Why do people pointlessly drive slowly?

Fuel economy, comfort, safety, less mental stress, less wear on the vehicle, vehicle capability, unfamiliar with the road, looking for a turning etc. The limit is the maximum not a requirement so I don't understand the hostility towards drivers who aren't always doing the maximum. I can see the problem when someone is significantly slower e.g. half the limit in good conditions, but most here seem to be complaining about drivers doing 40ish in a 60. Just because you and your vehicle are willing to travel faster, doesn't mean everyone is.

40 in a 60 adds an extra 50% to a journey. Suddenly that 60 mile commute takes an extra hour out of your day because of people driving unnecessarily slowly.


Your statement is as daft as me saying that if you like driving fast so much why don't you drive a Koenigsegg everywhere?

Well no, that's a ridiculous statement. Koenigseggs are clearly unaffordable to most. On the other hand, buying a car with a large engine will cost more and it will generally have higher running costs than a car with a smaller engine - so it makes no sense to buy a large-engined car when a small-engined car will give you the performance you want and better fuel-economy at the same time.

Maybe the "offenders" need the practicality of the bigger car. Diesels tend to cost more initially which low mileage drivers won't recoup. On a tight budget it is quite often cheaper upfront to buy a big old exec barge rather than an overpriced poverty spec small eco family car. Why shouldn't one get the best mpg out whatever engine they have?

Bigger engine /= bigger car, and an old exec barge will have far higher running costs than an overpriced poverty spec small eco family car.

The comments berating the new driver about pulling out into traffic seem a bit one sided. If the oncoming traffic is significantly speeding and there aren't other opportunities then I don't have much sympathy for the speeders if slower traffic pulls out in front. Hint: maybe the lower limit is in place to allow traffic to pull out safely! By the same token presumably some posters think that pedestrians deserve to be run over if they don't allow enough space to cross a road in front of a driver doing 50 in a 30 (even though there would have been enough time at 30). Although in the particular case mentioned it does sound like the new driver was at fault :o

No, regardless of the speed of the oncoming traffic, it is the person undertaking the manoeuvre who is at fault. And I take it when you're happily driving along at 60 on an NSL road (or perhaps 40) and someone pulls out in front of you meaning you have to brake sharply to 20 you'll be berating yourself for driving too quickly. :rolleyes:
And yes it would be the pedestrians fault for not looking where they were going, although also the driver's fault for driving inappropriately fast in this example.

I drive according to the conditions and in some circumstances that does mean going slower than the limit. In good conditions I would prefer be at or (in theory m'lud) a little over the limit because the car and I are capable. With a big torquey diesel I enjoy plenty of great overtaking opportunities. However I just don't seem to get as bothered by slightly slower traffic, even if I can't overtake.

:confused: Torque is of little relevance.

Now it's a different matter if we talk about people who tailgate, are too lazy to indicate (esp on roundabouts), don't show any etiquette at lane reductions, block box junctions, generally drive erratically...
Last time I drove to Gatwick, had some proper a-hole sitting on my bumper even flashing his lights and sounding his horn at me for about 20mins. Before someone says "don't be selfish pull over", realise that this was in heavy rain, heavy traffic in all lanes (nose to tail standing still at times) and most significantly I spent the entire time behind the same other vehicle anyway i.e. it's not like prevailing traffic was going faster or there was anywhere for him to go, without him harassing every vehicle on the road to get out of his way.

This sounds remarkably unlikely since it sounds like you're on dual carriageway/motorway, unless you were in the outside lane. If the conditions were as bad as that, fair enough, but generally it's better to just let the guy past so the accident he causes isn't in the back of you. :p
 
Last edited:
40 in a 60 adds an extra 50% to a journey. Suddenly that 60 mile commute takes an extra hour out of your day because of people driving unnecessarily slowly.
Which I don't have a problem with. Similarly I don't get wound up when the old lady in front of me takes longer than I do to get on the bus. It's not like most people get up and think "today I'm going to drive excessively slowly". More likely when asked they'll say "I don't like driving faster because... (insert reason from earlier list)". You and I may find it unnecessarily slow, but the point is they don't and can provide a reasonable cause for it, making it err.. necessary. It would be great for me if everyone did things the way I wanted all the time, but we do live in a diverse society, so that is unrealistic. Why should somebody else pay more than necessary for their journey just to please me? Do you consider it "necessary" to always drive as fast as the maximum speed limit?

