Driving with Headlights on

adouglasmhor

nickcc wrote: »

One draw back with using headlights during daylight is the increase in bulb failure and the cost of bulbs and vehicle downtime, not so much of a problem with LED's but a major cost with halogen headlight bulbs with a minimum downtime of 30 minutes and sometimes considerably longer.

I can change the headlight on my V70 in 5 minutes or less each. I buy spares in adavance when I can get a good price for them, alast ones I got at £2.99 per pair from a cash and carry, choice of Ring or Phillips, I have also bought from Lidl, I think I have changed both once in 2 years.

My old fiesta took a little longer to change bulbs as you had to remove the grille and dismount the headlights, but still less than 10 minutes.

Lum

alastairq wrote: »

It's there!

It has every 'right' to be there!

It is a fact-of-life!

Apparently not always?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10303689

almillar

No you won't.

It may in fact be the speed limit for your category of vehicle.

I don't know of any vehicle that can only do 30mph, and is allowed onto the motorway. Your vehicle is capable (I assume you're driving a normal car?) of more anyway. Please don't do 30 on a motorway!
Again - I'm talking about a car, in good conditions. Not specialised tyres, army vehicles etc.

A motorway isn't for high speed. It is to allow permitted vehicles to move more quickly between points without the hassle of conflicting traffic, and other obstacles.
The fact that such lack of conflict permits the safer use of higher speeds is but a by-product.

I agree with part of this theory - fewer hazards, better flow. But the speed limit is 70. I am absolutely within my right to do 70. If you're doing 30, there's a very big differential in speed, and that's danger, that YOU are causing. YOU WILL get done for dangerous driving if the wrong police officer catches you.
Yes - 70 and 30 can be done on a dual carriageway, but that's a hazard one should expect. It should not be expected on a motorway.

The problem with a slower vehicle on a British motorway isn't the slow vehicle...it is the incompetence of the thousands of other drivers who simply cannot cope wit that slower vehicle.

So, if the cap fits?

Fair enough, 30 isn't allowed on the motorway, because all the rest of the cars are doing a much higher speed. For safety, they aren't expected to cope with someone doing 30.
If I approach doing 70 and you're doing 30, you're a hazard. If you approach doing 70 and I'm doing 30, I'm a hazard. It's a harzard, and it's not allowed to exist on motorways, for the free flow of traffic. Dual carraigeways have the same (national) speed limit as motorways, but are slower - that's due to the harzards you mention above, and no restrictions on vehicle types.

It isn't the slow vehicle that creates the hold-up

Yes it is. If you do 30 on a 3 lane motorway, you've just made it into a 2 lane motorway. Have a think about how overtaking works. No matter how competent you or I are at overtaking, 2 lanes are involved instead of one.

Finally - in the Highway Code, you're told when entering from a slip road (a very common entry to a motorway), to match the speed of the traffic on the road. If the traffic's doing 70, so should you. If you're not happy about that, do yourself and everyone else a favour, and stay off it, for safety's sake.

Trade-Pro - alistairq's comments go against anything I've ever heard in the IAM.

alastairq

it's all cars, cars, cars, isn't it?

Well, cars are not the only types of vehicle on the road....and are not the only type of vehicle that will[if anything] primarily use a motorway, for example.

But, you all seem stuck in that rut of thinking everyone is driving a car...they're not.

There are lots of vehicles that have what may be described as restricted performance...yet are permitted to use motorways.

As for speed limits on motorways....one which stands out in my mind....and which applies to an LGV which may, to all intents and purposes, look no different to any other LGV, and that is, such a vehicle operating under STGO cat 2.[which covers a vehicle weighing between 46 & 80 tonnes.]

No 'outriders' required..no flashy lights required.

So, from behind, no different to any other LGV..yet..under STGO Cat 2 regs, the speed limit, on a motorway, is 40mph!


On a long climb, it may be travelling even slower.

So what!

That's what the centre and right lanes are for..overtaking.

The Highway Code refers to all vehicles, and is general advice...I've yet to see a lorry accelerate regularly to 70 on an entry slip road.

Your whole attitude to this matter is 100% wrong.

On the contrary..it's 100% inconvenient, for you and too many others.

To which, I care not, really.

Principally because, I have no issues with slower vehicles, whatever their shape.

I don't have problems overtaking any sort of vehicle.

Obviously, too many of you do, judging by the attempts to shift the blame onto the slower driver..instead of looking to personal failings?

It isn't what the other driver does...but, how comfortably you cope with what they do...that defines driver skill.

RichardD1970

alastairq wrote: »

it's all cars, cars, cars, isn't it?

Well yes, because that is what is being discussed.

The OP was driving a car in which he slowed down deliberately to 30mph. That is what annoys people, unnecessarily slow, inconsiderate driving.

No one is disputing that there are vehicles which have to go slower than the speed limit in some cases.

alastairq

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Well yes, because that is what is being discussed.

The OP was driving a car in which he slowed down deliberately to 30mph. That is what annoys people, unnecessarily slow, inconsiderate driving.

No one is disputing that there are vehicles which have to go slower than the speed limit in some cases.

Which is exactly my point.

Why 'differentiate?'

Next thing, everybody will be complaining because all BMWs aren't being driven flat-out!

As drivers/riders, it should not matter one jot what 'shape' or 'category' a vehicle is.

All that matters is, how comfortably we as drivers cope with that vehicle, and what it is doing.

