The end for middle lane hoggers?
Posted by: Trevor Newall on 13 October 2004
I was overjoyed to see in the news that the police are going to target middle lane hoggers on motorways, and force them to move into the inside lane.
it's about time something was done about these idiots who have no concern for other road users, and who cause so many tailbacks!
female drivers seem particularly guilty of this, and I couldn't help laughing when one was interviewed and asked why she hogged the middle lane, and replied: "it saves me having to change lanes, and it's safer".
jeezuz!
all we need now is a law to stop the even bigger idiots who hog the outside lane, and driving a car in this country will start becoming some fun!
gents, your thoughts please?
TN
it's about time something was done about these idiots who have no concern for other road users, and who cause so many tailbacks!
female drivers seem particularly guilty of this, and I couldn't help laughing when one was interviewed and asked why she hogged the middle lane, and replied: "it saves me having to change lanes, and it's safer".
jeezuz!
all we need now is a law to stop the even bigger idiots who hog the outside lane, and driving a car in this country will start becoming some fun!
gents, your thoughts please?
TN
Posted on: 13 October 2004 by Martin D
Safety cannot be measured in miles per hour, tired of this argument, but if your bothered and open minded look here at the facts (please note they are facts)
http://www.safespeed.org.uk
and no, i've nothing to do with him, it, its just the most comon sense thing i read with regard to roads and safety
http://www.safespeed.org.uk
and no, i've nothing to do with him, it, its just the most comon sense thing i read with regard to roads and safety
Posted on: 13 October 2004 by kevinrt
Martin D
if your post was in response to mine:
I was not suggesting that it was safer to drive slower, just that there was nothing wrong with driving slower, as has been suggested in other posts.
Careful with those knee-jerks.
if your post was in response to mine:
I was not suggesting that it was safer to drive slower, just that there was nothing wrong with driving slower, as has been suggested in other posts.
Careful with those knee-jerks.
Posted on: 13 October 2004 by bhazen
I'm American, so a bit confused: which is the outside lane in the UK?
I once rented a car for a drive 'round England, and was on an A road headed from Warwick to Salisbury or something. Came upon slow traffic, then noticed painted arrows going each way over the centerline. Thought I "ah that must mean it's OK to pass" which I did. Wrongo. Blue lights, motorbike cop pulls me over and gives me a barracking for overtaking exactly where I shouldn't (didn't get a ticket; lucky I guess). Moral: shoulda got the Rules of the Road book or whatever the AA provides before I rented the Focus or whatever it was.
Also, just after I picked up the car at Gatwick, was headed out, slowed down to enter an intersection and the car dies. Couldn't start. Motorists behind me honking. Sweat. Then I notice, in the dashboard: a manual choke. Now there's something we don't see everyday!
I have to say, though, that the standard of drivers in the UK is far superior to that in the US, generally. Once they realise you're a clueless Yank, they're quite sympathetic; f**k up in traffic here though, out come the Uzis.
One improvement here (Seattle area): roundabouts are starting to be constructed at low-density intersections, getting rid of unnecessary lights. As long as we don't get anything like the dreaded double roundabout in Bury St. Edmonds...gave me a heart attack.
[This message was edited by bhazen on Wed 13 October 2004 at 21:49.]
I once rented a car for a drive 'round England, and was on an A road headed from Warwick to Salisbury or something. Came upon slow traffic, then noticed painted arrows going each way over the centerline. Thought I "ah that must mean it's OK to pass" which I did. Wrongo. Blue lights, motorbike cop pulls me over and gives me a barracking for overtaking exactly where I shouldn't (didn't get a ticket; lucky I guess). Moral: shoulda got the Rules of the Road book or whatever the AA provides before I rented the Focus or whatever it was.
Also, just after I picked up the car at Gatwick, was headed out, slowed down to enter an intersection and the car dies. Couldn't start. Motorists behind me honking. Sweat. Then I notice, in the dashboard: a manual choke. Now there's something we don't see everyday!
