Why is it so hard for people to set their adaptive cruise control to the speed limit? Everyone is watching TikTok on their phone anyways. Can we have speed governors in all cars please? At least in official cars like public works and fleet for utilities?
Most of the cars I've driven won't allow you to activate cruise control until you're up over 40-45 mph, making it useless for pretty much anything other than highway driving
People will always drive at the speed that feels safe, it's not just Americans. Gradually here this is being recognized, and roads narrowed, speed bumps added, etc. in places where we need to go slowly. At my work complex the stated limit is 10 mph and even on my bike I am speeding, and cars are passing me, but it doesn't feel unsafe at all.
This. My city keeps putting in more and more traffic cameras, but it doesn't slow cars down; it just generates revenue. If they actually wanted people to slow down, they'd reconsider having the main road look like a pin-straight four-lane highway.
Lol wtf is all these car lovers doing in /c/FUCKCARS
Welcome to /c/all!
This isn't specific to America...
Here in Europe we occasionally get road construction sites on motorways where the speed limit is temporarily reduced to 80, 60 or even 40 because the lanes are narrower than usual and drivers need to navigate around the construction site. I'm never quite sure how fast to drive there: if I actually drive the posted limit, I'll have 0 cars in front of me, but it looks (from my perspective) that I'm holding up 67 cars behind me who would want to drive faster. If I keep up with what the driver in front of me is doing, I'm technically violating the law...
There are roads where speeding is so common you will in fact be dangerously tailgated if you drive the speed limit
i have gotten tailgated by a semi truck in a highway construction zone, one of the scariest things i have experienced while driving. i couldnt even see his lights in my back window he was so close
In my experience, American roads are built to support much higher speeds than the speed limit is set. Going 10-20mph over the limit doesn't feel particularly unsafe on the wide, straight roads.
On the other side, it felt crazy to drive the speed limit on (for example) the narrow, windy roads in Ireland. The limit there felt like a literal maximum, whereas in the US it feels like the minimum.
this is often not thought about when talking about this but even the spacing in the lines drawn on the road influences your perception of speed.
the solution isn't trying to enforce lower limits, it's having roads enforce them.
As noted car enthusiast NotJustBikes has said, driving is not a conscious activity. We drive to what feels right, to a degree. A road built to support 100kph will always have speeder problems until layers of traffic calming are put in place.
UK B road limits are in fact limits, often being little more than millennia old cart paths with asphalt applied
If you look at the design documents for the roads in your area, usually available in plain old PDF files at your State DOT website... it usually states both the designed speed, and what the posted speed will be.
If it's a modern road, it is almost certainly designed for 5-10mph over what the posted limit will be. Because they know most traffic will speed, and that is accounted for in the road design, regardless of the posted limit sign.
It's wild to me that someone heard this logic and said "makes sense".
Like, I get it from an engineering perspective. You find out the maximum capacity of a bridge, account for extremes like multiple heavy loads, find the point of failure, and then engineer in a safety factor. Making sure your bridge can handle your theoretical maximum several times over.
But, we aren't dealing with people seeing a strong bridge and thinking "nice, I can carry more stuff in my car" and encourage a larger capacity. The capacity they carry is already limited by their vehicle. They aren't even thinking about the bridges capacity.
With road design. The road controls the capacity (speed) directly to the user of the road. There is a physical speed that if their car reaches they will crash. They interact with it directly.
Designing a road that increases that speed at which a guaranteed crash will happen is primarily just increasing the lethality of said crash. That's the primary part of "safety" that the design guideline is controlling.
It's saying. "Hey, if you go too fast for the road conditions, don't worry. We made sure that the road was designed so that when you reach that speed you'll have less time to react and more chance of dying".
Also, "everyone speeds" is bull shit. Every speeds down a zero intersection straight road with a posted speed limit 15 MPH under what the road was designed for. It's a fucking self fulfilling prophecy.
It's saying. "Hey, if you go too fast for the road conditions, don't worry. We made sure that the road was designed so that when you reach that speed you'll have less time to react and more chance of dying".
