LPT: The closer your destination, the less your driving speed matters. Driving faster than everyone else increases the risk to human life and property damage at a MUCH faster rate than the increase to your time savings.

LPT: The closer your destination, the less your driving speed matters. Driving faster than everyone else increases the risk to human life and property damage at a MUCH faster rate than the increase to your time savings.


Hello and welcome to r/LifeProTips! Please help us decide if this post is a good fit for the subreddit by up or downvoting this comment. If you think that this is great advice to improve your life, please upvote. If you think this doesn't help you in any way, please downvote. If you don't care, leave it for the others to decide.


So what is the correct distance and speed to risk ratio?


I wish somebody had actually tried to answer your question instead of arguing about the flawed politics behind present speed limits. Somebody better than me and my non-contribution, obviously, because I have no idea how to even begin calculating that :)


O ACTUALLY KNOW THIS you're best off going 35 in 25s on more rural American town roads. As the wider roads abd less obstructions make kids abd animals more visible as well as the farther distance to the curb makes your apparent speed seem less than if you were in a tighter city road. The wide American roadway is also why cars speed more and tend to go into buildings more whereas in Europe if a car goes into a building there's a news crew there in minutes. And you wanna speed in lower limit areas as the only real thing that matters if your comparative speed to the limit. Ex: going 100 in a 90 around 11% over. Going 20 in a 10 is doubling the speed limit yet it's the same 10 over charge.


Well, if you're driving 5 minutes and you're going 5 over that's a complete waste of time, because the commute time is only 5 minutes to begin with, it is, in itself, too miniscule to reasonably change. Over the course of an hour it will mean you've gone an additional 5 miles, which is, we'll say, 5 minutes, not a very significant amount of time over the course of an hour. 3-4 hours and you're looking at 15-20 minutes difference, which is a little more than nothing, but contextually speaking, we're still looking at only a 15-20 minute difference over 3-4 hours, but I do feel this is where and when people begin to see this difference matter. So, less than 4 hours is insignificant and 4 hours or more trends towards a greater significance in time saving. Over 10 hours that could be an hour saved. But you'll also incur a greater cost in fuel, tire wear, risk of ticketing, and accidents in that period. The correct answer is to go the speed posted, the impatient answer is to save yourself an often insignificant amount of time to everyone else's detriment, basically, your convenience supercedes anyone's safely.


The speed limit


Wrong. In much of the U.S. speed limits are absurdly low. In many cases, this is the legacy of the “oil crisis” at the end of the 1970s, where the government imposed a national maximum speed limit of 55MPH, and required states to adopt it in order to receive certain highway funds, with the stated intent being to reduce gasoline consumption. It was never about lives, but instead about fuel. In the years since, the roads have gotten better, and the cars have gotten better, yet in many places the speed limits are still lower than they were before the imposition of that idiotic policy 40+ years ago. In PA for example, the statute which defines the process for setting speed limits lays out a reasonable procedure (do traffic and engineering studies to figure out the optimal speed), and then puts a hard cap of 55MPH on it for roads not administered by the turnpike commission (which can go up to 75MPH). The highway I drive going to and from work is wider and better than the turnpike, yet the posted limit is 20 MPH lower for reasons that are completely idiotic, and entirely political.


Our speed limits are asinine. It's called common sense people. Drive to the road conditions. Imo, sure, driving the speed limit is a "safe" thing but... Let's focus more on texting and driving people. Where I live, speed limits are far behind the rest of the world. We are the only province that has a maximum of 100 km/hr. Even in areas that are rural and well developed. It's a scam and a shame that we are so horse and buggy here. *SP


100 kmh is insane on roads without ramps to get you up to speed to merge in.


