Lane hogging.

[james_2k]

my jeep is bang on with gps speed, maybe 0.5 mph out which is nice. and i notice that in average speed camera zones most people seem to go under the 'real' 70. wimps!

also yesterday had several people slow (on a dual carriageway) down for the AVERAGE speed cameras to 60!?! as they passed them? talk about shallow end of the gene pool.

Speed limit or not, if you're in an overtaking lane and you don't need to be (i.e. you're not overtaking) it's inconsiderate.

agree, but thats not what was said.

im not saying im a perfect driver, i was passing on the left a few times yesterday back from the dealer, zombies stuck in the outside lane with nothing on the inner one.. insane

 

[Jamesyboyjim]

*Sigh* I knew this would happen. I like to think most people know what i mean.

I don't think you explained yourself very well.

If somebody is breaking the speed limit, anyone holding them up who is sitting AT the limit while correctly overtaking isn't at fault or being inconsiderate.

 

[Gaygle]

And the people doing 68mph indicated are probably doing 61mph 'actual', what difference does it make?

Because the speed limit is 70mph, not 61mph and you should be doing the speed limit where it is safe to do so, so as to not cause unnecessary inconvenience to everyone else.

You legally go off what your car says - if someone sees their car is doing 70mph they can stay there. My car does 69 GPS when indicating 70, don't know why you actually used such a big discrepancy.

Because many cars can be up to 10% difference between actual speed. I think this has generally reduced in the last 10 years or so to circa 3-5%.

I actually understand completely what you mean, but your attitude/wording is the bit that annoyed me.

You "completely understand what I mean", but my wording is what annoyed you? So why have you spend your last several posts arguing with the concept rather than my wording? Furthermore, i have no idea what part of my attitude you had a problem with in my original post? I wasn't rude, I wasn't disparaging and I wasn't sarcastic - from what I can see I was completely decent.

 

[Gaygle]

I don't think you explained yourself very well.

I'm not just saying this because I made the post - but I thought I explained my point of view just fine?

If somebody is breaking the speed limit, anyone holding them up who is sitting AT the limit while correctly overtaking isn't at fault or being inconsiderate.

In moral high horse world - you are correct.

Meanwhile in the real world when you are stuck in a queue of 20 cars on an otherwise quiet motorway because someone at the front wants spend the next 5 miles overtaking a line of cars at crawling speed so they can go 1mph faster - it is frustrating and leads to blockages on the road network. All they'd have to do nudge their gas pedal marginally harder to do 75mph and the road would flow. I know this would mean they would likely be shot at dawn for their misdemeanour, but I'd consider it a worthy sacrifice for the rest of us.

It's the same reason people get annoyed at lorries overtaking each other and taking 3 miles to do a simple overtake - but at least lorry drivers have an excuse as to why it takes so long.

Like I said, most people know what I'm saying and what I'm talking about, and most people will have felt this frustration.

 

[james_2k]

lorry drivers have no more excuse than car drivers, their trucks cant go faster true, but not expecting someone to break the law is just as 'excusable', imo.

its when people doing 60 are overtaking people doing 58, on a motorway, when the real blockages start.

 

[squerble]

You "completely understand what I mean", but my wording is what annoyed you? So why have you spend your last several posts arguing with the concept rather than my wording? Furthermore, i have no idea what part of my attitude you had a problem with in my original post? I wasn't rude, I wasn't disparaging and I wasn't sarcastic - from what I can see I was completely decent.

It was you saying they were inconsiderate not to accelerate over the speed limit. You can't use the indicated/GPS difference as an excuse; if they're showing 70, and they don't go faster, you can't have any complaint about it. Yes, it's annoying, but you can't complain about it.

Just as a side note, I personally add a couple of mph to get past a car quicker if I've seen someone coming up the lane faster in the mirror.

 

[Jamesyboyjim]

So what you are saying is you should speed to overtake quicker so you can get out of the way of the people who want to sit in the outside lane and drive at whatever speed they fancy?

In reality this is actually what I do, I don't want to be a hindrance to anyone, but it isn't right for you to suggest not doing so is inconsiderate towards those not interested in the law.

 

[mrk]

All this would be solved if lanes 1 to 3 were speed goverened. 1: Up to 70MPH, 2: Up to 80, 3: Up to 90.

That would be ideal

 

[Gaygle]

Yes, it's annoying, but you can't complain about it.

Yes I can - see post #93.

Just as a side note, I personally add a couple of mph to get past a car quicker if I've seen someone coming up the lane faster in the mirror.

Right. And why do you do that?

lorry drivers have no more excuse than car drivers, their trucks cant go faster true

Did you just contradict yourself in the same sentence?

its when people doing 60 are overtaking people doing 58, on a motorway, when the real blockages start.

B...b...but it's a LIMIT and not a TARGET. They have as much right to be there as you dammit

So what you are saying is you should speed to overtake quicker so you can get out of the way of the people who want to sit in the outside lane and drive at whatever speed they fancy?

