To shorten your drive time, you have to maintain a higher speed over longer distances. So on those long country drives, don't just tailgate me the whole way, pass me on a blind corner like a dickhead. Thanks!
Sorry. I’ve just read the rest of the comments. I’ve just realised that someone had already asked the same question and it had been answered very well; /gallery/CPNCVp6/comment/2512668911
I drive fast because I like the sensation of going fast. nothing too crazy, but still... it's nice to go 80 or 90 sometimes. I live in a high traffic city where the avg speed I drive is 30mph. it's nice to hit the gas every once in a while.
Presenter's name is Rory Sutherland. He's an advertising guy and has a lot of interesting videos about how they can tweak people's perceptions of things to get the desired result.
This is exactly why I drive 65 on my way to work. I've done the math; if I go 75 I save 1 minute 20 seconds. Pathetic. I just stick in the right lane and go the speed limit. Helps a long to have ACC, though.
As you go faster, ever 10kmph interval is a smaller and smaller fraction of your total speed. 10 to 20 is 2x your speed, then 20 to 30 is only is only 1.5x your speed, and so on. Doubling your speed with always save you half the time.
Driving 10km at 80kmph will take you 7.5min and at 160kmph will take 3.75min.
Driving 80km at 80kmph will take 60min and at 160kmph will take 30 minutes.
So the DISTANCE you have to drive also plays a role in how much time is being saved at faster speeds.
Pair this with the video of the guy explaining the difference ins topping distance going from 30 mph, 50 mph, 70 mph, 75 mph, etc, and you have a clear view if how insanely unsafe even an extra 5mph gets for how little it gains you.
I really hoped he was going to pivot and start commenting on the studies showing that, after a certain threshold, more money does not equate to more happiness.
German here occasionally I'm going 200km/h on a free highway. Because it's fun. What he's omitting is slow driving usually also means you need breaks (more breaks) so that 5 min late becomes more.
At the same time if the highway is full, lean back, drive as fast as everyone else and enjoy an audiobook. The permanent need to concentrate to overtake someone and the louder car on higher speeds make this an easy choice.
The part this doesnt account for is traffic lights. Getting stopped at 10 lights for 2 minutes each means 20 minutes waiting. If I can get through the first light, then there is a higher chance I can get through the others as well due to timing of the lights, and I effectivly save myself 20 minutes by going slightly faster. I am not endorcing wreckless speeding, just adding another layer of perspective that doesnt get addressed in these arguments.
I feel like this argument presupposes you're driving on the interstate, though, where there aren't any lights. When you add traffic control devices into the mix, the paceometer means jack and shit.
Which is all good and well, however, context is important. Only about 9% of fatal accidents (In the US) happen on highways. And yes that is not insignificant and I am not trying to justify anything by downplaying, it does seem like there is a disproportionate focus on highway speeds.
Note; while travel time stops decreasing by all that much, the damage that you do in an accident by going faster and faster scales quadratically. To travel 10km, going from 50km/hr to 60km/hr decreases the time taken by ~17%, but it increases the kinetic energy you're traveling with by 44%. When you get into an accident, you go from moving to not moving, and that kinetic energy goes into whatever's being broken to stop you.
Just go with the flow of traffic. Where accidents are more likely is when there are significant differences in speed. Even if the speed limit is 55 and everyone is going 70, go 70, or maybe 65, but if you go 55, that difference will put you in dangerous situations.
It might, yes! But it also depends on the road. If you know of a regular hazard (like a pothole old enough to vote), it's okay to slow down for that even if other people don't. If you know there's usual spots where the traffic gets stupid, it's okay to slow down. You're allowed to, encouraged to even, anticipate the road rather than follow the crowd. There's always that one guy they interview at pileups who stopped early and didn't get wrecked as a result.
"flow with the traffic" assumes there actually is traffic...one single idiot snailing around on an empty road doesnt count...but if there actually is traffic and everyone else is going barely half the limit there probably is a reason for that...but in general we are talking about everyone else slightly speeding, so you shall not be the only one going slower...