That's not at all what's being said. Knowing the speed people will want to drive with a specific design, doesn't make it inherently "too fast", its the exact opposite. The road designers are literally designing what the road condition will feel like to drivers, then taking the human factor into account to set a sensible limit instead of an arbitrary one.
If they know the road design will make people drive 50mph, and that most people drive 5mph over the posted limit, they post a 45mph limit. Driving at 50mph down that road is not "too fast", that's literally what was designed to feel correct.
There have been several studies over the years about posted versus real world speeds. Including studies of the same road with the posted speed being changed and monitoring driver behavior. They found that regardless of what the posted sign says, people usually drove about the same speed on that road. The minimum and maximum speeds varied with different signs as some people used that number directly, but the average of all traffic stayed the same regardless of the signage because that's the speed that felt correct for that roadway. In some cases that was under the posted limit, in others that average was up to 10 over the posted limit.
Every speeds down a zero intersection straight road with a posted speed limit 15 MPH under what the road was designed for. It's a fucking self fulfilling prophecy.
Most roads do not have posted speed limits that vary dramatically from the speed that feels right on that road, because they're designed for a specific speed and posted with that consideration. Artificially low speed limits are not common. They're usually from a speed being changed years after the road was designed and built, so it wasn't intended to have drivers at that speed and also wasn't physically changed to help reinforce that speed subconsciously, or from a town trying to boost ticket revenue.
That's not at all what's being said. Knowing the speed people will want to drive with a specific design, doesn't make it inherently "too fast", its the exact opposite.
You quoted and replied to my hyperbolic conclusion instead of the substance of what I was saying. Which is why I don't really disagree, on the face of it, with anything you said.
The problem is not in individual roads or individual road designs. Though we often have to use the thought of an individual road to describe the problem. Which is what I was doing through analogy. The problem is that there is nothing put into the design to account for the impact on the way people drive based on the design parameters themselves.
It is a feedback loop that is not being taken into consideration by the design guidelines of American road infrastructure. The very basic "post the height of the bridge as 1 ft lower than it actually is" is being applied to speed limits and road design. When this type of thinking is far too simplistic for a much more complex system of human interaction with the road and other humans themselves.
The truck driver that drives a 10ft tall truck that fits under a bridge with a posted 9 ft 11in tall sign doesn't think "hmmm I bet I could fit my 10ft 1in truck under here as well".
But drivers do have these more complex thoughts and interactions with the road that they drive down every day.
My post was more a criticism of the use of speed limits in general. Which is why I was being hyperbolic. But I should have been more clear.
I am in favor of the design choice that "the driver should not even need to know the limit. They should be incentivized by the design to drive at a speed that is both safe for themselves, other drivers, and above all, pedestrians.
I would agree with the several comments on the engineering and design of the higher speed roads being able to handle increased limits, but I don't think the road or even most of the cars' ability to go that fast are the problem. It's the drivers. Raising the limits means people will go that much faster (the ones who are even bothering to stay close to it), and the risks will be higher and more deadly.
There is also the issue of fuel efficiency vs. speed and how little time is gained for a lot more gas used. Even with modern cars there's a limit of aerodynamics and how much more it takes to push air out of the way faster as you get higher in speed. Of course this pales compared to how many people I see idling in parking lots on their phone, and then complain about gas prices. There's a disconnect somewhere.
many of the speeders could well be cops who don’t feel like enforcing traffic laws &, well, prefer to speed themselves
It’s because it is never enforced anymore.
It's worse than that. If everyone speeds all the time, cops have a valid reason to pull over and harass anyone they choose, on the pretext of speeding. You'll never guess what demographic gets a disproportionate amount of police attention despite not speeding (or committing other traffic violations) significantly more than average.
And of you're not speeding, it appears in the US they stop you for endangering others on the road
Because roads are engineered to accommodate a certain speed limit then politicians artificially lower it so they can show how safety conscious they are. Then instead of admitting it was a stupid rule they blame everyone for breaking it just like they do with abstinence only education.
I mean, going the speed of traffic is safer than not. So yeah, it's okay when everyone else is doing it.
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags: