What is it with German Tailights in the US

I would rather drive in the states because MY experience has been that US drivers suck less than Canadian drivers once you get out of North Dakota on your way to the real destination and that US roads (especially the interstates) put the shit we call highways up here to shame. Is that phrased good enough for you?

I drove from Winnipeg to LA and would rather drive in LA. (Maybe I'm a bit weird - 75mph, 8 lanes of traffic doesn't phase me in the least. In fact, I think I prefer it to the manitoba redlight addiction.) If Hwy

401 is the closest we can come to a "superhighway" then we have a long way to go.

Ray

Drive in ON and MI and NY and then say that with a straight face. Cross into MI or NY from ON and you notice three things:

1) The posted speed limit goes up (MI only) 2) The road quality goes WAY down 3) The drivers get WAY ruder and less competent

I had a hard time finding proof in that reference. Other references I have seen (

) would say it depends on whatyou are comapring - deaths ber 100,000 population (Canada is lower) ordeaths per Billion Km traveled (US is lower). Ed

well, I haven't yet driven in NY, but I've driven in Michigan. Other than downtown Detroit being the scariest looking city I've been in, the roads are still better than most of Canada.

Here's a Hint: Toronto is NOT most of Canada. Try some of rural Manitoba for "roads." I used to live in Fort McMurray - 200km of two lane crap road with a 6" drop off for a shoulder and one gas station on the whole stretch. I've driven through Montana and the mountains at

80-100mph and driven white knuckled at 50mph through the Canadian Rockies. (granted, roads in the mountains are iffy because of the location, but the Montana roads are still better overall.) I've driven on "highways" in Saskatchewan that wouldn't qualify as back lanes in the states.

That said, the roads in Canada are still better than the roads in Mexico. And THEY drive ... well... like it's a rodeo or something.

Ray

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

I think it's hard to compare drivers and road conditions in something like this - you've got places like Churchill (small town, but lots of bad weather and winter roads) and places like Orlando (nice weather and roads but 1000x the traffic and full of old people doing 45 in the passing lane.)

Ray

Oh, here we go, everybody pop some popcorn, it's another oblique rant about how Torontonians consider Toronto the centre of the universe, etc. Guess what, guy? Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver might as well be all of Canada. The overwhelmingly vast majority of Canadians live and drive in and around those places, and those places prop up the whole country financially.

Try some of rural anywhere for "roads". Where not many people exist to drive on the roads, 8-lane superhighways are neither needed nor, generally, wanted.

And it wasn't satisfactory for you, so you moved. Well done! Gold star on the fridge for you, and you get two desserts after supper tonight. Anyone asks, you tell 'em I said it was OK; you earned it.

Really? The evidence including ample data are about three clicks away, starting from the front page. Maybe try a little harder.

geeze Dan, you forgot about all those people in Montreal... but I guess they're not really Canadians, eh?*

And it still comes down to lies, damn lies, and statistics. When you say "best drivers" it's hard to nail down what people mean - I'm a great driver in rush hour, but I hate backing up stuff like moving trucks - I'd never be able to drive a semi, but I can go into turn one three wide... so does that make me a better driver than someone who gets road rage in rush hour but can park a rig 2" from the loading dock on the first try?

All I'm saying is Toronto is NOT necessarily representative of Canada's roads and drivers as a whole. It's a piece - an important piece, but not the whole damn country. I _like_ Toronto. I'd move there. (The wife won't so I'm stuck in Manitoba until I'm 55 and retire down south.)

*and before you french canadians get your panties in a wad, I'm one of you, whether I like it or not. :)

Ray

Your suggested reference made a big deal about death per thousand vehicles, but I can't see that as a valid measurement. Deaths per distance traveled seems a more valid measurement. Using this measurement the differences are not very significant and, like I said before, other sources are ambiguous / contradictory.

Deaths per billion veh-km Canada 9 US 9.4

Interestingly, Germany has a much higher death rate (11.1 Deaths per billion veh-km) than either the US or Canada depsite all the talk about how wonderful the German roads and drivers are.

Ed

The Taurus/Sable was significantly bigger than either. Although in the case of the XR4Ti, the most similar in size US Ford/Mercury was the Tempo/Topaz. The Contour/Mystique eventually replaced the Tempo/Topaz.

The larger Merkur Scorpio was probably more equivalent to the Taurus/Sable.

Nope. If your driving like a fool in the fog no light bulb is going to save you.

Where did you get that figure?

IRTAD put Germany at 9,7 fatalities/bvkm in 2003

Fatalities in 2004 were down by about 10% from 2003 for a rate of

8.4, and down another 7% in 2005 from 2004 for a rate of around 7.7.

The fatality rate on the Autobahn is down again; to about 3/bvkm.

It's actually NONSENSE to compare (just) those numbers. Road environments differ vastly from one country to another and even within countries.

If your object is to keep making roads more safe, then you need to look at the trends in fatality rates; ideally per occupant km, but realistically per vehicle km. That means recording the rates over time and comparing how they change; hopefully by how many percent they are reducing every year.

You then look at the real causes of why people die in crashes. Traffic is a complex, non-linear environment that nobody can control. All that can be done is to manage it.

If you just want to win elections, then you can wave the "comparative" figures about in the air and soothsay a silver bullet.

Just remember that most silver bullets turn out to be blanks.

Speaking of Syl-Glide, does anyone have a spec for it? I want to buy a large grease-gun sized cartridge of it from McMaster-Carr. If it's really proprietary, is there something similar in the open market?

JazzMan

Mostly, yes.

Not directly, it's just a product of all the design factors of the two bulbs,.

Not really materials so much as construction details.

Agreed!

*raises hand*

Both. And the P3496 is an excellent replacement for 1157 or P21/5W.

It is one valid measurement. Deaths per distance travelled is another valid measurement. They measure different factors in the road-vehicle-driver-bystander system. Neither figure alone conveys a full picure of the situation.

Hmm, it seems you need to advertise a little bit more (given the fact that you actually sold lighting equipment escaped both of us at first). :)

Probably. I try hard to keep a low commercial profile on Usenet; this ain't the place for advertising.

Very well said, and quite correct. The only addition I'd make is that an aggregate of fatalities per vehicle-distance travelled *AND* per vehicle registered gives a more accurate picture of trends than just looking at the first figure. The first figure is better at depicting the trend as regards vehicle occupants, while the second figure is better at resolving the trend as regards e.g. pedestrians, bicyclists, and others not necessarily inside the car.

DS

1) German secondary roads are not necessarily as good. Compare highways to highways and secondaries to secondaries. 2) You're disregarding the UK and Australia.