The Official No Need To Start a New Thread, Thread

[supafamous]

You need a bit more apex speed. More Max Verstappen, less Lance Stroll.

[SSM_DC5]

Originally Posted by donk.

All you need to do is not use your turn signals.

No, use it..... Just use it at the last second before you start turning the wheel.
It's not a ticketable offence anymore right?


I was approaching a smaller roundabout a couple weeks ago. And I'm inside the roundabout with a tesla to my right not even in the roundabout yet and they stomp on their brake while honking me.

[EvoFire]

There are a lot of people who shouldn't be on the road.

Questionable right of way knowledge
Can't colour inside the lines
Cell phone use
Not respecting school zone
Not respecting stopping and parking rules (Ubereats et la are especially bad
Zero spatial awareness

It would be fun if ICBC decided to bring in mass retesting. Lots of drivers would lose their licenses. Could be a big profit driver for a few years as well since they charge for exams.

[spoon.ek9]

I (almost) witnessed an accident behind me on No.2/Westminster on Friday. Maybe 3-4 cars involved and the entire wheel of the Tesla came off from the accident. Probably someone running a red, making a shitty left turn or both in combination.

Had I been maybe 10 seconds slower on my bike ride I would have witnessed the whole thing!

[donk.]

Originally Posted by EvoFire

There are a lot of people who shouldn't be on the road.

Questionable right of way knowledge
Can't colour inside the lines
Cell phone use
Not respecting school zone
Not respecting stopping and parking rules (Ubereats et la are especially bad
Zero spatial awareness

It would be fun if ICBC decided to bring in mass retesting. Lots of drivers would lose their licenses. Could be a big profit driver for a few years as well since they charge for exams.

Whats the difference between doing 70 in a 50 zone, and 50 in a 30 zone?

[EvoFire]

Originally Posted by donk.

Whats the difference between doing 70 in a 50 zone, and 50 in a 30 zone?

Ideally, you do 30 and don't hit the kid.

50 might mean you won't stop in time and bumping into the kid and pushing them onto the ground.

70 mostly likely means the kid goes flying.

Is it on the parents to keep better control of their kids? Absolutely, but kids forget, they see their friend across the street or their parents waiting in the car and they just go for it.

It's also for your own emotional well being.

I was picking up my son from school on Tuesday, the mom and daughter just walks out between two parked SUVs. I was doing 30 and I stopped and they gave me a dirty look like I was wrong. If I wasn't doing 30 I would probably have ran them over.

[donk.]

What i was getting at was:

Whats the difference between doing 70 on a normal residential street thats a 50 zone, and plowing anyone over
Vs
Doing 50 in a 30 "school" zone, and plowing someone over?

People, especially women, will drive recklessly / speed, as long as its not their kids at risk.
But you drive 1kmh over, in a townhouse complex or school zone, and they nearly have a stroke

Double standards. People dont give a shit about others lives, they only care if its their direct family in "danger"

[westopher]

Originally Posted by donk.

Whats the difference between doing 70 in a 50 zone, and 50 in a 30 zone?

About 26%

[Traum]

Originally Posted by mikemhg

This has been driving me nuts lately and I'm curious if anyone has noticed drivers doing this more often nowadays.

I feel like people have lost the idea of what the "right of way" rule is when on the road.

I'm 100% with you on this -- I see this almost daily because there are 2 four-way stops that I drive through pretty frequently, and it seems to me that the majority of drivers have no idea how 4-way stops are supposed to work.

The common theme that I seem to notice is -- all these idiot drivers think the rule is -- whoever gets there first gets to go first. Dude, it doesn't work that way!!! Ideally, drivers go in pairs. Say, the north-south pair goes first. Then the east-west pair goes next, and it repeats. And then you throw in other variations like going straight has right of way over the guy (in the opposite direction) turning left, or the case that Mike described where turning right has right of way over (the opposing direction traffic) turning left, etc.

A lot of times I need to turn left at the 4-way stop. If I stop at the stop sign first, and the car in the opposite direction needs to go straight, I'm supposed to give him the right of way so that he goes first. But nooooo~ because I arrive at the stop sign first, the other idiot driver expects me to go first. I don't go because that's wrong, and he doesn't go because he thinks I should go first. In the meantime, cars stopping in the other 2 directions at the 4-way stop aren't moving either because the guy going straight is supposed to go first. So every freaking body end up being stopped at the 4-way crossing.

When it comes to that, I usually just go "fxxk it" and take my left turn.