I have to say, though, that the standard of drivers in the UK is far superior to that in the US, generally. Once they realise you're a clueless Yank, they're quite sympathetic; f**k up in traffic here though, out come the Uzis.
One improvement here (Seattle area): roundabouts are starting to be constructed at low-density intersections, getting rid of unnecessary lights. As long as we don't get anything like the dreaded double roundabout in Bury St. Edmonds...gave me a heart attack.
[This message was edited by bhazen on Wed 13 October 2004 at 21:49.]
Posted on: 13 October 2004 by Trevor Newall
quote:
Originally posted by Lewis:
How many people here complaining of middle lane hoggers tailgated them in order to try and make them move over?
I don't tailgate, primarily because it puts me in a precarious position if the idiot middle lane hog in front slams on his or her brakes.
I usually flash my lights, or toot my horn to get them to shift, at a safe distance.
If the b*stards still don't move, I do whatever it takes to get past!
quote:
And how many went flying past them way over the speed limit when they finally got round? I think 95 got mentioned?
and exactly what's that got to do with you, providing you were not in any danger?
please tell me you're not one of those dreadful self-appointed traffic cops!!
leave the law enforcement to those officially appointed to carry it out.
when you see someone who's obviously in a hurry coming up behind you, it's usually best to move over and let them pass.
you don't know the circumstances as to why they're in such a hurry, and it could be an emergency.
remember, unlike police cars, ordinary cars don't have sirens!
TN
Posted on: 13 October 2004 by Geoff P
Ah well for extra entertainment come over here and drive around a bit. In the space of a couple of hours by carefull route planning you can, in sequence, experience the driving character of the Dutch, the Belgian's, the German's and the French.
You can be speeding according to the law one minute and then a couple of meters further down the motorway be obeying a different country's speed limit followed fairly soon by an araea where there is no speed limit at all.
Mind you in general the outside lane and middle lane hogging is much reduced. You stay out there a second too long and you will have the logo on the radiator of the car behind you up your ass as he tries to drive up the crash barrier to get round you.
It also tends to provide a bit more focus when a pair of headlights that were a mile behind you a second ago are right beside you the next as a Porsche or something screams by.
Lesson no 1 be very carefull pulling into the outside lane in Germany because they are allowed to drive that fast, also in France and Belgium because they are all mad buggers anyway. It's different in the netherlands. If there is nothing powering along in the outside lane it's probably because you are approaching a radar camera.
Strangely I feel safer driving with all these mad aggressive unperdictable europeans than I do when I return to the UK.
regards
GEOFF
The boring old fart
You can be speeding according to the law one minute and then a couple of meters further down the motorway be obeying a different country's speed limit followed fairly soon by an araea where there is no speed limit at all.
Mind you in general the outside lane and middle lane hogging is much reduced. You stay out there a second too long and you will have the logo on the radiator of the car behind you up your ass as he tries to drive up the crash barrier to get round you.
It also tends to provide a bit more focus when a pair of headlights that were a mile behind you a second ago are right beside you the next as a Porsche or something screams by.
Lesson no 1 be very carefull pulling into the outside lane in Germany because they are allowed to drive that fast, also in France and Belgium because they are all mad buggers anyway. It's different in the netherlands. If there is nothing powering along in the outside lane it's probably because you are approaching a radar camera.
Strangely I feel safer driving with all these mad aggressive unperdictable europeans than I do when I return to the UK.
regards
GEOFF
The boring old fart
Posted on: 13 October 2004 by Jez Quigley
quote:
our New Socialist Nanny Superstate
Everyone would be on bicycles. The tax rate would halve because we wouldn't need to keep building roads or fund the NHS to x billions to treat all the fat lazy drivers with diabetes and heart disease or the 1000s of road traffic accidents. We would all be so fit and healthy we would all be happy shagging all day and the £500 each per month we currently spend on cars could fund the cds3/552/500/dbl system we would listen to whilst doing it.
