California Mountain Snake Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 is there another way to check your blind spots besides having to turn around and look over your shoulders? You can buy convex mirrors to stick on the corner of your side views which can give you a hint if there's something there (I had a set on my old Explorer), but it's still best to just check if you're doing something like changing lanes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Kommissar Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Get in good habits. It doesn't matter if it's 3am and the intersection is dead: STOP at the stop sign, LOOK around, then proceed. Getting in good automatic habits could easily save your life or someone else's when it's NOT 3am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naglfarslayer Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Some people claim you can set your mirrors a certain way but I seriously doubt it. Looking over your shoulders isn't that bad. It's awkward at first but you get used to it. Actually, it's possible. If you get your mirrors just right, all you have to do is lean forward slightly to see the space just behind your peripheral vision. Sometimes you don't even have to lean forward, and you'll notice that right as a car disappears from your side mirror it will be in your peripheral vision. But it's still a good idea to casually glance over your shoulder. Also, if you have the opportunity, try driving a manual. It really challenges your response time and ability to perform "the basics" of driving, while throwing in another timing-related action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 (edited) Unfortunately it's situational, my dad has been tagged for going 37 in a 30 zone.I guess the advice I received only really applied to highways, because 30 zones are typically the places where you barely want to go above 30 anyway.I dunno, I tend to go along with traffic when there's people around me but I go within 5 mph of the limit by myself just to be safe, but my driving teacher's said 9 is okay. I think some other advice is that there's no such thing as overuse of your turn signal. At the same time, you don't want to use it too early to mislead the people behind you, though, depending on the situation (like if you're signaling to turn right, but you want to take the third right from the point in which you started signaling from, as opposed to keeping a right turn signal throughout the highway). Edited July 15, 2009 by Lord Raven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naglfarslayer Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Let's review the definition of the phrase "Speed LIMIT." Speed LIMIT I do believe LIMIT is synonmous to maximum, or the phrase nothing more than this. Keep that in mind if you ever get stopped for going 5 miles over the speed limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rehab Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 (edited) Okay yeah, but the point being made was that most people tend to drive 5 miles over the limit at least, so even if he chooses to hardbody obey the Speed LIMIT he should be aware that people around him should not be (realistically, not theoretically) expected to do exactly the same, and may get belligerent with him for not doing so if they're a particular kind of dickwad. Edited July 15, 2009 by Rehab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naglfarslayer Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 True dat, and yes, going exactly the speed limit makes one a malice to the public, but they can just get over it. I've learned that as long as you're not in the far left lane (where people tend to drive faster) then everyone else just goes around you and doesn't get mad. And yeah, I go a little over the speed limit sometimes, but it usually feels too fast for that part of the road so I slow down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dies Mori Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Oh, that's another thing: that thing they teach you in driving school about a 2 second gap between you and the car in front of you? Adhere to it. Don't be those assholes that like to ride the tailpipe, or you're going to end up in their trunk. Remember that in every state, someone rear-ending someone else is *always* the back person's fault. I myself would stress this a thousand times over, though I admit I have no actual knowledge as to what a "two second" gap is made to resemble, being that the rule given to us northern crabs would be to remain behind, in metres, the exact number of km/h your speed happens to be set to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naglfarslayer Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Dept. of Motor Vehicles insists that a safe following distance is 2 seconds behind the person in front of you. If they pass through an intersection, you should pass through that intersection at least 2 seconds later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dies Mori Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 (edited) That's more varying than the metre rule, fuck. Edited July 15, 2009 by Memento Mori Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiba Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 if you follow 3 feet behind someone you will save 41% gas then you would normally do by just driving around slowly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burning_phoneix Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Dept. of Motor Vehicles insists that a safe following distance is 2 seconds behind the person in front of you.If they pass through an intersection, you should pass through that intersection at least 2 seconds later. I remember a neighbor who had a bumper sticker that made it a lot easier to judge that. It said "If you can read this then you're to damn close!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
