Define "pushing on".

 

I don't expect to be forced to drive in the gutter when I'm doing 60mph because some arse wants to do 80 and overtake regardless of the presence of oncoming traffic.

 

Likewise, I don't expect to have to dive left because someone wants to play chicken with me.

 

It's arrogant, and it's extremely dangerous.

1) How long is a piece of string? I know some straightish roads where 50 is pressing on and others where 60{cough} is generally regarded as "slow" by regular users.

 

2) Define "in the gutter". For myself, as long as I'm completely on the carriageway (no wheels left of the edge line/hitting gravel) I'm not in the gutter.

 

3) "I don't expect...". Hah!! No-one expects the Spanish Inquisition! Seriously, people who're looking like they want to launch an overtake is one of the things I'm actively looking for on these roads. Oh and I've made overtakes safely on them, because everyone was keeping to the left side of their lane.

 

4) Based on (3), I think there may be a Mr Kettle wanting to discuss visual spectrum reflectance with you.

 

3) "I don't expect...". Hah!! No-one expects the Spanish Inquisition! Seriously, people who're looking like they want to launch an overtake is one of the things I'm actively looking for on these roads. Oh and I've made overtakes safely on them, because everyone was keeping to the left side of their lane.

 

4) Based on (3), I think there may be a Mr Kettle wanting to discuss visual spectrum reflectance with you.

 

Sorry Ken, I don't get what you mean by the pot/kettle thing. (obviously I know what the metaphor means, I just don't see how it applies to this  :no: )

 

I'm afraid I won't back down from my position that if an overtake (other than, say a tractor or something obviously slow) relies upon someone else changing or maintaining a particular road position within their own lane then it's not safe. You can't predict what the people on either side of the road will do with sufficient margin of safety.

 

Yes, you can get away with it. Probably 999 times out of a 1000. However in my book it'd be a straightforward case of dangerous driving and the penalties associated with it. 

 

"Getting away with it" <> safe.

Also, re: "pushing on".

 

Doing 80 along a wide open road, with little or no other traffic, whilst illegal, may well be safe given the conditions.

 

Doing 80 up through the middle of the white line in between two lines of traffic doing 60, with a foot or so gap on either side, is the very definition of "overtaking like a ****".

 

No different, IMHO, to the motorcyclist who overtakes on the motorway/dual carraigeway in between lines of traffic - just because there's "room" to do it. 

Also to a point of traffic keeping left. You are probably going to find a driver who won't want to keep left in their lane. (In both directions of travel)

 

They could be avoiding a pot holes and puddles etc. Therefore the rest of their lane could be required.

 

There is a huge element of trust, and I couldn't trust other cars in that kind of situation.

Sorry Ken, I don't get what you mean by the pot/kettle thing. (obviously I know what the metaphor means, I just don't see how it applies to this  :no: )

 

I'm afraid I won't back down from my position that if an overtake (other than, say a tractor or something obviously slow) relies upon someone else changing or maintaining a particular road position within their own lane then it's not safe. You can't predict what the people on either side of the road will do with sufficient margin of safety.

 

Yes, you can get away with it. Probably 999 times out of a 1000. However in my book it'd be a straightforward case of dangerous driving and the penalties associated with it. 

 

"Getting away with it" <> safe.

You're claiming that it's arrogant for someone else to make a manoevre that requires 2 or 3 feet of your lane, but somehow it is not arrogant for you to drive 4 or 5 feet to the right of the wheeltracks of everyone else in that lane.

Also, re: "pushing on".

 

Doing 80 along a wide open road, with little or no other traffic, whilst illegal, may well be safe given the conditions.

 

Doing 80 up through the middle of the white line in between two lines of traffic doing 60, with a foot or so gap on either side, is the very definition of "overtaking like a ****".

 

No different, IMHO, to the motorcyclist who overtakes on the motorway/dual carraigeway in between lines of traffic - just because there's "room" to do it. 

Other than possibly in your OP (but I note that AFAIK you are not an "expert witness"), I can't see any mention of "speed in excess of the posted limit" whilst overtaking. Nor, except in the quoted post, of a carriageway as narrow as the 23 feet you cite.

 

Do you ever overtake traffic in designated "crawler lanes" in the face of oncoming traffic?

Lol "are you watching the road Richard" sunday drivers everywhere unfortunately.

 

Do you ever overtake traffic in designated "crawler lanes" in the face of oncoming traffic?

