Earlier quoted context omitted.
East coast: death, west coast: not so death
Exactly, and the safest place to go drive your car through is the Grand Canyon.
US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
31–40 of 104 posts
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#32Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#33Not quite sure yet how this influences my recent urge to start riding motorcycles. There seems to be a (near) 1:2 ratio between motorcycle and vehicle fatalities. I already knew motorcycle riders were 5 times more likely to get in accidents, and those accidents were 35 times more likely to result in very serious injury. In my life so far I've been in one small fender bender. This does confirm some of the self-imposed…
If you live near a major city, try spending a couple of weeks cycling around it first. You'll learn to spot danger warning signs at much less dangerous speeds :)
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#34Not quite sure yet how this influences my recent urge to start riding motorcycles. There seems to be a (near) 1:2 ratio between motorcycle and vehicle fatalities. I already knew motorcycle riders were 5 times more likely to get in accidents, and those accidents were 35 times more likely to result in very serious injury. In my life so far I've been in one small fender bender. This does confirm some of the self-imposed…
My big suggestion is to act as if every car is either going to break the law (run stop signs) or not see you, so you've always got to be on the defense.
Other comments on the map, it's kinda odd feeling, finding the places of people you knew who died in a car crash, and seeing them as a statistic.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it was mostly in jest, yes, but I think it's more than just that, I think it's also that here on the west coast we tend to drive a lot better than people in New York ;)
Something I've noticed in Canada - is each province despises the drivers of the province to their east. So BC complains about Alberta, Alberta about Saskatchewan, Saskatchewan about Manitoba... and so on. Seems the same thing happens west to east down there too.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
You probably said this in jest, but if you look at a map of US population density, it is nearly identical.
Well, it was mostly in jest, yes, but I think it's more than just that, I think it's also that here on the west coast we tend to drive a lot better than people in New York ;)
While New York drivers are definitely aggressive, accelerating and braking quickly and making sharp, relatively high-G turns, they are also generally polite, focused, good drivers. They let people in when they need to be let in, they take turns when they need to take turns, they don't run lights, they don't tailgate at high speed, they (usually) use their signals, and they are defensive about pedestrians. They have to be this way to survive the traffic conditions in Manhattan and its freeways: if you don't stay on your game, you get into an accident really quickly. If you get over the aggressive aspect, I think they're some of the better drivers I've encountered.
Southern California, by contrast, always drives me insane. Drivers there just don't seem to think about the implications of what they're doing: they tailgate at 80 MPH, they won't let you in if they don't have to, they definitely won't yield to pedestrians if there's not a stark reason to. I've even seen a collection of cars on I-105 honk maniacally while weaving all over and nearly smashing a poor car that had a blow-out rather than make room for him to get off the road and other drivers to navigate around, even though there was plenty of time to see what was going on, slow down, and work around him. The nearest equivalent I've seen in New York, where a car was stalled out on the FDR (a comically narrow three-lane highway down the east side of Manhattan), had cars slowing down and letting traffic cleanly merge around the disabled automobile.
I don't know why there's such a stark difference. I suspect it has to do with a mixture of west coast drivers driving more, and therefore feeling more comfortable in their cars, combined with wider roads, higher speed limits, and fewer pedestrians. But I think both that New York drivers get a bad rap, and at least southern Californian drivers get an overly good score, when people discuss west- v. east-coast drivers.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#37Far more fatalities in the CA Central Valley than in the SF Bay Area, even though the respective population densities are the other way round.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#38This has just reaffirmed my fear of east-coasters.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it was mostly in jest, yes, but I think it's more than just that, I think it's also that here on the west coast we tend to drive a lot better than people in New York ;)
Something I've noticed in Canada - is each province despises the drivers of the province to their east. So BC complains about Alberta, Alberta about Saskatchewan, Saskatchewan about Manitoba... and so on. Seems the same thing happens west to east down there too.
Re: US Road Fatalities 2001-09 mapped with OpenStreetMap
#40Not quite sure yet how this influences my recent urge to start riding motorcycles. There seems to be a (near) 1:2 ratio between motorcycle and vehicle fatalities. I already knew motorcycle riders were 5 times more likely to get in accidents, and those accidents were 35 times more likely to result in very serious injury. In my life so far I've been in one small fender bender. This does confirm some of the self-imposed…
That said, if you spend some time around Hwy 9 on a summer weekend, it shouldn't surprise you that the accident rate is high. If you don't ride like those people, your risk will not mimic the statistics.