Speeding is only efficient if you're driving for more than an hour at a time, and at that point you'd be better off with time management skills than a lead foot
Slow down and MAINTAIN A CONSTANT SPEED! I don't mind dropping a couple of miles an hour, but if you are constantly going up and down, without a change in maximum legal speed, I will be tempted to kill us both via vehicle.
I love when I'm driving along at the speed limit and some pin-pricked twit absolutely tears past me at 10-20 over the limit... and then about ten minutes later, I pull up next to him at a stop light. Speeders really have absolutely no sense of just how pointless their speeding really is.
All it does is amplify the level of risk to themselves and other drivers. And let’s not forget wind resistance/drag is proportional to the square of the velocity. Double the speed, 4 times the drag
Thats said, my EV (Ford Mustang) is capped at 187kph, and i love blasting that speed right now on the Autobahn. Yes i can go only around 150km at that speed, but i am overtaking so many others cars today... which claims that their ICE Cars are faster then EV... not with prices which equals to 10USD/Gallon for Petrol.
It explains THAT it works. It does not explain HOW it works. Will it save some lives? Probably. But I still feel disappointed that I'm left to accept "because God says so" as to what causes it.
Going from 5 km/h to 10 km/h increases your speed by 100%, therefore you arrive in half the time. Going from 100 km/h to 105 km/h increases your speed by 5%, therefore you notice absolutely no difference in how long it took you to reach your destination.
Hm. I guess it would be more obvious if the KPH part said 1x10, 2x10, 3x10. It's literally the same thing, but it reframes it in a way that's harder to misconstrue. Like I said recently, the human brain is a weird thing.
Another way to think about it, with simpler math... Every time you double your speed, you halve the time. 20mi trip at 20mph takes 1h, at 40mph 1/2h, at 80mph 1/4h at 160mph 1/8h.
My last OTR truck was governed at 70mph, which is 113kph. Honestly? Actually a pretty damn good speed for the US interstate network. Didn't really get stuck in clumps of traffic, got where I was going in a reasonable amount of time, not so fast the truck couldn't stop within my sightline, like, it's a *good* speed to hold.
And then you get your paint peeled by some nutfuck doing 150+/240+ and what the FUUUUCK, bro. That's not a car, that's a fukin ICBM in search of a school bus.
Since you can only spend time out of our finite lives, this lends to the thought of for longer distances we have to travel, the faster one should move in an Ideally safe manner. /Maybe if we engineer a way to keep some sort of vehicle on rails that goes safely between major cities at high speeds we could all get more time of our lives back. And to make it more efficient, we could get a lot of people on it at the same time so we would need fewer of these vehicles./s
Bu then you'd have to spend our time waiting for one of these contraptions to arrive or start, instead of keeping one as a personal asset and setting course&schedule at your leisure.
I agree with the sentiment and it's a great way of framing this information, but one thing left out is the distance of travel. Sure, saving 2 minutes by doing 60 instead of 80 may be trivial when you're only covering 10 miles, but saving 60 minutes of travel over 300 miles is quite significant. I am not advocating anyone do this, I am only pointing out a meaningful flaw in this argument
I think he meant that at lower speeds 10, 20, 30, the time saved is proportionally bigger if you speed up by 10 mph. But if you’re already going 70, it makes less sense to add that 10 mph. Unless you reach 88 and have a flux capacitor, of course. v
My heart goes out to you. In general 50-60% of vehicle trips are under 5 miles distance. It would be great for society if we encouraged a built environment that didn't normalize super-commuting
Hello fellow brutal commuter. Fun fact though Commute times where I was were actually only slightly shorter just getting into the city form teh suburbs. the hundreds of extra kilometers are almost meaningless compared to the total time taken.
I don't think it's a flaw, I think the sentiment stays the same. For example, if you are driving 100 miles instead of 10. Going 80 vs 60 will save you a whole 20 minutes of a 1.5 hour or so journey, true, but is that percent of savings worth the increased stopping distance, turn radius and reaction time in a situation which has an increased chance of happening over the now increased distance? Also, over greater distance, the odds of you maintaining that increased speed is lower as well.