 

If you mean the roads I call "two up, one down" then my own rule for those is - provided overtaking downhill is not prohibited by double white lines - I will only overtake if there is only one oncoming car, and that car is in the nearside lane on their side of the road. If there is more than one car, I will not take the risk of one of them moving out to overtake without looking ahead. On that basis, the answer to your question is no.

 

If there's only one opposing car, and as I say, that it is its nearside lane, then there is no reason for it to change lane.

 

The bottom line of what I am saying is that if an overtake requires, or may require, others (in either direction) to take avoiding action, then it's not safe. It's not comparable, IMHO, to the crawler lane scenario as that provides an overtaking lane which may be legally used by traffic in either direction.

 

Neither am I referring to an orthodox overtake which was started with "good" intentions but the speed or distance required was misjudged. We all make mistakes after all. I am clearly referring to an overtake which was started on the basis that some or all of the traffic is going to have to move left in their own lane to make room for a vehicle overtaking neither in one lane nor the other.

Learning to overtake safely in a low powered car makes for good tuition.

 

You have to be absolutely sure you have sufficient clearance to complete the manoeuvre so there are no 'suck it and see' decisions, everything is meticulously planned.

 

More than 100,000 miles in a 70bhp diesel Peugeot 306 has taught me well.

 

+1 i had a defender 90 wasn't very pokey but still overtook safely and made safe progress

Happens a lot when I'm in the M135i lol.

 

If you overtook me in that I would flash.......

 

Just to say, 'Nice work, love the car. but next time give me notice so I can roll down my window and hear it scream past!'

If you mean the roads I call "two up, one down" then my own rule for those is - provided overtaking downhill is not prohibited by double white lines - I will only overtake if there is only one oncoming car, and that car is in the nearside lane on their side of the road. If there is more than one car, I will not take the risk of one of them moving out to overtake without looking ahead. On that basis, the answer to your question is no.

 

If there's only one opposing car, and as I say, that it is its nearside lane, then there is no reason for it to change lane.

 

The bottom line of what I am saying is that if an overtake requires, or may require, others (in either direction) to take avoiding action, then it's not safe. It's not comparable, IMHO, to the crawler lane scenario as that provides an overtaking lane which may be legally used by traffic in either direction.

 

Neither am I referring to an orthodox overtake which was started with "good" intentions but the speed or distance required was misjudged. We all make mistakes after all. I am clearly referring to an overtake which was started on the basis that some or all of the traffic is going to have to move left in their own lane to make room for a vehicle overtaking neither in one lane nor the other.

Ok, well you're more "risk adverse" than I am, so let's let our own actions slide since that's just going to "religious arguments" where the longer we go on, the more convinced we bother become that we're right and the other one's wrong.

 

What I am saying is that, on most of these "once was 3 lanes roads" that I've used, the normal convention for anyone not looking to overtake is to keep well left in the lane allowing space for others to do so.

I'm afraid I won't back down from my position that if an overtake (other than, say a tractor or something obviously slow) relies upon someone else changing or maintaining a particular road position within their own lane then it's not safe. You can't predict what the people on either side of the road will do with sufficient margin of safety.

 

 

I think that's the issue here.

 

Some people will keep left (without driving in the gutter) to allow people to pass more safely, being aware of their surroundings and being courteous.

 

Others who believe it isn't safe for anyone to overtake will drive more defensively and not yield.

 

There will always be people who support one or the other decision. In those situations illustrated by the OP those that are happy for others to overtake won't have an issue, those that don't want to be overtaken will have cause for complaint. I'm not saying one or the other is wrong, just that two different people with different opinions will disagree.

 

I'm happy to be overtaken so long as when I want to overtake those around me show the same courteousness I do to make it as easy and as safe as possible.

Edited 21 October, 201411 yr by silver1011

If you overtook me in that I would flash.......

 

Just to say, 'Nice work, love the car. but next time give me notice so I can roll down my window and hear it scream past!'

Haha, yeah that's what I try to imagine they are thinking when they flash after a perfectly legitimate overtake. It must be a compliment surely! ;-)

 

The bottom line of what I am saying is that if an overtake requires, or may require, others (in either direction) to take avoiding action, then it's not safe. It's not comparable, IMHO, to the crawler lane scenario as that provides an overtaking lane which may be legally used by traffic in either direction.

