amy is a forum nazi and every body speeds... Its just stupid they got cameras to catch you 10 miles over the speed limit at 4 in the morning when no one else is on the road.

 

The road was empty, except for me. Which is why I was even speeding in the first place. That means the variation from average speed was 0, relative to myself, and by my calculations, you MUST be C-3PO.

Never tell me the odds, 3PO!

 

This thread makes me

 

That is a really cheap speeding ticket. Don't think I've ever gotten one under $450...

 

My thoughts- A change from 55 to 35mph then right back to 55mph would appear to be a "speed trap" or a low set speed limit. If the average mph is 5mph over the speed limit, that would put the average driver at the 60mph prior to the sudden speed change. Since OP was going 5mph over what the average probably would have been, the increased risk would be negligible based on the graph by GeorgeL. Though I am not condoning speeding, some of the comments seem to be a little harsh. To me, it would be pointless to drop my speed from 60-65mph to 35mph if the driving conditions were safe to do so.

As someone who almost got a ticket for something similar, I understand where OP is coming from. I was on a 2 lane each way surface road where the speed went from 45 to 25 around a bend with the sign being mostly blocked by a tree. The cop was kind enough to understand so that was nice. My driving habits were not excessive and by no means unsafe.

 

As someone who drives 5-10 UNDER the speed limit fairly regularly....

It is dangerous.

People don't pay attention and fly up on you. They get angry, anger + incompetence = risk.

However, I'm in no rush and do my best to allow for easy passing, however, some people don't notice such opportunities or are so blinded by rage that they miss them. They are the dangerous ones.

Speed doesn't kill. Sudden stops do.

 

When discussions of what speed is too fast come up, I am always reminded of something the late great George Carlin would say, "Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac ?”

 

Maybe I'm reading this wrong. The chart I'm reading states the following I think -->

1) When travelling at a speed of -40mph under the average speed, collision rates are 60,000 per 100 million vehicle miles,
2) When travelling at a speed of +25mph over the average speed, collision rates are 800 per million vehicle miles.

So travelling -40mph slower than average has a 75X more collision rate than travelling 25mph over the average speed. This would mean that travelling slower than the speed limit makes you more likely to be involved in a collision.

 

I was told there would be no math.....

 

No, you have it correct. I think that most of us can figure out that you are taking your life in your hands if you drive in 65MPH traffic at 25MPH. There's a pretty good chance that you'll be rear-ended and there isn't much you can do about that. You're a sitting duck, so to speak.

If you are travelling well over the limit you are motivated to stay as sharp as possible. You still have a greater chance of accident, but at least you have more control over the situation.

Welcome to the 21st century, where the geeks will inherit the Earth!

 

"The curve based on research conducted by David Solomon in the late 1950s and published in 1964."

50 year old data? The American landscape of drivers and driving habits, not to mention the cars themselves, is completely different today. For example, the curve would now have to account for accidents at average speeds due to texting and driving. Or accidents at higher than average speeds averted due to better safety/accident avoidance features. Heck, SEAT BELT laws didn't even exist yet.

Even the subsequent research is almost 25 years old. They had Julie Cirillo testify (on her own behalf...) in 2003, 35 years after doing her research, when texting and driving still had not become a widespread problem and active safety features included ABS and that's about it.

For better or for worse there are other major accident-contributing factors that are just not present here.

 

Vanguard, you made me laugh. Thanks!


Is it me or isn't 60,000 per 100 million miles equal to 600 per million miles, and therefore lower than 800 per million miles for the speeders? I do recall doing well in math on the SATs.

 

Amen to that. People texting, talking on phones, on legal and illegal drugs, lack of sleep, just don't care, they depend on the car gadgets to save them, etc, makes driving not only more dangerous but much less fun to me.

I gave up on motorcycle riding because people just don't care and take very little responsibility for their actions. Still, it does not excuse speeding just to be speeding.

 

Distracted driving behaviors (which, for you young'uns, existed long before the cell phone) and functional safety improvements like ABS would serve to move the entire curve up or down the Y-axis, but would not alter its basic shape. The fundimental task of driving and the ability of humans to perform it hasn't really changed.

 

Exactly right. Updated studies have shown the basic premise as the above Solomon's curve. The safest driver is the one following the flow of traffic. However, risk assessment companies still site the above Solomon's curve because it was the first to accurately map it, and subsequent studies have backed it up.