Forum menu
Ian - how can you do a test in one of the major cities then?
I suspect it was one passed in 1954
Which is IIRC about right for TJ 🙂
Regarding people not overtaking when they should- sadly I usually can't. I'm crap at it because my old car lacks the gumption to overtake without 5 miles of clear space.
my old car lacks the gumption to overtake without 5 miles of clear space
Well, if I were you, I'd keep well clear of the roads when m_f and some of his supporters are on the road. You don't want to be inconveniencing them now...
5mph (but there were speed bumps on the stretch of road, but FFS I can go over them at 30mph in my (very firmly suspended) car without issue.
Surely this is trolling?
Are people driving slower because of the price of petrol? Generally a good thing imo.
I do find driving in the Lakes infuriating sometimes though - lots of people who've seemingly never driven on narrow, windy roads before and slow down to 10mph for every bend.
Maybe they were lost or looking for some shop and hence driving slow.
Life is too short...
Regarding people not overtaking when they should- sadly I usually can't. I'm crap at it because my old car lacks the gumption to overtake without 5 miles of clear space.
With practice, you can back off (opens up your sightlines and gives you room), eyeball a spot for overtaking then put your foot down in anticipation of the overtake. If someone comes the other way, you can just brake or lift off the throttle. Hopefully I'm not teaching you how to suck eggs 😆
I know the theory and am happy doing it in modern cars with engines rather than 300 mice in wheels but my car won't accelerate past someone doing 50 without a huge distance.
I remember our hire car in SW France - a Hyundai Getz 1.0. Luckily there are huge long straights there because it genuinely needed a quarter of a mile++ and merciless thrashing to overtake anything.
Handy to have a bit of oomph - reduces your TED and is (if sensibly used) safer.
Are people driving slower because of the price of petrol? Generally a good thing imo.
Perhaps that is the reason - still is often dangerous.
Wikipedia suggests Turtle Exclusion Device for TED?
TJ, you're ace, bang on.
I wonder how many people have been killed because a motor vehicle was going too slow? Not many I'd wager. As a driver, you should always expect a cyclist or other road user to be travelling at anything from 1-20mph or whatever, unless you are on a dual carriageway or motorway.
Nope - Turd Excreting Donkey.
Or Time Exposed to Danger 😉
Time Exposed to Danger
Someone's been watching repeats of Driven...
As a driver, you should always expect a cyclist or other road user to be travelling at anything from 1-20mph
Agreed - but it doesn't alter the fact that someone driving a car that is able to progress at the speed limit should drive at half the limit when driving in normal circumstances in good conditions on a stretch of road like the one in my OP.
The point is, if they don't have the confidence to do a fairly basic task of driving competently at 60 mph in an NSL, then they probably shouldn't be driving at all.
Not true, I know a few drivers who'd be cautious of driving at 60 in a 60 as they'd rather err on the side of caution. They'll happily use the motorway at 60-70 but don't want to blast around the NSLs at the limit allowed by the law, they have no urgency and no need to do so, so why should they? Because you can't overtake for toffee?
Of course the flip side is that they WOULD, when they spotted a lot of traffic behind, pull over and let people pass if they wanted to. The roads are there for all, not just those who want to drive to the limits allowed.
While I find them annoying to get stuck behind, as I said, and I rarely have a queue of traffic behind me, I never complain when stuck behind someone driving lower than the limit unless they're driving *erratically* - dabbing the brakes with oncoming traffic, braking for every bend despite not changing speeds or actually needing it. Likewise if I'm cruising along at 40-50 in the sun on an NSL and you sit up my arse and get upset at me I'll laugh in your face, lifes too short.
I can see where you're coming from, I really can, but I think you have to accept that roads are not for getting from one place to another as fast as legally possible, not everyoen is in a rush and anyone with any level of skill should be able to pass them soon enough to not build up a queue.
The people that annoy me the most are those who drive up the bum of the slow car, too close to see past, and can't overtake meaning anyone behind has several cars to pass and to deal with the unpredictable moron in 2nd place who's popping left and right trying to see past the leader.
Someone's been watching repeats of Driven...
Never seen it.
Someone's actually done IAM and Cop training actually....