People actually use the ramps to speed up where you're from? I feel like I always get stuck behind someone who goes half the posted speed until they merge into the traffic anyways. It's not even a "getting there on time" thing to me, I just think it's so much safer and easier to merge when you're going the appropriate speed. People probably think they are being safer by going slower, or maybe they just aren't paying that much attention to it. It's kinda like asking someone to change how they take a shower, though. I don't think it's gonna change, we just have to build a way around the weird habits of people. I'm personally for more trains in America. They don't need as many sensors to automatically navigate a rail. So many cities have plenty of space for it!! For example, in Tulsa, Oklahoma we have entirely built passenger train stations just sitting there unused. It's so sad. End my merging misery! Rant over, haha


This is a joke, yes? Have you ever even seen “the rural?” I literally drive 140 to my hometown on the regular. I will see no other people on my 20 minute drive.


A lot of people have never been outside of their city lol Also happy cake day!


One good thing to note is that in some places, like lots of places in Europe, there standard rural (non-freeway) roads are built to quite a low standard where even reaching 100 could be hard. In most of North America though, the major rural roads could be safely driven at higher speeds. Better design standards and less cross-traffic help.


I’m with you. I can easily go +10 on 85% of the roads I am on with no risk to safety. You want to know where a lot of accidents seem to happen? When someone is pulled over on the side of the road.


Another accident causing issue is people cruising in passing lanes. Holds up traffic and causes others to pass elsewhere, there by increasing accidents as people are less predictable on the road. Also the polite drivers. Yes, let me stop in the middle of the road, where I have the right of way, to allow this person at a stop sign to pull out in front of me.


Also intersections!


Political? I don’t get it. Why is it political?


Political in the sense that the only way to fix it is to get a bill through the legislature, and signed into law by the governor. It’s not a *partisan* issue in terms of political parties clashing over it; Its a political issue in terms of politicians wanting to avoid dealing with it because they think it will lose them votes (and this is a universal concern in the legislature). As for judicial solutions, I think that there’s a possibility that someone with appropriate standing could fight the arbitrary 55 MPH maximum limit based on the rest of the specific statue that sets it—both on the grounds that the statute says that the right way to set limits is with periodic traffic & engineering studies (how fast do people actually drive, and what speed is the road designed to support safely), and that this limit was lifted to 75 MPH for roads administered by the turnpike commission. The trouble with that is that you’d need a plaintiff (or a class of plaintiffs) with standing and sufficient motivation to sue. That’s difficult, because cops in large portions of the commonwealth tend to enforce what the traffic and engineering studies say that the speed limit *should* be, not what actually gets posted. An example of that is that the local police who run speed on the section of U.S. 202 I’ve been referring to seem to actually police it as if the limit is 75 MPH, not 55 MPH. I drove past their speed traps for 5 years at ~75 MPH and they didn’t bother me. They did stop me once for doing (allegedly) 83.6 MPH, and the officer wrote it up as “60+”. He was pretty clear that if I just paid it, it would go through as a 5-over (no points, ~$142.50 total) and not the 25+ over he’d make sure I would face if I chose to fight it (IIRC mandatory license suspension, and a much larger fine). Those two enforcement choices ensure that there is effectively no good plaintiff, and that tickets remain an easy source of revenue. That last is yet another reason why it’s a political issue: Politicians don’t want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.


Speed limits on highways are potentially too low, although this is arguable. Limits in the US in cities are still broadly far too high (really anything over 25mph is too high in areas with significant ped/cyclist usage) when considering the danger to road users other than motor vehicles.






That argument is not valid when you consider that efficiency is not the whole story. Yes cars are most efficient at 55 to 60, but we do drive slower than this even though it is less efficient because we have to. So why not let people use their money to save a bit of time? Yes, average people are saving only 26 seconds a day on speeding, but most aren't on highways which is exactly what we're discusing. On a big roadtrip, going 130km/h vs 100 is going to make a big difference if you are ready for the cost. And as always, it is a speed limit, you can still go slower if you want to, you'll get a safer ride and you'll get better fuel efficiency at the expense of time of ride.


it's very dangerous to have people driving different speeds on the same road. not everyone will be comfortable driving 130 km/hr. most people are comfortable driving 100 km/hr.


