Forum menu
Oh, and,
If your idea of overtaking is to pull out into the middle of the road a yard behind the next vehicle before deciding whether to commit or not, you're Doing It Wrong. The key to overtaking is to drop back and apply a bit of forward planning. That way you've got vastly improved visibility and the opportunity to build up relative speed before starting the overtake.
100% disagree with you on the overtaking molgrips. People should be leaving enough space so that if others decide to overtake they can, regardless of their own intentions. It's a fairly typical British motoring (in fact anything) attitude, "I'm not doing something so you're not."
Edit: I'm not saying you don't leave space, but what has what people behind you do got to do with you as long as they are safe?
I was speeding and running red lights, going down the wrong way on one way streets, pavements, zipping over zebra crossings, weaving in/out of traffic and you know what it was fun.
I was on my roadie hacking through That London.
Even had a couple of races with other roadies out playing.
"turns back, walks off and snubs all the "OMG!!!'ers""
I often find it rather silly when people reply to a thread before reading it all, but this time I am making an exception. I just have to know!
"Many motorists feel entitled to something they are not entitled to. They get stroppy when they don't get what they want and the emotion means that any logical thought is thrown out of the pram together with ther toys.
The problem is that they were sold a lifestyle, a dream, a trophy that they have now failed to receive. Welcome to modern marketing... "
Are you currently strung out on crack or just really stupid?
Thats what happened - ever seen any advertising for cars? All anyone actully needs is a basic vehicle - fiat panda or the like
I often find it rather silly when people reply to a thread before reading it all, but this time I am making an exception. I just have to know!"Many motorists feel entitled to something they are not entitled to. They get stroppy when they don't get what they want and the emotion means that any logical thought is thrown out of the pram together with ther toys.
The problem is that they were sold a lifestyle, a dream, a trophy that they have now failed to receive. Welcome to modern marketing... "
Are you currently strung out on crack or just really stupid?
All anyone actully needs is a basic vehicle - fiat panda or the like
TJ, I like you, but you really do say some ill-conceived things sometimes.
http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/i-was-only-speeding-slightly/
epic youtube video embed fail
Cougar - its true tho - all anyone needs is a basic vehicle - modern cars are so good that any car will fulfil the role of transport. Anything else is about dreams and aspirations that can never be fulfilled on the UKs crowded roads.
You're going to get a family of six plus bikes in a Panda?
You're going to get a Panda up unmade rural roads if you live out in the sticks?
You're going to do 50,000 miles a year for work on the motorways in a Panda?
Arguably, by your argument no-one "needs" a car at all, it's a luxury.
Fiat Panda[i] or the like [/i]
A panda is at least as good on unmade rural roads - not that we have many here. They do a 4x4 for that reason and Italy has a lot of gravel roads.
How many folk need a car for a family of 6 plus bikes - other basic cars are available
50 000 miles a year? why not?.
TJ - you are a comedy genius - I salute you sir!
Most people describe bikes in the way you describe cars 😆
However you want to put it the basic premise is true which is
Many motorists feel entitled to something they are not entitled to. They get stroppy when they don't get what they want and the emotion means that any logical thought is thrown out of the pram together with ther toys.The problem is that they were sold a lifestyle, a dream, a trophy that they have now failed to receive. Welcome to modern marketing... "
A car for utility does not need 100+ bhp etc etc. A family car 25 years ago weighed half what it does now and had half the power and half the gadgets
TJ, am i guessing you don't drive or do little mileage?
And was less than half as safe. IIRC, most of the weight gains are to do with crash protection 🙂TandemJeremy - MemberA car for utility does not need 100+ bhp etc etc. A family car 25 years ago weighed half what it does now and had half the power and half the gadgets
You're right though. As a family of 4 (and a dog) we'd load up a Morris Traveller and go off camping for two weeks. I don't recall feeling squashed in it, but seeing one recently brought home just how small it was.
The big car fascination does seem to be quite UK-centric though. In France and Italy, it's more common to see small cars being driven fast than fast cars.
I have a car with a bit of poke. I love getting the thrill of the oomph even though it doesn't actually get me anywhere quicker.
It's fun, that's why I prefer a car with more power than I need.
Utilitarianism is ok but I like a bit of fun in my life.
Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks that making progress on a single carraigeway isn't akin to mugging grannies in a supermarket queue.
Common sense prevails
How many folk need a car for a family of 6 plus bikes
Everyone with four kids? Going on an extended camping trip I can fill a family sized car without any kids at all.
50 000 miles a year? why not?.
Because you'd spend the next year in traction.
What I'm getting at is, it's about the right tool for the job. I [i]could[/i] pound in nails with a rock, but I'd rather have a hammer, and if I did it professionally then I'd want a nail gun.
To say "all *anyone* needs is a Panda or the like" is utter nonsense. It might be true for some people, sure, but different people have different usage requirements.
What bike do you ride, TJ? Because all anyone actually needs is a [url= http://www.bikes2udirect.com/B3892.html?mv_pc=gp1 ]basic bike[/url].
To extend on a similar point, when will people learn to use motorways correctly? My understanding is that everyone should be in lane 1 unless overtaking (as in France - works perfectly). The key point is to always move back in once you have overtaken.
Very few people actually do this, and this is why motorways tend to crawl along at the same speed across all lanes.
My understanding is that everyone should be in lane 1 unless overtaking (as in France - works perfectly). The key point is to always move back in once you have overtaken.Very few people actually do this, and this is why motorways tend to crawl along at the same speed across all lanes.
