"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit

The problem with driving at 85 mph is that, even a small
ripple or object on the road will make my truck lurch and
I will spill my beer !!!!!

On Nov 18, 4:52*am, Robert wrote:
The problem with driving at 85 mph is that, even a small
ripple or object on the road will make my truck lurch and
I will spill my beer !!!!!

Not to mention having to put my book down to correct the steering!

Harry K

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:55:09 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Nov 18, 4:52*am, Robert wrote:
The problem with driving at 85 mph is that, even a small
ripple or object on the road will make my truck lurch and
I will spill my beer !!!!!

Not to mention having to put my book down to correct the steering!

"Wait a minute, I'm just about done with the text message."

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 04:52:28 -0800 (PST), Robert
wrote:

The problem with driving at 85 mph is that, even a small
ripple or object on the road will make my truck lurch and
I will spill my beer !!!!!

Can't be spillin' the beer now, can we...

Recently there was news reports (and video) of the number of wild hogs
crossing this road in farm country. If you drive a motorcycle forget
your chances of survival, if you hit one.

Video page bottom:

http://automotivediscovery.com/85-mph-texan-tollway-invested-with-wild-hogs-video/9215405/

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:28:24 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit



Regardless how good the cars are made, I think the weak point is
people's reflexes and reaction times. The only fallacy to this is
that I have also seen speed limits change back and forth for given
stretches of roads. FWIW, many years ago I was told out in west
Texas, people used to drive at 90+ mph minimum tho the speed limit was
less. This was where it was desert and straight boring roads.

On Nov 18, 5:14*am, Doug wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:28:24 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:





"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit

Regardless how good the cars are made, I think the weak point is
people's reflexes and reaction times. * The only fallacy to this is
that I have also seen speed limits change back and forth for given
stretches of roads. * FWIW, many years ago I was told out in west
Texas, people used to drive at 90+ mph minimum tho the speed limit was
less. *This was where it was desert and straight boring roads.

Re rflexes/reaction time. Those went out the window when it became
standard to tailgate. 90% of the cars I see in moderate to dense
traffic are way to close. Just eyeball the next clump of cars you
see.

Re 90+ Back then, just as today, such claims are 90% BS I spent many
years in
the 60/70s in Central Tex (San Angelo/San Antonio) Traffic on those
wide open,
straight streches were the usual 'posted plus 10%' which is common in
every state

I live on a major 2 lane hiway and edveryone says "drive 65 and you'll
get run over (posted is 60). Odd, I hit that highway for a 50mile
trip, set my speedo at 64/65 and will be passed at most by two
vehicles and will pass maybe 3 in that 50 miles.

Harry K

Harry K wrote:
On Nov 18, 5:14 am, Doug wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:28:24 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:





"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit

Regardless how good the cars are made, I think the weak point is
people's reflexes and reaction times. The only fallacy to this is
that I have also seen speed limits change back and forth for given
stretches of roads. FWIW, many years ago I was told out in west
Texas, people used to drive at 90+ mph minimum tho the speed limit was
less. This was where it was desert and straight boring roads.

Re rflexes/reaction time. Those went out the window when it became
standard to tailgate. 90% of the cars I see in moderate to dense
traffic are way to close. Just eyeball the next clump of cars you
see.

Re 90+ Back then, just as today, such claims are 90% BS I spent many
years in
the 60/70s in Central Tex (San Angelo/San Antonio) Traffic on those
wide open,
straight streches were the usual 'posted plus 10%' which is common in
every state

I live on a major 2 lane hiway and edveryone says "drive 65 and you'll
get run over (posted is 60). Odd, I hit that highway for a 50mile
trip, set my speedo at 64/65 and will be passed at most by two
vehicles and will pass maybe 3 in that 50 miles.

Harry K

Try driving 4-5 MPH over the limit on many highways and you'll be holding
up traffic. Most 65 MPH highways I drive on run at 75 and higher.

On one major 65 MPH interstate that I drive on a lot, I set the cruise to
74 and drive right past the troopers in the medium. I gave up slowing down
when I see them many years ago because they obviously allow 74. I typically
drive in the left lane, moving to the right only when someone approaches
from the rear at a higher speed. I don't see the sense in moving
left-right-left all the time when driving 74 will mean that I will be
passing a lot of - but certainly not all - cars.