 

Neither am I referring to an orthodox overtake which was started with "good" intentions but the speed or distance required was misjudged. We all make mistakes after all. I am clearly referring to an overtake which was started on the basis that some or all of the traffic is going to have to move left in their own lane to make room for a vehicle overtaking neither in one lane nor the other.

Totally agree with this. "Making a lane" by overtaking straddling the centre lane lines whilst forcing cars on either side of the road to move to their left to make space for you and avoid a collision is well out of order imho.

Yanno when you're really going for it. N i mean like, properly shifting. Why do people flash you going the other way?

 

Believe it or not, speed limits are set the way they are for a reason, except for the 70 mph motorway limit which was set as a temporary fix during the fuel crisis of the 1970's and never taken off again.   Subsequent multiple vehicle accidents and motorway carnage have effectively put paid to any relaxing of the 70 mph limit, despite many attempts to get the government to raise it to 80 mph.   Deliberately, and wanton speeding is both dangerous and inconsiderate and, speeding in excess of 30 mph above the limit fully deserves withdrawal of the privilege of using the Queen's Highway!

 

If you're "really going for it" on a public road, then you're not only putting yourself at risk, but other road users as well.   The flash of headlamps is a warning to say "I am here" in a bid to avoid collision - not an attempt to blind you or pi55 you off!   If you want some mathematics:

Two vehicles heading towards each other at 60 mph have a potential impact speed of 120 mph - realistically, about 80 mph because both will slam the anchors on when they realise a collision is imminent.   At an 80 mph impact, with seat belts, pre-tensioners, crumple zones, collapsible steering columns, safety cell protection,  airbags and the gamut of improvements in car safety design over the last 30 years, there is a reasonable chance of survival, although severe injury is likely.

 

If one is travelling at 60 mph, and Mr Speed Merchant is hooning it along at 90 mph, the potential impact speed is 150 mph - too fast for either driver to react in an emergency.   The slightest thing - a bird swooping over a hedge, a child kicking a football out of a field, a fox darting out of the hedgerow etc could easily wipe out both the Speed Merchant and an innocent party - as well as other vehicles that plough into the wreckage!   If you possess a high performance vehicle, there are literally hundreds of Track Test days organised at private race tracks all over Europe where you can put the Ferrari or Lambo through its paces and risk your life with like-minded individuals.
 

Believe it or not, speed limits are set the way they are for a reason, except for the 70 mph motorway limit which was set as a temporary fix during the fuel crisis of the 1970's and never taken off again. Subsequent multiple vehicle accidents and motorway carnage have effectively put paid to any relaxing of the 70 mph limit, despite many attempts to get the government to raise it to 80 mph. Deliberately, and wanton speeding is both dangerous and inconsiderate and, speeding in excess of 30 mph above the limit fully deserves withdrawal of the privilege of using the Queen's Highway!

If you're "really going for it" on a public road, then you're not only putting yourself at risk, but other road users as well. The flash of headlamps is a warning to say "I am here" in a bid to avoid collision - not an attempt to blind you or pi55 you off! If you want some mathematics:

Two vehicles heading towards each other at 60 mph have a potential impact speed of 120 mph - realistically, about 80 mph because both will slam the anchors on when they realise a collision is imminent. At an 80 mph impact, with seat belts, pre-tensioners, crumple zones, collapsible steering columns, safety cell protection, airbags and the gamut of improvements in car safety design over the last 30 years, there is a reasonable chance of survival, although severe injury is likely.

If one is travelling at 60 mph, and Mr Speed Merchant is hooning it along at 90 mph, the potential impact speed is 150 mph - too fast for either driver to react in an emergency. The slightest thing - a bird swooping over a hedge, a child kicking a football out of a field, a fox darting out of the hedgerow etc could easily wipe out both the Speed Merchant and an innocent party - as well as other vehicles that plough into the wreckage! If you possess a high performance vehicle, there are literally hundreds of Track Test days organised at private race tracks all over Europe where you can put the Ferrari or Lambo through its paces and risk your life with like-minded individuals.

But its fun though. And I'll only do so where safe to do so and im in full control.

No point flashing at me. Im on the other side of the road, and I've already seen you. Its dangerous going faster than you can see, which is why id never do that. So trust me. I dont go blind above 60mph on an a-road.

No point preaching about crumple zones or seatbelts either tbh. Id only be 'properly shifting' on the motorbike. The 70hp fabia isnt really up to the job haha.

