So this has been annoying me lately; drivers leaving excessive spacing when stopped for a red light. I get it, you don’t want to be right on the next guys bumper, you should leave space to escape if the guy in front stalls or somebody tries to carjack you. But 2-3 car lengths? It really bugs me when they do it in a left turn lane causing a back up to the travel lane resulting in overall congestion. Or, if they’re first at the light, they don’t pull up far enough to reach the road sensors that trigger a light change. I haven’t been able to isolate to a specific demographic, seems to be young, old, black, white, you name it. Maybe they’re just stoned at the wheel. I’m tempted to roll down my window and ask ‘wtf’? I’m in the Northeast US. Has anybody else witnessed this?
You must log in or register to comment.
I got the advice once to make sure you can see the bottom of the tires in front of you. As a general rule, your turning radius tends to align with that. This falls apart with big trailers and snub nose trucks, but it’s a good start.
I think this advice made more sense when the majority drove reasonably-sized vehicles rather than the huge trucks and SUVs that pollute our roads now (at least in North America).
I wouldn’t be surprised if this bit of advice contributes to the problem in OP.
That’s likely true. I drive a little car, so it still makes sense for me
Thanks for not participating in the vehicular arms race!
I would bike more for utility if there were places to park it safely (though I would have to add the rack back onto the bike, and it interferes with the tag-along)
You should just be able to see the ground under the back tires of the car in front of you. That’s the appropriate distance.
I believe this happens everywhere. I think maybe some people lack correct depth perception or something and maybe they are overcompensating for it? It is highly annoying though, I would agree.
Also: TURN SIGNALS, PEOPLE!!! USE THEM EVERY SINGLE TIME FOR THE LOVE OF GOD. EVEN IF YOU THINK NO ONE IS LOOKING OR YOU’RE IN A TURN ONLY LANE. No excuses
Though, of course, don’t use them until you’re already halfway through the turn or lane change. It’s not like the signal is to show your intention, it’s to assert that You Had The Right Goddamn It to have just made that abrupt and dangerous maneuver that you just made. You signaled, so all’s OK, you’re in the right, no matter what happens.
You don’t need them in turn only lanes, but otherwise yes, use the damn turn signals.
I disagree. Mainly for the reason that if pedestrians are around, they might not know the lane your vehicle is in is a turn only. It’s just good etiquette and makes things safer.
Nice advice to fail a driving test.
No it isn’t, you’re not required by law to use a turn signal in a turn only lane. If I was giving a driving test I’d fail you for using a turn signal in the turn only lane as it demonstrates you don’t know the law.
I was a Driver Examiner in the Province of Ontario.
You wouldn’t fail for this, but it is an infraction.
You must ALWAYS SIGNAL YOUR INTENTION.Also, cite this ‘law’ you pulled from your ass.
Ah, OK might be a Canadian thing then. There is no law in the US that requires usage of a turn signal in a turn only lane. I didn’t pull a law from my ass, you’re pulling one from yours, or rather I’m talking about US law and it seems you’re talking about Canadian.
It seems you’re a shitty driver in every country.
Wrong.
Minnesota (this is a state in the US) traffic code 169.19 Subd. 5 Signal to turn:
A signal of intention to turn right or left shall be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning. A person whose vehicle is exiting a roundabout is exempt from this subdivision.
You don’t need them in turn only lanes
No mention of America.
No it isn’t[:] you’re not required by law to use a turn signal in a turn only lane
No mention of America.
I’m talking about US law and it seems you’re talking about Canadian.
Are you forgetting that 95% of the world’s population lives outside of America?
Minnesota (this is a state in the US) traffic code 169.19 Subd. 5 Signal to turn:
… and incorrect even in America.
What does False Consensus mean?
deleted by creator
I stated there wasn’t a law.
A law not saying you need to, is not the same as a law saying you need not to.
Wrong.
Minnesota (this is a state in the US) traffic code 169.19 Subd. 5 Signal to turn:
A signal of intention to turn right or left shall be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning. A person whose vehicle is exiting a roundabout is exempt from this subdivision.
There isn’t a federal law on turn signal use that I can find and it’s left up to the individual states. Every law I looked at said you have to have a continuous signal before the turn and when turning into a different lane. I did not see any exceptions listed anywhere, including turn lanes.