Well no, that's a ridiculous statement. Koenigseggs are clearly unaffordable to most. On the other hand, buying a car with a large engine will cost more and it will generally have higher running costs than a car with a smaller engine - so it makes no sense to buy a large-engined car when a small-engined car will give you the performance you want and better fuel-economy at the same time.

Bigger engine /= bigger car, and an old exec barge will have far higher running costs than an overpriced poverty spec small eco family car.
The post I was referencing mentioned a bigger car (Passat) and implied that if one has any care for fuel cost they should forget about other concerns and always get a diesel. The example of the K was extreme but the point was that choosing a car is a balance of purchase cost, running cost, comfort, practicality i.e. people don't normally ignore all other factors just to get one specific thing, be that performance or economy. Even if it cost the same to buy as a Focus, most sane people wouldn't buy the K as their sole family car.

You get more for your money with larger cars i.e. features, space, comfort, safety, practicality. A 5yr old Toyota Avensis petrol will cost much less than the same mileage/age Yaris diesel. The £1000 or more price saving pays for several thousand miles of fuel i.e. a couple of years motoring for a low mileage user despite the "far higher running cost". Parkers did a feature that showed for new prices it can take 250,000 miles :eek: to recoup the extra upfront cost of diesel. For many people on a tight budget, they don't have the luxury of paying more up front to potentially start saving money in 3yrs time.
As for engine size, what's wrong with wanting higher performance on tap when desired, but still looking to improve mpg when not pushing it? Can a driver not choose a mix of performance/economy according to their mood/conditions/needs?

No, regardless of the speed of the oncoming traffic, it is the person undertaking the manoeuvre who is at fault. And I take it when you're happily driving along at 60 on an NSL road (or perhaps 40) and someone pulls out in front of you meaning you have to brake sharply to 20 you'll be berating yourself for driving too quickly. :rolleyes:
And yes it would be the pedestrians fault for not looking where they were going, although also the driver's fault for driving inappropriately fast in this example.
If I'm doing NSL at 60 and someone in a regular car (i.e. not an HGV or horse trailer etc) pulls out causing me to brake sharply then no I wouldn't be blaming myself. However if the limit was 40 while I was doing 60 and the only reason I got too close to them was because I was going too fast (i.e. there wouldn't have been a problem if I was going 40), then yes I would consider myself at fault and adjust my driving.

:confused: Torque is of little relevance.
Was merely pointing out that I like a spirited drive as much as the next man and don't drive a diesel just to save money. Inevitably on a forum some troll will pop up and interpret my lack of animosity as meaning I simply must be an eco hippy or one of the slower drivers in question.

This sounds remarkably unlikely since it sounds like you're on dual carriageway/motorway, unless you were in the outside lane. If the conditions were as bad as that, fair enough, but generally it's better to just let the guy past so the accident he causes isn't in the back of you. :p
Conditions were attrocious 0-50mph on the motorway, often wipers on max, and yes I was in the outside lane. If there was anywhere for him to usefully go then I would have moved over in a heartbeat. As stated though there wasn't (in any of the 3 lanes) so I preferred to be aiming away from his inevitable accident rather then pointing right at it.
 
This. So much this.

Also because my speedo over-reads but I have no idea by how much, so I stick to the limit indicated. That's my excuse.

In which case you'll only be doing a few mph below the limit in reality, and nothing in this thread really applies to you. The drivers causing frustration are the ones that meander down roads unnecessarily slowly, completely oblivious to the massive queue of cars they are holding up. The pit manoeuvre should be legalised for use on these cretins :mad:

Of course this also leads onto the fact that almost no-one appears to have the mental capacity to perform an overtake these days...the people following Mrs Miggins doing 30mph in an NSL seem to prefer bunching up and tailgating each other rather than making any attempt to (safely) get past. This means if you are more than a few cars back there is nothing you can do as there is no space to leapfrog, and it's too far to take them all in one go. Of course as soon as you hit a DCW, the ***** will move to the outside lane and sit there, further blocking any progress.

