New Englanders and Their Stupid Tires

Just in case you're not in the northeast, or midwest, the first big storm of the season is coming through today. Which has me disgruntled because I'm going to have to go out in it.

It's not that I'm worried about my ability to drive in snow. I've been doing it for over 20 years, and the last time that the snow tripped me up Ronald Reagan was still President. You drop your speed by 5-10 mph, and look a little further ahead for potential trouble, and you're golden.

After the first storm of the season, 99% of the drivers on the road here will all remember how to do that.

Today, however, it's going to feel as through fully half the drivers out there are panicking because they've never seen this white stuff, have no idea how to compensate for it, and just will be getting road-ragey because everyone sane is slowing down.

The only explanation for this phenomenon, which I've seen in every state in the Northeast, and in several in the midwest, is that back in April or May, everyone took off their All-Weather radials, and put on their stupid tires on their cars. And far too many of the people out there have refused to take them back off.

There are going to be tons of stupid accidents today, annoying delays, and people driving crazy, all because they've still got their stupid tires on. It can't be because they're actual idiots, can it? I mean - 95% of them have seen and driven in snow before, and (see above) there's no great hidden secret for driving in the stuff. It can't be because there are too goddamned many idiots on the road!:Shake::smash::Shake::smash:

Yeah, "FUCK YOU!" stupid snow, and even stupider drivers! We've all had enough of you. :Shake:

Just imagine the turmoil on Houston, Texas freeways when we have snow ( only a few inches ) once a year or two!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Papaw

Just imagine the turmoil on Houston, Texas freeways when we have snow ( only a few inches ) once a year or two!

---

My imagination is fueled by having been in Orlando, FL when it got coated in an eighth of an inch of snow back in 1989. I hope y'all aren't quite as crazed as they got, but it was an education at the time. :o

You do know that Rochester NY (your listed location) is not in New England, right?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OtakuLoki

Just in case you're not in the northeast, or midwest, the first big storm of the season is coming through today. Which has me disgruntled because I'm going to have to go out in it.

It's not that I'm worried about my ability to drive in snow. I've been doing it for over 20 years, and the last time that the snow tripped me up Ronald Reagan was still President. You drop your speed by 5-10 mph, and look a little further ahead for potential trouble, and you're golden.

After the first storm of the season, 99% of the drivers on the road here will all remember how to do that.

Today, however, it's going to feel as through fully half the drivers out there are panicking because they've never seen this white stuff, have no idea how to compensate for it, and just will be getting road-ragey because everyone sane is slowing down.

The only explanation for this phenomenon, which I've seen in every state in the Northeast, and in several in the midwest, is that back in April or May, everyone took off their All-Weather radials, and put on their stupid tires on their cars. And far too many of the people out there have refused to take them back off.

There are going to be tons of stupid accidents today, annoying delays, and people driving crazy, all because they've still got their stupid tires on. It can't be because they're actual idiots, can it? I mean - 95% of them have seen and driven in snow before, and (see above) there's no great hidden secret for driving in the stuff. It can't be because there are too goddamned many idiots on the road!:Shake::smash::Shake::smash:

---

What about the poor Stupid Tire sellers. What about their families? Did you think about the Stupid Tire factories and all the employess there? If the economy is to recover, someone has to buy and use the Stupid Tires. Do you want your rant to be the reason for massive fail?

Scarier still are the blissfully ignorant morons who think 4-wheel drive = magic brakes. Coming soon to a ditch near you.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Laughing Lagomorph

You do know that Rochester NY (your listed location) is not in New England, right?

---

Well, as always, it all depends upon your definition of terms. The only official gov't body that ever defined New England was the old Dominion of New England, under Governor Andros. Which did include New York. ;)

Now that the hopeless pedantry is out of the way, I figure, honestly, Rochester, and most of the upstate region, has more in common with our New England neighbors than we do with the people downstate. Certainly we're not part of any other regional grouping: The Midwest starts in Ohio, it's purely foolishness to claim that we're part of the Mid-Atlantic States, and while you could make an argument that we're part of the Rust Belt, that only works if you specifically exempt NYC from consideration. So, I tend to define the Northeast in very broad terms, and view the Northeast and New England as being synonymous terms. Certainly there's more than a little commonality in climate, geography, culture, and political views across the region.

I ALWAYS read the "meep" aloud (in my head) because I like the sound and it's you.