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:26:47 +0000 (UTC), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Harry K wrote:
On Nov 18, 5:14 am, Doug wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:28:24 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:





"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit

Regardless how good the cars are made, I think the weak point is
people's reflexes and reaction times. The only fallacy to this is
that I have also seen speed limits change back and forth for given
stretches of roads. FWIW, many years ago I was told out in west
Texas, people used to drive at 90+ mph minimum tho the speed limit was
less. This was where it was desert and straight boring roads.

Re rflexes/reaction time. Those went out the window when it became
standard to tailgate. 90% of the cars I see in moderate to dense
traffic are way to close. Just eyeball the next clump of cars you
see.

Re 90+ Back then, just as today, such claims are 90% BS I spent many
years in
the 60/70s in Central Tex (San Angelo/San Antonio) Traffic on those
wide open,
straight streches were the usual 'posted plus 10%' which is common in
every state

I live on a major 2 lane hiway and edveryone says "drive 65 and you'll
get run over (posted is 60). Odd, I hit that highway for a 50mile
trip, set my speedo at 64/65 and will be passed at most by two
vehicles and will pass maybe 3 in that 50 miles.

Harry K

Try driving 4-5 MPH over the limit on many highways and you'll be holding
up traffic. Most 65 MPH highways I drive on run at 75 and higher.

On one major 65 MPH interstate that I drive on a lot, I set the cruise to
74 and drive right past the troopers in the medium. I gave up slowing down
when I see them many years ago because they obviously allow 74. I typically
drive in the left lane, moving to the right only when someone approaches
from the rear at a higher speed. I don't see the sense in moving
left-right-left all the time when driving 74 will mean that I will be
passing a lot of - but certainly not all - cars.


I did the same on I-71 going to Austin and back....set my cruise to 74
and drove by state troopers with no problem. I usually stayed in the
right lane unless I needed to pass. Of course there are some who
pass me up.

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:02:35 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:


Re rflexes/reaction time. Those went out the window when it became
standard to tailgate. 90% of the cars I see in moderate to dense
traffic are way to close. Just eyeball the next clump of cars you
see.


Yup. I do 3k mile road trip at least once a year. See it all the
time in the left lane. I stay in the right lane to avoid the tailgate
crowd. Usually tucked about 2-300' behind a steady going semi doing
5-10 over. Nice that trucks use cruise now.
Haven't driven in Texas for years, but the Edens x-way (I-94) was the
fastest local road I drove, with big groups at 85 being pretty common.
Limit is 55.
The one that always took the prize was I-75 right through downtown
Atlanta in the daytime. Limit 55. I've been in groups doing 90-95
and we were getting passed. Never could figure that out.
Last couple years has been real close to 5-10 over.
And lots more mars lights.

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:45:36 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:02:35 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:


Re rflexes/reaction time. Those went out the window when it became
standard to tailgate. 90% of the cars I see in moderate to dense
traffic are way to close. Just eyeball the next clump of cars you
see.


Yup. I do 3k mile road trip at least once a year. See it all the
time in the left lane. I stay in the right lane to avoid the tailgate
crowd. Usually tucked about 2-300' behind a steady going semi doing
5-10 over. Nice that trucks use cruise now.
Haven't driven in Texas for years, but the Edens x-way (I-94) was the
fastest local road I drove, with big groups at 85 being pretty common.
Limit is 55.
The one that always took the prize was I-75 right through downtown
Atlanta in the daytime. Limit 55. I've been in groups doing 90-95
and we were getting passed. Never could figure that out.
Last couple years has been real close to 5-10 over.
And lots more mars lights.


Funny, you remind me of when I drove to Florida from Texas. I too
got into a group of cars and one 18 wheeler and we drove around 75 to
80mph (in the early 1980s). We all slowed down when the truck slowed
down for "good" reason and sped up when he did too. It worked out
nicely.

On Nov 19, 4:59*am, Doug wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:45:36 -0600, Vic Smith





wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:02:35 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

Re rflexes/reaction time. *Those went out the window when it became
standard to tailgate. *90% of the cars I see in moderate to dense
traffic are way to close. *Just eyeball the next clump of cars you
see.

Yup. *I do 3k mile road trip at least once a year. *See it all the
time in the left lane. *I stay in the right lane to avoid the tailgate
crowd. *Usually tucked about 2-300' behind a steady going semi doing
5-10 over. *Nice that trucks use cruise now.
Haven't driven in Texas for years, but the Edens x-way (I-94) was the
fastest local road I drove, with big groups at 85 being pretty common.
Limit is 55.
The one that always took the prize was I-75 right through downtown
Atlanta in the daytime. *Limit 55. *I've been in groups doing 90-95
and we were getting passed. *Never could figure that out.
Last couple years has been real close to 5-10 over.
And lots more mars lights.