Casual but brutal


Please elaborate.


I go by at least 100 miles. If it's less then no gain speeding. Just personal decision.


it's not a valid question. a safe speed depends on where you are, not how far you might be from your destination. the safest speed is to go with the flow. if there's no traffic then your concern is not just safety but speed limits, and that depends on where you are (type of road, urban/rural, local leo, weather, etc)


The amount of times some doof is weaving and speeding in traffic only for me to catch up to them... It’s more than two.


I used to drive with my foot in the carb until I realized that I really wasn't getting anywhere any faster. Now I just cruise along at the speed limit happily. In TX we have some highways were 75 is the limit and, to be honest, driving in traffic at that speed makes me nervous. I've seen too many stupid things happen on the road in my life.


I’m from NJ and if you drive 75 on our 55 limit highway you’ll have a line of cars flipping you off behind you 🤷‍♂️


Here in PA we have a highway that is 70mph and people drive even faster than that. I don’t understand how driving 90mph is ok. Or why the speed limit is some kind of challenge to beat. I’ve seen terrible wrecks on the highway and now I try to avoid at all costs.


Generally speaking, following the flow of traffic is the safest speed though, since if you're slower, you cause the faster drivers to perform lane change maneuvers, which is actually what causes the most accidents on the road. If you're going slow, just don't stay in the left lane, basically.


The flow of traffic is generally 75. I’m talking about the lane weavers and tailgaters that go 90mph. I stay in the right lane as I don’t even want to attempt switching for those folks who like to tempt fate. Most get off at the next exit a mile down as it’s a popular town/city. I don’t understand the rush when you are exiting anyway.


Yeah those people are idiots


Is 70mph not normal? Almost every motorway in the uk is 70mph and people routinely drive much faster


I don’t believe it’s very popular. Most highways (at least in my state) are 55-60mph. I rarely encounter roads above 60 while traveling to other states, but I could be skipping them as I use “avoid highway” on gps as much as possible now.


Most highways in my state list 55mph, but most people seem to drive 70-90 mph. Rule of thumb is just go with the flow of traffic in that case.


Some people even cops drive 85+ on our 55mph in the left lane on the highway. When leaving the city from where I was coming from came in from the left lane. It goes from 2 to 3 lanes from the ramp. If I don't go 70-75 I got people riding my ass and honking. Most people drive 65-70 in the middle lane.


The incident that broke me was I was in a train of cars rolling 80 mph up I-35 here in TX. The lead car in the train moved from the center lane to the left lane to pass a slower vehicle. The second car in the train moved right. They passed the center vehicle as I moved to the left lane to go around the guy in the middle. Well lead car and second car met in the center lane and started spinning across the highway. I was too close to brake and managed to shoot the gap. Since that day I do not follow close and I go only the speed limit. Fortunately nobody was badly injured or killed but it was very very close there for a few seconds. Edit: Ya I've driven in PA recently. The right lane is my friend LOL


That's why you don't pass on the right. You should always pass on the left. It is a standard teaching in schools over here in WA however it isn't legally enforceable. If it wasn't for our horrible road infrastructure over here I would love it if the left lane was passing only but traffic is already incredibly slow over here.


Or when they do this just to beat you to...the red light.


Yeah, I never understood weaving in an out of traffic. If you want to go fast sit in the left lane. If someone is coming up behind you in the left lane move over when you can. People weaving though traffic, tailgating, and people going to slow are the reason traffic get backed up.


>If someone is coming up behind you in the left lane move over when you can. People don't do that though. At least, that's the main cause I see for people weaving in and out of traffic. But it's just anecdotal, so who knows


How many times does something anecdotal have to occur before it becomes imperical?


I think it's a game to some people


i swear it's a *video* game to some people


Just testing that *reload game* out


> If you want to go fast sit in the left lane. If someone is coming up behind you in the left lane move over when you can. Better yet, just sit in the second to the leftmost lane and don't worry about people coming up behind you. They can go around.


