speed limits

Strider590

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

I think you are correct, the message is getting through, ie, the right boot governs fuel costs.

And many are also driving less as well as slower,

Don't think it's quite that simple.....

I've started driving with my OBDII reader connected to the cars ECU, on standard run 5 miles of DC and 10 miles of NSL single carriageway. doing 60-70mph in 5th gear I average 39mpg, doing the same journey stuck behind some numpty at 45mph I average 32mpg....

Why? because im unable to get into 5th gear due to all the hilly bits.

Then at the extreme end today same journey stuck behind a Morrisons truck doing 25-30 for the first 10 miles, I averaged just 28mpg.... Why? because I was constantly up/down the gears looking for a safe overtaking spot that never arrived.

cyclonebri1

Lum wrote: »

My favourite example of such an idiot was the Audi S4 driver on the M4 who undertook a yellow van with flashing lights and a big "wide load" flag, having apparently failed to notice the enormous yellow digger with tracks the width of a car overhanging either side of the flatbed that was straddling L1 and L2. They then proceeded to pull in front of the escort van and get very wound up as everyone in L3 who had seen this decided to bunch up and not let the idiot in.[/QUOTE]


This is my basic worry in this topic, (which now seems to be fairly well down the inside lane rather than speeding track wth, ), even if it's only slightly dodgy, may not be breaking any LAWS, but is against the advice as printed in the HC, which lets not forget is perceived as the rules of the road, then it is likely to incite some form of road rage, bunching deliberately is a classic example here. These guys were driving sensibly untill someone tried a smart move and then suddenly see red.


I said it earlier, in the few driving friends I'm out with I know a couple who will deliberately pull back into the inside lane if they think someones about to pull a foul manouever.

Ok a calculated pull back in intended to inconvenience rather than cause a collision, and carefull use of the word think but this is what happens. :A

Edited to add,
It's a few mins since I wrote that but I was thinking about what I said about the Highway code being a set of rules, now it's over 40 years since I passed my last driving test but I do have a copy of the latest version of the HC at hand. There is a paragraph in the introduction that really should settle the views expressed here, word for word;

Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not in itself cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see page 124) to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as 'should/should not' and 'do/do not'.

(The highlight is mine but the wording is as is)

mikey72

Strider590 wrote: »

Don't think it's quite that simple.....

I've started driving with my OBDII reader connected to the cars ECU, on standard run 5 miles of DC and 10 miles of NSL single carriageway. doing 60-70mph in 5th gear I average 39mpg, doing the same journey stuck behind some numpty at 45mph I average 32mpg....

Why? because im unable to get into 5th gear due to all the hilly bits.

Then at the extreme end today same journey stuck behind a Morrisons truck doing 25-30 for the first 10 miles, I averaged just 28mpg.... Why? because I was constantly up/down the gears looking for a safe overtaking spot that never arrived.

So, poor driving style costs.
As cyclonebri1 said.

cyclonebri1

Strider590 wrote: »

Don't think it's quite that simple.....

I've started driving with my OBDII reader connected to the cars ECU, on standard run 5 miles of DC and 10 miles of NSL single carriageway. doing 60-70mph in 5th gear I average 39mpg, doing the same journey stuck behind some numpty at 45mph I average 32mpg....

Why? because im unable to get into 5th gear due to all the hilly bits.

Then at the extreme end today same journey stuck behind a Morrisons truck doing 25-30 for the first 10 miles, I averaged just 28mpg.... Why? because I was constantly up/down the gears looking for a safe overtaking spot that never arrived.

Crikey Stryder when in a hole stop digging chap, can you actully see out of the car with all that plugged in electronic gadgetry, sorry had to say it because someone surely would have done :rotfl::rotfl:

On a serious note, yes of course, it's never that simple as there will be so many different situations to consider, but driving slower will, overall reduce fuel consumption.
I too have studied at length how to eek every last mile out of a gallon of juice. The 1 real issue that you can't get around is the dissproportionate amount of fuel used from a cold start compared with a warm 1, the fuel consumption is probably doubled over the 1st 2 miles, hence my coments about driving less, ie cut out the short runs,

NBLondon

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Ok a calculated pull back in intended to inconvenience rather than cause a collision, and carefull use of the word think but this is what happens. :A

If you mean what I think you mean by calculated - you're right. Better to inconvenience A than collide with B - if you calculate that the risk of A colliding with you as a result of that manoeuvre is less than the risk of B colliding with you if you don't.

Inconvenience A to prevent A colliding with B? If you can do it without increasing risk to yourself - good for you. You're calculating that the risk of A developing road rage is less than the risk of a collision. You're also hoping that A will see the whole picture afterwards and realise you were being proactive rather than obstructive.

Of course, you are saying that your calculation of the risk is more accurate than A's. You may be right if you have a better view than A or A is obviously dangerous (like the Audi driver Lum has just described). However... Inconvenience A just because one thinks they are wrong, going against the highway code or appear aggressive and one may be drifting towards being an arrogant git.

Back to the topic! Higher limit --> higher (probably) average speeds --> less time to do all this judging of risks.

DirectDebacle

mikey72 wrote: »

Try it, and if you're pulled, tell them that and report back.
Should be good for a laugh.

(And if you don't think you're overtaking, your reference to Rule 268 was a bit pointless)

I don't think I am overtaking. I know I am. My reference to the Highway Code wasn't my main point but was relevant to my previous posts.

Strider590

mikey72 wrote: »

So, poor driving style costs.
As cyclonebri1 said.

Sorry, I forgot overtaking was a crime........

Lum

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not in itself cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see page 124) to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as 'should/should not' and 'do/do not'.

That's never been in doubt as far as I can tell.

Not illegal, but if you have an accident and you were violating the HC then you're more likely to be found at fault and lose your NCB. I've posted that several times in this and other threads. Not that exact wording but words to the same effect.

However, is it not still the case that the HC also requires you to look before changing lanes?

alastairq

Sorry, I forgot overtaking was a crime........

Overtaking without ensuring first, it is safe to do so.....deserves its own reward.

Remember, one driver's idea of what constitutes 'safe' may not be others....or a Court's?

And...if a Court cannot arrive at a reasonable conclusion regarding an action, then it will defer to the DSA....

It isn't what other folk 'do wrong' that is important to a driver....but how comfortably one copes with that problem.

And if a driver's idea of 'coping' involves transgressing the Law...or even, simply feeling the need to take 'dramatic' action.....then these alone say more about the shortcomings of an individual driver than anything else.

Two-lane motorways?

What about the M18, anyone?

The_Turner

alastairq wrote: »

Remember, one driver's idea of what constitutes 'safe' may not be others....or a Court's?

And...if a Court cannot arrive at a reasonable conclusion regarding an action, then it will defer to the DSA....

It would conclude there is no case to answer, would it not?