Funny, you remind me of when I drove to Florida from Texas. * I too
got into a group of cars and one 18 wheeler and we drove around 75 to
80mph (in the early 1980s). * We all slowed down when the truck slowed
down for "good" reason and sped up when he did too. * It worked out
nicely.

It works out even nicer to stay out of the parade back a hundred yards
or so and then you don't need to keep making minor adjustments. Makes
for a very relaxed trip.

Harry K

On 11/18/2012 7:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials

The difference is the drivers in 1958 were not busy texting.

On Nov 18, 7:10*am, diy savant wrote:
On 11/18/2012 7:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials

The difference is the drivers in 1958 were not busy texting.

No difference, the morons still drive as fast as they would if not
texting, etc.

Harry K

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:04:05 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:

On Nov 18, 7:10*am, diy savant wrote:
On 11/18/2012 7:28 AM, HeyBub wrote:

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials

The difference is the drivers in 1958 were not busy texting.

No difference, the morons still drive as fast as they would if not
texting, etc.

Harry K


I don't see a problem with 85 or even 95 under the right conditions.
Daylight, dry, relatively straight road with easy curves, good tires
and suspension.

Some drivers though, do stupid things. Just last week I was doing 95
and was about to pass a slower (about 95) car and he changed lanes
with no signal. I just went around him, but he would have made it
safer with a blink of the turn signal so I knew where he would be when
I got to him.

Per Ed Pawlowski:
I don't see a problem with 85 or even 95 under the right conditions.

I cannot cite, but I read somewhere that above a certain speed
the consequences of loss of control increase all out of
proportion to the speed diff.

Half my family lives in Germany.

Their highways and general level of driver education are so far
above ours technically that there's almost no comparison and even
with Porches doing 150+ mixing it up with tandem tractor-trailers
pulling out to pass at 45 they *claim* a lower freeway fatality
rate than the US'.

But I lay virtually all of that to driver training and
infrastructure because when they do have a pileup, it tends to be
horrendous. Newscasts tend tb in the vein of "Between 7 and 10
people were killed, the exact number pending an inventory of body
parts."

--
Pete Cresswell

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:29:43 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per Ed Pawlowski:
I don't see a problem with 85 or even 95 under the right conditions.

I cannot cite, but I read somewhere that above a certain speed
the consequences of loss of control increase all out of
proportion to the speed diff.

Half my family lives in Germany.

Their highways and general level of driver education are so far
above ours technically that there's almost no comparison and even
with Porches doing 150+ mixing it up with tandem tractor-trailers
pulling out to pass at 45 they *claim* a lower freeway fatality
rate than the US'.

But I lay virtually all of that to driver training and
infrastructure because when they do have a pileup, it tends to be
horrendous. Newscasts tend tb in the vein of "Between 7 and 10
people were killed, the exact number pending an inventory of body
parts."


Never drove in German, buy I have driven frequently in Italy. They
don't drink coffee and put on makeup. They stay to the right. They
drive faster than the US, but I feel safer

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:29:43 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote:

Per Ed Pawlowski:
I don't see a problem with 85 or even 95 under the right conditions.

I cannot cite, but I read somewhere that above a certain speed
the consequences of loss of control increase all out of
proportion to the speed diff.

Half my family lives in Germany.

Their highways and general level of driver education are so far
above ours technically that there's almost no comparison and even
with Porches doing 150+ mixing it up with tandem tractor-trailers
pulling out to pass at 45 they *claim* a lower freeway fatality
rate than the US'.


One of the things they have going for them is their intolerance for
drunks driving.

Jim

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote


I don't see a problem with 85 or even 95 under the right conditions.
Daylight, dry, relatively straight road with easy curves, good tires
and suspension.

If you were to consider a closed course, I would agree with you. However,
when you add any other car, the actions of that car or of those cars affect
the actions of the 90 mph driver. I drive to and from Vegas frequently, set
on 75 mph on the cruise. I find that enough of being on the edge to have
time to reply to the actions of others. When I approach a large truck, I
will kick it up to around 90 to jump around the semi. I've had half a dozen
bad experiences with trucks blowing tires, throwing caps, or dropping load.
During the time when I am going up to 90, and then back down to cruise, I
have to be hypervigilant for people wandering, or just not watching what I'm
doing, and my rate of travel.