Doen't sound so bad, does it?
Posted on: 13 October 2004 by Rana Ali
quote:
Originally posted by bhazen:
Also, just after I picked up the car at Gatwick, was headed out, slowed down to enter an intersection and the car dies. Couldn't start. Motorists behind me honking. Sweat. Then I notice, in the dashboard: a _manual choke._ Now there's something we don't see everyday! ]
Was this visit over 10 years ago? Which car was it? Rental cars tend to be pretty new. EU legislation effectively outlawed non-fuel-injected cars 10 years ago.
Having read all this (and test-driven cars for a living), I have to say that UK driving standards are not as bad as made out. Middle-lane hoggers make us mad, but at least the are usually predictable.
Try Naples during rush-hour (devil may care attitude), Boston USA (nutters with attitude whose driving standards don't match), and for a real terror-rush, any "highway" on the Indian Subcontinent.
We're all right, let's not be too hard on ourselves.
Cheers
Rana
Posted on: 13 October 2004 by Steve Toy
quote:
I defend the right to drive below the speed limit if I choose, and it has nothing to do with laziness or incompetence,
In your case it is probably laziness and not incompetence if much of the time you do manage to drive at the speed limit, but laziness it certainly is.
The faster you drive, the more concentration is required. There is an optimum level of concentration/stress to be driving safely.
Lower your speed, your concentration will drop, and eventually your mind will wander. This is why I detest driving through extensive built-up areas with 30mph limits enforced by cameras late at night.
Deciding to drive below a speed limit in good, clear driving conditions is just a case of not really being in the mood to drive, having things on your mind etc. You want to switch off from the interactive process of driving and being aware of what is going on around you so you can opt to be a passenger at the wheel, and allow your thoughts to follow their own path...
As for the queue of traffic forming behind you, you just think, "fuck 'em!"
When stuck behind such clots I don't tailgate as it is both dangerous and counterproductive - slow drivers are usually incredibly stubborn and territorial occupiers of roadspace, and their reaction to anyone trying to hurry them along is usually to defend their territory by slowing down even more.
I just flash my lights or sound my horn (once) to let them know I'm there, just in case their attention has wandered involuntarily. If that doesn't work I just drop back and wait for the first safe opportunity to overtake - if such an opportunity ever arises.
Drivers who proceed quickly without intimidating other road users are not antisocial for they don't get in anybody's way - unlike the slow driver...
Regards,
Steve.
[This message was edited by Steven Toy on Thu 14 October 2004 at 5:54.]
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by bhazen
Rana - you're correct, it was over 10 years ago, a Ford hatchback of some sort (Fiesta?)
I actually think it's cool that India's road system is mainly two-lane; freeways destroy the rural atmosphere of most countries where they proliferate.
So, the outside lane is the one closest to the median (on a motorway)? Is is OK for slow drivers to poke along on the inside (far left in the UK) lane?
quote:Oh, yes...when you're on the road from, say, Jodhpur to Agra which is not quite a two-lane road; you're in a bus, a heavily-laden lorry approaches from the opposite direction, both drivers commence honking; it's a game of chicken, folks! Then, at the last possible instant, both vehicles move slightly towards the shoulder and you stay alive.
Originally posted by Rana Ali:
...and for a real terror-rush, any "highway" on the Indian Subcontinent.
I actually think it's cool that India's road system is mainly two-lane; freeways destroy the rural atmosphere of most countries where they proliferate.
So, the outside lane is the one closest to the median (on a motorway)? Is is OK for slow drivers to poke along on the inside (far left in the UK) lane?
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by MarkEJ
quote:
Originally posted by kevinrt:
The speed limit is intended as a maximum not a mimimum.
I defend the right to drive below the speed limit if I choose
Agreed 100% with the voice of sanity above. The times when driving was inherently entertaining are now unfortunately past -- there are simply too many other vehicles on the road, and therefore too many other lives at stake.