Well, I passed my test towards the backend of last year and can confirm that in a minor city at least (derby) driving on a dual carriageway was a necessary component and that going too slow would have been a problem.
Someone above has mentioned the thing that annoys me most - people who, for whatever fearful reason, have to slow down [i]dramatically[/i] for corners that don't warrant it.
And people with ABS fitted - Arbitrary Braking Systems.
Arbitrary Braking Sytems - love it, and bang-on!
I can see where you're coming from, I really can, but I think you have to accept that roads are not for getting from one place to another as fast as legally possible, not everyoen is in a rush and anyone with any level of skill should be able to pass them soon enough to not build up a queue.
On the A roads in Lincolnshire and Norfolk, this kind of attitude causes big problems - there are no motorways, and they're mostly single carriageway. One articulated lorry doing the mandatory 40mph or slow driver has a large queue form behind it very quickly, making it very dangerous for people to overtake.
The roads are there for all
Wrong, the roads are there for those competent to use them. This is why we have driving tests. If you can't drive at a speed suitable for the conditions (which is what we're talking about here), then perhaps you should go and have a chat with the DVLA about handing your license in. After all, you are quite likely to have had to demonstrate your ability to handle a car at speed to pass said test in the first place.
Well said Zokes.
It is interesting to note that all the decriers have ignored my comment about WHY the driver was travelling at 20mph when the road was clear and safe to travel at 30mph on.
Hesitant, slow driving IS very dangerous [b]for people who are not concentrating[/b] and causes loads of accidents [b]because people are not concentrating[/b] - it's just hard to convict someone doing it.
HTH. 😉
Cop training taught us how to go much slower than "expected" in certain conditions (narrow road, blind bend, etc) as well as "briskly" when appropriate.Always expect a child/bike/tractor around every bend and you'll probably never crash.
totally agree.
Wrong, the roads are there for those competent to use them. This is why we have driving tests. If you can't drive at a speed suitable for the conditions (which is what we're talking about here), then perhaps you should go and have a chat with the DVLA about handing your license in. After all, you are quite likely to have had to demonstrate your ability to handle a car at speed to pass said test in the first place.
You fail simply because you assume that driving below the limit suggests you're not capable of driving AT the limit. There is no minimum limit, driving below the limit is not a crime and is in no way a problem if everyone else possesses the skills they were required to have when passing the test (overtaking) just the same as the slow driver. Obviously the slow driver should, if a queue of idiots builds up or the road doesnt allow overtaking, pull over to allow others to pass where safe.
m_f - I didn't ignore the reason for driving at 20, I simply defended peoples ability to drive at that speed should they want to, as it is entirely legal and only a problem if other people are idiots. I don't condone driving slowly if it's solely because you're faffing in the footwell and unable to concentrate on the road.
Obviously the slow driver should, if a queue of idiots builds up or the road doesnt allow overtaking, pull over to allow others to pass where safe.
Agreed - although it has been my recent experience that people are simply not concentrating. If I have reason to drive at a speed that is holding someone up, I would indicate and let them past.
You fail simply because you assume that driving below the limit suggests you're not capable of driving AT the limit.
Given that most are also incapable of seeing the 30mph signs and reducing their speed when they get to villages, then yes, I do quite rightly make that assumption. Most also exhibit the other tendencies mentioned on this thread: unnecessary braking, swerving / veering around, no obvious perception of anything happening around them. Quite a few actually seem surprised to be driving a car if you glance sideways whilst overtaking.
Ultimately, roads are a means of transport, designed to get people from A to B. If you're not in a rush, great, pull over and look at the view; but please bear in mind there are other people with more exciting things in their lives at A and B, and quite rightly don't need some self righteous twonk driving at 40 when 60 is quite safe.
I normally get 380 miles out of a tank of fuel, I managed 483 this week by driving slowly. I made sure I wasn't holding anyone up though!
Wrong, the roads are there for those competent to use them. This is why we have driving tests.
Oh, and for cyclists who don't need to pass a test at all, oh and horse riders, who also don't.
As a cyclist, I'm far more scared of fast drivers who think their speed and how close they can overtake is representative of their virility, than of someone driving slowly.
To hell with forum etiquette - I'll quote myself frome the bad drivers thread...