In normal driving, there are countless incidents of people pulling out onto
the Interstates, ignoring the acceleration lanes, and entering the hiway at
45 mph. Then there are the wanderers. And the slow/fast/slow/fast drivers.
Then those who just aren't looking because of something going on inside the
car. Nevada has no hand held devices laws against driving, and I call in
every one of them. They don't usually catch them, but it goes on file, and
when the person is stopped or is involved in a crash, it shows up on their
vehicle check.

Point is, when a fast driver encounters a slow stupid one, it's usually the
fast driver that comes up on the short end. There was a place in Northern
Nevada near Battle Mountain, now near Lund, where they shut down about 75
miles of rural hiways, and let pre-qualified race drivers go as fast as they
can. Record speed is over 200 mph. There have been some fatalities, which
show that even on a dry road, with an experienced driver, and ABSOLUTELY NO
OTHER TRAFFIC, that people still have accidents.

I'm not worried about it. I know how I drive, and that is pretty damn well,
not a major accident that had the force to break a windshield in 48 years of
driving. I'm worried about all those snarky teens, old people, texters,
make up putter onners, people slapping their kids, and all others who are
just plain bad drivers. I don't give a whit about them, I just don't want
to mess up MY ride.

Steve

Remove the power steering, and I'd feel
safe at any speed! I want that sucker to
feel like it's on RAILS.

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:28:24 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit


On the other hand- the most important piece of equipment in autos has
gone *way* downhill. There were no cup holders, cell phones, GPS's,
laptops, or noise canceling headphones in the cars of the 70's.

Too many drivers are doing too many things other than driving- so the
rest of us need to be hyper alert to look out for them.

Jim

On 11/18/2012 9:53 AM, Jim Elbrecht wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:28:24 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit


On the other hand- the most important piece of equipment in autos has
gone *way* downhill. There were no cup holders, cell phones, GPS's,
laptops, or noise canceling headphones in the cars of the 70's.

Too many drivers are doing too many things other than driving- so the
rest of us need to be hyper alert to look out for them.

Jim


I won't even talk on my cellphone while driving, if I answer it I tell
the caller, "I'm driving and I'll call you when I reach my destination."
If it's an emergency, I pull over to the side of the road and talk to
them. I spend half my drive time dodging yackers and texters who are an
extremely hazardous impediment to the efficient flow of traffic. O_o

TDD

The Daring Dufas wrote:

On 11/18/2012 9:53 AM, Jim Elbrecht wrote:

-snip-
On the other hand- the most important piece of equipment in autos has
gone *way* downhill. There were no cup holders, cell phones, GPS's,
laptops, or noise canceling headphones in the cars of the 70's.

Too many drivers are doing too many things other than driving- so the
rest of us need to be hyper alert to look out for them.

Jim


I won't even talk on my cellphone while driving, if I answer it I tell
the caller, "I'm driving and I'll call you when I reach my destination."
If it's an emergency, I pull over to the side of the road and talk to
them. I spend half my drive time dodging yackers and texters who are an
extremely hazardous impediment to the efficient flow of traffic. O_o

I don't even look to see who called until I get where I'm going. I'm
not a cardiac surgeon, so I assume that a few minutes one way or the
other is inconsequential.

More amazing is that my 25 yr old son is the same way! [Daughter
not so much-- she has the 'hands free' setup-- but IMO spends too much
time on it.]

Jim

On 11/18/2012 10:30 AM, Jim Elbrecht wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:

On 11/18/2012 9:53 AM, Jim Elbrecht wrote:

-snip-
On the other hand- the most important piece of equipment in autos has
gone *way* downhill. There were no cup holders, cell phones, GPS's,
laptops, or noise canceling headphones in the cars of the 70's.

Too many drivers are doing too many things other than driving- so the
rest of us need to be hyper alert to look out for them.

Jim


I won't even talk on my cellphone while driving, if I answer it I tell
the caller, "I'm driving and I'll call you when I reach my destination."
If it's an emergency, I pull over to the side of the road and talk to
them. I spend half my drive time dodging yackers and texters who are an
extremely hazardous impediment to the efficient flow of traffic. O_o

I don't even look to see who called until I get where I'm going. I'm
not a cardiac surgeon, so I assume that a few minutes one way or the
other is inconsequential.

More amazing is that my 25 yr old son is the same way! [Daughter
not so much-- she has the 'hands free' setup-- but IMO spends too much
time on it.]