For the record, I for one do consider breaking a speed limit to be antisocial behaviour, even on a near deserted motorway at 2.30am. It is still a public road, and Stephen's admission that he was close to another vehicle for much of the time means that there were at least two lives potentially at risk in the event of either vehicle suffering (for example):
1. a blowout.
2. engine management malfunction a la Ford Explorer, when the throttle just floors itself without warning.
3. Steering failure.
4. Driver with unforeseen and undiagnosed medical problems, such as an endochrine attack, heart failure or diabetes-derived loss of faculties.
Naturally none of the above are all that common, but they do happen. The speed and distance limits are there to minimise the impact of such an occurence on the lives of all involved, whether we are unfortunate enough to have it happen to us, or need time to take evasive action if it happens to another vehicle around us.
Finally:
In 1979, I was driving a hired vehicle on a motorway. It wasn't particularly crowded -- there were about 5 vehicles in view at the same time on my carriageway. The road was in a shallow cutting -- there were grass banks either side. It was raining slightly, and the wiper motor was in such bad condition that the blades took about 10 seconds on each sweep of the screen. Because of this impaired visibility (and much to my frustration), I was travelling at about 60mph instead of my habitual flat-out 85mph (it was a 1300cc Escort van). In the leftmost lane, I came up behind a Mini pickup heavily loaded with building materials travelling at about 50mph, with its tailgate down, and loaded with breeze blocks. As I was preparing to overtake, the cordage holding the tailgate horizontal failed, and about 15 blocks landed in the road in front of me at about 25m distance. I swerved inside them on the hard shoulder successfully, but lost control of the vehicle, probably due to the change of surface. Travelling sideways in a gracefull arc, I went onto the grass, and up the bank next to the motorway, finally coming to rest about 20 seconds later (it felt like 20 years) within 3m of the brick wall supporting a bridge approach. I had to clear a lot of grass out the steering gear, but otherwise both myself and the vehicle were undamaged. I have no doubt that if I had been travelling any faster, I would have hit either the blocks or that bridge very hard indeed, possibly with an entirely different outcome.
The point of all this is that the major difference between motorways and other roads is primarily the average speeds maintained, and the faster you go, the faster stuff happens, if it's going to. On motorways, we constantly make assumptions that the drivers of other vehicles are awake, sober and of sound mind, and that shit will not happen. Occasionally we will be wrong, and the faster we are travelling at the time, the less chance both we and others around us who have done us no harm have of surviving the experience. We have no control over how others behave, so we need to take all the precautions ourselves.
Best;
Mark
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by bigmick
My favorite Indian driving trait is at night, turning off the headlights when meeting an oncoming vehicle so as not to dazzle the other chap. Best when travelling with an Indian newbie as the scream is particularly blood curdling.
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by kevinrt
Stephen Toy
Stephen, as you and I have never knowingly met I think you should accept my rational for my actions and not make up your own version. I think I am probably in a better position to judge them.
You appear as fixated on the speed limits as those who advocate never excedeing them.
Stephen, as you and I have never knowingly met I think you should accept my rational for my actions and not make up your own version. I think I am probably in a better position to judge them.
You appear as fixated on the speed limits as those who advocate never excedeing them.
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Trevor Newall
quote:
Originally posted by Tom Alves:
Perhaps I normally see Linn or Audiolab drivers who like the middle lane or more commonly the outside lane with a queue of 20 cars behind them and nothing in the two inside lanes for a mile or so.
tom, linn owners drive volvos, so what do you expect?
the ‘ensemble’ is completed with a cloth cap and leather driving gloves.
as for audiolab owners, surely they’re on mopeds?
quote:
Thank fuck for single track roads
yep, they’re a hoot, especially when there’s only one passing place every 2 miles!