I've always thought that the Italians are rather good.Yes, they drive with a certain panache - but in general seem to pull it off. A mixture of nerve and skill?.....(and luck?)
[b]On returning from one trip to Italy I concluded that in the UK we had all been bored / subdued into a skill free, attention free, ability free moron zone [/b]
This was from a few years ago, but I had already taken the view that years of nanny state mollycoddling, speed is bad, driving is reeeeaaaallly dangerous do-gooder propaganda had turned this country's drivers into a collective comatose state - driving along aware only of the car xm in front, whether bunched on the M-Way at 90 in fog or driving in town with multiple hazards and distractions
Zokes, I never disagreed, people who are unsafe are a bad thing, my point is that if you want to drive at 40 in a 60, you can. It's fine. If you've more important things at A or B, learn to overtake. If there's no-where to overtake then sure it's the slow drivers responsibility to pull over to let you past.
How do you cope with cyclists at 15mph? Do you get bent all out of shape with them too? Throw a fit because they're daring to cycle on a road with double whites at less than the speed limit? The "I want to be there now and you're in my way" attitude really is a bit pathetic. No-one condones poor driving, but slow does not necessarily mean poor. (as as I've said in the past, I own a 300hp sports car, I'm not one of the slow drivers in question).
the decriers have ignored my comment
It's a classic Trolling Zoo Fighter move. Additional information is introduced once the thread has got going to prove beyond doubt that the OP is in the right. Masterfully done. 🙂
I'm certainly driving slower 'coz of fuel prices. Only to keep the rev range .. I still drive as near speed limits as economic driving permits .. i.e. may start to slow a little sooner, change down a gear on bendy hills yadda yadda.
29 going on 92 me.
but I can't really afford to run the car I'm driving
I think they fail you if you go 'too slow' in tests as they want you to show appropriate confidence in your ability.
NB we took my granny off the road when she said she never used any higher gear than 2nd and that's the truth. Bear in mind that 1/2 - 1 mile in any direction of her house she's in NSL zones.
.... the next service we told the local village mechanic to lie as she was only going to keep driving as long has her then current little old car did.
When I drive to work I regularly follow drivers in NSL @ 45mph, 50 limit @ 45, 30 limit into village @ 45. I think there are those golden oldies that are scared of 5th gear.
Manonsoul and Coffeeking, you are being particularity pedantic about a small part of the argument. To assume that anyone driving at whilst paying attention 60 would not give you enough room, whilst those bimbling along not paying attention to anything at 40 would is simply naive. I'd rather be overtaken at 60 by someone who was reading the road, saw there was room and passed with plenty of space; as opposed to someone at 40 who didn't see me until the last second and squeezed past.
No-one condones poor driving, but slow does not necessarily mean poor.
But usually, it does. In 7 years of driving in North Wales, most cars I catch up and overtake have some doddery old bloke peering through the wheel gripping it in terror. The exception to this is summer, when the roads are full of people pointing at sheep when they should be looking where they're going. Having recently moved to the moors above Bolton, I've not seen much of a change to this demographic.
I admit all this may sound self important, but it's not meant as such. Just how sad can your days be if the highlight of it is neither where you came from, nor where you are going, but the boring bit in between? As said, if you want to look at the scenery. Pull over and admire at your leisure...
If you've more important things at A or B, learn to overtake. If there's no-where to overtake then sure it's the slow drivers responsibility to pull over to let you past.
I can, have a car that allows it pretty easily, and do. If a slow driver is unwilling to pull over, then they fit firmly in the 'unaware of what's going around them' category, and are therefore a poor driver. The point is, in your test you are expected to 'make good progress'. If a driver is not doing so, they're driving in a manner that would cause them to fail their test, and are therefore a poor driver.
On returning from one trip to Italy I concluded that in the UK we had all been bored / subdued into a skill free, attention free, ability free moron zone
lol - I saw some terrible terrible driving in Italy. They also have significantly more deaths/person than we do. Only if you think there is something clever about being aggressive and macho would you think driving was better in Italy.
you are being particularity pedantic about a small part of the argument.