Jim


Well, the only time I may use the phone while driving is when I'm
getting directions in real time but not at 80mph and certainly not
in heavy traffic. ^_^

TDD

On Nov 18, 4:19*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 11/18/2012 9:53 AM, Jim Elbrecht wrote:









On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:28:24 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit

On the other hand- the most important piece of equipment in autos has
gone *way* downhill. * There were no cup holders, cell phones, GPS's,
laptops, or noise canceling headphones in the cars of the 70's.

Too many drivers are doing too many things other than driving- so the
rest of us need to be hyper alert to look out for them.

Jim

I won't even talk on my cellphone while driving, if I answer it I tell
the caller, "I'm driving and I'll call you when I reach my destination."
If it's an emergency, I pull over to the side of the road and talk to
them. I spend half my drive time dodging yackers and texters who are an
extremely hazardous impediment to the efficient flow of traffic. O_o

TDD

Illegal in the UK to use hand held cellphone while driving, has been
for years.
Or any other device

On 11/18/2012 11:01 AM, harry wrote:
On Nov 18, 4:19 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 11/18/2012 9:53 AM, Jim Elbrecht wrote:









On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:28:24 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit

On the other hand- the most important piece of equipment in autos has
gone *way* downhill. There were no cup holders, cell phones, GPS's,
laptops, or noise canceling headphones in the cars of the 70's.

Too many drivers are doing too many things other than driving- so the
rest of us need to be hyper alert to look out for them.

Jim

I won't even talk on my cellphone while driving, if I answer it I tell
the caller, "I'm driving and I'll call you when I reach my destination."
If it's an emergency, I pull over to the side of the road and talk to
them. I spend half my drive time dodging yackers and texters who are an
extremely hazardous impediment to the efficient flow of traffic. O_o

TDD

Illegal in the UK to use hand held cellphone while driving, has been
for years.
Or any other device


Yea but do the gals still.... you know, while the guy is driving? O_o

TDD

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 11:27:56 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

Illegal in the UK to use hand held cellphone while driving, has been
for years.
Or any other device


Yea but do the gals still.... you know, while the guy is driving? O_o

Of course they do, don't be silly.

On 11/18/2012 11:27 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 10:19:26 -0600, The Daring Dufas


I won't even talk on my cellphone while driving, if I answer it I tell
the caller, "I'm driving and I'll call you when I reach my destination."
If it's an emergency, I pull over to the side of the road and talk to
them. I spend half my drive time dodging yackers and texters who are an
extremely hazardous impediment to the efficient flow of traffic. O_o

TDD

I tried using my phone in the car but I ran out of cord before I even
got out of the driveway.


There are chargers that plug into the cigarette lighter socket. O_o

TDD

On 11/18/2012 4:54 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 11:54:08 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 11/18/2012 11:27 AM, wrote:


I tried using my phone in the car but I ran out of cord before I even
got out of the driveway.


There are chargers that plug into the cigarette lighter socket. O_o

TDD

Charger? I have not heard of this thing. My phone plugs into a jack on
the wall with a big round 4 pin connector and the phone company has
the battery


How do you manage the hand crank on the phone while you're driving? O_o

TDD

"Hol my beer, woman. I gots to crank de fone."

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...

Charger? I have not heard of this thing. My phone plugs into a jack on
the wall with a big round 4 pin connector and the phone company has
the battery


How do you manage the hand crank on the phone while you're driving? O_o

TDD

On 11-18-2012 18:32, The Daring Dufas wrote:
How do you manage the hand crank on the phone while you're driving? O_o

Rubber band to one of the tires.

--
Wes Groleau

€œBrigham Young agrees to confine himself to one woman,
if every member of Congress will do the same.€�
€” Weekly Republican, 1869

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 17:32:46 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 11/18/2012 4:54 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 11:54:08 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 11/18/2012 11:27 AM, wrote:


I tried using my phone in the car but I ran out of cord before I even
got out of the driveway.


There are chargers that plug into the cigarette lighter socket. O_o

TDD

Charger? I have not heard of this thing. My phone plugs into a jack on
the wall with a big round 4 pin connector and the phone company has
the battery


How do you manage the hand crank on the phone while you're driving? O_o

Drive left handed.

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 10:53:27 -0500, Jim Elbrecht
wrote:


Too many drivers are doing too many things other than driving- so the
rest of us need to be hyper alert to look out for them.

Sex can BE fun ...