Do the rest of you guys do sound effects in your heads?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OtakuLoki

Well, as always, it all depends upon your definition of terms. The only official gov't body that ever defined New England was the old Dominion of New England, under Governor Andros. Which did include New York. ;)

---

Oh, please. Screw ancient official goverment definitions. I'm talking about the definition pretty much everyone but you, apparently, has been using for the last 350 years...Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachussets, Rhode Island and Connecticut. Or is Maine still part of Mass. in your mind? And Vermont is an independent country?

Quote:

---

Now that the hopeless pedantry is out of the way,

---

It'll never be out of the way for me...it's one of my go-to-the- mat issues (http://www.mellophant.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9680)

Quote:

---

... I figure, honestly, Rochester, and most of the upstate region, has more in common with our New England neighbors than we do with the people downstate. Certainly we're not part of any other regional grouping: The Midwest starts in Ohio, it's purely foolishness to claim that we're part of the Mid-Atlantic States, and while you could make an argument that we're part of the Rust Belt, that only works if you specifically exempt NYC from consideration. So, I tend to define the Northeast in very broad terms, and view the Northeast and New England as being synonymous terms. Certainly there's more than a little commonality in climate, geography, culture, and political views across the region.

---

I say you are in the Rust Belt and yes, NYC is not. There's no law that all parts of a state have to be included in the same region. I grew up near NYC, went to college in Buffalo and have lived the past 20+ years in the Boston area so I feel uniquely qualified to comment on this.

You are also in the Northeast. New England is part of the Northeast but not all of the Northeast is New England (and not all of the Rust Belt is in the Northeast). Heck, I've had other misguided people insist southwestern CT isn't in New England.

(BTW from my recollection the people in the Buffalo area at least are much, much better at driving in snow than the people in the Boston area are.)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Laughing Lagomorph

Oh, please. Screw ancient official goverment definitions. I'm talking about the definition pretty much everyone but you, apparently, has been using for the last 350 years...

---

Thank you! Loki and I have had this argument before on more than one occasion. He actually is the only person that thinks this. :lol:

Anyway, the roads here in the Berkshires are pretty nasty, but from what I saw the drivers were remembering to be pretty careful. I'm pretty surprised.

New York is an odd state. It is clearly North-East, but I feel like only Westchester and South-East out to the Island is Mid-Atlantic, the rest feels and acts more like New England or Rust Belt. Upstate New York is much like Vermont and New Hampshire to me at least and Western Mass of course. South-Western Conn is so much a part of the NYC Metropolis it is hard to consider it New England. Just as North-East NJ is really just a part of the NYC Metropolis.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Laughing Lagomorph

I'm talking about the definition pretty much everyone but you, apparently, has been using for the last 350 years...Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachussets, Rhode Island and Connecticut. Or is Maine still part of Mass. in your mind?

---

If you're going back any further than 190 years, yes it has to be.

Quote:

---

And Vermont is an independent country?

---

Well, have you talked to any Texans lately? I figure Vermont has just as much of a reason to brag of their independent origins as they do. Or are you planning to expand this fight to include all of Texas?

Quote:

---

It'll never be out of the way for me...it's one of my go-to-the- mat issues (http://www.mellophant.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9680)

---

Just an aside: How on earth did you manage to stay at the Dope so long, then? :dumbo:

Quote:

---

I say you are in the Rust Belt and yes, NYC is not. There's no law that all parts of a state have to be included in the same region.

---

Wait a sec, you're going with private definitions that we both know aren't going to be accepted by a majority of the population, while at the same time using my own perfectly accurate description?

Blasphemer!!!

Quote:

---

I grew up near NYC, went to college in Buffalo and have lived the past 20+ years in the Boston area so I feel uniquely qualified to comment on this.

---

And I grew up on the shores of the Assabet, myself, and since then have spent nearly 15 years here in the Rochester area. So I also feel my observations of these two areas is pretty well informed, as well.

(Ignore Taumpy - he's just a prescriptivist.)

Quote:

---

You are also in the Northeast. New England is part of the Northeast but not all of the Northeast is New England (and not all of the Rust Belt is in the Northeast).

---

In all seriousness, I'd argue that the Rust Belt is only marginally connected to the Northeast. It's a legitimate placement for Buffalo, Rochester and Syracuse, of course - but it's far more centered upon the Great Lakes cities west of us, and often Pittsburgh is described as the far eastern end of the Belt.

Quote:

---

Heck, I've had other misguided people insist southwestern CT isn't in New England.