Yeah. I agree…. To a point. I’m not saying you should speed here…. At all. But what you really should do is drive defensively. Stay away from other cars. Way away. If that means going slower fine. If that means going a little faster and safely passing fine. But you’ll decrease your risk for accidents when you keep yourself and your vehicle far away from other moving objects (vehicles mostly)


My work involves driving to homes and businesses within about an hour of where I live. I use Google maps daily and, while I don’t rush, I drive the speed I feel comfortable driving. The most I’ve ‘beaten’ the GPS arrival time by is 4 minutes on an hour drive with zero traffic and going 25% over the speed limit. OP is right. Don’t rush. You won’t get there much sooner and the risk is too high.


On a 100 mile trip, which is longer than most do frequently, the difference between doing 65 and 95 is 29 minutes. To maintain an average of 95 would be very stressful and would probably require sustained periods of above 100 to make up for any slow downs. Set your cruise control at the basic speed of traffic flow, don't worry about anything other than trying to anticipate the stupid shit the people around you will do.


Cannonball run. Check it out. Covid made the roads empty enough for the new record. Yeah they had to go that fast.


"Can't wait for another pandemic so traffic clears up." - some random Waze comment


I don't know about your car, but my car's cruise control gets markedly worse mileage than when I control the speed myself. Mostly because the car will automatically brake on downhills to try to match the control setting.


I've noticed this too. Does well enough on near flat empty straightaways but throw elevation or a few other cars into the mix and efficiency drops at least 5-10%.


"Markedly"? Curious as to how you documenting that. But even on the 350 mile trip I used to take twice a week for 3 years, I would doubt it made more than a gallon loss in a 25mpg vehicle. And I doubt I saved more money that the cost of the ticket I got for hilling (speeding up down hill to get up the next)


It depends on how hilly the terrain is, but it's a noticeable enough difference for me- maybe 2-3 mpg. My car digitally tracks and displays my mpg. I reset my trip meter after every fill-up so I can notice trends like this and figure out how to waste less. I don't know how expensive the ticket was, but if you're saving a gallon of gas twice a week for three years, that's 312 gallons over a three year period assuming one gallon per trip. So yes, it probably would have saved you quite a bit of money.


The car reading really doesn't mean much. Track your mileage and use how much gas you put in the tank every time. 2-3 seems to me is you looking at avg mpg. I'm also always fascinated by conversations like this on reddit which absolutely loves the idea of self driving cars. The end goal is that everyone on the road will go exactly the same speed.


Plus going 95 kills your car and gas faster, if you care about that kind of thing.


Google Maps will adjust its time estimates to your driving style. My sister and I will get time estimates 10-15% different for the same route at the same time.


I'm not certain that's correct. I routinely beat Google Maps on a specific country trip by 4-8 minutes; it's never correct. Are you sure you were both looking at the same time period on the same day? Google definitely adjusts for traffic...


It's more noticeable on longer trips (60+ min). We've been in the same car and gotten different time estimates. We're not always the best at saying who's going to navigate so we both pull it up and get the same route.


People who drive 20mph under the speed limit are the problem


This so much.. very bloody day! Asshats driving at 40mph on 60 roads, it’s beyond stupid but very few people overtake for whatever stupid reason. So the traffic builds behind them full of pissed off drivers.


I knoooow. Why is this a thing? There'll be 8 cars behind one slow driver in the fast lane, and its wide open in the other lane....


People are fucking useless honestly. Bonus points for them just pulling out as you’re trying to overtake and nearly causing a collision.


People who say shit like this think that going 5 over = going 20 mph under


People who say shit like this think that going 5 under = going 20 mph over


*a* problem. Not the 1 problem.