When turning from a turn lane, to a different lane, that is a change of lane and therefore falls under the law. If you have any other evidence to the contrary or happen to live in a state that I didn’t check where that is an exception, I and the others here would love if you’d source that. If you can’t, then you’re just making shit up and should just take the “L”.
The only law in my state that requires usage of turn signals states this:
No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a highway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety, and then only after giving an appropriate signal in the manner hereinafter provided, in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.
The key there is “direct course”. The direct course in a dedicated turn lane is the turn, so no signal is required. If it’s a turn or straight lane it is required as in that case the direct course is straight.
You conveniently left out the rest of the law…
(1) No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a highway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety, and then only after giving an appropriate signal in the manner hereinafter provided, in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.
(2) A signal of intention to turn right or left must be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning, except that such a signal by hand or arm need not be given continuously by a bicyclist if the hand is needed in the control or operation of the bicycle.
(3) No person may stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided herein to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear, when there is opportunity to give such signal.
(4) The signals provided for in s. 316.156 shall be used to indicate an intention to turn, to overtake, or to pass a vehicle and may not, except as provided in s. 316.2397, be flashed on one side only on a parked or disabled vehicle or flashed as a courtesy or “do pass” signal to operators of other vehicles approaching from the rear. (5) A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a moving violation as provided in chapter 318.Yes because it’s irrelevant. The first clause failing means subsequent clauses don’t apply. Because a signal isn’t necessary it doesn’t matter how far back you don’t signal for.
Cite this ‘law’.
What law, that’s the point, no law requires usage of a turn signal in a turn only lane. There is no law that requires that and a driving test is testing that you’re following the laws. It’s the same as if you turned on your turn signal in a straight lane and then didn’t change lanes.
So, is there a law or not, or are you simply full of shit?
You can’t prove a negative. You cite the law that says you need to use a turn signal in a turn only lane. Or are you full of shit?
Wrong.
Minnesota (this is a state in the US) traffic code 169.19 Subd. 5 Signal to turn:
A signal of intention to turn right or left shall be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning. A person whose vehicle is exiting a roundabout is exempt from this subdivision.
deleted by creator
You don’t need them in turn only lanes
My driving instructor would disagree, as I recall.
Usually this is the result of distracted driving. At a stop light? Perfect time to check your phone! Once the light turns green I give a solid three count then I honk. I’ll probably end up shot dead sooner than later but fuck it and fuck those assholes on their phones.
In case of armed road rage, remember that your car is a weapon. It’s self-defense if a gun is drawn on you.
I usually flash my high beams first as a more gentle “look up” and then do the horn if they don’t notice that one
Yup, I see this shit all the time. “The sooner I stop the faster I can stare at my fucking phone!” It’s one thing I wish was actually policed, cause these people are a menace. It’s one thing to risk your own life, but those dumb asses are making it dangerous for all of us around them. Throw in two or more and baby you’ve got a stew going.
Once the light turns green I give a solid three count then I honk
In Ottawa it’s a customary 4 picoseconds.
When I took my driving test. The correct spacing was taught as, if you can see their bottom back tires visible above your hood, then that’s the correct distance.
so with modern hood heights, that’s… 30 meters?
I still hear my driving instructor saying this, 30 years ago. Thanks. :D
I don’t know… People have wildly different positions in a car and this easily fluctuates for a few car lengths. Then again, people in general suck at estimating distances.
I was taught this in driving school. If you’re the last car slowing down, leave a gap of a few car lengths so if a car behind you is going to hit you, it gives you some room to escape either to move up, or enough room to turn out of the lane.
That sounds like some kind of superhero fantasy to me. In what scenario am I about to be rear ended and have enough time to move my car safely?
I usually leave enough space that I could turn into another lane without having to reverse, so if the car in front of me stalls I can go around without too much fuss. That’s like half a car length at best.
I agree it’s highly unlikely. However, I’ve been rear-ended once, and my car got pushed forward the space of at least another car and a half, in spite of my panicked reflex of pressing the brakes as it happened. I didn’t crash into anything because I was first on the lane, I got pushed into the intersection.
So yes, you can get rear-ended and the gap in front of you will save you in money and insurance claims bs time if you don’t hit anyone in front as well as a result. It will make little difference regarding your ability to switch lanes though.
