Driving too fast or driving too slow...

[CFB]

Take this scenario for example....

You are following two vehicles in a 30 mph zone. The front one travelling at the speed limit.

You then enter a NSL and the first of the vehicles in front accelerates to 40 mph despite the road and conditions allowing progress to be made at the NSL.

There are no real overtaking opportunities and the road is long and has long blind bends.

The driver of vehicle 2 is following much too closely.

Does this create a more dangerous situation than a vehicle speeding along the same stretch of road?

My opinion is yes it does.

The following driver is showing frustration at being prevented from making progress by following too closely and attempting to "push" the driver in front to speed up.

His next move is likely to be an overtake in less than ideal, possibly dangerous, circumstances possibly leading to evasive action by another driver and or the likelihood of a collision.

The speeding driver is much less likely to affect others. He is only travelling too fast.

Wat do you think?

[Volvomeg]

I tend to drive quiet fast anyway but i used to have a road that was a 60 then dropped to a 40 on my way home from work and used to get people regular doing 50 in the 60 then when it came to the 40 would continue to do 50, used to find it quiet amusing,

its not people on single carrageways that annoy mea, well apart from the old giffer today that insisted on doing 30 in a 60 thats a long downhill drag and sitting all the way with his foot on brake with me behind in mightly vetra with trailer on with a ton of rubble in it, it people that just don't know theres 3 lanes on a motorway and insist on traveling in middle lane even when there is no other cars on the motorway :swear: ,

[Beryl's Chief Pilot]

Take this scenario for example....

You are following two vehicles in a 30 mph zone. The front one travelling at the speed limit.

You then enter a NSL and the first of the vehicles in front accelerates to 40 mph despite the road and conditions allowing progress to be made at the NSL.

There are no real overtaking opportunities and the road is long and has long blind bends.

The driver of vehicle 2 is following much too closely.

Does this create a more dangerous situation than a vehicle speeding along the same stretch of road?

My opinion is yes it does.

The following driver is showing frustration at being prevented from making progress by following too closely and attempting to "push" the driver in front to speed up.

His next move is likely to be an overtake in less than ideal, possibly dangerous, circumstances possibly leading to evasive action by another driver and or the likelihood of a collision.

The speeding driver is much less likely to affect others. He is only travelling too fast.

Wat do you think?

I agree totally with you providing that the 'speeder' is driving within there own skill level & the road conditions.

[Llanigraham]

The person who is causing the greater danger is the person who is driving too close (driver 2)

The NSL is just that, a LIMIT. It does not mean you have to attain it.

You don't know the reason driver 1 is not driving faster, and there may be a very good reason for it, even on an open road.

In that situation, if I was driver 1 I would actually slow down more, as this then given driver 2 a better chance to overtake reasonably safely.

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

My fiend failed her test, one of her faults was doing 50mph in a 60 limit on a clear open road in good conditions. She was told its not a target, but if conditions allow you should be doing the limit and "making good progress". (these are not always the same thing granted)

As above, i`d probably slow down the closer he got to me tbh, only because I hate people sitting up my arse. The chances of me holding someone up are slim though

[ncarring]

If you're getting frustrated by drivers in front of you driving "too slowly", that says as much about you as it does about the person in front.

One could argue there's no such thing as too slow, only "slower than the maximum progress possible in the conditions" (or the speed limit). Yes, it can be tiresome when you want to go faster, but then it's up to you to find a safe and sensible overtaking opportunity.

As for the slower driver causing "a more dangerous situation", this is plainly nonsense. Yes, it can lead to irresponsible overtakes, but the drivers carrying out the overtakes should be the judge of that danger for themselves.

Discuss...

[Farnz]

Arguably, the situation is the same in both cases; in the one with two cars, the driver who wishes to go faster than the road conditions and/or legal limits permit has encountered an obstacle in front (a slower moving vehicle), and is refusing to slow to a safe speed or overtake safely. In the one with only one car, the driver simply hasn't encountered an obstacle that forces them to slow down. In both cases, it's the driver who wishes to go fast who's creating the hazard - if they slowed down, then overtook the slower driver when it was safe to do so, there wouldn't be a hazard in the two car case, while in the one car case, the only hazard is that they will be unable to control their car in the event of something unexpected.