[westopher]

I'm pretty sure that isn't correct.
If you come to a two way stop and someone is going straight and you are turning left, the person going straight has the right of way.
At a 4 way stop its who gets there first. If there's a tie, person on the right or person going straight goes first.
If it didn't work like that you'd be stuck forever behind someone going left at busy 4 way stops.
From drive BC

4 way stops are always first in, first out.

[Traum]

Olivia Chow has been saying this on repeat on the news lately bcos Doug Ford is trying to legislate to ban all speed cameras in Ontario.

https://carsp.ca/en/news-and-resourc...n/safe-speeds/


The stats above is probably measuring the vehicle's speed at the time of the impact though. In most cases if the driver realizes he is going to hit someone, he'll probably slam the brakes and slow the car down a tad.

[Traum]

Great! So you're saying I'm the stupid villian now? How dare you~!

Originally Posted by westopher

I'm pretty sure that isn't correct.
If you come to a two way stop and someone is going straight and you are turning left, the person going straight has the right of way.
At a 4 way stop its who gets there first. If there's a tie, person on the right or person going straight goes first.
If it didn't work like that you'd be stuck forever behind someone going left at busy 4 way stops.
From drive BC

This is what the BC Driver's handbook says:

four-way stops — when there are stop signs at all corners:
• The first vehicle to arrive at the intersection and come to a
complete stop should go first.
• If two vehicles arrive at the same time, the one on the
right should go first.
• If two vehicles are facing each other and have arrived at
the intersection at about the same time, the one making a
left turn must yield to the one going straight through.

What happens a lot is, the 4 way stop that I go through is almost always very busy in the N-S direction, less busy in the EB direction, and least busy in the WB direction. I tend to come in going west, and turn left to go south. Or I'd be heading north, and turn right to go east. So when I arrive at the 4-way stop facing west, I usually don't sync up with the traffic that is already there at the 4-way. So I stop at the stop sign, and let the other cars go through first (cuz they are already going through the intersection).

And then the situation I described happens.

So I may have stopped before the car going in the opposite direction did, but that's bcos something is already hapening at the intersection. Effectively, both me (facing W, and trying to turn left) and the car facing E and trying to go straight have already stopped at the stop sign out of necessity.

I honestly think the EB car should have the right of way because he's going straight, and I am turning left.

[spoon.ek9]

I can't remember if it was in this thread, but we talked about it before:

https://www.richmond-news.com/the-mi...homes-11363941

I ain't trusting that shit lol

[EvoFire]

Originally Posted by donk.

What i was getting at was:

Whats the difference between doing 70 on a normal residential street thats a 50 zone, and plowing anyone over
Vs
Doing 50 in a 30 "school" zone, and plowing someone over?

People, especially women, will drive recklessly / speed, as long as its not their kids at risk.
But you drive 1kmh over, in a townhouse complex or school zone, and they nearly have a stroke

Double standards. People dont give a shit about others lives, they only care if its their direct family in "danger"

Maybe I'm just being factual now, but 70 on a residential side street is reckless.

The biggest difference is a school zone means it's a lot more likely for someone to run out between cars because the ratio of kids is a lot higher. Yeah if you smoke someone while you are doing 70 and chances are they are gonna die, but the actual chance of that happening is lower.

That said in Vancouver, residential side streets are all 30 now I believe, it's just that school zones and playground zones have an actual sign up.

Originally Posted by spoon.ek9

I can't remember if it was in this thread, but we talked about it before:

https://www.richmond-news.com/the-mi...homes-11363941

I ain't trusting that shit lol

I'm guilty I just recently bought a package of lo mai gai from some auntie running it out of her kitchen, but I'm sorry T&T, your shit doesn't even come close.

[AzNightmare]

Originally Posted by Traum

Great! So you're saying I'm the stupid villian now? How dare you~!

This is what the BC Driver's handbook says:


What happens a lot is, the 4 way stop that I go through is almost always very busy in the N-S direction, less busy in the EB direction, and least busy in the WB direction. I tend to come in going west, and turn left to go south. Or I'd be heading north, and turn right to go east. So when I arrive at the 4-way stop facing west, I usually don't sync up with the traffic that is already there at the 4-way. So I stop at the stop sign, and let the other cars go through first (cuz they are already going through the intersection).

And then the situation I described happens.

So I may have stopped before the car going in the opposite direction did, but that's bcos something is already hapening at the intersection. Effectively, both me (facing W, and trying to turn left) and the car facing E and trying to go straight have already stopped at the stop sign out of necessity.