In saying that, I don’t leave this massive space in front of me. I stick to the “see the next car’s tyres” rule and if traffic is really packed (as during rush hour, when everyone crawls start stop) I sometimes reduce it to curb parking distance.
On the other hand I had a guy get out of his Jaguar the other day and yell at me a while because I stopped too close to his bumper.
I’d just be like “my bad dude” and pull a little bit closer after that. What a weenie.
I turned up my music and ignored him because historically nothing good happens when someone gets out of their car in traffic and you bet your sweet ass I made sure our bumpers were almost touching next red light.
You should be able to see pavement under the rear tires of the car in front of you when stopped
That works for small cars with hoods that slope to the ground like sedans and station wagons. It is outdated and useless advice for anyone in an SUV, pickup, or the vast majority of vehicles on the road today in the US.
It should be far enough back to be able to turn and move out if the car in front of you stalls, which should be easy to estimate for anyone who can parallel park.
Everyone should be able to parallel park, it is part of the driving test.
I’m experiencing this daily in Los Angeles. Also people don’t seem to scoot up onto the sensor so the light takes longer than necessary to change (though stupidly half of those sensors are in the crosswalk or even beyond it).
Or worse, people who stop just past it, but not far enough to get the car behind it to actually touch the sensor
I leave a couple of feet between the front of my Miata or Wrangler and the next car ahead. I’ve been driving since the late 70s and this is the first I’ve heard of the “botton of the tires” rule of thumb. It wasn’t taught back in the day (is it, widely, now?) and it doesn’t make much sense to me since it’s a function of the size and the shape and height of one’s vehicle, which can vary greatly, whereas I know where my front bumper is and I can (usually) clearly see where the rear of the car in front of me is, and hence create the appropriate gap. Sure, I might leave more space if I’m on a steep hill and think the person in front might have a manual (another Miata for example) but that’s rare.
Up until very recently people seemed to always keep just a couple of feet between cars at stops like I did. This business of “a car length or two” seems like a very new thing - the past 5 years mostly - and that led me to think it’s some kind of stupid new internet cancer. Probably some “influencer” telling his/her audience that you should put your dominance on display at stoplights by pissing people off and preventing them from getting through intersections. Or putting your dominance and alpha-hood on display by blocking them from getting into the turn lane at all. Anything to get attention, anything to show that you’re not (truly) a nobody, even when you are, because you have power!
I’ve only been rear-ended once in 45 years of driving. Being a d*ck on the road in order to (allegedly) absolutely f-ing MAXIMIZE your own self-perceived “safety” (from highly unlikely events) at the expense of everyone else is a totally modern-American sort of thing to do I guess. But I’m not doing it.
Tyres and tarmac!
I don’t leave any space
I just ram them
Enough that you can maneuver out of the lane in an emergency.
The correct answer
Are ‘road sensors that trigger a light change’ a real thing? I thought lights are on a timed cycle.
There sometimes are induction loops under the street for this purpose: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induction_loop
Video, radar, and infrared are also common. In some places I’ve been, only older non-upgraded intersections have induction loops.
In Germany almost every traffic light has them nowadays. It can sometimes be annoying when you’re riding a bike made of carbon. But usually my phone and laptop seem to be enough to trigger them.
I once ran a red light with my moped, made of steel, because the light never turned green
Add a magnet! Maybe idk if this works for sure or not
In the US I’ve noticed a difference between west coast and the rest of the country. West coast tends to use these circle bandsaws to cut circles into the pavement, everywhere else uses a circular saw to cut rectangles into the pavement. Either way, these are the things you want to be stopped right on top of, especially if you’re on a side street or left turn where you might get skipped if it doesn’t sense you. If you’re on a motorcycle, try to scoot up a bit so a car can be on them. They probably won’t sense a motorcycle.
I recall i was driving with a friend, and he was surprised I pulled up, leaving only a feet between my car and the car in front of me. I asked him why.
He said he grew up in an area prone to car-jackings. His dad taught him to leave that extra space in case someone tries to car-jack you. The extra space is so you’re not boxed in by the driver in front and can get around them no matter what. Even if you have to jump the curb and escape on the sidewalk.
I agree that the sensor lights are annoying to deal with, but perhaps the driver has a reason.
