Driving Pet Peeves

[speedy_gonzales]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Standard practice? I generally drive at our round about the speed limit and it's rare that I overtake a motorbike.

Well, if the bike is doing the speed limit, you won't 😕
My point, perhaps poorly put forward is that we were getting trained to drive towards the speed limit of conditions allowed.

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well, if the bike is doing the speed limit, you won't
My point, perhaps poorly put forward is that we were getting trained to drive towards the speed limit of conditions allowed.

Sorry, I understood that you were told the standard practice was to sit below the speed limit.

[speedy_gonzales]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sorry, I understood that you were told the standard practice was to sit below the speed limit.

Ahhh, like I said, probably poorly written on my behalf.
We were told to ride at the "speed band" between the posted limit and the next recognised limit down.
Obviously many folk, including bikers, exceed the posted limit (a couple of SP30's and an SP50 is testament to that) but the message was not to sit at 45 in a 60 or 70 if conditions allow you to make progress, faster.

[lapsedhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sorry, I can't remember exactly what he said about that.


But this is apparently the advice given out:

"Many people are nervous when driving on motorways due to the volume of traffic and the high speeds. Such drivers may tend to drive a little slower than the maximum speed limit of 70 mph.

Anywhere between 50 mph and 70 mph is acceptable although any slower, you would yourself become a hazard and increase the potential of being involved in an accident or creating an accident for others.

If you do feel the need to drive excessively slow on a motorway, if possible find an alternative route that eliminates such high speed roads."

https://www.drivingtesttips.biz/mini...-too-slow.html

(p.s. I added the bold highlights)

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Safer than a driver doing 45mph in a 30 zone. If other drivers are not aware of what is going on around them then they are as much of a problem

I think this as close as we'll get to you admitting that you have got this one one wrong.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Final point - if someone is going at 45mph, there might be a reason, mechanical, physical or other reason.

If you, doing 70ish, don't notice the other driver, doing 45ish, and run into the rear of the car, who do you think would face prosecution?

Absolutely the person in the car driving at 45 either because the car is unfit to drive or they are physically unfit to drive competently. You are really going round in circles on this one.

Its ok to just say that actually cars shouldn't be driving at 45mph. Keith's post confirms that

[calumhibee1]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Re acceptable driving speeds on roads. I sat my motorbike test 10 years after my car test. The motorbike test was much more intensive, and beside training you to pass the test, they trained you to stay alive.
My instructor, who was ex-Police, told me it was standard practice to drive between the posted limit and the one below if conditions allowed.
So, on a motorway, you'd be between 60 & 70. Dual carriageway the same, single carriageway 50-60, a posted 40 limit would be 30-40 and obviously below 30 for urban areas (putting 20's to one side).
I was taught, for my test, to exaggerate the acknowledgment of speed limit changes for the benefit of the DSA examiner. So big visual look at the speed roundels, then a marked increase or decrease of speed to demonstrate an awareness of the posted limit.
Re cars that seem to crawl at a very low speed relative to those around them, they may well have a valid reason but ignoring any perceived inconvenience to other road users, they're just inviting some pernickty traffic cop to give them a tug to ask them if they "know the speed limit".

That is the case.

It’s not enforced as strictly as speeding is for obvious reasons but you’re expected to drive pretty much no less than 10mph below the speed limit as you’ve said. If you are doing less than that (although apparently it would need to be a good bit less to realistically get pulled over) then you should be getting pulled for it. Reason being, as others have said, it’s dangerous.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this as close as we'll get to you admitting that you have got this one one wrong.



Absolutely the person in the car driving at 45 either because the car is unfit to drive or they are physically unfit to drive competently. You are really going round in circles on this one.

Its ok to just say that actually cars shouldn't be driving at 45mph. Keith's post confirms that

You do realise that things can go wrong on the journey. My car had been in for a service, on the way home, on a single carriageway section of the A9 it decided to enter 'limp home mode'. I have also asked the question whether it is possible that the car in question was electric and needed to conserve range.

Feel free to drive as fast as possible and ram the back of any car going slower, I'm sure you'll feel better for it. 🙄

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You do realise that things can go wrong on the journey. My car had been in for a service, on the way home, on a single carriageway section of the A9 it decided to enter 'limp home mode'. I have also asked the question whether it is possible that the car in question was electric and needed to conserve range.

Feel free to drive as fast as possible and ram the back of any car going slower, I'm sure you'll feel better for it. ��

Jesus, Joseph, Mary and the wee donkey, as pointed out already the original post was about people driving too slowly for no reason. To which you have indicated that you think its acceptable to do so without reason.

If there is a valid reason then thats not ideal but understandable. I dont think however that either of your reasons are very good ones. If your car is trundling along you'd be better finding a safe space to pull over and calling breakdown recovery rather than remaining a hazard in the road. Anyone driving electric cars and not knowing how much charge they have in relation to a journey should not be driving.

Your last sentence is absolutely laughable - poor stuff. I really dont understand why sometimes people can't just admit they are wrong.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Jesus, Joseph, Mary and the wee donkey, as pointed out already the original post was about people driving too slowly for no reason. To which you have indicated that you think its acceptable to do so without reason.