One thing to bear in mind, speed limits are a thing and important BUT, they're a beurocratic decision as often as a safety decision. Where i am several highways just raised their speed limit after many decades where they were. Are they suddenly more safe than they were last week? No, but cars have improved, tires, road maintenance, etc. over decades. so somebody going 10 or 20 over last week was breaking the law and crazy, now they're the norm. Point being, the sign isn't always logical.
Nothing in my comment related to legality. Physics don't change with the law. Someone going 80 vs 60 is less safe to those around them, bar none. Why? Because it takes longer distance for them to react, avoid obstacles and stop. Do bureaucrats set arbitrary speed limits? Sure. But physics don't care about if something is legal or not when you're trying to stop 1 ton of metal from hitting a kid or obstacle in the road.
If a kid is running across a highway there's a lot bigger problems to deal with than the speed limit. And if you're going 20 under the speed limit without hugging the shoulder with your 4 ways on you're going to be a hazard yourself. Physics are clearly not the only factor in safety. Don't be disingenuous.
JanglesPrime
This leaves out that when people drive too slowly they become a road hazard. There are maximum sage speeds on a highway but also minimum safe speeds
MirTheDragon
The gains from 100 - 110 kmph is not worth the extra risk. Thats why you gotta go 200. This guy has a point!
lightfoot2
Very good point. In the midwest you really have to go >120mph to get anywhere.
kurvarVillain
To shorten your drive time, you have to maintain a higher speed over longer distances. So on those long country drives, don't just tailgate me the whole way, pass me on a blind corner like a dickhead. Thanks!
mocosoft
Why does the image above show the term ‘kilometres per hour’, whilst the image in the presentation shows ‘miles per hour’?
mocosoft
Sorry. I’ve just read the rest of the comments. I’ve just realised that someone had already asked the same question and it had been answered very well; /gallery/CPNCVp6/comment/2512668911
bobyran
I drive fast because I like the sensation of going fast. nothing too crazy, but still... it's nice to go 80 or 90 sometimes. I live in a high traffic city where the avg speed I drive is 30mph. it's nice to hit the gas every once in a while.
InfocalypseRising
Presenter's name is Rory Sutherland. He's an advertising guy and has a lot of interesting videos about how they can tweak people's perceptions of things to get the desired result.
Snooj
This is exactly why I drive 65 on my way to work. I've done the math; if I go 75 I save 1 minute 20 seconds. Pathetic. I just stick in the right lane and go the speed limit. Helps a long to have ACC, though.
HeadJamistan
The only thing that this doesn't take into account is red lights. Going 50km/h here (limit) is a completely different trip time than 70km/h
zFUBARz
yeah poor road design and light usage is a huge factor in gridlock and accidents.
SacrificialClam
As you go faster, ever 10kmph interval is a smaller and smaller fraction of your total speed. 10 to 20 is 2x your speed, then 20 to 30 is only is only 1.5x your speed, and so on. Doubling your speed with always save you half the time.
Driving 10km at 80kmph will take you 7.5min and at 160kmph will take 3.75min.
Driving 80km at 80kmph will take 60min and at 160kmph will take 30 minutes.
So the DISTANCE you have to drive also plays a role in how much time is being saved at faster speeds.
tsooji
Pair this with the video of the guy explaining the difference ins topping distance going from 30 mph, 50 mph, 70 mph, 75 mph, etc, and you have a clear view if how insanely unsafe even an extra 5mph gets for how little it gains you.
baloogarus
Im a gamer. Milliseconds matter
RuricOrhlandis
Cannonball run record 2816 miles in 25 hours and 39 minutes.
Poopette
the fuel usage gets exponential too
Ebo352
I really hoped he was going to pivot and start commenting on the studies showing that, after a certain threshold, more money does not equate to more happiness.
codeacrobat
German here occasionally I'm going 200km/h on a free highway. Because it's fun. What he's omitting is slow driving usually also means you need breaks (more breaks) so that 5 min late becomes more.
At the same time if the highway is full, lean back, drive as fast as everyone else and enjoy an audiobook.
