Lane courtesy — moving over to allow faster-moving
traffic to get by — is a wonderful concept. But I’d take it a step
farther: If you’re not passing, you should not be in the left lane
at all.
That, at any rate, is the way it’s done in Germany - and
for good reason. That reason being something called closing
speed. If a Porsche turbo doing 140 comes up on a Fiat doing
80, the Porsche either better have excellent brakes (and its driver
superior reflexes) or the Fiat driver had better notice the
headlights getting much larger, much faster in his rearview — and
get the hell out of the way in time.
To avoid such dangerous conflicts, German drivers are
taught to use the passing lane only to pass — and not to set the
cruise control and zone out, like so many American drivers
unfortunately do.
That’s why the Germans can have unlimited speed Autobahns
— and why we can’t.
Or rather, don’t.
We could have them. At least, from a technical
point of view.
Our Interstate system was modeled on the German Autobahn
and could safely support much higher speeds than are currently
permitted. Even the national high of 80 MPH in a few areas of Texas
is absurd when put into context. That context being, the
designed-for speeds of the U.S. Interstate system — updated to
reflect the advances in vehicle design over the past 60
years.
The starting point is 70 MPH. That is the average, routine
speed of traffic envisioned by the Interstate system’s designers.
Curves, lines-of-sight, merge areas and so on were laid out on that
assumption. That most cars would be toodling along at about 70
MPH.
Implicit in this is that maximum safe speeds were
higher.
Pre-PC, a “speed limit” was precisely that: The
maximum safe speed for the typical driver in the typical
car on a given stretch of road. A speed limit was not
supposed to be synonymous with average, cruising along
speeds — as they are today.
At any rate, the point is that 60 years ago — when the
typical car was a plodding behemoth with balloon whitewalls, drum
brakes, a farm tractor suspension and nothing in the way of
electronic safety systems — the engineers who laid out the
Interstate system deemed 70 MPH average speeds well within
the design parameters of the road — and of the cars of the
era.
We’ve only recently seen speed limits go back up to about
what was recommended — and posted — 60 years ago.
When you factor in the galloping advances in everything
from tire design to high-capacity four-wheel-disc brakes with ABS
and passenger cabins built to withstand impacts better than the
race cars of the not-to-distant past — well, 70 (even 80) seems
awfully slow.
If a 1960 Chrysler was deemed capable of safe operation at
70 then surely a 2012 Chrysler can handle 80 or 90 just as safely.
Probably, in fact the 2012 Chrysler is a whole lot safer at 80 or
90 than the 1960 Chrysler was at 70. Anyone who has driven examples
of both (as I have) knows this automatically. Just for some
perspective, a 2012 Chrysler 300 SRT-8 can haul itself down to a
complete stop from 60 mph in 120 feet. I could not dig up a stat
for the 1960 Chrysler, but depend on it, that car took many more
feet (yards, actually) to stop. That’s if you didn’t lock
up the brakes — and skid into a telephone pole.
Yet — again — cars of the mid-late '50s and '60s, which
were crap compared with any modern car — including the
lowliest 2012 model year economy car — were regarded as being
capable of comfortably, routinely, handling 70. But we’re told
modern cars can’t handle 80 or 90. And that even 70-ish is pushing
it. (In fact, in many states, driving 80 MPH or faster is statutory
“reckless driving.” Really.)
Well, actually, it’s modern drivers that can’t
handle 80 or 90.
Modern drivers who don’t use their mirrors — or do, but
just don’t care (and absolutely won’t move over). Who consider it
their American Idol watching, Football-worshipping,
god-given right to park their car in the left lane, set the cruise
control at precisely the posted speed limit — and ignore
whatever’s going on behind them.
Thus, we have the problem of speed variance.
It’s not so much that some cars are traveling at higher
rates of speed; that isn’t a problem if people maintain lane
discipline — and pay attention.
If slower-moving drivers scan their mirrors and anticipate
the need to move over — and do so — before the
overtaking car is forced to jam on his brakes. Speed variance only
becomes a problem when slower-moving drivers refuse to yield, or
wait until an overtaking car is right behind them before they even
put on their signal — causing faster-moving traffic to decelerate
suddenly or take evasive action to get around the
slow-mover.
Cars bunching up and up jockeying for position is what
creates the safety hazard; not some cars moving at a higher rate of
speed than others.
If the left lane was understood to be for passing only; if
American drivers could be taught to reflexively defer to overtaking
traffic rather than viewing such as a threat to their personal
space and doing all in their power to impede it — well, then our
speed limits could be real limits and we could drive
faster, legally, in 2012 than people did back in 1960.
Don’t look for it to happen anytime soon.