I've been flashed by gals, even seen them changing clothes while
driving....and all that other non-attentive behavior.

Per Oren:
Too many drivers are doing too many things other than driving- so the
rest of us need to be hyper alert to look out for them.

Sex can BE fun ...

Ask Teddy Prendergast about that one.
--
Pete Cresswell

HeyBub wrote:
"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit

Ever drove on German Auto Bahn?

On Nov 18, 4:39*pm, Tony Hwang wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
"Perhaps by 2030 we'll be able to lawfully drive as fast as we should have
been allowed to drive back in 1990. But don't count on it. There's too much
revenue at stake."

and ...

"If it was "safe" and "reasonable" for a 1958 Chevy with drum brakes and
bias-plys [and independent suspension, non-independent rear axle, anti-sway
bars, etc.) to operate at 70, what of a 2013 Chevy with high-performance
four-wheel disc brakes and 17-inch alloy wheels shod with modern radials
designed for safe travel at continuous speeds in excess of 130 MPH? There
isn't a new (or recent vintage) car that isn't inherently safer (more
controllable, less likely to crash) at 90 MPH than any car of 1958 -- or
1968 (or 1978) -- was at 70. Yet speed limits are, for the most part, just
about back to where they were circa 1970."

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/1...-a-speed-limit

Ever drove on German Auto Bahn?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0987x...feature=fvwrel

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:39:07 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Ever drove on German Auto Bahn?

Yes. driving a 5-ton Army truck with a jeep in the bed and pulling
another jeep. The truck had a governor and was limited to 55 MPH.

ZOOM, ZOOM right past me..

Ever drove a self-propelled howitzer through a small German town?

On 11/18/2012 12:57 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:39:07 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Ever drove on German Auto Bahn?

Yes. driving a 5-ton Army truck with a jeep in the bed and pulling
another jeep. The truck had a governor and was limited to 55 MPH.

ZOOM, ZOOM right past me..

Ever drove a self-propelled howitzer through a small German town?


I knew a veteran of The Army who drove M1 tanks while serving in Germany
and he said sometimes idiots in little VW type cars would
pass the tank in a convoy and make the mistake of stopping in front
of the tank. At least it supplied a bit of lubricant to the tank's
tracks. O_o

TDD

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:57:24 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 11/18/2012 12:57 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:39:07 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Ever drove on German Auto Bahn?

Yes. driving a 5-ton Army truck with a jeep in the bed and pulling
another jeep. The truck had a governor and was limited to 55 MPH.

ZOOM, ZOOM right past me..

Ever drove a self-propelled howitzer through a small German town?


I knew a veteran of The Army who drove M1 tanks while serving in Germany
and he said sometimes idiots in little VW type cars would
pass the tank in a convoy and make the mistake of stopping in front
of the tank. At least it supplied a bit of lubricant to the tank's
tracks. O_o

TDD

My 155 SP Howitzer would barely get through some of the small German
towns. Cobble stone roads, very narrow sidewalks and even rose bushes.

The tracks had rubber pads. Never damaged the streets. Grannies would
head for the doorway or stand closer to the building wall.

There were no M1 tanks when I was there. They had not been developed,
yet.

On 11/18/2012 5:59 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 13:57:24 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 11/18/2012 12:57 PM, Oren wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 09:39:07 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Ever drove on German Auto Bahn?

Yes. driving a 5-ton Army truck with a jeep in the bed and pulling
another jeep. The truck had a governor and was limited to 55 MPH.

ZOOM, ZOOM right past me..

Ever drove a self-propelled howitzer through a small German town?


I knew a veteran of The Army who drove M1 tanks while serving in Germany
and he said sometimes idiots in little VW type cars would
pass the tank in a convoy and make the mistake of stopping in front
of the tank. At least it supplied a bit of lubricant to the tank's
tracks. O_o

TDD

My 155 SP Howitzer would barely get through some of the small German
towns. Cobble stone roads, very narrow sidewalks and even rose bushes.

The tracks had rubber pads. Never damaged the streets. Grannies would
head for the doorway or stand closer to the building wall.

There were no M1 tanks when I was there. They had not been developed,
yet.


I suppose the main battle tank then was the M60 Patton? I remember my
paternal great uncle who was an Army lifer in the Signal Corps since
they were using two tin cans and a string for communications. He spent
time in Germany and mentioned that the little cars would mix it up with
a convoy and his description of what happened was, "They fold up real
good." ^_^

TDD