Engine braking and stop lights

[texanidiot25]

Originally Posted by dcb

bullcrap you should not be on the road if you cannot avoid hitting slower objects. There will always be slower objects. That link was tripe. You go faster, you put everyone at risk, a slower moving herd is always safer.

You should not be on the road if you're going to instantly make your self a road hazard to teach someone a lesson. No one here owns the road, so please don't act like it. Otherwise you give yourselves the hugely negative connotations seen here:
How To Get 99.7 Mpg From A Geo Metro

Some members here end up with the exact same attitude of the car owners that they criticize. It becomes ironic.

[Lokalazeros]

You were implying that because you drive slower, you instantly create a safer situation.

I only wanted to add to this that, by speeding, you are creating lots of slower objects Thus, everything is relative.

[dcb]

There is one exception to the slow herd is safer rule, and that is when you have predators.

[texanidiot25]

Originally Posted by Lokalazeros

I only wanted to add to this that, by speeding, you are creating lots of slower objects Thus, everything is relative.

Not even necessarily talking about speeding. If you're driving more than 10mph below the limit, there's a problem here. It's not safer by any means to slow down everyone else because you feel it creates a safer situation. All you're doing is instigating road rage and causing everyone else behind the first driver trouble too, who had nothing to do with the initial situation. Then, human emotion kicks in for everyone, and all aspirations for safety goto shreds.

A slow herd is safe, given if there was a herd. One driver slowing down traffic is not a herd by any means.

Adjust your driving techniques to traffic, period. It's silly to expect everyone to adjust themselves to your car when you refuse to adjust yourself for the rest of everyone else.

[MadisonMPG]

Speeding is safer than driving slower? Bull****.

Drive 80 on the highway, when most people are going 70, tell me how stressed your are after the run. Drive 60 on the highway, when most people are going 70, tell me how stressed your are after the run.

Ever since I started hypermiling, I feel better on the road, and I like driving more.

[texanidiot25]

What speed I drive at doesn't effect my stress levels. I do 65-70 in the CST10 because of it's gearing limitations and ~70 in the CRX with the flow of traffic. I could come home at night doing 90 for all I care, I'm not stressed. What causes stress is drivers who feel they own the road and think it's their job to control everyone's speeds on roads where passing is not an option. This goes for tail gaters and those who are going well below the speed limit.

You're entirely missing the point. What you do outside of traffic doesn't mean anything, at speeds with-in reason of the limit.

Causing a traffic jam is not safe, period. Making your car a ROAD HAZZARD, NO MATTER IN WHAT WAY, IS NOT SAFE. A pack of cars "speeding" along is safer than a pack of cars sitting behind a driver who is being unreasonably slow.

"Research conducted by the Florida Department of Transportation showed that the percentage of accidents actually caused by speeding is very low, 2.2 percent."

Like I said before, and I'll say again, adjust your driving techniques to the flow of traffic. Either that, or pull aside when safe and at the very least be courteous.

Engine braking is one thing, but blocking traffic is blatant stupidity and incites more road rage.

[texanidiot25]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

...but, the real question is *why* does the legal-speedlimit driver have to either speed up or pull over because other drivers are SPEEDING?

...why should the person obeying the law have to choose between breaking the law too, or abdicating his/her right to use the roadway at the posted legal speedlimit?

Driving too slow is against the law as well. Notice, my posts are about the driver who thinks that slowing down well below the speed limit is a grand idea. The driver who is blocking traffic because he is "being safe" by continuously dropping his speed. We're talking about more than 15-20% below the limit, in my opinion.

Also, to counter your question, say you're doing 10 under in a 45. A driver coming up behind you is doing 45. Are you now so inclined to "stick to your guns", or be courteous to the other law abiding driver who happens to just want to go the speed limit? Take into account the inaccuracy of speedometers and how that effects a person's speed compared to you.

A judge has nothing to do with this, I could tell him doing 30 over is a sweet idea, in writing. Nothing he can do, talking is not breaking the law.

You, as a driver must do what is safe for everyone. This means, -gasp- compromising! If a person is breaking the speed limit, then you as a safe driver should do what is necessary to alleviate the problem. If this means yielding to the other driver so they can get on their merry way, so be it. It does not, however, mean causing further road rage. When you drive your car in a way to "get your way", you are not better than the other person.

[texanidiot25]

I haven't mentioned freeway driving, there's enough room for everyone to get along. My point has been on roads where there are not extra lanes to pass, say one on each side of the median.

Obviously 45mph for your case is with-in the law, but hardly with-in reason with a 20mph speed difference. I'll let logic take over at that point, it's obvious on a freeway you'll find cars going over 65mph at which point the 45mph minimum becomes can become even more dangerous, depending on traffic. If traffic is tight at rush hour, but generally moving along at 65mph, I'll leave it to you to say if doing 45mph is a grand and safe idea when prevailing traffic is safely moving along 20mph faster.

If you're scootin' along at 3am in the far-right lane, 45mph becomes much more reasonable with next to no traffic to deal with. Though, I'd never do that low on a TX freeway.

You can argue semantics and situational examples all day. Fighting road rage with road rage and further exacerbating the situation is not safe driving, as per some posters' opinions.

[texanidiot25]

I'll go out and say "herd speeding", is safer than "herd trying to avoid one slow cow in a skinny stockade". Laws are one thing, but logic and real life tend to win-out. You shouldn't have to, by all means, speed your car up to an unreasonable speed to appease another driver, but vica-versa if you're blocking them on a road where passing is not an option. The most you can do is "be the better man", and do what's best to alleviate the problem. It does mean compromising.

Being a dick and slowing down more maybe fun, but certainly isn't safe, as par some opinions here..

[Arragonis]

Coming back to the original question about the lights, how about a foot switch ? Old Minis used to have the main beam / dipped headlights controlled by a foot switch instead of a stalk switch and that worked reasonably well. If positioned correctly you could press it instead of the brake pedal but you would need to make sure your foot didn't rest on it. Also it may be easier to add to the brake light circuit if it is close to the existing switch on the pedal assembly instead of reprogramming something.