"No, if a speed limit is raised to actually reflect real travel speeds, the new higher limit will make the roads safer. When the majority of traffic is traveling at the same speed, traffic flow improves, and there are fewer accidents." www.motorists.org


In Western Canada that did a study and found that most people traveled 10km/h (6.2mph) faster than the posted limit. So they chose hundreds of miles of highway and upped the speed limit by 10km/h. Looking at the 1.3 years of data that followed, they found this in the final report looking at those changes: ​ >Overall, \[...\] sections of roadway where new speed limits were changed experienced an increase in the number of severe (fatal and injuries) crashes equal to 11.1% following the implementation of speed limit increases.


Confounding factor is that people are used to the speed limits being lower, and have a trained behavior to beat the posted limit by 10. Raising it by 10, you still have the behavior of beating it by 10. If you took the speed limit away completely I bet crashes would go down, as you are forced to evaluate road conditions for yourself


That implies people are good at evaluating road conditions, and yet we have people doing above the speed limit at night with their lights off, with limited or 0 visibility, lowered traction such as rain or snow -- sometimes just one of those things and sometimes a combination of all of the above, and more. Humans are known to be pretty terrible at risk analysis, especially when Dunning–Kruger effect comes into play and everyone thinks they're above-average drivers. Traffic works best when everyone is following the same set of rules, really. Everyone knows what to expect, what other people are going to do, predictability is huge.


Absolutely. This is why I said, "Driving faster *than everyone else* increases the risk..."


I'll agree that I can cause more horrific crashes but that's not entirely correct, the single biggest cause of death while driving is from distracted drivers followed by alcohols and drugs and they usually go hand in hand In the eyes of the law, driving too slowly is a hazard to those who are following the speed limit maximum and may cause unnecessary road rage to other drivers. This can then lead to them taking risks and making reckless decisions on the road. “According to state and federal studies, drivers that are driving significantly below the average speed are the ones that are most likely to get involved in an accident. Studies show that the most accidents occur when the driver is driving at 10 mph slower than the speed limit. So someone going 45 in a 55 has a bigger chance of getting into an accident than someone driving at 65-70 mph.” https://www.motorbiscuit.com/are-faster-drivers-safer-drivers/


I'm not recommending people drive too slowly. There are only so many qualifications and caveats which you can write out in a post title on Reddit.


Fair enough


At higher rates of speed your time to react is diminished greatly and any minor adjustments are amplified. I'm not arguing if it's more or less safe to drive faster, but it would require everyone keeping safe following distance and communicating their merges. People cannot do those two things so I don't really see driving faster as necessarily safer or more efficient. There's also a growing percentage of the population that cannot maintain those speeds.


While I have no issue believing this in general, that people moving below the speed of traffic get into more accidents, I have to wonder if the overall statistic >Studies show that the most accidents occur when the driver is driving at 10 mph slower than the speed limit. So someone going 45 in a 55 has a bigger chance of getting into an accident than someone driving at 65-70 mph.” is potentially being confounded or exaggerated by people getting into accidents during bad road conditions, where it's quite reasonable for them to be driving below the speed limit.


This assumes that the flow speed of traffic is unrelated to the speed limit. Edit: Also, you are quoting a lobby group. Their claims are not facts, just things they made up.


You are right but the OP is also right. What your posting is what can be considered an “administrative” solution to traffic in general. It is relevant to this post but it is off topic and misses the point and overall message of this legitimate life pro tip. Your comment can be misinterpreted as “yes it’s okay to speed as you get closer to your destination because it’s safer.” Please reconsider moving your very interesting comment to a topic of its own. Can someone recommend a thread?


Stoplights will negate whatever small amount of time you most likely won’t gain by speeding.


If you stop


There's an SLPT in there somewhere.


Theoretically But I like where this is going >=) ;)


Going through a red light I suppose


A lot of times you're right, but in the long run you *will* statistically beat more lights by going faster. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but the numbers do support the idea.


Hm, where I live lights are timed to the speed limit. So if you go the speed limit from the time the light turns green you’ll hit mostly green for a while.