"Failing to make progress" should be a good reason to re-introduce corporal punishment :mad:
 
I find a lot of people driving 40 on a 50 road that goes into a town and in town they still drive 40 when they should drive 30, totally oblivious to speed limits.
 
seriously, if these people are so nervous about driving they should have their licences revoked

As mentioned many times in the thread, it isn't always about the driver "being nervous" or for "economy reasons"...
 
Just a note to the yatezy. If you pulled out and assumed other drivers speed, you are going to die or kill someone else very quickly. ALWAYS be observant of others speed. He was wrong to be speeding, but you should have been looking properly.

Also, it's annoying that people only do 40 in a 60, but so what. It's a legal maximum not a target. I was driving down a single track road with hair-pin bends last night trying to get the baby to sleep, and that was a 60, doesn't mean I should be doing it. Sure it is annoying being stuck when you want to go somewhere quick - it sometimes annoys me -, but you have to understand not everyone share's the same view as you.

A big reason is that a lot of people (especially around where I live on Dartmoor) are unfamiliar with the road or don't use it often, so tread carefully. Other's do as mentioned, 40 in a 60, then 40 in the 30. Which means they can never criticise you for overtaking so don't worry.

If you drive fast, do it safely and aware of others and your environment.
 
I find a lot of people driving 40 on a 50 road that goes into a town and in town they still drive 40 when they should drive 30, totally oblivious to speed limits.

yup, see it all the time.

youll be tailgated in a 30mph (50kph) zone by a moron in a volvo or bmw, then it goes to 50mph (70kph ish) and they get absolutely left behind
 
It's a limit, not a target. And I'm not always in a hurry to get everywhere in the optimal time available. Remember that.

If you don't like it, overtake me. It's quite simple.
 
It's a limit, not a target. And I'm not always in a hurry to get everywhere in the optimal time available. Remember that.

If you don't like it, overtake me. It's quite simple.
But when I drive home it's usually to busy with oncoming traffic to overtake.
 
Which I don't have a problem with. Similarly I don't get wound up when the old lady in front of me takes longer than I do to get on the bus. It's not like most people get up and think "today I'm going to drive excessively slowly". More likely when asked they'll say "I don't like driving faster because... (insert reason from earlier list)". You and I may find it unnecessarily slow, but the point is they don't and can provide a reasonable cause for it, making it err.. necessary. It would be great for me if everyone did things the way I wanted all the time, but we do live in a diverse society, so that is unrealistic. Why should somebody else pay more than necessary for their journey just to please me? Do you consider it "necessary" to always drive as fast as the maximum speed limit?


The post I was referencing mentioned a bigger car (Passat) and implied that if one has any care for fuel cost they should forget about other concerns and always get a diesel. The example of the K was extreme but the point was that choosing a car is a balance of purchase cost, running cost, comfort, practicality i.e. people don't normally ignore all other factors just to get one specific thing, be that performance or economy. Even if it cost the same to buy as a Focus, most sane people wouldn't buy the K as their sole family car.

You get more for your money with larger cars i.e. features, space, comfort, safety, practicality. A 5yr old Toyota Avensis petrol will cost much less than the same mileage/age Yaris diesel. The £1000 or more price saving pays for several thousand miles of fuel i.e. a couple of years motoring for a low mileage user despite the "far higher running cost". Parkers did a feature that showed for new prices it can take 250,000 miles :eek: to recoup the extra upfront cost of diesel. For many people on a tight budget, they don't have the luxury of paying more up front to potentially start saving money in 3yrs time.
As for engine size, what's wrong with wanting higher performance on tap when desired, but still looking to improve mpg when not pushing it? Can a driver not choose a mix of performance/economy according to their mood/conditions/needs?