If there is a valid reason then thats not ideal but understandable. I dont think however that either of your reasons are very good ones. If your car is trundling along you'd be better finding a safe space to pull over and calling breakdown recovery rather than remaining a hazard in the road. Anyone driving electric cars and not knowing how much charge they have in relation to a journey should not be driving.

Your last sentence is absolutely laughable - poor stuff. I really dont understand why sometimes people can't just admit they are wrong.

I'd like to know how the OP could tell the car was being driven at 45mph "for no reason" did they ask? I'm pretty sure any car, regardless of speed is being driven for a reason. 😁

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Haha. What are you on about single carriageway roads for? They are of no relevance to anythlng here.

Eh!!! This is the driving pet peeves thread. Of course single carriageway roads are relevant 🤔

[AltheHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this as close as we'll get to you admitting that you have got this one one wrong.



Absolutely the person in the car driving at 45 either because the car is unfit to drive or they are physically unfit to drive competently. You are really going round in circles on this one.

Its ok to just say that actually cars shouldn't be driving at 45mph. Keith's post confirms that

Actually, I believe in the UK that the presumption is that the person who runs into the other is to blame; so the person going at 70. Also, from watching TV, I think that 'failing to maintain a safe gap', or similar wording is a specific offence down under.

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Eh!!! This is the driving pet peeves thread. Of course single carriageway roads are relevant 🤔

It was completely irrelevant to the point you were responding to though.

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Actually, I believe in the UK that the presumption is that the person who runs into the other is to blame; so the person going at 70. Also, from watching TV, I think that 'failing to maintain a safe gap', or similar wording is a specific offence down under.

Yeah usually ( but not always). It wouldn't change the fact that if you drive too slow without good reason then you are in the wrong.

[Northernhibee]

Every ****ing time at the same roundabout before the Tay Bridge someone cuts into your lane in front of you and slams on the brakes in your own braking zone so they can be one car in front. Dangerous and moronic.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yeah usually ( but not always). It wouldn't change the fact that if you drive too slow without good reason then you are in the wrong.

But, here is the point, you and I are not arbiters of what is "driving too slow without good reason"

Remember, this is on a dual carriageway and the first time anyone is aware of the car is when you see that you are gaining on them, you have no idea what has happened in the moments beforehand and that they are possibly driving to the next lay-by.

We can't prejudge the action of others without knowing all the facts. All I'm trying to say is that you and I have no idea what the circumstances were and should give the driver the benefit of the doubt.

[danhibees1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes that’s what I meant maybe didn’t explain it well.😀

You pull onto motorway maybe behind a lorry you go to overtake but the car that followed you on has come straight across and stopped you pulling out.

Funnily enough, I came on to post this - well mine was slightly worse (obviously ) I think.

Coming up a slip road and there was a big lorry coming down the slow lane so I slowed down a tad to time it so that I could pull in behind the lorry before I ran out of slip road in front of me.

The lorry gets up along side me and the car behind me decides to dart out immediately behind the lorry (didn't/couldn't then immediately proceed to the fast lane either) leaving me with no road to get on to and having to slow down further before then getting on to the main road at a much reduced speed.

I'm usually pretty calm and just laugh off a lot of the stuff I see on the roads/the sort of stuff that's posted on here - but that felt like it could have endangered me and I lost it with them (well, I shouted at my window in their direction ).

[Scouse Hibee]

People who run temporary red lights into a single file traffic and meet the traffic head on with nowhere to manoeuvre apart from in reverse, absolute ****wits.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yeah usually ( but not always). It wouldn't change the fact that if you drive too slow without good reason then you are in the wrong.

Maybe, just maybe partially to blame. I don't think driving 40 would fall into that category though.

[AltheHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Maybe, just maybe partially to blame. I don't think driving 40 would fall into that category though.

The thing is, the police would look at it as you going too fast and not able to slow in time. I was taught that you should be able to stop in the distance you can see. That's why we slow down on bends and in fog. There's no getting away from the fact that whatever reason someone is going slow, you shouldn't run into them under normal circumstances.

[AltheHibby]

Source:https://www.drivingtestsuccess.com/b...ation-distance


"Always know your limitations, and remember that: “Only a fool breaks the 2-second rule.”

Multiple collisions or pile-ups are caused by driving too close and too fast, which leads to drivers being unable to brake in time. You can avoid this by looking well forward, checking how the traffic is performing, getting clues from large vehicles, looking for buses pulling in and out, taxis stopping and turning, junctions and pedestrians."

And:

"Plus, if you hit the car in front of you, you are considered to blame. You have no choice as to the space left behind you, but you can control the amount of space in front".

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Source:https://www.drivingtestsuccess.com/b...ation-distance


"Always know your limitations, and remember that: “Only a fool breaks the 2-second rule.”