Some places you can tell they’re timed a little faster. On my commute to work back in Ohio, there was a stretch with a speed limit at 35 and about 5 lights each a block apart. You tried to do 35-38 you would hit every single red, probably right as it turned, even if you made the first one. 40-43 give or take? You would hit them all at green. Not yellow, green with time to spare in both directions. Shockingly, the engineers had timed the lights for the speeds people *actually drove* on that road.


Theoretically. But I like where this is going… >=) ;)


I love when assholes swerve around me at dangerous speeds and we both end up stopped at the same light anyway


Like this? https://youtu.be/gnPjIQB5uYg?t=90


Or when they are pulled over and you're still continuing.




It doesn’t matter if you make the lights or not. In order to save any time at all and to get to a destination faster you have to be driving at speeds ridiculously over the speed limit without slowing down


I don't know why you keep repeating this nonsense. Even the studies that show speeding saves less time than most people estimate clearly prove speeding saves *some* time. Because ya know - math.


I’m not saying speeding doesn’t save you time. I’m saying in the end unless you can drive without slowing down at all you won’t save as much time as you think you will. That’s not just math. That’s physics. It’s more than just go fast get there fast. You have to take i to consideration different variables. Which is exactly what you are also saying. So if you are saying what I am saying then where is the nonsense?


Not necessarily—traffic lights operate cyclically. That means that if your speeding gets you stuck at a light a cycle ahead of where you would have gotten to it without speeding, that you didn’t actually have your speeding negated by the light. QED.


Ah yes, the green stream.


It doesn’t matter if you make the lights or not. In order to save any time at all and to get to a destination faster you have to be driving at speeds ridiculously over the speed limit without slowing down


Slow drivers and people hogging the left lane are definitely more of risk to other drivers ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Exactly these people are a plague and cause far more issues by being slower. People want to get where they want to go as fast as they expect too.


Fun fact: Driving speed matters. The *slower* you are, the more at risk you are to cause an accident. Google it.


Pay attention to the people who speed in the city and you'll quickly notice that you often catch up to them, or even pass them. Traffic & red lights hold them back enough. In other words - moving faster doesn't usually even get you there faster. Just creating danger and wasting fuel for no reason.


What a "pro" tip. Wow. Incredible.


I wish people in my town understood this and stopped trying to go 60 everywhere. I'm just trying to go to work man and my car is old. Just let me do the speed limit and chill out.


Catch one redlight and it evens you out with the other drivers


At 60 mph you're doing a mile a minute. Every 10 mph is only 5 seconds a mile faster.


When we were on our way home once and we were stuck behind a bunch of cars that drove slowly. I got VERY impatient. I said "If it weren't for them we would have been home by now". And then my mom just calmy asked "To do what?". I then realised that there really isn't a good reason for speeding. Sure if there is an emergency you would have to, but 99.9% of the time it isn't the case. It's just impatience and the glamour of speeding that cause people to drive like that. With that being said, driving slowly is also dangerous as you are a hindrance to other drivers. Causing other people to get impatient and drive recklessly. Like I was also tought when I learned to drive: "You should also think FOR other people on the road". If every single car on the road drove the exact same speed, there would be far less accidents. What I usually do is gage the flow of traffic and try to match it.


Patient on the road is better than patient in the hospital


I drive 3 hours routinely between two cities. If you think speeding saves you time, consider this: If you drive 110 km/h on a 100 km/h road, you would only save 6 minutes on the hour IF you could at that speed constantly for that distance. On most roads, you cannot. Also, you fuel consumption goes up faster than the percentual increase of your speed. Check this out: Speed 70 - 90 km per hour 120 km per hour 140 km per hour Consumption per 100 km 5.4 liters 7.7 liters 9.4 liters Difference 42% higher 74% higher EDIT: I don't know what happened with the formatting but you get the point.


