Readers’ opinions swerve far, wide

You readers have strong views regarding driving topics. Many of these subjects are controversial, and opinions are diametrically opposed. Do you have strong feelings about any of the following driving themes?

Senior Citizen Drivers

Medical Lake reader F.K. sent a detailed story of a “little old lady who could barely see over the steering wheel” making a dangerous freeway entrance, and then becoming an obstacle on the roadway. F.K. has had “numerous” concerning encounters with senior citizen drivers. He believes that periodic testing of older drivers should be enacted, and encourages, “anyone who has an elderly parent or relative still driving, ride with him/her once in a while and see if he/she can still drive safely.”

I’m with you about periodic skill testing, F.K. — except I think it should be expanded to all age groups. I’d like to see a tougher test to begin with, followed by periodic check-ups. Occasional testing might mitigate the growth of the bad driving habits we all tend to acquire. Vision and reaction do deteriorate with age, so please keep watch on the driving of elderly loved ones. By the way, F.K. is 70 years old.

Studs or No Studs

J.S., of Spokane, wonders how taxpayers feel about protecting the newly resurfaced freeway here against stud wear. To him, “The choice could be between no studded tires, or an annual tax on those wishing to use studded tires.” I fully agree with you J.S. As I wrote last October, the Washington State Department of Transportation is encouraging alternatives to studs because of the accelerated road wear and rutting they cause. J.S. also points out that hard-winter states in the Upper Midwest have banned them.

Regular reader, J.H., has also asked that I cover the issue again, as the advantage of studded tires is questionable. Last year, I cited studies of studded versus non-studded winter tires, and I’ll do that again soon. Essentially, those tests show only a slight advantage to studs, and only on glare ice — a condition that we experience, on average, only 1-to-2 percent of the wintertime here. J.H. has been successfully using a studless alternative for three years — I last used them in 1980.

I object to the woeful inadequacy of studded tires on wet and dry pavement (low grip), along with the noise and road surface destruction they cause. How about you?

Daytime Running Lights

As with so many issues today, reader response on daytime running lights (DRLs) runs about 50/50 — those who don’t like them, and those who do. Evidently, they are sort of good, but sort of bad.

C.F., of Grand Coulee, concurs that the lights aggravate other motorists, obscure directional lights, mask drivers without headlights on, and “for sure” waste fuel. Incidentally, the additional alternator load occurring with DRL use is minimal for one vehicle, causing minimal extra fuel use. I think C.F. has a point, though, when millions multiply that small waste.

Reader G.T. also has a point when she says that DRLs are useful for drivers who refuse to turn on their lights in rainy or foggy conditions. She’s concerned about those who don’t think they need lights then, just because they don’t need them to see where they are going. They do need lights to be seen, though, so if they had DRLs, their lights would automatically be on.

R.D. thought my information about DRLs “stunk,” citing their need on Highway 95. Along those lines, L.S. feels speed is a problem on that highway. Well, R.D. and L.S., the high accident incidence on 95 stumps me, along with many experts. I believe that it should be configured to four lanes (same with 195) to save lives and expedite travel — I believe neither lower speeds nor DRLs alone can restore (or even improve) safety there.

RV Watch

After completing a long RV trip, J.H. has some reminders to pass along to drivers contending with these homes on wheels. Important items according to J.H., in his words, are, “1) Awareness of the weight and momentum of these rigs should be stressed; they can’t start, stop and maneuver like a car. 2) Reminding people that if they can’t see the RV’s rear-view mirrors, the RV driver can’t see them. 3) The importance and courtesy of not being in too much of a hurry when returning to the R(ight-)hand lane after having passed the RV. 4) Reminding persons entering a freeway that the freeway traffic has the right of way.”

That last item is true, J.H., but most drivers expect (rightfully so) thoughtful freeway drivers to change lanes, allowing their merge. Often, however, there is a vehicle to the left of the RV driver on the freeway, one that the merging driver might not see due to the RV’s size. Also, changing lanes suddenly in an RV can be tough.

Feedback

One of my favorite things is reader feedback. I wish to thank those who have sent it, and encourage those haven’t — your opinions are important!