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Toy:
slow drivers are usually incredibly stubborn and territorial occupiers of roadspace, and their reaction to anyone trying to hurry them along is usually to defend their territory by slowing down even more.
that's when I reach for the gun in the glove compartment and open the window
TN
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by MarkEJ
quote:
Originally posted by Steven Toy:
There is an optimum level of concentration/stress to be driving safely.
<snip>
Lower your speed, your concentration will drop, and eventually your mind will wander.
Forgive me Stephen, but if you cannot concentrate adequately at 30mph then should you really be driving at all? If your mind is prone to wandering, is it not better for others that it does so at 30mph than 50? And is your logic not just seeking to make a social case for "flooring it" in order to let yourself off the hook? (albeit with some originality)
quote:
This is why I detest driving through extensive built-up areas with 30mph limits enforced by cameras late at night.
I cannot see what possible difference "late at night" makes. In more civilised times, there used to be road signs advising against the use of motor horns at night. This is when many people are trying to sleep without some goddam taxi roaring up their road, particularly in the built-up areas with 30mph limits that you dislike so much. Add to this urban foxes, badgers, cats and lost dogs, and you begin to make a good case for a reduction of this limit to 20mph, in my opinion. We begin to see how you manage to go through so many gearboxes!
Best;
Mark
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Matthew T
Benefits of driving slowly
I tend to drive around the speed limits. Having decided I couldn't be bothered to do the 'camera paranoia' thing and living in London it doesn't really slow thing down, it is the law as well. One benefit of this habit is that I can generally arrive at my destination relaxed, and really quiet calm, I don't get pissed off with other motorist as much (I do have a good laugh now and again).
In fact it makes driving a rather relaxing endeavour and recently found my heart rate (just a curiosty thing) was around 55bpm as compared to rest rate of 45-50bpm.
The sacrifice? Having to allow an extra 5 minutes for most journeys, not really a big deal!
That being said driving on German autobahns I will drive at 100-120-140... whatever I deem as safe given the conditions, of course at that speed if anything goes wrong, byebye, actually it anything goes wrong above 60mph it's probably the same story...
Matthew
I tend to drive around the speed limits. Having decided I couldn't be bothered to do the 'camera paranoia' thing and living in London it doesn't really slow thing down, it is the law as well. One benefit of this habit is that I can generally arrive at my destination relaxed, and really quiet calm, I don't get pissed off with other motorist as much (I do have a good laugh now and again).
In fact it makes driving a rather relaxing endeavour and recently found my heart rate (just a curiosty thing) was around 55bpm as compared to rest rate of 45-50bpm.
The sacrifice? Having to allow an extra 5 minutes for most journeys, not really a big deal!
That being said driving on German autobahns I will drive at 100-120-140... whatever I deem as safe given the conditions, of course at that speed if anything goes wrong, byebye, actually it anything goes wrong above 60mph it's probably the same story...
Matthew
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Trevor Newall
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Ellis-Jones:quote:
Originally posted by Steven Toy:
There is an optimum level of concentration/stress to be driving safely.
<snip>
Lower your speed, your concentration will drop, and eventually your mind will wander.
Forgive me Stephen...
why are people spelling steven's name incorrectly?
are you blind?
sorry for being pedantic!
TN
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Laurie Saunders
quote:
Everyone would be on bicycles. The tax rate would halve because we wouldn't need to keep building roads or fund the NHS to x billions to treat all the fat lazy drivers with diabetes and heart disease or the 1000s of road traffic accidents. We would all be so fit and healthy we would all be happy shagging all day and the £500 each per month we currently spend on cars could fund the cds3/552/500/dbl system we would listen to whilst doing it.
How perceptive of you
I can confirm it is NOT bad!!!
laurie S
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Trevor Newall
quote:
Originally posted by Matthew T:
I tend to drive around the speed limits. Having decided I couldn't be bothered to do the 'camera paranoia' thing and living in London it doesn't really slow thing down, it is the law as well. One benefit of this habit is that I can generally arrive at my destination relaxed, and really quiet calm, I don't get pissed off with other motorist as much (I do have a good laugh now and again).