If I'm doing NSL at 60 and someone in a regular car (i.e. not an HGV or horse trailer etc) pulls out causing me to brake sharply then no I wouldn't be blaming myself. However if the limit was 40 while I was doing 60 and the only reason I got too close to them was because I was going too fast (i.e. there wouldn't have been a problem if I was going 40), then yes I would consider myself at fault and adjust my driving.


Was merely pointing out that I like a spirited drive as much as the next man and don't drive a diesel just to save money. Inevitably on a forum some troll will pop up and interpret my lack of animosity as meaning I simply must be an eco hippy or one of the slower drivers in question.


Conditions were attrocious 0-50mph on the motorway, often wipers on max, and yes I was in the outside lane. If there was anywhere for him to usefully go then I would have moved over in a heartbeat. As stated though there wasn't (in any of the 3 lanes) so I preferred to be aiming away from his inevitable accident rather then pointing right at it.

I don't disagree with any particular point :p

Something about your previous post just riled me :o
 
The should be a law that if a trucker/caravanner sees more than 10 cars behind him he must pull in at the next opportunity to let them past lol

There should be a law that says if your stupid enough to sit up the arse of an HGV so you can't see whats ahead then you deserve to sit there and rot.

Equally, if you don't have the ablity to overtake such a large slow vehicle then why are you driving?
:p

Caravanners however should be shot.:D
 
But when I drive home it's usually to busy with oncoming traffic to overtake.
Leave earlier. Or tell your wife you'll be home 5 minutes later. Or live closer. Or have a job that doesn't stress you out so much you have to rush home :)
 
It bores me, the constant whining about "making progress" there is no law that states "failure to make progress". There are speed limits both maximum and minimum, the only place there is a minimum speed limit is on a motorway.

If someone wants to drive at 30 on a NSL single carriageway so be it, I never see them never get stuck behind them and I live in the country surrounded by B roads, the vast majority of people drive at 40+.

The vast majority of people on this fora drive above the speed limit and seem to get annoyed when someone else drives within the limit and holds them up, boo bloody hoo get over it. You may come across me on the roads, I'll be doing 50ish until someone tailgates me then I will get slower and slower until the road provides a chance to overtake then I will ensure you don't get that chance as I will be far down the road till you catch up. Yes its pathetic, I don't do it dangerously if anyone gets too upset I will let them past, but it provides light relief on the commute home.
 
There should be a law that says if your stupid enough to sit up the arse of an HGV so you can't see whats ahead then you deserve to sit there and rot.

Equally, if you don't have the ablity to overtake such a large slow vehicle then why are you driving?
:p

Caravanners however should be shot.:D

My apologies if I offended you, I wasn't trying to insult you or any other people who do your job merely suggesting a way to improve our roads, I dont know what the roads are like on the dark side of the moon but in Wales they are rubbish, the fastest way to get from north to south Wales is to drive into England then down the M6 and back into Wales. chances to overtake are few and far between unless you fancy doing it on a blind corner, I have personally been trapped behind HGV's for over 10 miles before an overtaking opportunity has arisen and I drive a sports car. The problem is further compounded by dozens of HGV's (mainly Polish) sent diagonally through Wales towards the Irish ferry by sat navs that don't understand its much faster to drive up the M6 then across on the M56/A55.




You may come across me on the roads, I'll be doing 50ish until someone tailgates me then I will get slower and slower until the road provides a chance to overtake then I will ensure you don't get that chance as I will be far down the road till you catch up. Yes its pathetic, I don't do it dangerously if anyone gets too upset I will let them past, but it provides light relief on the commute home.

Actually what oyur describing is called dangerous driving and its punishable by points and a fine if caught
 
Last edited:
Leave earlier. Or tell your wife you'll be home 5 minutes later. Or live closer. Or have a job that doesn't stress you out so much you have to rush home :)
Rushing/stress isn't the issue, I just don't understand why you would want to drive slower than the limit holding up people that want to go faster, driving home after/to work isn't fun so why make it last longer.
 
Back
Top Bottom