---

Culturally, unless you're going to reverse yourself and accept NY is part of New England, I really don't think CT is a good fit for the rest of the states you'd listed. If one really wanted to look at economic figures, I think you could even make an argument that CT is the furthest east bastion of the Rust Belt. But that's a fluidity that you're denying, with your strict adherence to common definitions, regardless of any facts. :sci:

Quote:

---

(BTW from my recollection the people in the Buffalo area at least are much, much better at driving in snow than the people in the Boston area are.)

---

Well, that's Buffalo. Suuuuuure I'm in a Gerrymander that includes part of the Buffalo metropolitan area, but that's just because NY politics are FUBARed.

More seriously, I've not noticed all that much difference between how Massholes and Rocs drive in the presence of snow, compared to their baseline driving habits. I will argue that Massholes do live up to that nickname - it's just not a weather related factor.






Oh, Jali! Thanks! I'm glad you're hearing my meep! :smug:

http://indiespeaker.com/wp-content/u...7/09/pic12.jpg
The South Shall Rise Again

I still don't know what this thread is about.

Is the OP mad that folks aren't driving around all year on snow tires?

And they drive poorly when the show hits because of this?

Do people still switch their tires in the winter? I did not know that.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SeeOhTwo

Scarier still are the blissfully ignorant morons who think 4-wheel drive = magic brakes. Coming soon to a ditch near you.

---

Word!!!!

I live in Canada, but I live in a part of Canada that is not necessarily going to get snow - the lower mainland of BC. Last year, however, we had snow to burn. :eek: Figuratively speaking. ;) I am, at this very moment, in the process of pricing out a set of winter wheels and tires for my car - and it's going to cost me a fortune, but I figure it will keep the snow away. Mostly.

It didn't work last year, though.:(

And there is nothing - NOTHING :fist::Shake::fist::Shake:, I say - nothing as irritating and annoying and just generally stupid than people who try to drive in the snow without winter tires. All-seasons won't do it, unless they're new. Everywhere I go around here is a hill. I can't go anywhere without going up a hill or down a hill and I am fed up with having to take a long detour to get around the morons trying to get uphill on bald tires.:Shake:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Oliveloaf

I still don't know what this thread is about.

Is the OP mad that folks aren't driving around all year on snow tires?

And they drive poorly when the show hits because of this?

---

Sorry - the stupid tires are a metaphor. AFAIK most people don't use specific snow tires. I'm just trying to come up with some explanation for why people who have been driving in snowy conditions all their adult lives seem to freak out, every year, with the first snow of fall/winter.

This lifelong Masshole refuses to accept any part of NYS into his region. :fist:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sarahfeena

Do people still switch their tires in the winter? I did not know that.

---

Actually, they sort of do again.

Some tire makers now sell really, really good (and expensive) high-performance snow tires.

These are mostly for high-end rear-drive cars.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Oliveloaf

Actually, they sort of do again.

Some tire makers now sell really, really good (and expensive) high-performance snow tires.

These are mostly for high-end rear-drive cars.

---

All season tires are not really "all season" unless your winter includes no real snow. Maybe on the prairies where there are no hills and the snow is as dry as sand you could get away with them, but not in the mountains, for sure. Once you get to Hope at this time of year the signs say "Do not proceed without winter tires or chains".

I guess my car qualifies as a "high-end rear-drive car" all right, but we also put snow tires on the old one.

I lived in fairfield county (south western CT) for 12 years. It's nothing like the rest of New England. The small towns want to project a quaint, New England-like atmosphere but there's no hiding the money. It's too wealthy NYC exurb for that.

Quote:

---

It's nothing like the rest of New England. The small towns want to project a quaint, New England-like atmosphere but there's no hiding the money

---

If you really wanted, you could use this exact statement to describe the Norfolk county, MA. See: Milton, Sharon, Canton, Westwood. At least, while I was growing up there.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OtakuLoki

Sorry - the stupid tires are a metaphor. AFAIK most people don't use specific snow tires. I'm just trying to come up with some explanation for why people who have been driving in snowy conditions all their adult lives seem to freak out, every year, with the first snow of fall/winter.

---

All I have to add is that this is true. It really doesn't have to do with the specific tires so much, as people just have snow amnesia the first time they see the stuff every season.

I don't know why, but I've noticed it too.


ETA: The first time this really occurred to me was winter of 2004. Except it wasn't snow, it was a heavy amount of road icing which every weather report warned about for three days prior. Traveling from Gloucester to Salem down 128 I saw well over a dozen cars wrecked off the side of the highway. The second I got on the road I was sliding, I couldn't understand why everyone else couldn't remember how to drive cautiously under those conditions.

It took me over four hours to get home, but I did get there.