Originally Posted by
FBinNY
Do we really need more jargon?
Can't we simply say something like dense fast moving traffic.
For my part I had no issue with "bumper to bumper" here. Even though I'm from NYC where it implies a slowly oozing p a ring lot, the context made it clear that was a suburban highway moving along at a decent clip.
"dense fast moving traffic" works for me. So did "50 mph bumper-to-bumper" really. The issue is obviously no gap in which to take the lane without risking the next car not being able to slow down in time. As a driver, it's also a situation where it's risky to slam your brakes, and while I'm not concerned as a cyclist with short delays of motor vehicle traffic if that slight inconvenience is making me safer, I don't think it's a good idea to deliberately put drivers in a safety dilemma where they are choosing between their safety and mine. I think you and I agree that lane-choice is highly contextual, and Joey's point as I understood it is that the same road may be a completely different context at another time of day. That's a point worth discussing while the "proper" meaning of bumper-to-bumper is a complete waste of time.
I'd bet money that you would have something interesting to say about "same road different context" whether you agreed or disagreed with the idea.