Overtaking just as the speed limit increases

mikey72

Parva wrote: »

Not at all, if the driver in front is driving to the sort of limits and speeds that I myself am happy with (taking into account weather conditions etc etc) then I wouldn't even bother to attempt an overtake unless they were going unnecessarily slowly in my eyes. I don't overtake for the hell of it and I certainly wouldn't bother if the end result means I'm going to gain perhaps a whole minute at the end of the journey!

I drive briskly but safely and I attribute this to being situally aware of all that is going on around me, not just what I see in front.

Well, you wrote it originally.

Parva wrote: »

Once he's gone then continue to assess the opportunity of overtaking the car in front assuming that he too isn't some idiot that drives at bang on 30mph and then accelerates to 60mph in 2.1 seconds when he hits an NSL zone.

mikey72

Strider590 wrote: »

^^ I'd pass a van, truck, caravan or 4x4 that was accelerating up to the speed limit.... Simply because they reduce my visibility when I'm behind them, I lose count how many time's the above vehicles simply swerve to avoid road obstacles like parked/broken down cars or huge potholes, instead of indicating for the benefit of the cars following them.

It's pretty scary when the large vehicle in front swerves to avoid something and leave's you almost no time to react to the hazard yourself.

Hence, I will overtake large vehicles even if they intend to do the speed limit.
This excludes artic's as even if/when they don't indicate for an obstacle, you do have a much better visual sense of what they're doing.

Leave a gap, if you tailgate no wonder you can't see anything.

Wig

anewman wrote: »

Another road rage thread with a pet hate of mine. Got to hate it when people overtake you as you're doing the speed limit (and I mean by sat nav not the under-reading speedo), and pull straight back in apparently without looking, just as the speed limit increases. It is exactly the point in time law abiding motorists want to put their foot down to make progress and get up to the new speed limit, but such overtakers often force you to do the sensible thing and not accelerate. It's like they have no forethought to consider that as the speed limit increases someone might want to increase speed.

Or is it just me who has experienced this? :rotfl:

Can't say I have ever experienced this.

mikey72

"Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so."
So if I suddenly accelerate out of a 30mph limit, it can't be safe to overtake me.
If I haven't used the mirrors, and don't even know they're there, and then they're stuck next to me on the wrong side of the road, it certainly wasn't safe.

ACID

most of the time it tends to be women or business men!

Mark_Hewitt

mikey72 wrote: »

"Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so."
So if I suddenly accelerate out of a 30mph limit, it can't be safe to overtake me.
If I haven't used the mirrors, and don't even know they're there, and then they're stuck next to me on the wrong side of the road, it certainly wasn't safe.

No, it wasn't safe. But given they've made an unsafe manoeuvre and exposed themselves to danger it is incumbent on both of you to make sure the situation is returned to a safe one as soon as possible. If that means you dropping back to allow the overtake, that's what you should do.

almillar

In the same way as none of you would overtake a car that's indicating right (well I hope not!), you generally shouldn't overtake a car approaching a NSL sign, or any increase in speed limit. Just as the right indicator is probably going to turn right sometime, you should expect the driver to speed up after the sign.
If you've been following a numpty at 25 through a 30, that's a different matter, but you should of course technically wait until after the sign.
And ignoring second guessing another driver's attitude, please indicate that you're going to overtake, where's the harm? I thought you had to indicate to change lane anyway, and that's what you're doing temporarily.

Strider590

almillar wrote: »

please indicate that you're going to overtake, where's the harm? I thought you had to indicate to change lane anyway, and that's what you're doing temporarily.

I agree that indication should be used when overtaking.... However, in the real world indicators turn a simple overtake into a race.

Mark_Hewitt

Strider590 wrote: »

I agree that indication should be used when overtaking.... However, in the real world indicators turn a simple overtake into a race.

That's not something I've experienced. I find in practice using your indicators is a good way to show to oncoming traffic that you are moving back into your own lane, so they don't have to panic!

King_Nothing

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

That's not something I've experienced. I find in practice using your indicators is a good way to show to oncoming traffic that you are moving back into your own lane, so they don't have to panic!

I think he was on about at the start of an overtake, if you indicate, it gives the person in front time to drop a gear and floor it to spite you and be dangerous, whereas, if you accelerate and stealth overtake, you're past him before he realises, and doesn't have any time to react and be a buffoon.