Poor motorway driving standards

[xtrailman]

Jimbob

I fail to understand how you can describe some one as a lane hogger travelling at the national speed limit.

While i see no point in traveling in the middle lane while the lhs lane is empty.

I certainly see no reason to continually weave in and out of traffic, i find this very amusing, and it must be tiring.

If the rhs lane is empty, why not use it and overtake.

Or try traveling at the legal limit.

 

[MichaelE]

Ray

You should brush up on the Highway code

You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past. Slow-moving or speed-restricted vehicles should always remain in the left-hand lane of the carriageway unless overtaking.

 

[Thorpedo]

I have to agree with Ray, I don't see how anyone can complain about a driver in the middle lane if they are, and I quote "doing 70m.p.h. plus". It seems like a non argument.

Although I agree that one should move to the left hand lane as soon as practical. Surely that doesnt mean constantly moving into gaps betwen possibly 2 trucks doing 56 so that Mondeo man can push on at 85.

One note above refered to "these ignorant people", but I would suggest that "these ignorant people" who may be breaking the speed limit themselves, may have similar perceptions about other drivers who want them to weave in and out of slower traffic allowing a greater degree of law breaking by someone else.

As I mentioned above, I've been mondeo man doing 90, but after enforced slower driving I can see the whole topic from another perspective.

It would be interesting to see what the Highway agency would put on Jimbobs "Education Boards" . 'Please keep left unless your breaking the speed limit by a sunstantial amount' perhaps.

Maybe 'keep left, Nigel Mansell's behind you'

 

[Steve L]

I think the main object of the thread is sadly being missed.

You're all quite right to quote the maximum speed limit as 70 Mph, but who actually sticks to it anyway!!

It is still not good enough for some dope to sit in the middle lanes while the nearside lane (lane 1) is empty. People have to perform illegal undertaking manouvers and also speed above 70 Mph to put the dope who is more often than not, the root cause of a multi car pile up, behind them.

Using the nearside lane as much as possible should be encouraged as this will inherantly make the motorways safer.

Steve L.

 

[mistermac]

Passing the ADI test may well put someone in the top 2% of skilled drivers but that is only relevent if they practice what they preach. In my experience a driving school car with only the instructor on board is a positive menace on thr road! I think many have the belief that because they are "highly trained" it is ok for them to drive in a mannor which without doubt would lead to prosecution were they to be spotted by the police.

Rather crass generalisations, I fear...

 

[mistermac]

If we're all moaning....

What I find VERY difficult to comprehend is upon joining the motorway, a lot of drivers seem to think that, despite the motorway traffic moving at 60/70mph, it is ok to merge at around 40mph.

The last time I followed a particularly naive (but fairly 'experienced') driver, he actually BRAKED as he tried to merge - as if it were a give-way situation....

Makes life very difficult for the truck drivers and us caravanners who are - dare I say it - in lane 1 on the motorway....

Mac

 

[ProfJohnL]

Steve,

We can agree that Lane hogging when the inside lanes are available is illegal.

It is particularly annoying for following drivers if the hogger is travelling at less than the prevailing speed limit.

I cannot agree that your other points are defendable.

I for one try to observe the speed limits, and when overtaking, I am not phased when others try to push me to go faster. That is their problem not mine, and only when I am ready to pull in with sufficient space between me, and the vehicle I have overtaken will I do so.

No body 'has to' perform an illegal undertake, that is a personal choice.

And nobody has to drive illegally above the speed limit, again that is a personal decisions to break the law.

Nobody who is travelling at head of a line of traffic (for example a lane hogger) is the root cause of a multiple car pile up behind them, That is exclusively the result of poor driving by the following drivers.

 

[Chrisbee]

Passing the ADI test may well put someone in the top 2% of skilled drivers but that is only relevent if they practice what they preach. In my experience a driving school car with only the instructor on board is a positive menace on thr road! I think many have the belief that because they are "highly trained" it is ok for them to drive in a mannor which without doubt would lead to prosecution were they to be spotted by the police.

Like I said "in my experience", but keep your eye open and you'll see what I mean. Only today on the way to work a driving school car pulled to the offside kerb without indicating and parked on a yellow line whilst the driver (instructor?) popped into a shop. The reason the yellow line is along about 50 mtrs of this residential road is to stop access to the shop's car park being blocked! Let's hope he doesn't teach this kind of action to his pupils.