The permanent need to concentrate to overtake someone and the louder car on higher speeds make this an easy choice.
echonite
The part this doesnt account for is traffic lights. Getting stopped at 10 lights for 2 minutes each means 20 minutes waiting. If I can get through the first light, then there is a higher chance I can get through the others as well due to timing of the lights, and I effectivly save myself 20 minutes by going slightly faster. I am not endorcing wreckless speeding, just adding another layer of perspective that doesnt get addressed in these arguments.
HavelTh3Rock
I feel like this argument presupposes you're driving on the interstate, though, where there aren't any lights. When you add traffic control devices into the mix, the paceometer means jack and shit.
echonite
Which is all good and well, however, context is important. Only about 9% of fatal accidents (In the US) happen on highways. And yes that is not insignificant and I am not trying to justify anything by downplaying, it does seem like there is a disproportionate focus on highway speeds.
AsheLake
Mileage also gets exponentially worse.
goodtrackrecord
"those of you over 35 who can afford a car..."
gtfo
jacblake
And the exact opposite effect happens during sex (*not while driving).
MrAcurite
Note; while travel time stops decreasing by all that much, the damage that you do in an accident by going faster and faster scales quadratically. To travel 10km, going from 50km/hr to 60km/hr decreases the time taken by ~17%, but it increases the kinetic energy you're traveling with by 44%. When you get into an accident, you go from moving to not moving, and that kinetic energy goes into whatever's being broken to stop you.
halfabubbleoff
Just go with the flow of traffic. Where accidents are more likely is when there are significant differences in speed. Even if the speed limit is 55 and everyone is going 70, go 70, or maybe 65, but if you go 55, that difference will put you in dangerous situations.
QuartzPoker
It might, yes! But it also depends on the road. If you know of a regular hazard (like a pothole old enough to vote), it's okay to slow down for that even if other people don't. If you know there's usual spots where the traffic gets stupid, it's okay to slow down. You're allowed to, encouraged to even, anticipate the road rather than follow the crowd. There's always that one guy they interview at pileups who stopped early and didn't get wrecked as a result.
halfabubbleoff
There are always exceptions to the rule.
squishybaker
Even if they are barely doing half the limit?
n0n53n53
if they are, how are you going to go much faster?
RecurringNightmare
"flow with the traffic" assumes there actually is traffic...one single idiot snailing around on an empty road doesnt count...but if there actually is traffic and everyone else is going barely half the limit there probably is a reason for that...but in general we are talking about everyone else slightly speeding, so you shall not be the only one going slower...
dohcohv
Well obviously I should be doing 100 in a 25 if I want to save time.
/S
qtRaven
I paid for the whole Speedometer I'm gonna use the whole Speedometer!
FundamentallyFlawed
https://media3.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1YXRoZWpiajVrYmVzYTh0emZqNHJjdXhiNDJoOXduMnAxZHI0d3hnaCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/LSKVmdIwZFeNEBKBxZ/200w.webp
mikeatike
Just wear speedos when reading it.
KrazedOmega
Until the auto manufactures start charging you a subscription fee to unlock faster speeds.
Jandegrote
They are already doing that with electric cars.
magichal
Ugh, stuff like this is coming down the pipeline, and I hate it.
zFUBARz
I mean Tesla basically already does.
Hekatombe
Remember to apply the same logic to the tachometer
KruenchyPetzo
I want a meter taco
Omicron416
And the fuel gauge, and the temperature gauge, as well!
zFUBARz
The Fuel gauge? In this Economy!?
aChungusAmongUs
I like that this keeps getting reposted. I hope the understanding sinks in. We need to slow TF down in cars
zombiejedediah
Even worse if you consider wind resistance which squares when you double your speed. So you'll spend a lot more petrol the faster you go.
WhyDontYouMakeMe
Speeding is only efficient if you're driving for more than an hour at a time, and at that point you'd be better off with time management skills than a lead foot
aChungusAmongUs
Remember that aerodynamic drag is proportional to the square of velocity.
anjeleyezjr
Slow down and MAINTAIN A CONSTANT SPEED! I don't mind dropping a couple of miles an hour, but if you are constantly going up and down, without a change in maximum legal speed, I will be tempted to kill us both via vehicle.