>Also, you fuel consumption goes up faster than the percentual increase of your speed. [Heavily dependant on your drag coefficient](https://i.imgur.com/nYfvZXd.jpg)


Yes of course. And open windows after 80 km/h can increase fuel consumption by 20%. I think the point remains that speeding has marginal benefits unless you are an emergency responder with sirens and lights to clear the road for you.


This is fine in an ideal world. But in the real world not everyone drives at the speed limit or even close to it, as you mention. Then you have red lights, traffic, accidents, tractors, buses etc. I routinely drive a 2h journey through country roads. Nearly always at the speed limit when possible/conditions allow, maybe just over now and then. Just to point out I'm not encouraging people to speed or saying you're wrong but in the real world. Speeding or speeding to overtaking someone, could infact save you a lot of time. Imagine the road is 60mph, the driver in front is doing 40mph, you hit a couple red lights, then a tractor or a bus pulls out in front of you. All that would add up to much more than 6mins. If you overtook that car straight away, you'd be traveling 20mph faster, you might make it through the red light, not get held up by the tractor or bus or the traffic jam. Again, not encouraging anyone to speed but I've heard this going 10mph faster doesn't get you their quicker theory so many times and they never take in to account the many things that could slow you down if you're unlucky. Obviously, crashing and dying because you were going too fast, will in fact make you late. So drive safe folks.


Being behind a slow vehicle means you drive under the speed limit. Obviously this impacts your travel time and it's okay to overtake them. That is not the same as consistently driving over the speed limit. Adding to my previous comment: road design and sign-placement is done with the speed limits in mind. When I drive the speed limit I rarely use my brake at all in those 3 hours because that's how things are designed. Speeding costs you more fuel, wears out your brakes and decreases road safety for everyone. Your point about avoiding a red light or traffic jam is inconsequential because these are random factors that you cannot take into account.


Good points, I went on a tangent about overtaking. You're right, driving over the speed limit is definitely more likely to get you killed than shave a considerable amount of time off your journey.


Tangent or not you’re right also. I have to leave 30mins earlier than I should have too every day because everyone loves doing 40 on 60 roads around here and it causes tons of traffic, along with all those other random factors, and generally adds 20+ mins to my estimated arrival time every single day.


I love statements like this, how you think you're *dealing* with traffic everyday, when in fact you *are* traffic. Driving safely requires yielding to the conditions of the road as you find them, not as you wish them to be. If you have to leave early, then do it, but let's not get upset that everyone else is doing the thing we're also doing, and that it causes slow downs. I like to try to keep myself positive by thinking about the other drivers who aren't going as fast as I would like them to be. Maybe that's the fastest they can go and still be safe (maybe I'm just unusually good at driving, and I need to come down to their level). It's not the nicest thing in the world to think about other people, but my solipsism takes these ideas a lot easier than "they're in my way" type stuff.


By all means adjust to the conditions of the road, but on a standard clear day on a straight road you should NOT be 10-20 below the speed limit without a damn good reason. (Also never are) It makes YOU a speed hazard at that point. They literally are “in the way”. One person doing this isn’t the main problem, its the people sitting behind them with plenty of room and time to overtake but they won’t for no reason which prevents others from doing so safely, therefore causing traffic build up and angry drivers behind them. Everytime I over take these people they are on their phones, women doing make up(gods why) or in any other way being asshats and not paying attention to the road or speed limit as if it’s “their road”. They are dangerous drivers for going slower than expected. Period.


Overtaking is terrifying to me. Also if I’m the one right behind the slow one, it seems like people behind start overtaking before I decide it *might* be safe. No curves, no hills, no trees? I’ll do it. But if I can’t see far enough ahead I second guess myself and just let everyone else go.


It’s honestly not bad, it sounds more like you haven’t done it much and aren’t used to it. By all means If you’re unsure don’t go, no one will blame you for being safe. But if people see the chance to go and you’re dawdling they will try for a 2 car overtake if they can do it, because no one wants to be stuck behind the slow drivers and if they don’t take the chance god knows when the next one will be. Uncertain drivers are also a possible danger. Be nervous sure, but if you’re doing something then commit to the action or don’t do it at all.