 

[johno1]

i had an experience a couple of years back which is exactly the kind of thing your talking about steve.

travelling in the inside lane of a fairly quiet m6 i came up behind a lorry. i had been aware of a 1 series bmw in the middle lane just behind me, travelling at exactly the same speed as me for miles. i indicated my intention to make my way into the middle lane, expecting bmw man to make use the empty outside lane. but no.

so with a few car lengths to spare i pulled out into the middle lane anyway. you may criticise me for that if you wish.

bmw man at this point stood on the gas pedal and swerved past me in the outside lane, giving me abuse as he went, though he refused to pull of the road when i signalled i would rather like him to.

so why didn't he move out when he saw my intention to overtake the lorry? same reason he spent the next 15 miles in the middle lane when the inside lane was empty.

a prime example of an idiot, who probably went home to tell his wife stories about the madman with the caravan who cut him up. probably thinks he's the best driver in the world.

was bmw man clarkson?

 

[johno1]

When we get rid of the lunacy of NO under taking the problem will be resolved. It works fine in the US and they are thicker than we are!!!!!!!!!

the offside is the pass side, the nearside is the suicide!!!!!

 

[CheapnCheerful]

There is a very simple solution to lane hogging - Toll charges. Lane 1 - free, Lane 2 10p/mile, lane 3 20p/mile. Overnight people will suddenly develop impeccable lane discipline, congestion will be reduced as traffic flows more freely and the Government raises more money. Even a toll charge of less than I have suggested would work, as the psycological thought of even spending a few pennies unnesessarily would probably be enough to sort most lane hoggers out.

 

[colin-yorkshire]

nice try C&C but then the motor way would be reduced to a one lane 40mph zone as nobody would pay 50p just to overtake the granny in the punto.

I also agree with mark mac and john L if the left hand lane is full of slower moving traffic doing 50/60 mph with gaps in between of less then 200 mtrs, then I am in the middle lane doing 70 mph if mondeo man or bmw man wants to get passed thats what the outside lane is for.

colin

 

[xtrailman]

colin

ditto

 

[CheapnCheerful]

Colin, I think you are not factoring in the impatience of the typical driver. After about 2 seconds following a driver doing 40 mph he will think 'sod it' and pay the 5p cost to overtake, but will return to lane 1 as soon as possible.

 

[CheapnCheerful]

Because if he is doing 40mph you can easily get past in 1/4 of a mile and 1/4 of a mile at 20p/mile = 5p.

 

[colin-yorkshire]

ahh but that doesn't take account of the 6 mile tail back caused by tight gits that won't pay 5p

colin

 

[CheapnCheerful]

Which is exactly what you want since it leaves lane 2 and 3 clear for the intelligent drivers!

 

[Steve L]

Hi John.

I have quite clearly stated that i do not condone any excess speeding on any road. However motorways have a high level of drivers who see fit to travel at speeds way above 70mph. It is a regular event to find cars doing over 90mph in the outside lane.

I'm afraid I do have to disagree with you about lane hoggers. By virtue of the fact that they inadvertantly through their neglect, cause following drivers to take the risk of causing an accident by performing illegal undertaking manouvers.

While a car undertaking may be the periferal cause of an accident because they take un-necessary risks by performing a manouver that other motorists don't expect. The "root cause" of the accident is the lane hogger who, if they were actually using the correct lane for their travel, would not present the opportunity for nearside undertaking. Mind you, there would probably be some idiot who would use the hard shoulder to pass.

Steve L.

 

[xtrailman]

Steve

What possible reason would you have for undertaking?

Why not use the 3rd lane to overtake?

You don't condon speeding, but you speed.

Is this a windup?

 

[Steve L]

It's no wind up Ray.

Suffice to say if I were to admit to any form of speeding that would not only be admitting to breaking the law but would also envoke a raft of critisizum.

But then who are the angel's who stick to 70mph on the motorway?

I don't see many solo cars doing that these days. So I think the white halo's can be chucked out! Know what I mean.

As most family cars are now well capable of exceeding the magical ton (100 mph for the non ton up teds)then a more practical speed limit might be in order after correct lane usage has been adopted.

Steve L.

 

[Thorpedo]

Blimey Steve in Leo you've really opened this up.