The sacrifice? Having to allow an extra 5 minutes for most journeys, not really a big deal!
good advice, matthew.
sadly, though, what you recommend isn't always possible, or practical.
you can plan ahead so much, but when things crop up unexpectedly, and you need to get somewhere fast, the last person you want to meet on a motorway is a middle lane or outside lane hog.
nor some stubborn arsehole anywhere else, for that matter, who won't give way to let you pass!
TN
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Matthew T
TN
I usually take the approach I use the 'slow' lane and when I need to over take will move into the mayhem that is the center and fast lane. This generally involves quite a bit of undertaking but then that's ok in 'slow' moving traffic according to the HWC if I remember correctly
But I must say sympathy to people who have to drive as part of their jobs, and those middle lane hoggers do tend to be annoying even on the occasional trip on to the motorway.
Matthew
PS 4 lane motorways are even better cause the trucks take over the two slow lanes, then the middle lane hoggers stay in lane 3 and the 'no honestly, quite safe to drive 6ft behind the car in front at 70 (want to be driving at 90)' drivers in the fourth lane. Actually, even if there are no trucks the cars seem bound the the 2 fast lanes as demostrated by the 'slip road to 3rd lane in under 50yds' brigade.
I usually take the approach I use the 'slow' lane and when I need to over take will move into the mayhem that is the center and fast lane. This generally involves quite a bit of undertaking but then that's ok in 'slow' moving traffic according to the HWC if I remember correctly
But I must say sympathy to people who have to drive as part of their jobs, and those middle lane hoggers do tend to be annoying even on the occasional trip on to the motorway.
Matthew
PS 4 lane motorways are even better cause the trucks take over the two slow lanes, then the middle lane hoggers stay in lane 3 and the 'no honestly, quite safe to drive 6ft behind the car in front at 70 (want to be driving at 90)' drivers in the fourth lane. Actually, even if there are no trucks the cars seem bound the the 2 fast lanes as demostrated by the 'slip road to 3rd lane in under 50yds' brigade.
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Trevor Newall
matthew.
I'm glad you realise that, for some of us, driving is a big part of our job, as is sometimes pressure to get from a to b as quickly as possible.
we're not out for a 'jolly', or an afternoon shopping trip, so, yes, we get pissed off when the jolly squad deliberately refuse to move over and let us pass (when safe) out of sheer stubbornness!!
but then, perhaps they have nothing else better to do.
I'm don't mean to sound aggressive, and our roads are, of course, for the use of everyone with a valid driving licence, but perhaps the next time you see a car coming up fast behind you the road users who aren't working, or those who are retired, and have plenty of time on their hands, could spare a thought for the person who's livelihood depends on getting to a particular destination on time?
or the person who's rushing to an emergency and doesn't have the benefit of being in an ambulance or a police car?
to impede their progress is at best inconsiderate and selfish, and at worst, potentially fatal.
TN
quote:
But I must say sympathy to people who have to drive as part of their jobs, and those middle lane hoggers do tend to be annoying even on the occasional trip on to the motorway.
I'm glad you realise that, for some of us, driving is a big part of our job, as is sometimes pressure to get from a to b as quickly as possible.
we're not out for a 'jolly', or an afternoon shopping trip, so, yes, we get pissed off when the jolly squad deliberately refuse to move over and let us pass (when safe) out of sheer stubbornness!!
but then, perhaps they have nothing else better to do.
I'm don't mean to sound aggressive, and our roads are, of course, for the use of everyone with a valid driving licence, but perhaps the next time you see a car coming up fast behind you the road users who aren't working, or those who are retired, and have plenty of time on their hands, could spare a thought for the person who's livelihood depends on getting to a particular destination on time?
or the person who's rushing to an emergency and doesn't have the benefit of being in an ambulance or a police car?
to impede their progress is at best inconsiderate and selfish, and at worst, potentially fatal.