I honestly think the EB car should have the right of way because he's going straight, and I am turning left.

I can see why your scenario can be complicated and confusing. NGL, 4 way stops generally aren't designed well for busy traffic flow. But the technical rule isn't whether W and E cars are now facing each other after the N/S traffic clears. It's simply who was there first. If W car arrived first, then that car gets to go first. Even if the E car arrives afterward while W car is waiting for the N/S trafic to clear, it's now technically 2nd in line, after the W car goes.

Imagine it's like a queue, every car that reaches the stop sign hits a "button" to say "I'm next". Unless two cars arrive at the same time, both hitting the "button" at the same time, would the left turner have to yield to the car going straight.

[EvoFire]

Originally Posted by AzNightmare

I can see why your scenario can be complicated and confusing. NGL, 4 way stops generally aren't designed well for busy traffic flow. But the technical rule isn't whether W and E cars are now facing each other after the N/S traffic clears. It's simply who was there first. If W car arrived first, then that car gets to go first. Even if the E car arrives afterward while W car is waiting for the N/S trafic to clear, it's now technically 2nd in line, after the W car goes.

Imagine it's like a queue, every car that reaches the stop sign hits a "button" to say "I'm next". Unless two cars arrive at the same time, both hitting the "button" at the same time, would the left turner have to yield to the car going straight.

Tell that to CoV. I don't know why they haven't done anything about the 45th Ave/Elliott and 45th Ave/Tyne intersections. Those two intersections are absolutely shit shows.

They've done some trials at 45th and Elliot 20 years ago, but that was all it was, trials. It didn't work. Ideally it should be a roundabout but people here don't know how to use one, which leaves traffic light as the only option for the volume.

[BIC_BAWS]

Originally Posted by EvoFire

I was picking up my son from school on Tuesday, the mom and daughter just walks out between two parked SUVs. I was doing 30 and I stopped and they gave me a dirty look like I was wrong. If I wasn't doing 30 I would probably have ran them over.

The lack of personal accountability these days is despicable.

Originally Posted by EvoFire

It would be fun if ICBC decided to bring in mass retesting. Lots of drivers would lose their licenses. Could be a big profit driver for a few years as well since they charge for exams.

Someone I know is an examiner and his KPIs are passing people. He personally has a big deal about this and has been a big advocate for failing people more as its truly a responsibility to be on the road. But management's narrative is that they need to get more people through the tests (and passing them). Hell they can't even keep up and have taken (or will be) away the Class 5 portion of the test.

[Gerbs]

Originally Posted by westopher

I'm pretty sure that isn't correct.
If you come to a two way stop and someone is going straight and you are turning left, the person going straight has the right of way.
At a 4 way stop its who gets there first. If there's a tie, person on the right or person going straight goes first.
If it didn't work like that you'd be stuck forever behind someone going left at busy 4 way stops.
From drive BC

Holy fuck, no wonder 50% of the time, I get smoked on 4 ways at 45th and Tyne. People thought they were supposed to go first on right turns and straights

[Traum]

Originally Posted by EvoFire

Tell that to CoV. I don't know why they haven't done anything about the 45th Ave/Elliott and 45th Ave/Tyne intersections. Those two intersections are absolutely shit shows.

They've done some trials at 45th and Elliot 20 years ago, but that was all it was, trials. It didn't work. Ideally it should be a roundabout but people here don't know how to use one, which leaves traffic light as the only option for the volume.

To give credit where credit is due, CoV is actually already midway through their consultation process on significantly revamping the stretch of Tyne between 49th and Kingsway, and the stretch of 45th between Rupert and Boundary. You can result about the proposed options for change and the consultation results here:

https://syc.vancouver.ca/projects/tr...nt-summary.pdf

TL;DR summary from my interpretations:

- (I am almost certain that) vehicular (ie. cars) traffic will be significantly cut back through drastic traffic reduction and calming measures on 45th because 45th is a designated bike path, and residents there are complaining big time about both the traffic volume and the high speeds vehicles zip through there

- it is not obvious what CoV will do on Tyne, but they will almost certainly do something

With the upcoming changes to those 2 streets, it'd only make sense if the City also make some significant changes to the 4-way stop intersection as well.