INeverReadTheTOS
I love when I'm driving along at the speed limit and some pin-pricked twit absolutely tears past me at 10-20 over the limit... and then about ten minutes later, I pull up next to him at a stop light.
Speeders really have absolutely no sense of just how pointless their speeding really is.
aChungusAmongUs
All it does is amplify the level of risk to themselves and other drivers. And let’s not forget wind resistance/drag is proportional to the square of the velocity. Double the speed, 4 times the drag
INeverReadTheTOS
And thus, significantly increased fuel use.
Elkarlo77
Thats said, my EV (Ford Mustang) is capped at 187kph, and i love blasting that speed right now on the Autobahn. Yes i can go only around 150km at that speed, but i am overtaking so many others cars today... which claims that their ICE Cars are faster then EV... not with prices which equals to 10USD/Gallon for Petrol.
INeverReadTheTOS
Unfortunately, the people who need to absorb this information the most will completely and utterly refuse to.
kaneinencanto
Or absorb the wrong idea from it... "speed at lower speeds where it's more effective time-wise"
Rips4w
They'd more than likely call it gay and proceed to run over a cat and laugh.
Rips4w
Ope! Found one.
noobyorkcity
It explains THAT it works.
It does not explain HOW it works.
Will it save some lives? Probably. But I still feel disappointed that I'm left to accept "because God says so" as to what causes it.
INeverReadTheTOS
Going from 5 km/h to 10 km/h increases your speed by 100%, therefore you arrive in half the time.
Going from 100 km/h to 105 km/h increases your speed by 5%, therefore you notice absolutely no difference in how long it took you to reach your destination.
noobyorkcity
Hm. I guess it would be more obvious if the KPH part said 1x10, 2x10, 3x10. It's literally the same thing, but it reframes it in a way that's harder to misconstrue. Like I said recently, the human brain is a weird thing.
ChewyTheWookie
The amount of time it takes to travel 200 miles non-stop at various speeds. t=200m/Xmph
55 3hrs:38min:11sec
60 3h:20:00 (18m:11s fewer)
65 3h:04:37 (15m:23 fewer. 33m:34s total)
70 2h:51:26 (13m:11s fewer. 46m:45s total)
75 2h:40:00 (11m:26s fewer. 58m:11s total)
80 2h:30 (10m:00s fewer. 1h:08m:11s total)
85 2h:21:11 (8m:49s fewer. 1h:17m:00s total)
90 2h:13:20 (7m:51 fewer. 1h:24m:51s total)
For a 400m trip, just double everything
FuzzyX
Double everything...
1010 6hrs:616mins:22sec
etc
PowerFart
This is why I only speed when I’m on a journey over 150 miles
PowerFart
Looks like you’d save nearly an hour driving 90 in a 55
jackal696
As soon as you do stop all that little time gained is all thrown away lol
RibbleTPibits
But you’d stop if you were driving slower too.
ChewyTheWookie
More likely to stop if taking longer
Mechame
Another way to think about it, with simpler math... Every time you double your speed, you halve the time. 20mi trip at 20mph takes 1h, at 40mph 1/2h, at 80mph 1/4h at 160mph 1/8h.
Elkarlo77
Now you understand the German Autobahn and why 230kph is a thing here.
mockingbird75
https://youtu.be/f43X6u5hPww?si=jELnYFDVwqTh92Qc
magichal
For a 400mi trip, double my speed. Understood.
quietmrbean
So 100Kph looks like the best, anything over that is a bit excessive with very little gain
IHaveGreatKittenRecipes
My last OTR truck was governed at 70mph, which is 113kph. Honestly? Actually a pretty damn good speed for the US interstate network. Didn't really get stuck in clumps of traffic, got where I was going in a reasonable amount of time, not so fast the truck couldn't stop within my sightline, like, it's a *good* speed to hold.
And then you get your paint peeled by some nutfuck doing 150+/240+ and what the FUUUUCK, bro. That's not a car, that's a fukin ICBM in search of a school bus.
Sickma
Since you can only spend time out of our finite lives, this lends to the thought of for longer distances we have to travel, the faster one should move in an Ideally safe manner.
