Direct route vs comfortable route

[Freefaller]

A bit of an inane thread but I was thinking about this the other day.

My car doesn't like speed bumps, and often scrape the plastic guard either under the front spoiler or under the engine bay if I'm not careful or drive too quickly over them or stradle them (a righteous pain in the backside here in London as they are everywhere!).

Coming home I had 2 choices:

The direct route which has lots of speed bumps but gets me home nice and quickly. Time wise it probably is slightly quicker (but would be a lot quicker if I didn't have the bumps to contend with) and in terms of mileage it's probably 1/2 a mile shorter.

or

The indirect but "main" road which would also lead me home, this usually has more traffic and also has more traffic lights to contend with. This is a main road so no speed bumps. Typically going this way can add a good 5mins to the journey sometimes more if it's congested.

Because I hate bumps, I always go the longer route, I know psychologically we like to keep moving, when stuck in a jam we snake our way down back roads to keep moving and have an impression we are making progress. Sometimes it pays off, invariably though we cover more miles and probably don't get there any quicker had we stayed in the traffic.

I'm less and less bothered about shaving 5-10 minutes off my time these days - and would much rather have a comfortable drive/ride home than worry about slowing down, accelerating, slowing etc... I'm just getting more patient these days I think.

 

[DanH84]

it's good to share


i'd probably be taking the shorter route myself.

 

[Hxc]

I'd take the comfortable route. I'll often take a route via the dual carriageway to a friends house even though it'll take about 5 mins more because it doesn't involve lots of stupid junctions and traffic lights.

There's one speedbump at the UEA in Norwich though which my car is unable to get over without scraping the exhaust. My car is at standard ride height! (which is admittedly, fairly low)

 

[beermonster]

My cars a pain over the bumps too, I have to almost stop over the tile types, the sleeping policeman type aren't too bad, but I go the long way round rather than cut through, another thing is people have no patience on the road at all. Speed bumps are there to slow people down yet folks in clapped out bangers just ride over them at 40+ mph and I often get overtaken while going through areas with them.

 

[[DOD]Asprilla]

I take the comfortable route. I have no quarms about taking longer if it is 'easier'.

Mrs Asprilla, however, has to keep moving, even if it means going a much longer route; she is simply incapable of sitting in traffic for any length of time.

 

[Confused]

I wish I could avoid speed bumps, but they're about mile in every direction from my house

 

[Vonsteve]

Bristol traffic is far too anoying, I'll take a few speed bumps to save a bit of time. Far more hesitant now because my car is lowered and harsher ride but not low enough to scrape or anything which is good.

 

[Clarkey]

Unless the bumps are extremely annoying, i'd go for the quicker route. I can't be doing with traffic jams and traffic lights.

 

[bledd]

I shave 15 mins from my previously 45 minute drive home from work by going a route that is 3 miles longer

I hit about 3 sets of lights instead of 10

 

[Freefaller]

My cars a pain over the bumps too, I have to almost stop over the tile types, the sleeping policeman type aren't too bad, but I go the long way round rather than cut through, another thing is people have no patience on the road at all. Speed bumps are there to slow people down yet folks it clapped out bangers just ride over them at 40+ mph and I often get overtaken while going through areas with them.

What's worse is that people overtake very dangerously since I'm going too "slow" over the speed bumps. Another reason why I avoid them, although I wouldn't be responsible I don't want someone to cause an accident.

I take the comfortable route. I have no quarms about taking longer if it is 'easier'.

Mrs Asprilla, however, has to keep moving, even if it means going a much longer route; she is simply incapable of sitting in traffic for any length of time.

Yeah I'm the same, though I used to be "must keep moving can't keep still!"

Unless the bumps are extremely annoying, i'd go for the quicker route. I can't be doing with traffic jams and traffic lights.

I used to be impatient, but I've really mellowed out and I just can't be dealing with a) annoying people behind me owing to my slow driving over bumps b) the discomfort of having to go over bumps c) the damage it's probably causing d) the extra fuel for constantly braking and accelerating e) I usually get infatuated with a radio programme and don't mind sitting in a bit of traffic if I get a smooth ride home!

On my bike it's different though

 

[Overlag]

im always a bit indirect in my ways.

took parents to London Stansted, went via the M11. Came home via the B184 as im beginning to hate motorways.

 

[BigT]

I'm with you Freefaller. I have to go so slow over the bumps in London that I am constantly overtaken by people in knackered old cars who don't care. So I always take a longer route avoiding them. Driving in London constantly mellowed my views on delays and I just turn the stereo up and calmly make my way home in comfort. I sort of wish I still had an automatic in London though as constantly engaging/disengaging the clutch in stop/start traffic is a bit of a pain.

 

[The_Abyss]

Comfortable route every time.

 

[Freefaller]

Glad to see some people are in a similar mindset to me.

Now if I lived in the country and had decent roads to drive I'd probably also take the scenic route, but it wouldn't matter so much as there wouldn't be bumps on the road!