[winson604]

Hmm my personal experience is different. I'm by 45th and Elliot and go through that intersection generally at least 3 times a day often heading West Bound and turning left South Bound. In my experience having being here for 7 years I haven't had issues with people not knowing what to do regardless of when I get to the intersection and what direction I'm going. When somebody does something out of the norm it's not necessarily they didn't know but they are simply taking advantage of the situation of traffic flow to cut the queue because it doesn't actually affect much or at all the next person who was actually supposed to be going.

For example you're heading westbound and you hit the intersection with your left signal on. Car to your left is heading northbound was was 1st, you're 2nd, car heading southbound 3rd. You can't even attempt to start your turn until the northbound car basically clears the intersection but car #3 see's this and basically goes at or near the same time as car #1. That aside I've seen a hand full of cars completely blow through the intersection not even knowing there's a 4 way stop once in broad daylight but the rest at night. Luckily, I'm aware of my surroundings because each of the times I was the car that was about to enter the intersection with me having right of way.

While we are on this topic what else drives me nuts is people not knowing how to hit a traffic circle. Generally but not always either east/west or north/south has heavier traffic and these people seem to think they have unlimited right of way and the people coming from the other direction have to wait until it's clear but these are considered uncontrolled intersections and work the same way as a 4 way stop unless I'm wrong like Traum

[supafamous]

I thought the rule at 4-way stops is that seniors get to go first? They're supposed to gun it as soon as they get to the white line. The older the first-er they go.

[EvoFire]

Originally Posted by Traum

To give credit where credit is due, CoV is actually already midway through their consultation process on significantly revamping the stretch of Tyne between 49th and Kingsway, and the stretch of 45th between Rupert and Boundary. You can result about the proposed options for change and the consultation results here:

https://syc.vancouver.ca/projects/tr...nt-summary.pdf

TL;DR summary from my interpretations:

- (I am almost certain that) vehicular (ie. cars) traffic will be significantly cut back through drastic traffic reduction and calming measures on 45th because 45th is a designated bike path, and residents there are complaining big time about both the traffic volume and the high speeds vehicles zip through there

- it is not obvious what CoV will do on Tyne, but they will almost certainly do something

With the upcoming changes to those 2 streets, it'd only make sense if the City also make some significant changes to the 4-way stop intersection as well.

I saw the signs up at KCC a few months ago. I spoke with the people there and they took notes about what I said. I don't remember if it had anything to do with Elliott, but it definitely would affect the Tyne/45th intersection.

One of the suggestions was blocking access on Tyne but as the only major thorough way between 49th and Kingsway, it's not feasible, it'll just drive all the traffic to the side streets trying to get through, and Boundary northbound is already over capacity between 49th and Kingsway.

I'd say make it a controlled intersection at those two junctions, and limit through traffic on 45th. Cutting off through traffic on 45th at Vivian and 45th at Arlington probably. It would force people who are using 45th as a shortcut between Boundary and Victoria off that road.

[spoon.ek9]

I remember coming to a 4-way stop and this young asian girl completely failed to stop lol. The look of horror on her face 1 second after realizing what she did was pretty entertaining. To her credit, she did wave to apologize.

[GLOW]

that type/45th 4-way is super dangerous, one of my biggest concern with kids walking home from school b/c the drivers there take the 4 way as a suggestion and really don't want to allow pedestrians to cross. not sure what type of traffic calming or obeying a 4 way there will work tbh...

but they need to remove the shrubs there. if you're heading west, no one can see your car waiting at the 4 way unless they're sitting high up in a pickup or big SUV or really paying attention. it's like hey lets remove visibility and make a shitty 4 way even shitter

[Gerbs]

Originally Posted by Traum

To give credit where credit is due, CoV is actually already midway through their consultation process on significantly revamping the stretch of Tyne between 49th and Kingsway, and the stretch of 45th between Rupert and Boundary. You can result about the proposed options for change and the consultation results here:

https://syc.vancouver.ca/projects/tr...nt-summary.pdf

TL;DR summary from my interpretations:

- (I am almost certain that) vehicular (ie. cars) traffic will be significantly cut back through drastic traffic reduction and calming measures on 45th because 45th is a designated bike path, and residents there are complaining big time about both the traffic volume and the high speeds vehicles zip through there

- it is not obvious what CoV will do on Tyne, but they will almost certainly do something

With the upcoming changes to those 2 streets, it'd only make sense if the City also make some significant changes to the 4-way stop intersection as well.

I cut through kingsway boundary / 41st traffic via Tyne to Richmond / South area.

Would be a bummer if they closed it off