/Maybe if we engineer a way to keep some sort of vehicle on rails that goes safely between major cities at high speeds we could all get more time of our lives back. And to make it more efficient, we could get a lot of people on it at the same time so we would need fewer of these vehicles./s
Margrave9000
Bu then you'd have to spend our time waiting for one of these contraptions to arrive or start, instead of keeping one as a personal asset and setting course&schedule at your leisure.
MantisTobagganMD
awesomebiome
Slot cars, but using buses?
stronomer
For really long distances the truely best thing is to not take the trip in the first place.
shehdbeuebw738373
so calculate your extra chance of dying per unit of speed. weigh it against your time saves. travel at the speed likely to produce longest life.
Sickma
And before its asked, Yes I'm neurospicy.
AndThenThereWereSquirrels
we didn't need to ask
pr0t34n
I agree with the sentiment and it's a great way of framing this information, but one thing left out is the distance of travel. Sure, saving 2 minutes by doing 60 instead of 80 may be trivial when you're only covering 10 miles, but saving 60 minutes of travel over 300 miles is quite significant. I am not advocating anyone do this, I am only pointing out a meaningful flaw in this argument
123asqw
But he does say "if youre going 10, 20, 30 miles, something in that magnitude"
icouldntthinkofabetterusername2
I think he meant that at lower speeds 10, 20, 30, the time saved is proportionally bigger if you speed up by 10 mph. But if you’re already going 70, it makes less sense to add that 10 mph. Unless you reach 88 and have a flux capacitor, of course.
v
marvelousx
He was saying, “10, 20, 30 miles [per hour]”
nothingunused
How often do you travel 300+ miles?
dragoonwraith
Not anymore, but used to do about twice that at least twice a month, often four times.
RecurringNightmare
lots of people do that like twice a week, some people even more often...its insane, but the reality of their lifes...
PoorBoyChevelle
Half dozen times a year, at minimum
Cthulhu2121
I used to have a job where I drove 7000 miles a month.
pr0t34n
Personally? Twice a week. My commute is rough.
alyssajones123
Jesus, only people I know who do that work camp jobs, and fly in fly out... Although they are usually 2 weeks on one week off... That's 480 km
nclu
My heart goes out to you. In general 50-60% of vehicle trips are under 5 miles distance. It would be great for society if we encouraged a built environment that didn't normalize super-commuting
pr0t34n
Sure would be. You know what would be great? More trains.
zFUBARz
Hello fellow brutal commuter. Fun fact though Commute times where I was were actually only slightly shorter just getting into the city form teh suburbs. the hundreds of extra kilometers are almost meaningless compared to the total time taken.
Grurim
I don't think it's a flaw, I think the sentiment stays the same. For example, if you are driving 100 miles instead of 10. Going 80 vs 60 will save you a whole 20 minutes of a 1.5 hour or so journey, true, but is that percent of savings worth the increased stopping distance, turn radius and reaction time in a situation which has an increased chance of happening over the now increased distance? Also, over greater distance, the odds of you maintaining that increased speed is lower as well.
zFUBARz
One thing to bear in mind, speed limits are a thing and important BUT, they're a beurocratic decision as often as a safety decision. Where i am several highways just raised their speed limit after many decades where they were. Are they suddenly more safe than they were last week? No, but cars have improved, tires, road maintenance, etc. over decades. so somebody going 10 or 20 over last week was breaking the law and crazy, now they're the norm. Point being, the sign isn't always logical.
Grurim
Nothing in my comment related to legality. Physics don't change with the law. Someone going 80 vs 60 is less safe to those around them, bar none. Why? Because it takes longer distance for them to react, avoid obstacles and stop. Do bureaucrats set arbitrary speed limits? Sure. But physics don't care about if something is legal or not when you're trying to stop 1 ton of metal from hitting a kid or obstacle in the road.
zFUBARz
If a kid is running across a highway there's a lot bigger problems to deal with than the speed limit. And if you're going 20 under the speed limit without hugging the shoulder with your 4 ways on you're going to be a hazard yourself. Physics are clearly not the only factor in safety. Don't be disingenuous.