Yes it does my head in. There seems to be a good proportion of motorway drivers who want to do their entire journey in the middle lane. But we should probably accept that there are things in this country that we do well on the roads - general courtesy and not killing that many people generally and things we do badly - overaking and lane discipline.
Yes the French are great at lane discipline but they tailgate like maniacs and parking that only results in a single dent is considered successful.
Yes the French are great at lane discipline but they tailgate like maniacs and parking that only results in a single dent is considered successful.
Yes, on my frequent trips to France it always makes me chuckle at how many (nearly all?) cars have small dents in them.
Kind of makes me think they're less bothered about their cars than we are.
Not saying that's a good or bad thing, just different viewpoint.
If you want to see dented cars, go to Rome...
Will you lot stop flirting and get on with the angry sex please.
My understanding is that everyone should be in lane 1 unless overtaking (as in France - works perfectly).
In France they use the right hand lane except when overtaking? Just like here then.
I drive for a living, and everyday I see near misses and dodgey overtakes caused by slower drivers,or poor driving not necesserily the ones speeding.
driving slowley increases driver fustration and creates more hazzards imhe.
As a motorcyclist theres a clear definition between making progress safely, and dangerous speeds on the road.
Its only courteous to warn other motorists of accident blackspots identified by camera vans or other "saftey camera devices" 😉
driving slowley increases driver fustration and creates more hazzards imhe.
Its the impatient driver that creates the hazard not the slow one.
driving slowley increases driver fustration and creates more hazzards imhe.
Whilst I don't disagree, that's kind of akin to the 'well, she was asking for it' defence.
Slow drivers increase frustration, sure. But the frustrated drivers are the ones causing accidents.
Its the impatient driver that creates the hazard not the slow one.
No. The slow driver creates the hazard, the impatient driver fails to avoid the hazard. If I smash a wheel on a pothole, it's my fault for not negotiating it, but it's the pothole that's the hazard.
Tehre is no hazard unless there is an impatient driver. There is no hazard without an impatient driver.
No matter how you dress it up its not the slow driver creating the danger - its the impatient one
Creating danger isn't the same thing as creating a hazard. Nice try though.
In France they use the right hand lane except when overtaking? Just like here then.
Took me a while at this late hour but good one 😛
I have been googling 'fat man small car' to try and disprove TJ's (hi TJ) claim that the Fiat Panda is the only car anyone would ever need. I couldn't find a picture of a man too fat to fit in a Fiat Panda, so I concede the point and now agree with TJ. I did, however, find this, which I think is worth posting up.
[img] 
[/img]
No matter how you dress it up its not the slow driver creating the danger - its the impatient one
Both have an element of responsibility.
Davidjones
The slow driver is driving along safely within the rules of the road creating no danger at all. The impatient driver creates the danger by his impatience to overtake and by doing so inappropriately
If the slow driver is driving slower than you woulod expect them to be, they too are causing problems.
In fact, [url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3694201.stm ] Scotland's finest [/url] have it down as "driving carelessly and without due consideration for other road users".
End.
The slow driver is driving along safely within the rules of the road
See [b]Driving without reasonable consideration - Section 3 RTA 1988[/b]
Which includes
[i]unnecessarily slow driving or braking without good cause[/i]
Not sure what constitutes unnecessarily slow driving, but it seems there is provision to address the issue. I'd personally argue that unnecessarily slow is when you have a queue and people are getting frustrated. You almost always have the option to pull in and let people pass.
Edit: Thinking about it, this might be a good candidate for some camera footage to be submitted to the police so they can take action...? Let's say you're following someone who's doing 50 or less in a 60 on a good road, and you just happen to have a dash mounted camera...?
That is for extreme instances - not what most folk on here are complaining about
50 in a 60? perfectly acceptable
Its the people getting frustrated that are at fault
That is for extreme instances
Not going to get in to an argument, but that is not what is written. The text just says "unnecessarily".
That is for extreme instances
🙂
"If the slow driver is driving slower than you woulod expect them to be"
Which "you" are you talking about? The abstract reasonable person or the hair-trigger aggro merchants that are on this thread? 😀
How about a cyclist pootling along at 12 mph - are they a hazard? or a tractor at 25 mph?
How about a cyclist pootling along at 12 mph - are they a hazard? or a tractor at 25 mph?
Tractors often have big amber flashing lights on them, why do you think that might be? Have they just come from a rave?
I'd personally argue that unnecessarily slow is when you have a queue and people are getting frustrated.
Not necessarily. I have a queue of people following me every time I drive in south Bristol. That's because I'm one of the very few people here who stick to the speed limit.
I'd argue that anyone who can't manage to organise their right foot and eyes so that they observe the limit needs to re-take their test.
How about a cyclist pootling along at 12 mph - are they a hazard? or a tractor at 25 mph?
Yes TJ those would be hazards too well spotted
"Unnecessarily slow" is when you're driving significantly slower than conditions would safely allow.
For example. Driving to work this morning, I encountered a hazard in the form of an elderly driver travelling at 25mph in a NSL (60mph) area. I waited patiently until visibility was good and the road was clear, then smoothly overtook them, safely passing the hazard and going on my way.
You'll fail your driving test for driving too slowly - "failure to make progress" it's called. You can be pulled over for it too; drive down the motorway at 30mph and see how far you get before the police come to investigate.
hazard assessment is subjective