Gawd help Granny in the 2nd lane dawdling along at 80 without a care in the world if you up the speed limit to match modern car capabilities.

I can see me know undertaking the sluggish old bird.

Of course all drivers of cars capable of excess of 100mph are also capable of reactions as fast as Damon hill and when they lose control or have to stop suddenly and the rd will be empty enough to ensure there is no unfortunate family in a 10 year old fiat punto waiting to be demolished by the unguided missile.

Lucky the scientists haven't mentioned global warming, and the e greens haven't shown that slowing down reduces fuel consumption expeditiously.

I think I'll stick to the speed limit or below I won't have to undertake granny and I can spend the money I save on an extra Caravan holiday or 2.

What do they say about sarcasm?

 

[Robert_374373903]

It might be the lorry driver in me, but I do tend to give the 'hoverer' the chance to clear me, and if they keep hanging on, the indicator goes on, and if they are still there then that's a shame as I am on the way out. You can only be nice for so long before it gets a little tedious.

Traffic cops used to sort this stuff out but a camera can't. There is no substitue for having them on the roads doing their jobs.

Ditto.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hi John.

I have quite clearly stated that i do not condone any excess speeding on any road. However motorways have a high level of drivers who see fit to travel at speeds way above 70mph. It is a regular event to find cars doing over 90mph in the outside lane.

I'm afraid I do have to disagree with you about lane hoggers. By virtue of the fact that they inadvertantly through their neglect, cause following drivers to take the risk of causing an accident by performing illegal undertaking manouvers.

While a car undertaking may be the periferal cause of an accident because they take un-necessary risks by performing a manouver that other motorists don't expect. The "root cause" of the accident is the lane hogger who, if they were actually using the correct lane for their travel, would not present the opportunity for nearside undertaking. Mind you, there would probably be some idiot who would use the hard shoulder to pass.

Steve L.

Steve I concur that speeding does happen, But nobody is forced into doing it so it is either a lack of control, or a deliberate act either way it is illegal. But just because others are doing does not make it legal.

You seem to differentiate between speeding and excess speed, how in your view are they different?

As for hoggers, whilst thier actions are deplorable and contravene the highway code, by its self it does not force or cause other drivers to take unnecessary risks.

The following drivers have to make their own decisions on what to do. They may decide to over or undertake but there is another option which is to sit behind the hogger.

You cannot transfer blame onto the hogger for the unsafe actions of other drivers.

 

[ScouseIan]

Steve, I'm with you. Good post.

Undertaking. What does that actually mean. Apparently its ok if you are in a queue. How do you define a queue. At what point does busy traffic become a queue? As stopped traffic starts to move off when does it change from a queue to normal? Its all very personally judged I suppose, and very petty.

I'll tell you what 'undertaking' is. Its the opposite of 'overtaking' If I were driving along and wanted to go past a car in the same lane as me then I pull out to the right , gopast and then go back in. Undertaking is doing this but on the other side. Picture it and you have all seen it, and its wrong.

I've been in taffic, outside lane, nowhere to go and the bloke (its always a bloke) behind wants to get past. He will often go over to the moddle lane or even the inside lane, whack past and then get back in the queue further up. This makes peoples blood boil. Its dangerous and wrong. This is the kind of undertaking that people get points for.

'Drifting past' somebody on the inside lane because the twonk in the middle lane hasn't a clue what day it is, without changing lane, is in my opinion justified. Now I'm sticking my neck out here and leaving myself open for accusations of being just as dangerous, but at least I'm saying what I believe.

Can anybody see/agree that these two descriptions are morally different?

 

[Clockwork_374390647]

I use the dual carriageway A34 between M40 and M4 about once a month. Outer lane is often chocka block with cars with the inside lane with mile long gaps. I often move to left lane as I don't fancy being the piggy in the middle of a multi car shunt. I've often found that I'm twenty or more cars ahead of where I moved over as others panic and break and slow the outer lane to under 60mph, If I get to a lorry and there is a large gap I can slide out into to overtake a lorry I pass.

I'm not risking my driving record out with tail ending chumps in the outer lane, nor am I into racing along on the inside. I keep a good steady legal speed and if the chumps break and I end up ahead.

I don't see that getting on and off the brakes slowing mainly commercial vehicles thus creating two lanes of rolling jams is helping anybody.