Folk yatter on about how a slower-moving vehicle on a motorway [as but one example?] presents a 'danger!'

The reality [as far as driver skills are concerned ] is that, any 'danger' actually stems from the inability of other drivers to cope ...and cope comfortably, with that slower vehicle.

A lot of that 'inability to cope' stems from a pervading attitude amongst [too many] other drivers towards speed, motorways..., etc...and an inability to conclude what is 'right' & what is 'wrong'....without injecting either an emotive, or a selfish, response.

Ask the driver of any 'slower' vehicle about using a motorway [the best place, actually, to be?] and the biggest response [I have had, anyway] is an acute fear of 'being run into' by other vehicles.

Ask anybody who works on motorways?

Or maintains them?

The danger is not the slow vehicle.

The danger lies with the incompetence of other road users.

Now, that comment may or may not apply to anyone looking on this forum...it matters not to me.

But it does represent a conclusion that I, and hundreds of my colleagues where I work, have arrived at when attempting to train, coach, mentor & instruct others on how to overcome or deal with that very issue....amongst many others.

James_N

alastairq wrote: »

Which is exactly my point.

The reality [as far as driver skills are concerned ] is that, any 'danger' actually stems from the inability of other drivers to cope ...and cope comfortably, with that slower vehicle.

A lot of that 'inability to cope' stems from a pervading attitude amongst [too many] other drivers towards speed, motorways..., etc...and an inability to conclude what is 'right' & what is 'wrong'....without injecting either an emotive, or a selfish, response.

I don't disagree with the thrust of what you have written. But you miss the point in THIS particular case. The OP is driving at 30 mph, in his own admission deliberately, in an area where it would be reasonable and possible to go faster. And he isn't doing this because of any restrictions to his vehicle, difficult conditions or personal difficulties in coping with higher speeds: he's doing this because in his own mind he wants to "punish" someone with DLR, because he disagrees with DLR and in a show-off-I-am right-you-are-wrong way wants to demonstrate this to others.
It's the arsy, difficult and combative attitude that's largely to blame, and it's THIS that could led to problems with others.
It's similar to caravans or tractors on narrow lanes that fail to pull over every now and then where possible to let others pass. Yes, you do pay for your caravan and have every right to use the road, but that don't not mean you deliberately hold others up.
In this case the OP is seeming a nasty piece of work with a bad attitude and low tolerance - a poor mix for the type of driving you are obviously keen and able to promote.

Joe_Horner

alastairq wrote: »

The danger is not the slow vehicle.

The danger lies with the incompetence of other road users.

I'd go one step further than that to be honest. (Relative) incompetence in drivers - we've all passed the same test, so it has to be relative - isn't automatically dangerous.

What creates danger is driver's unawareness of the limits of their competence. Few drivers really have the skills to drive safely at 80 or 90 mph on anything but the clearest of motorways, where the only skill needed is point n shoot.

That's proved by the fact that a vast majority of cars on motorways are regularly too close to the car in front - a driver who can't even grasp the fundamental fact that safety requires separation is showing lack of skill at the first hurdle!

No doubt they all have super-human jet-fighter reflexes so the normal laws of physics don't apply to them. They "react instantly" as soon as something happens, not realising that they actually react as soon as they become aware that something's happening, which is entirely different!

The fact that they also don't seem to realise that separation also greatly improves traffic flow, increasing their average speed, suggests that they haven't really thought about what they're doing at all. And you can't develop skills in anything if you don't think about it!

Meanwhile, the driver who's sitting at 50 that they're all getting so worked up about is most likely aware of the true limits of his abilities and is keeping within them!

DantheMan

I'll be honest and say I haven't read this whole thing, as it's a a constant Troll by the looks of things.

DRLs while a little garish at times, are useful.

In both images provided earlier in this thread (with the Ka in it) i was drawn to the one with the headlights on with both the black and white border.

Driving at 30mph in a zone which has a higher speed limit than that with a vehicle CAPABLE of doing the speed limit is actually considered to be dangerous and is seen as such by the law as you force other road users to take unnecessary risks in order to pass, which can result in an accident. You can actually be issued penalty points for this.

Driving with your dipped headlights on is as others have mentioned required by law in some European countries, if however, I have read the OP correctly, the driver behind had his full beams on?

Turning your sidelights on and off would not say to me that something is wrong with my car if I have seen someone in front of/behind or in the opposite lane doing so, i'd just think they where being an idiot. If however hazards are flased or a rear foglight was switched on and off, i'd have a check and make sure I wasn't doing anything un toward.

In my mind, Aardvaark is an obvious troll, with many others now taking up the baton while he is not here.

Joe_Horner

DantheMan wrote: »

Driving at 30mph in a zone which has a higher speed limit than that with a vehicle CAPABLE of doing the speed limit is actually considered to be dangerous and is seen as such by the law [...]

No, it's seen as (at most) inconsiderate, and even that would depend on the circumstances.

DantheMan wrote: »

[...] as you force other road users to take unnecessary risks in order to pass, which can result in an accident.

At which point those other drivers potentially commit an act of dangerous driving (a far more seirous offence than driving without due consideration!).

When you're in control of a car no one "forces" you to take unnecessary risks (assuming you haven't just picked up a hitch-hiking machette murderer). If you choose to take those risks because of your own impatience / over confidence / lack of restraint then any consequences are purely down to you, and no-one else!