Multiple collisions or pile-ups are caused by driving too close and too fast, which leads to drivers being unable to brake in time. You can avoid this by looking well forward, checking how the traffic is performing, getting clues from large vehicles, looking for buses pulling in and out, taxis stopping and turning, junctions and pedestrians."

And:

"Plus, if you hit the car in front of you, you are considered to blame. You have no choice as to the space left behind you, but you can control the amount of space in front".

Ah yes, remember the 2 second rule, let the car in front pass an identifiable point, count 1 pink elephant, 2 pink elephant and if you are past the point you are too close. I wonder if people still learn these things. Somehow I doubt it. 😉

[Alfiembra]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ah yes, remember the 2 second rule, let the car in front pass an identifiable point, count 1 pink elephant, 2 pink elephant and if you are past the point you are too close. I wonder if people still learn these things. Somehow I doubt it. 😉

I’ll see your pink elephants and raise you 1 Mississippi 2 Mississippi.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’ll see your pink elephants and raise you 1 Mississippi 2 Mississippi.

When I learned to drive there were no breathalysers 😉

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The thing is, the police would look at it as you going too fast and not able to slow in time. I was taught that you should be able to stop in the distance you can see. That's why we slow down on bends and in fog. There's no getting away from the fact that whatever reason someone is going slow, you shouldn't run into them under normal circumstances.

Same can be said for hitting something that's not moving. If you hit a broken down car for example, then chances are you'll get done for careless driving and rightly so.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Source:https://www.drivingtestsuccess.com/b...ation-distance


"Always know your limitations, and remember that: “Only a fool breaks the 2-second rule.”

Multiple collisions or pile-ups are caused by driving too close and too fast, which leads to drivers being unable to brake in time. You can avoid this by looking well forward, checking how the traffic is performing, getting clues from large vehicles, looking for buses pulling in and out, taxis stopping and turning, junctions and pedestrians."

And:

"Plus, if you hit the car in front of you, you are considered to blame. You have no choice as to the space left behind you, but you can control the amount of space in front".

In Germany you get taught that braking distance in meters is calculated by speed in kmh ÷ 10 × speed in kmh ÷ 10. For example if you're travelling at 100kmh then your braking distance should be 100m (100÷10) × (100÷10) = 100m.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In Germany you get taught that braking distance in meters is calculated by speed in kmh ÷ 10 × speed in kmh ÷ 10. For example if you're travelling at 100kmh then your braking distance should be 100m (100÷10) × (100÷10) = 100m.

Another benefit of the EU, how the fuch do you calculate that in miles per hour 🙄

[danhibees1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In Germany you get taught that braking distance in meters is calculated by speed in kmh ÷ 10 × speed in kmh ÷ 10. For example if you're travelling at 100kmh then your braking distance should be 100m (100÷10) × (100÷10) = 100m.

"So why did you crash?"

"I was reaching into the back seat for my calculator"

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Maybe, just maybe partially to blame. I don't think driving 40 would fall into that category though.

It does though - see posts from others on police views.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The thing is, the police would look at it as you going too fast and not able to slow in time. I was taught that you should be able to stop in the distance you can see. That's why we slow down on bends and in fog. There's no getting away from the fact that whatever reason someone is going slow, you shouldn't run into them under normal circumstances.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Source:https://www.drivingtestsuccess.com/b...ation-distance


"Always know your limitations, and remember that: “Only a fool breaks the 2-second rule.”

Multiple collisions or pile-ups are caused by driving too close and too fast, which leads to drivers being unable to brake in time. You can avoid this by looking well forward, checking how the traffic is performing, getting clues from large vehicles, looking for buses pulling in and out, taxis stopping and turning, junctions and pedestrians."

And:

"Plus, if you hit the car in front of you, you are considered to blame. You have no choice as to the space left behind you, but you can control the amount of space in front".

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ah yes, remember the 2 second rule, let the car in front pass an identifiable point, count 1 pink elephant, 2 pink elephant and if you are past the point you are too close. I wonder if people still learn these things. Somehow I doubt it. 😉

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Same can be said for hitting something that's not moving. If you hit a broken down car for example, then chances are you'll get done for careless driving and rightly so.

Of course if someone drives too quickly they can be to blame as well. Nothing in any of these posts changes the fact that driving too slow is dangerous

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It does though - see posts from others on police views.

Of course if someone drives too quickly they can be to blame as well. Nothing in any of these posts changes the fact that driving too slow is dangerous

And nothing alters the fact if someone driving faster can't anticipate the slower driver then they are more dangerous.

Nothing alters the fact that neither you, nor I, will know the reason for the driver going slower than you want, so maybe you should ask yourself, 'I wonder if they are in trouble'?

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But, here is the point, you and I are not arbiters of what is "driving too slow without good reason"

Remember, this is on a dual carriageway and the first time anyone is aware of the car is when you see that you are gaining on them, you have no idea what has happened in the moments beforehand and that they are possibly driving to the next lay-by.

We can't prejudge the action of others without knowing all the facts. All I'm trying to say is that you and I have no idea what the circumstances were and should give the driver the benefit of the doubt.

Funny how Ray missed this one in his multi reply 🤔