TN
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Jay
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Ellis-Jones:
On motorways, we constantly make assumptions that the drivers of other vehicles are awake, sober and of sound mind, and that shit will not happen. Occasionally we will be wrong, and the faster we are travelling at the time, the less chance both we _and others around us who have done us no harm_ have of surviving the experience. We have no control over how others behave, so we need to take all the precautions ourselves.
I'd like expand more on this point from Mark because I think he makes a lot of sense.
It doesn't matter whether it's a motorway or a one-way, you can't control what other people do. I'm of the mind that if I drive responsibly, then I am most likely to be involved in an accident through someone else's actions or just plain bad luck. When I'm driving I assume that everyone else is an idiot (no offense). I think that's the safest way to travel, drive defensively, not aggresively.
I don't accept the excuse that because of middle lane hoggers, you become impatient and do silly or risky things. "They made me do it!" Well what an all too familiar cop out and another example of not taking responsibility for your own actions.
J
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Trevor Newall
quote:
When I'm driving I assume that everyone else is an idiot (no offense).
none taken. I do the same.
more often than not, you'll be right!
btw, did you mean to write irresponsibly in your above post?
TN
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Jay
quote:
Originally posted by Trevor Newall:quote:
When I'm driving I assume that everyone else is an idiot (no offense).
none taken. I do the same.
more often than not, you'll be right!
btw, did you mean to write _irresponsibly_ in your above post?
TN
No, but yes. If you get my meaning
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Nigel Cavendish
quote:
Originally posted by Trevor Newall:
...
could spare a thought for the person who's livelihood depends on getting to a particular destination on time?
or the person who's rushing to an emergency and doesn't have the benefit of being in an ambulance or a police car?
to impede their progress is at best inconsiderate and selfish, and at worst, potentially fatal.
TN
The emergency services have lights and sirens for obvious good reason.
I don't see why an hotelier (or anyone else) in the normal course of business would consider what they do to be equivalent to an emergency.
If you get held up that regularly, then leave earlier, go a different way, travel by other means, be patient - it won't kill you or anyone else.
cheers
Nigel
Posted on: 14 October 2004 by Steve Toy
quote:
For the record, I for one do consider breaking a speed limit to be antisocial behaviour, even on a near deserted motorway at 2.30am. It is still a public road, and Stephen's admission that he was close to another vehicle for much of the time means that there were at least two lives potentially at risk in the event of either vehicle suffering (for example):
1. a blowout.
2. engine management malfunction a la Ford Explorer, when the throttle just floors itself without warning.
3. Steering failure.
4. Driver with unforeseen and undiagnosed medical problems, such as an endochrine attack, heart failure or diabetes-derived loss of faculties.
Firstly it was the vehicle behind, the Freelander who was on occasions travelling too close to me each time I pulled out into the middle lane to overtake a lorry doing 56. By doing 95 and not just 70 I spent less time on my overtaking manoeuvre, and less time in the middle lane in front of the Hogger.
In the event of a blowout you just take your foot off the accelerator and maintain a straight line.
In the event of a throttle surge you hit the brakes.
As for steering failure I had a new steering rack fitted two months ago.
As for the medical issues I'm required to have a thorough medical check at least every five years until 45 years old then every three years thereafter.
As for getting through gearboxes it is just the Skoda that has suffered this problem.
My own private car, a Ford Mondeo TD (the one I was travelling at 95 in on the M6 Toll) has done 251,000 miles, was previously my taxi for three years and is still on its original gearbox.
As for wild foxes, badgers, cats etc. I've only killed two cats - both times it was the rear wheel that hit the cat and I was travelling at 20mph in both instances.
Along straight, wide roads like the A34 from Cannock to Birmingham, the car will run quieter at 50mph in 5th gear than at 29 mph in 3rd late at night.
Regards,
Steve.