[Llanigraham]

CFB,

Replace "slow driver" with a tractor.

Do your thoughts still apply?

[Moist Von Lipwig]

It is frustrating to have a slow driver ahead of you but equally really annoying to have someone running so close behind you trying to intimidate rather than get passed. Neither is right. If you want to there are always things out on the road to get stressed about, I am guilty of it at times. If you can chill out and relax and just drop back and let it go then you will get far less stressed and probably only get to your destination a few minutes later.

We all need to chill out at times and forgive people for mistakes, not everything is deliberate and many people just don't understand the concept of admitting they were wrong. Then again there are also BMW drivers (oh yeah and the Astra driver who pulled out on me at a roundabout today as I was half way round!).

[Farnz]

A thought - having just noticed (yes, I'm slow on the uptake!) that you said this was first discussed on the Yeti forum.

Some drivers get extremely frustrated because higher vehicles (like the Yeti) obstruct their view at junctions, whereas smaller vehicles (e.g. the Fabia) don't - you can see straight through the windows of a Fabia if you're in an Audi A8, but the Yeti's height means that you're looking at body panels instead. This is especially true when there are multiple lanes at a T-junction, going in different directions, and uneven traffic flow on the major road, where the Yeti can stop you seeing gaps that would otherwise be safe.

Does this make Yeti drivers inherently dangerous compared to Fabia drivers? I would argue not - it's not the Yeti driver's fault that some people get frustrated at their safe and legal use of the public highway, and it's certainly not their fault if the frustrated driver does something dangerous that they wouldn't have done in the absence of the Yeti.

Similarly, and by analogous reasoning, it's not the slow driver's fault that some people get frustrated at their safe and legal use of the public highway.

[Llanigraham]

Farnz,

Whilst I can understand the logic of that, there are many cars that don't allow "see through". Try following the Citreon C3 or a Honda Civic, they are terrible. And to be honest the Yeti isn't actually that high; the new Freelander or the Sportage are much worse.

[Farnz]

Farnz,

Whilst I can understand the logic of that, there are many cars that don't allow "see through". Try following the Citreon C3 or a Honda Civic, they are terrible. And to be honest the Yeti isn't actually that high; the new Freelander or the Sportage are much worse.

Sure - it's just an example of how saying "you're dangerous because something about your driving causes other drivers to become frustrated" leads to ridiculous claims. I would hope that no-one would attempt to claim that anyone who drives a certain model of car is inherently dangerous.

It would work just as well with "The presence of Skodas on the road causes some drivers of 'prestige' cars to get upset and drive badly - are you a bad driver because you drive a Skoda?"

Edited 6 January, 2012 by Farnz

[domhnall]

It would work just as well with "The presence of Skodas on the road causes some drivers of 'prestige' cars to get upset and drive badly - are you a bad driver because you drive a Skoda?"

I've had plenty examples of where other drivers (mainly Audis for some reason) seem to find it necessary to prove their superiority to my Skodas at junctions etc. I thought it was me being paranoid until my wife said she'd noticed that when driving the skoda she got hassle from Golf GTIs and the like. :wonder:

[ncarring]

In approximately 7 years of driving Skodas I don't remember ever having had "hassle" from other makes that I could attribute definitely to my being in one.

[CFB]

CFB,

Replace "slow driver" with a tractor.

Do your thoughts still apply?

Getting back on topic...

A tractor is a slightly different circumstance because everyone knows that they only travel relatively slowly (yes I know some can travel at 40 mph) a tractor driver is obliged to pull off the road into laybys or passing places to allow following traffic to pass. He (or she) should be aware if they are causing several vehicles to queue behind and take appropriate action as stated in the highway code.

A normal driver is under no such obligation.

In answer to your question, yes it does make a diffence.

[Llanigraham]

CFB,

Pulling in certainly doesn't apply around here, plus is it Law? I think you might find it is advisory only.

I stick with my original point. The "pusher" potentially causes more danger than the slow driver.

[CFB]

I didn't say it was law, The highway code says "you should" I believe.

I agree, the pusher does cause a significant problem but the question is why is he pushing in the first place?

Maybe both the pushers and the pushee are both equally to blame?

[Moist Von Lipwig]

Slightly off topic but has anyone ever seen a minimum speed sign? I know they are mentioned in the highway code but have never come across one.