See, and you said I wasn't explaining myself very well.

In reality this is actually what I do, I don't want to be a hindrance to anyone, but it isn't right for you to suggest not doing so is inconsiderate towards those not interested in the law.

I'm not sure if you and James_2k are just different personalities in the same body, or if you are trolling me by trying to see how many times you can contradict yourself. So what you're saying is that you yourself speed up slightly to get passed a car so as to not cause a hindrance. So, if people didn't do what you do, you would say they are being a hindrance?

...

Are you serious? This is exactly what I've been saying for my last 5 posts which you have been trying to bemoan me for.

On that bombshell...

 

[grudas]

All this would be solved if lanes 1 to 3 were speed goverened. 1: Up to 70MPH, 2: Up to 80, 3: Up to 90.

That would be ideal

would solve nothing, you'll still have people doing lower or higher speeds. Kinda like the speed limit solves nothing

 

[Jamesyboyjim]

See, and you said I wasn't explaining myself very well.



I'm not sure if you and James_2k are just different personalities in the same body, or if you are trolling me by trying to see how many times you can contradict yourself. So what you're saying is that you yourself speed up slightly to get passed a car so as to not cause a hindrance. So, if people didn't do what you do, you would say they are being a hindrance?

It wasn't until your next post that I realised what you were saying.

The point still stands, those feeling hard done by have no right to. Do you understand this? Then we can acknowledge we both have a point.

I don't like to hold people up, but its their problem if they've chosen to speed.

 

[james_2k]

Did you just contradict yourself in the same sentence?

did you read the whole sentence?

again, their trucks cant go faster, its impossible. but the cars shouldn't be expected to break the law, just happens its the law of the land rather than the laws of physics with the trucks. same justification for both.

 

[robj20]

would solve nothing, you'll still have people doing lower or higher speeds. Kinda like the speed limit solves nothing

What would solve it is smart motorways set to 50mph during peak times, no need to go faster, trucks not needing to overtake.

 

[adolf hamster]

People, (normally middle aged men in big German cars) who think you're scum for 'only' doing 70mph in the outside lane, they come steaming up your bottom flashing telling you to move over even though you yourself are overtaking, only for them to zoom off at 80odd when you do move back over. They have chosen to speed they should understand that they are in the wrong and keep their whinging to themselves.

Its like some people view the outside lane as this executive lane only to be used by expensive cars driven at 80mph plus.

No its the salesman lane, your banned from entering unless you have a 320d, 520d or audi tdi in base trim with a suit jacket hanger in the back seat.

 

[Housey]

I hardly see anyone in the outside lane doing 70mph these days. What I think people are actually saying is "you are going to fast so can wait" as they overtake at 85-90mph...

THAT is the reality of the "i'm doing 70 so you should not want to overtake me" brigade, they rarely are doing 70 they are just ****** off others seek to go quicker.

 

[Howard]

I'm all for making smooth efficient progress on motorways and I usually cruise at 70mph. If I need to move out to lane 2 to overtake someone I probably won't increase my speed if there isn't any traffic close behind me, but if I need to move into lane 3 then I'll give the throttle a squirt if I can see traffic approaching.

 

[HangTime]

We've had this conversation before but I'll explain why some do it (middle lane):

-Traffic in left lane is going slower than they wish to travel and they get fed up changing lane all the time i.e. weaving in and out but (unlike outside lane) are still leaving a lane outside them for anyone who wants to go faster
-Sometimes if they pull over into left lane, other drivers won't let them out so they have to reduce speed behind the slow traffic until they are finally released rather than being able to maintain a stable speed
-When approaching an on-slip, they want to leave more room for new traffic entering the motorway
-When approaching an off-slip they don't wish to take themselves, they want to avoid the queue of traffic in the left lane
-They are driving at 70mph+ so believe that anyone who wants to break the speed limit by overtaking them should have to do so in the outside lane

I am not suggesting that these are all 'valid'/legal reasons, just the mindset.

 

[Nasher]

Yea except most of them time when people are "going 70", they are actually going 65

 

[Semple]

It's the same reason people get annoyed at lorries overtaking each other and taking 3 miles to do a simple overtake - but at least lorry drivers have an excuse as to why it takes so long.

Or what annoys me most these days is when one lorry attempts to do an overtake, then after about 2-3 miles they realise they can't push any faster than the lorry they're attempting to overtake, and then slow down and drop back in behind.

These type of lorry drivers need to be lined up and shot!

So because of they're failure to judge overtaking distances, they've now caused a queue to build up behind them.

 

[Semple]

What would solve it is smart motorways set to 50mph during peak times, no need to go faster, trucks not needing to overtake.

Yeah that would NEVER work!

Go through any 50 mph average speed check zone, and watch all the lorries jump into the middle lane because they want to do 52mph.