Yes, 2 seconds is considered by SOME that should know, but it is considered as the ABSOLUTE minimum distance. I did not say it was wrong, just that I did not agree with it.Ginjaninja wrote:Nereus,Nereus wrote:Sorry, I do not agree with that. I was taught a couple of different ways, and 2 seconds was not one of them. 1 car length for each 10 kms / hr you are travelling at, which might be difficult to compute for some people.HHTel wrote:Incidentally, Ginja, it's a two second rule.
The better way is to count 4 seconds from when the vehicle in front of you passes a FIXED object, such as a power pole, tree, bridge, etc., and when YOU pass the same object. That way does adjust for whatever speed you are travelling at.
ANY set time, be it 2 seconds or any other, does not work, as your car will travel further at a higher speed, even given that your reaction time MAY be the same.
HHTel is correct as it is internationally considered the '2-second rule' however I was just factoring in Thailand into the equation and I personally feel the 2-second rule is inadequate a distance.
Your point regarding the 4 seconds passing a fixed point is correct and this is what the 2-second rule applies to. The faster the traffic then the greater the distance between the fixed point and this is why it can be applied at different speeds.
![]()
GN.
I misread what HHTel wrote and he has posted basically what I have posted with the exception of the time involved. There are many variables involved: for a start, 2 seconds should not be applied to your motorcycle! Neither should it be applied to a wet road! Peoples reaction time varies greatly, and can be influenced by changing circumstances and distractions, which even 3 seconds will give a much greater margin.
I guess I am also biased a bit as in a previous life I drove a big truck, or HGV as you Poms refer to them, and if I had driven it like some of the p---s on the road here I would still be in goal / jail!