On topic of cars though. Cars fitted with big engines to make them accelerate fast and reach high speeds are generally a lot better handling and the brakes are a mile ahead of a normal car anyway. So although it going fast, its not at all out of control or anywhere near its limits.

Theres cars out there that will corner at 140mph better than my fabia will at 60, if not slower.

At the end of the day though, flashing your lights makes absolutely no difference, other than it could distract the rider/driver from other things that they should be looking at further ahead.

But its fun though. And I'll only do so where safe to do so and im in full control.

No point flashing at me. Im on the other side of the road, and I've already seen you. Its dangerous going faster than you can see, which is why id never do that. So trust me. I dont go blind above 60mph on an a-road.

No point preaching about crumple zones or seatbelts either tbh. Id only be 'properly shifting' on the motorbike. The 70hp fabia isnt really up to the job haha.

On topic of cars though. Cars fitted with big engines to make them accelerate fast and reach high speeds are generally a lot better handling and the brakes are a mile ahead of a normal car anyway. So although it going fast, its not at all out of control or anywhere near its limits.

Theres cars out there that will corner at 140mph better than my fabia will at 60, if not slower.

At the end of the day though, flashing your lights makes absolutely no difference, other than it could distract the rider/driver from other things that they should be looking at further ahead.

Not to mention that in a high performance vehicle when you unleash the beast for an overtake you are exposed on the opposite side of the road for far less time than if you were crawling past sedately!

Not to mention that in a high performance vehicle when you unleash the beast for an overtake you are exposed on the opposite side of the road for far less time than if you were crawling past sedately!

Too right.

And theres no worry about the guy your overtaking being a pillock and flooring it when your half way past.

I hate that. Makes me wanna do some American cop style action driving

Too right.

And theres no worry about the guy your overtaking being a pillock and flooring it when your half way past.

I hate that. Makes me wanna do some American cop style action driving

Why when you can be checking the Kebabs in the GTR

Too right.

And theres no worry about the guy your overtaking being a pillock and flooring it when your half way past.

I hate that. Makes me wanna do some American cop style action driving

The thing is they can floor it and you probably wouldn't notice. Must be abit like that on the bike I would have thought? Might explain the flashing tho when you've gone past.... Mr Fury has mashed his accelerator through the bulkhead but there is nothing he can do as you sail past as if he isn't even moving lol

 

 

 

Believe it or not, speed limits are set the way they are for a reason, except for the 70 mph motorway limit which was set as a temporary fix during the fuel crisis of the 1970's and never taken off again.   Subsequent multiple vehicle accidents and motorway carnage have effectively put paid to any relaxing of the 70 mph limit, despite many attempts to get the government to raise it to 80 mph.   Deliberately, and wanton speeding is both dangerous and inconsiderate and, speeding in excess of 30 mph above the limit fully deserves withdrawal of the privilege of using the Queen's Highway!

 

If you're "really going for it" on a public road, then you're not only putting yourself at risk, but other road users as well.   The flash of headlamps is a warning to say "I am here" in a bid to avoid collision - not an attempt to blind you or pi55 you off!   If you want some mathematics:

Two vehicles heading towards each other at 60 mph have a potential impact speed of 120 mph - realistically, about 80 mph because both will slam the anchors on when they realise a collision is imminent.   At an 80 mph impact, with seat belts, pre-tensioners, crumple zones, collapsible steering columns, safety cell protection,  airbags and the gamut of improvements in car safety design over the last 30 years, there is a reasonable chance of survival, although severe injury is likely.

 

If one is travelling at 60 mph, and Mr Speed Merchant is hooning it along at 90 mph, the potential impact speed is 150 mph - too fast for either driver to react in an emergency.   The slightest thing - a bird swooping over a hedge, a child kicking a football out of a field, a fox darting out of the hedgerow etc could easily wipe out both the Speed Merchant and an innocent party - as well as other vehicles that plough into the wreckage!   If you possess a high performance vehicle, there are literally hundreds of Track Test days organised at private race tracks all over Europe where you can put the Ferrari or Lambo through its paces and risk your life with like-minded individuals.

 

The 70 mph limit was introduced in December '65, as an "experiment" & ratified as a permanent limit app. 6 months later.

