traffic engineers recommend, I might have no argument with this. But I'd bet cash US money that we have all seen underposted speed limits, generally done for no other reason than what is euphemistally called revenue enhancement. Speed limits are, in theory, supposed to be about our safety. All too often, they are not about safety at all. They are posted pursuant to some politician's whim or some town's ledgers which are full of red ink.

The stories about towns like Waldo FL and Lindale OH are legendary...drastically underposted speed limits and cops lying in wait to fatten the town's coffers, particularly victimizing out-of-towners who are less likely to come back to fight the citations. On some weekends, the entire state of Connecticut becomes one huge speed trap, with motorists being stopped and cited for 1 mph over the limit. How does garbage like this enhance and protect the safety of motorists?

If you want to know why laws are disrespected, this is a prime example.

 

Speed, by itself, never killed anyone. 600-mph jet airliners attest to that on a daily basis. No one ever died just because they were going 65 in a 55 zone.

"Speed too fast for conditions" is another matter entirely. Driving beyond the capabilities of the car, the road, the weather and/or the driver...or worse, not knowing what those limits are...definitely has the potential to kill.

 

First Rule, don't get behind a school bus.

Second Rule, don't get behind a Prius.

Yes, there are a few Prius haters out there...

 

This is overly simplistic, as it is only one of many factors considered. As my state DOT writes:

"Speed limits reflecting the speed most motorists naturally drive are selected in part by determining the “85th percentile speed†(the speed that 85 out of 100 vehicles travel at or below). This method is based on the principle that reasonable drivers will consider roadway and roadside conditions when selecting travel speeds.
When setting speed limits, engineers also consider other factors like:

• Roadway characteristics, shoulder condition, grade, alignment, and sight distance
• Roadside development and lighting
• Parking practices, e.g., angle parking, and pedestrian and bicycle activity
• Collision rates and traffic volume trends
• Right lane/entering traffic conflicts (for freeways)"

What a pathetic rationalization for speeding.

Of course most of us have seen a few such places. But blaming the very widespread habit of speeding on a few such revenue enhancement zones betrays a selfish attitude looking for an excuse.

I believe our highway death toll is much too high. The 85% rule, by itself, will push it substantially higher.

 

I slow down without the brakes. I just take my foot of the gas. If you hit the brakes it just pisses them off more. Going slower will make them want to pass you. Once they pass your golden.

I don't do it to be a road ranger. I never cruise in the left lane anyway. But if someone feels like tailgating me in the right lane then I need to have them pass me.

 

As with most things in life, the bad apples spoil it for the rest of us. People will not respect laws which are abused by those in power, and it doesn't take many of them to breed such contempt. It's a principle as old as the United States and was one of the reasons we broke away from the British crown.

An assumption not borne out by any facts or statistics whatsoever. Highway death rates have been falling steadily since the late 1940s and show no sign of climbing again, including the years following the abolishment of the national 55mph limit. (Note that I'm referring to the *rate* [number of deaths per 100 million miles driven], not the annual number of highway deaths.)

 

The last time I looked at such figures, the decline was not steady. During the decade following the abolition of Double Nickels, the rate of decline was quite noticeably slower than the average of the past half century.

I don't know how much of this was due to higher speeds. For instance, this also coincided with the mass consumer shift to SUVs, which were regulated by much weaker safety standards than ordinary passenger cars.

Now I need to go actually plot the annual decline, to see the patterns.

 

This is exactly what I do, and it usually works. I never move over for someone tailgating me, that just encourages bad behavior.

On an unrelated note, SidS1045 I disagree with you completely in regards to speed limits. Driving faster significantly raises the chance of injury during an accident, even if it is only 10 MPH. I'd rather be forced to drive slower than I want to because other idiots can't control themselves then just agree to pick a perfect speed. Your comparison to Jet Airliners is inherently flawed, flying a plane and driving a car might be similar in mechanics, but they are entirely different animals. Not only are there WAY LESS planes in the sky, but you don't have idiots with expired licenses or other such nonsense flying around (or at least, not nearly as many). That's like saying people who get shot in the leg don't die if they go to a hospital therefore getting shot isn't life threatening.

I will agree with you on one thing, one idiot ruins it for the rest of us.

 

Sorry to hear that...i can't stand it when people tailgate me!

It makes me feel worried and all rushed....def not cool at all. =-\

 

Tailgaters don't bother me. What bugs me are the folks that pull out in front of you because they see a Prius coming and assume you're going to be poking along. It happened twice today along the same road.

 

Page 66 of the Maine Motorist Handbook and Study Guide.

I slow down gradually, and if they don't take the opportunity to pass I then ignore them. If they're the only car behind me and I ignore them it means I can DWL and pulse and glide, which improves my mileage.

 

I usually try to go with the traffic flow. Taking foot off the pedal and/or putting on the emergency blinkers sounds like a good strategy to get tailgaters to pass, if there's a passing lane available. If that doesn't work, they would have to be looking for trouble. I would never pull over if already in the right-most lane.

 

They just want to breathe the clean air coming out of the Prius' AT-PZEV tailpipe.

 

My last car was a VW TDI (not a clean diesel) and I got tailgated on a two lane road doing well over the speed limit at night. I ignored the guy but it was pretty annoying.