Nope, I'm pointing out that driving slowly is not a crime and does not mean someone is lacking confidence, ability or skills to go fast. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, but you can't generalise and say "everyone driving slowly is a pain in the ass" just as you can't say everyone driving at or slightly above the limit is dangerous and out of control.
lol - I saw some terrible terrible driving in Italy. They also have significantly more deaths/person than we do. Only if you think there is something clever about being aggressive and macho would you think driving was better in Italy.
Ahhh, but I haven't said that they are better drivers...
FWIW, they scared the sh!t out of me - BUT the really striking contrast with the UK was how so many drivers here trundle around like drones, not paying attention, not concentrating, no spatial / situational awareness and basically not recognising any need for knowledge, skill and judgement.
1) there's a perception amongst some drivers that slower is safer/better driving; this is encouraged by the police and govt. (keed spills)
2) the population is getting older, hubby has to stop driving and Gladys has to learn to drive again even though she's been driven around by Cyril all her adult life, she's scared sh1tless by the fast moving pace of traffic nowadays, but Cyril bullies her in to driving down to the Lidl, so she wibbles along at walking pace.
3) fuel is stupidly expensive, I'm certainly driving lightfoot these days
Zokes, I suppose the issue for me is that people who drive fast, or 'make good progress' or whatever term you want to couch it in, often believe they are a better driver because they do so. Invariably, they are not.
Yes, I would prefer to be overtaken by a driver who was paying attention and gave me lots of space than one who wasn't. But I'd also prefer if they were driving slower. If you think otherwise, then I rather doubt you have cycled much on the roads. A car overtaking a cyclist perfectly legally at 55mph in a 60mph zone feels like the wrath of God going past.
Speed kills.
A car overtaking a cyclist perfectly legally at 55mph in a 60mph zone feels like the wrath of God going past.
I'd rather the 'wrath of god' of someone going past me, than someone who probably died a few weeks before they got into the car bimbling into me at 40.
[u][b]INAPPROPRIATE[/b][/u]Speed kills.
but you can't generalise and say "everyone driving slowly is a pain in the ass" just as you can't say everyone driving at or slightly above the limit is dangerous and out of control.
I agree. However it's usually the slow drivers who have that perception of faster drivers...
I do REALLY hate being passed on my road bike by cars doing 60/70 up a hill (when I'm doing 10ish mph!). Extremely dangerous and stupid. As a cyclist myself, I give cyclists loads of room when I'm driving.
It's so bad that I have changed a few regular routes to avoid all fast (for cars) uphill sections. Still alive so it's working so far.
It's not the speed (although it's shocking to the cyclist) it's the road positioning that's dangerous.
A car overtaking a cyclist perfectly legally at 55mph in a 60mph zone feels like the wrath of God going past.
Does it? Can't say that's something I find provided the car gives me the correct amount of room. Much preferred to somebody crawling past giving me no room because they're scared to cross the white line.
More car drivers driving slowly - good - that will reduce casualties.
A very one dimensional way of looking at it - do you have definitive proof that's the case? I'd suggest that drivers such as that mentioned in the OP who are going far slower than the reasonable/legal speed for the road are actually likely to result in more casualties due to provoking other drivers into doing dangerous things. That of course is assuming all things are equal - it is of course bad driving and lack of attention rather than speed itself which results in road casualties.
BTW I passed my test in 1987 (making me an average middle aged STWer) without going over 30mph.
INAPPROPRIATE Speed kills.
I'd disagree - bad decision making kills.
Drivers going too fast, driving beyond their vision / braking distance, not anticipating danger, are all making bad decisions. Most of the time they get away with it and believe themselves good drivers (and most of us would be included from time to time).
On the other hand, the ditherers give the impression of not knowing what a decision is, let alone the ability to make good ones. Whether this is reality or an unjust perception is irrelevant in terms of why they bother other road users - it's just too easy to conclude that they aren't up to it..
In my experience it is the drivers that have no awareness of what is going on around them, driving slowly for no reason etc that are the ones that will continue on their chosen path and not give cyclists room.
I always pull over to the kerb side as far as is safe to do so when seeing a bike coming in the opposite direction simply so the car manoeuvring around it can give it more space but you often get people still buzzing the cyclist presumably because they are not concentrating and haven't registered the fact that there is space for them to allow the cyclist room.
And another thing - how many of these drivers that give cyclists no room would slow right down behind a horse and only overtake when they have space to go right to the other carriageway?