Or maybe, you know, real LPT respect the person who wants to go fast, accepting that risk, and get out of their way in the left lane as opposed to camping there like an SJW making the world a better place.


Fun to speed, though


Yeah people often forget this aspect of driving. It’s *fun* to drive fast an weave around cars. Sure, do so sanely with safety in mind, but there’s no reason not to have a bit of fun on your boring commute.


Sure there is, all the other people on the road. If you want to have fun driving then go to a track where you are not endangering others. Weaving in traffic is inherently more dangerous compared to not. All it takes us one person doing something you v don’t expect and you end up in an accident, and when that eventually happens to you during your commute you will cause damage and inconvenience to others as well as yourself.


At least for me, I don't really drive 'fast' to save time. I drive what feels like the natural speed to go at, and it oftentimes so happens to be faster than the average. If everyone drove way faster starting tomorrow, I would still prefer to drive at the speed I go at now. Not defending it, just noting that it's not really a time thing for some. In fact, I'd prefer to drive however I happen to drive now, instead of driving slower, even if the way I drove now magically took longer, and vice versa. It's a comfort thing. Driving slower than the aggregate norm feels more dangerous TO ME than driving (a bit) faster


The fucking slowpokes ahead of me must be following this then, and going 15 under to save themselves


It's a good LPT, but doesn't this violate rule number 6? I'm just curious (I don't want OP to get banned or something).


Average Speed matters WAY more than peak speed. And depending on traffic there is a definite speed Vs effort curve. If you have to weave to go the speed you are going you have past the point of diminishing returns. A lot of people don't realize that when they hit an open stretch of highway that they tend to slow down due to the lack of visual cues. Cruse control is your friend.


Even better life pro tip. Increase the value of your time spent traveling by finding something good to do, like reflecting, or listening to music, relaxing, or learning via podcasts, etc.


if only the people that needed to understand this would do so from simply reading it online.. unfortunately i doubt that will ever happen. you either already do this or already don't care.


Don't drive slow in the passing lane. By doing that you are creating all sorts of unnecessary car movement.


What is this common sense you allude to? Way too many idiots thinks it's fine to drive with a cell phone in their face. I don't know the statistics, but I bet cell phone accidents is right up there with drunk driving....


I always assumed people speed because it's more fun, or the car sounds nicer at a higher speed. Never got the whole speeding to save a minute thing, or speeding obliviously.


Lookin' at you, Albuquerque...


Well when i speed i can reduce my ETA by 5 minutes and sometimes thats crucial


It’s about smiles per mile


Unless you need to pee.


But it's fun tho...


Without much context this is the worst racing advice I've ever seen


If you actually want to cover ground fast, you don't need to go very fast. What you need is this magical thing called a motorcycle which at a stroke transforms traffic into someone else's problem. All cars go the speed of the queue. Bikes don't.


Speeding... It wont change your life, but it might save one. A reminder that the energy associated with a vehicle is not linear. The energy increases with the square of its speed. ke=1/2mv\^2. An identical vehicle going twice as fast has four times as much energy.


Sounds like someone won’t get out of the passing lane.


So if you're far away from your destination drive like a mad man, got it 👌


Also, don't cheap out on hotel stays if possible. I drove half across the US in my 20s stopping only to fuel up and eat a few times. Cannon balled the entire 23 hr drive(SC-TX). This hurts you mentally and physically.


The anti vaccers are the ones dying if covid now. Their sperm is going to be quite rare…. And incredibly low IQ


How about just “drive the speed limit.” Going 110 on a 3 hour road trip is still unsafe as shit.


*laughs in Autobahn*


I like driving 90mph so I can do the math in my head while Im driving.


Then why did I buy a fast car?


So if I’m driving 9 hours go 90mph, Got ir 👍🏼


And this is why most tickets occur in the last 15 mins of your commute