Well...the trucker(s) know me.

[slowmover]

Back on topic; it would be nice if slow moving vehicles would move over as far as practicable when traffic piles up behind them. It would be nicer still if that became so commonplace that people came to expect it, knew how and when to do it, and knew how and when to respond to it (by passing ahead of the slower vehicle).


Might be even better if the self-important didn't jam up behind someone moving legally down the highway, just slower than them . . since, as the law addresses slower moving traffic yielding when it is safe to do so the self-absorbed could then more easily pass and do so more quickly in time and distance.

Hey, a guy can dream . . . .

.

[roflwaffle]

Originally Posted by Marc F.

b) being behind a guy doing half the speed limit and unable to
pass for 30 minutes cuts my pay in half. period. how
would you feel if I came to your work place and cut your pay?
And yes this has happened to me several times. I didnt feel
that he needed to be "run over" but I though it would have
been nice for him to help me pass safely.

I am not saying that I am perfect, I have made bonehead moves in
traffic, I screwed up this week. Sorry, I'm human. But if you can
take a different route and let the trucks do their thing you might
consider it. A truck can only take certain routes.

The problem, IME anyway, is that truck drivers take this to some absurd extreme. It's like every single one expects a car in the right lane to be going faster than whatever speed they're at, which is anywhere from ~60mph to ~75mph, rather than pass. It's one thing to expect a driver to do 55mph (the posted speed limit for trucks in the state) instead of something like 27mph on the freeway, it's another to ride someone's rear-end because they aren't breaking the speed limit as fast as they want them to be.

A driver may be making slightly less if they have to go 55mph instead of 65mph for a few miles, but ion the flip side of the coin it's also unreasonable to expect a car to speed up and also pay more just so the truck driver can make more.

[Marc F.]

I was going to clarify, but its not worth the bother.

[slowmover]

Originally Posted by Marc F.

I was going to clarify, but its not worth the bother.

The easy answer to his "dilemma" is that only a few truck drivers are that bad, and, to let them (the trucks) find their own way along. If one can be of help by moving over, the benefit of having commercial traffic well ahead instead of jammed behind ought to be obvious.

And what he -- the four wheeler -- think is "just a few miles" is indicative of not understanding what a truck is like to drive. No surprise, and nothing that marks him out from the crowd. But it's a bad assumption nonetheless as his air conditioned go-kart can do anything it wants, any time it wants. A big truck is constrained in every way possible, and more he hasn't considered.

He hasn't the knowledge, thus why chastise his ignorance?

But he might take seriously someone who does it for a living. We might ask what it is he does, and make his work life dangerous, and a lot less remunerative. Not only threaten him with being fired, but seeing to it that he is not ever again hired in that field.

If he works at a computer all day then the analogy would be that whenever he switches to to a non-work related screen everyone around him could be electrocuted. And, in the meantime we'll cut his daily or weekly pay by a considerable percentage while also adding to the stress in other ways because it's convenient for us to ignore him as we go along our dumb and happy way. He has to switch screens, as there are others around who make it so.

We others might take him seriously if he'd stated that, as this is my field, I can say from experience that . . . . to some question around here. Statistical analysis. Design. Engineering. Whatever. Literally doesn't matter. He should try doing the same. Ignorance is one thing, and often easily remedied by the knowledgeable. I've been handed my head before.

But rudeness is quite another in assuming he has any idea of what commercial driving is like . . that is, if he expects equal consideration for what he's worked hard to achieve in his field. His skill level as a car driver would cause him to kill other people the first day in a big truck. There's no translation that is direct, but that his assumptions make it so.

.

[roflwaffle]

IME it's more than just a few. I'd say it's one in three as to whether or not a truck driver will tailgate, at least where I've consistently driven (10 freeway through riverside county). There may be some magical place out there where 90+% of the truck drivers are polite, and there's always room to move over, but in CA, even with a 55mph speed limit, they will tailgate (unless they see a CHP cruiser) rather than move over to pass. I think there's some implicit assumption that if they creep up to the point where I can see the bugs in their grill I'll go faster. I don't care how bad their job may be, they have huge vehicles and shouldn't be tailgating, period. There's no excuse, just like there's no excuse for a car to tailgate a motorcyclist or someone on a bicycle.

[Ladogaboy]

Well, statistically speaking, one in three people have an IQ below 100.

[larrybuck]

If we drive anything akin to a turtle, we come equipped w a shell.
In multilane situations,you should be able to ignore, don't make eye contact.

If you wish to assist them by, please find the older thread: Getting the bird at onramps.

This addresses much of what is being said here.

[wdb]

Originally Posted by slowmover

Back on topic; it would be nice if slow moving vehicles would move over as far as practicable when traffic piles up behind them. It would be nicer still if that became so commonplace that people came to expect it, knew how and when to do it, and knew how and when to respond to it (by passing ahead of the slower vehicle).


Might be even better if the self-important didn't jam up behind someone moving legally down the highway, just slower than them . . since, as the law addresses slower moving traffic yielding when it is safe to do so the self-absorbed could then more easily pass and do so more quickly in time and distance.

Hey, a guy can dream . . . .

.

Quite a few years ago I spent a few hundred miles on the Trans-Canada Highway. At the time it was two lanes wide, one lane in each direction. Slower moving vehicles routinely moved onto the (generous) shoulder to let faster moving vehicles by. None of them appeared to make any assumptions about the mental state of the drivers of the faster moving vehicles.

When I rode my bicycle in the French Alps, cars routinely moved over to allow faster moving bicycles to pass them on descents. Again, I did not discern any gestures or movements indicating moral judgements being made by the drivers of the vehicles that moved over.

I have never had a similar experience in the United States despite having driven many hundreds of thousands of miles, from one coast to the other. In fact in the US my experiences have been almost 180 degrees opposite. Drivers here seem to believe they are infused with godlike powers when they slip behind the wheel, among them the ability to judge the character of every other driver they encounter. George Carlin may have said it best; "Did you ever notice how every other driver on the road is either an idiot or a moron?"

[roflwaffle]

IME using the shoulder/"emergency lane" is only done on one lane roads and the like in the US, and even then it's discouraged because the driver is more likely to run into trouble from road debris. There tend to be turn-outs where they're needed, for instance on extended single lane roads with no ability to pass. In every other (multi-lane) situation the usual "drive right, pass left" applies. For whatever reason a significant portion of truck drivers in CA, IME of course, seem to think "tailgate until they go faster" (unless of course they see a LEO) is the way to go.

[UFO]

Haha, I just realized LEO = "Law Enforcement Officer". That acronym means "Low Earth Orbit" to me.