[Farnz]

I didn't say it was law, The highway code says "you should" I believe.

I agree, the pusher does cause a significant problem but the question is why is he pushing in the first place?

Maybe both the pushers and the pushee are both equally to blame?

At what point is the pushee blameless? Presumably, you wouldn't consider the pushee to blame if they were travelling at the NSL, but the driver behind was pushing because they wanted to speed?

Would you also consider the pushee to blame if they were being pushed into speeding up by someone who could safely overtake, but was choosing not to?

[CFB]

At what point is the pushee blameless? Presumably, you wouldn't consider the pushee to blame if they were travelling at the NSL, but the driver behind was pushing because they wanted to speed?

Would you also consider the pushee to blame if they were being pushed into speeding up by someone who could safely overtake, but was choosing not to?

The pushee becomes blameless when he is driving at an appropriate speed for the conditions, whatever that may be.

If the pushee is driving at an appropriate speed for the conditions then the original question is mute.

The pushee decides to speed up to try and stop the pusher from getting too close then that is his choice. If he is speeding as a result then that is also his choice.

Even though the pusher is following too closely there is no reason for the pushee to break the law.

If the pusher is choosing not to overtake then surely he is showing he is happy with the speed of the vehicle he is following?

[Moist Von Lipwig]

One of the key attributes of advanced driving I think is appropriate to this discussion is 'making progress without impact on other drivers'. To me that means overtake if safe to do so, otherwise stay behind at a safe distance and just enjoy the drive.

[vwcabriolet1971]

IMHO it's often the driver who is too close to a slow moving vehicle who is at fault . Being too close leaves other following vehicles ,who wish to overtake , little chance to do so as they would have to overtake not one vehicle but two . If a driver has no intention of overtaking then he/she should leave sufficient room in front of them to allow following drivers to overtake. Also leaving some space in front makes it easier to overtake as it gives some space to accelerate before passing. But I guess in this day & age, & current road manners and consideration for other road users, there is little chance of this happening. Tailgating, or not leaving sufficient room in front, is one of biggest causes of accidents.

Edited 7 January, 2012 by vwcabriolet1971

[MartynVRS]

I always like to make progress and with the vRS and the fruit pastille effect I tend to use my right foot a lot and will not hesitate to overtake someone provided it's SAFE. Just take today travelling to work on a NSL single carriageway and I was catching a car at a fair pace. It was safer for me to check my mirrors and fly past. Bearing in mind I haven't broken the speed limit at this point and the alternative would have been to slow right down and not make the same progress. I overtake someone everyday I commute to work and I don't go on motorways.

I do get impatient behind slow moving traffic when there is absolutely no need to drive that slowly. If it's a tractor it should pull over. Limits must me stuck to unless the weather conditions are poor. But I will always maintain a 2 second gap maybe more if the driver seems pi$$3d. Once is there a gap I blast past. I've got no time for hanging about tbh. They should all get on a bus instead, at least it would only be one thing to overtake

[Llanigraham]

I do get impatient behind slow moving traffic when there is absolutely no need to drive that slowly. If it's a tractor it should pull over. Limits must me stuck to unless the weather conditions are poor.

Really, and can you tell me where in any Legislation it says that?

But I will always maintain a 2 second gap maybe more if the driver seems pi$$3d. Once is there a gap I blast past. I've got no time for hanging about tbh. They should all get on a bus instead, at least it would only be one thing to overtake :giggle:

With an attitude like that I suggest you take a Defensive Driving course.

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

I can see the difference between a tractor/lorry/bus etc which is **** slow and has no choice but to do 30mph and a car that is doing 30mph on a nice clear 60mph road for no reason.

If/When I catch a slow moving vehicle as annoying as it is sometimes, I just sit back and wait for a gap which never normally takes long to be honest. I have learnt form my younger years sitting 2 inches from some ones bumper gets you no where fast. :wonder:

I did get a bit high tempered this week when I was following a car doing 35mph in a 60mph limit, nice clear evening. I kept back and waited for a nice clear bit of road, as I pulled out and got level with him he floored it like a ****. I broke hard (nothing behind me luckily) and pulled back in behind only for him to slow back down. What a cool guy