California Mountain Snake Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 if you follow 3 feet behind someone you will save 41% gas then you would normally do by just driving around slowly Bullshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GKSB Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Bullshit. You save gas when you turn your engine off after hitting the person you are trailing so closely behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
California Mountain Snake Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 You save 100% on gas mileage if you sneak into their trunk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superbus Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 (edited) I myself would stress this a thousand times over, though I admit I have no actual knowledge as to what a "two second" gap is made to resemble, being that the rule given to us northern crabs would be to remain behind, in metres, the exact number of km/h your speed happens to be set to. Basically, pick a spot on the side of the road - like a mile marker - when the car ahead of you passes. Count "one-onethousand, two-onethousand". If you don't make it to two, you're too close. This takes speed into effect, since it takes longer to brake at 60mph than at 30mph. Edited July 15, 2009 by Superbus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
California Mountain Snake Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Basically, pick a spot on the side of the road - like a mile marker - when the car ahead of you passes. Count "one-onethousand, two-onethousand". If you don't make it to two, you're too close.This takes speed into effect, since it takes longer to brake at 60mph than at 30mph. I think they're now actually stressing the four second rule, at least they were when I took drivers ed. uh.... 4 years ago? The exact amount of time is pretty hard to nail down, since hypothetically the time would have to increase as you go faster, because kinetic energy increases by the square of the relative change in velocity, so braking from 60mph compared to 30mph actually takes 4 times the energy/distance, braking from 90 compared to 30 actually takes 9 times the energy/distance etc. 4 seconds is probably a safer bet for highway driving, 2 for town driving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superbus Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 I think they're now actually stressing the four second rule, at least they were when I took drivers ed. uh.... 4 years ago?The exact amount of time is pretty hard to nail down, since hypothetically the time would have to increase as you go faster, because kinetic energy increases by the square of the relative change in velocity, so braking from 60mph compared to 30mph actually takes 4 times the energy/distance, braking from 90 compared to 30 actually takes 9 times the energy/distance etc. 4 seconds is probably a safer bet for highway driving, 2 for town driving. Four seconds is excessive, especially considering the fact that the two second rule has been around - I believe - for a few decades, and back then, cars were heavier and took longer to slow down/stop. They also didn't have a lot of the niceties that we take for granted, like anti-lock brakes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
California Mountain Snake Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Four seconds is excessive, especially considering the fact that the two second rule has been around - I believe - for a few decades, and back then, cars were heavier and took longer to slow down/stop. They also didn't have a lot of the niceties that we take for granted, like anti-lock brakes. Did we not already establish that your words with respect to driving are worth less than fishmeal, Connecticunt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kedyns Crow Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 This is completely nuking things out. Most wheels I've used are designed for 10-2 - my wheel has nubs on it - and keeping things lower just increases the chances that 1) your hands will slip, especially if 2) you have to quickly react to something fast (ie, someone cutting you off or someone locking up in front of you). I learned 10-2 back in '96, but I think it still is the best way to do it overall. You shouldn't be positioning your hands based on something you're going to do less than half the time (hard turns). I've also heard that a common hand positioning is left knee six o-clock, right hand big mac, and left hand big gulp. It's all a matter of preference though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superbus Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Did we not already establish that your words with respect to driving are worth less than fishmeal, Connecticunt?Hey fucker, I'm not the one fucking up your state's roads. Maybe if your state was less shitty at driving, our guys wouldn't have as much trouble adapting.I've also heard that a common hand positioning is left knee six o-clock, right hand big mac, and left hand big gulp. It's all a matter of preference though. No, no, no, the Big Gulp is in the cupholder. The left hand is texting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
California Mountain Snake Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Hey fucker, I'm not the one fucking up your state's roads. Maybe if your state was less shitty at driving, our guys wouldn't have as much trouble adapting.No, no, no, the Big Gulp is in the cupholder. The left hand is texting. If you're talking about Mass Holes, you must know I do not identify with those, uh, people. I only go so far as to take advantage of their university system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kedyns Crow Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 No, no, no, the Big Gulp is in the cupholder. The left hand is texting. Yeah, that seems even more efficient. And in my experience, Maryland drivers are even worse than Connecticut ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 they aren't that bad -_- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kedyns Crow Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 they aren't that bad -_- They're not bad in the sense that if you're driving and have a death wish, a Maryland driver would be more than happy to oblige. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.