 

DC

The thing is they can floor it and you probably wouldn't notice. Must be abit like that on the bike I would have thought? Might explain the flashing tho when you've gone past.... Mr Fury has mashed his accelerator through the bulkhead but there is nothing he can do as you sail past as if he isn't even moving lol

Haha yeah!

Why do they do that though? Soo many do it. I know you wont notice in the 135i, but its soo much more apparently in low powered stuff like my fabia. Luckily iv usually built up enough run up to catch em out haha.

Yeah. Cant even tell mate. Well, with a 0-120mph of 10 seconds, the only way youd notice is if the car you were tryna overtake was a nissan gtr. Which id be abit more careful about tryna overtake haha.

Edit: only actually use full throttle for the fun factor. Never really need it as such.

No point flashing at me. Im on the other side of the road, and I've already seen you. Its dangerous going faster than you can see, which is why id never do that. So trust me. I dont go blind above 60mph on an a-road.

 

Agree 100%.

 

People won't need to flash at me either, If I am making progress on many of the good roads near to where I live, I will be doing so when it is safe to do so and I am 100% happy that the conditions are right and the road is clear. If I am I coming up to a corner I can't see through, I slow it down.

 

People who flash are normally the drivers that are either elderly or not a confident on the road. These drivers cause just as much danger than hot headed younger drivers or sales rep's that are late for their next business meeting or dinner date with a Ginster's pasty.

 

When I see a road captain cursing along Snake's Pass on a Sunday morning in a 10 year old BMW 520i I just cringe. I don't condone other drivers behaviour, but people driving too slow for no reason will provoke other drivers to perform lairy overtakes. You can understand being held up by a lorry, farm traffic or dare I say it; cyclists..... but a car driving along a national speed limit road at 35mph for no reason, IMO is more dangerous than someone travelling at 80mph.

Agree 100%.

People won't need to flash at me either, If I am making progress on many of the good roads near to where I live, I will be doing so when it is safe to do so and I am 100% happy that the conditions are right and the road is clear. If I am I coming up to a corner I can't see through, I slow it down.

People who flash are normally the drivers that are either elderly or not a confident on the road. These drivers cause just as much danger than hot headed younger drivers or sales rep's that are late for their next business meeting or dinner date with a Ginster's pasty.

When I see a road captain cursing along Snake's Pass on a Sunday morning in a 10 year old BMW 520i I just cringe. I don't condone other drivers behaviour, but people driving too slow for no reason will provoke other drivers to perform lairy overtakes. You can understand being held up by a lorry, farm traffic or dare I say it; cyclists..... but a car driving along a national speed limit road at 35mph for no reason, IMO is more dangerous than someone travelling at 80mph.

Yes!

I cant remember the last time somebody was mad at me for holding them up, not even in the HTP. So theres no excuses really.

Even if im just tootling along, I'll do the speed limit. 50-60mph isnt fast.

Edit: oh yes i can. That audi driver that kept tailgating me at 60mph on an a-road. So i used all the overtaking opportunities up in the htp, just so he couldnt make further progress. He was getting very mad that his bullying tactics didnt make me move out of his way.

Needless to say his A3 was considerably faster than my car, so he kept racing up behind me like a gorp.

As if to prove my point, some idiot in a puke coloured Corsa nearly took me out on my way home last night, on this exact stretch of road.

 

As I got onto the straight bit, I looked up to the limit point some 400 yards away. In the distance there was a Focus overtaking a large van, forcing the oncoming car to move left.

 

I then started to line up with the setting sun (5.15 last night) and was looking right into it, so I looked up momentarily to flip down the sun visor. When I looked back down my eye was caught by the Focus, and I had a moment's eye contact with the driver. When I looked straight ahead again, there was this clown in the Corsa about 50 yards away coming right at me. I had to swerve to miss him.

 

This is the second such incident I have had on that road in the last 3 or 4 weeks. My default road position on this road is about 3ft to the left of the white line, so it is clear from my road position that I am NOT inviting the overtake. In other words, this idiot in the Corsa started that overtake with the express intention of FORCING me to move.

 

There is an argument to be made that if the opposing traffic is keeping well to the left, then this makes the overtake possible. I can see this point of view but I still think it's dangerous; you're still relying on someone maintaining a given road position for the safety of (at least) 3 cars and their occupants.

 

However, I deliberately do not keep left so as not to encourage these dangerous manoeuvres. 

 

 

I'm not anti-speed as such. Given little or light traffic, that road would be "safe" for 80.