Bad Drivers

stephen77

Cycrow wrote: »

That should be the other way round.
anyone who thinks the speed limits are targets should not have a licence

safety before convenience

But we are talking about people who are going 40mph on a straight road in daylight in a 60mph.

before some one says over take there are cars coming the other way.

If they have a half decent car that has passed its MOT how is it not safe to do 60mph unless they are incompetent drivers?

Cycrow

stephen77 wrote: »

But we are talking about people who are going 40mph on a straight road in daylight in a 60mph.

before some one says over take there are cars coming the other way.

If they have a half decent car that has passed its MOT how is it not safe to do 60mph unless they are incompetent drivers?

and how is it unsafe for them to only do 40 ?
its not unsafe, its only more convenient for the driver behind so they can go faster.

if both cars end up doing 40 down the road, then surely thats safer all round ?

its certainly not less safe to go slower

JohalaReewi

stephen77 wrote: »

But we are talking about people who are going 40mph on a straight road in daylight in a 60mph.

Why do you find that a problem?

Unless there is a minimum speed limit in force, the vehicle in front is entitled to go at whatever speed they like (up to the speed limit of course ). If conditions allow, you can overtake them. Otherwise you have to wait and not get worked up and angry.

I have noticed that younger drivers seem to be taught that they should drive at the speed limit, and doing "40 in a 60" is bad. Not sure when that came in but it wasn't the case when I was taught to drive.

DCFC79

An example Ive noticed for a while are drivers who make up the speed ( or just dont know ) for a road yet its clear its 30mph from the street lights and no other sign indicating the speed is different.

JohalaReewi

PZH wrote: »

But I do have people who come speeding up behind and then sit on my rear quarter as I approach traffic and need to pull out, even when the road ahead is clear in the middle lane as well as clear in the 3rd lane

That is strange isn't it? Why do they do it? They could easily keep going at the same speed and overtake, or slow down and pull in behind you. But no, they slow down and sit on your rear corner.

And there are loads of them. :wall:

hgotsparkle

JohalaReewi wrote: »

Why do you find that a problem?

Unless there is a minimum speed limit in force, the vehicle in front is entitled to go at whatever speed they like (up to the speed limit of course ). If conditions allow, you can overtake them. Otherwise you have to wait and not get worked up and angry.

I have noticed that younger drivers seem to be taught that they should drive at the speed limit, and doing "40 in a 60" is bad. Not sure when that came in but it wasn't the case when I was taught to drive.

Having passed my test 2 years ago, if I was doing 25mph in a 30 then I would be told to do 30. I have known people to be pulled over for driving too slow, and I have seen tractors being pulled over for not letting traffic pass. We are now taught that you must do what the limit is, dependent on driving conditions. I take a 60 as, if its a smooth road, and straight then do 60, bends at 55, sharp bends at 40, narrow roads at 50, single country lanes at 30.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Cycrow wrote: »

and how is it unsafe for them to only do 40 ?
its not unsafe, its only more convenient for the driver behind so they can go faster.

if both cars end up doing 40 down the road, then surely thats safer all round ?

its certainly not less safe to go slower

I think the question is why? They are usually too busy looking at their passenger and talking, taking in the scenery or don't know what the national speed limit sign actually means.

On busy roads where you end up with a big queues of traffic it's pretty selfish behaviour.

Same as sitting in the middle lane, lazy and selfish people holding up others.

Just to add when learning to drive the instructor did a mock test and I went 40 down a national speed limit road, he said that would have counted as a minor fault.

DCFC79

hgotsparkle wrote: »

Mini roundabouts in supermarket car parks have the same rules as your standard big roundabout - give way from the right, don't make everyone at every exit sit there wondering who is going to go first and then suddenly everyone miraculously remember the rule.

Yes there's some drivers I encounter who just dont know who to give way to on roundabouts. Its especially bad at the mini roundabout at the local morrisons.

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

Azari wrote: »

This is a particular problem if you are in the outer overtaking but you often wonder why you should have to be inconvenienced just to facilitate others breaking the law.

I can understand the sentiments here, but the limit was set by Babara Castle, in 1967. This eorson never drove and car safety features were abundant by the absence.

Today, the speed limit on motorways could easily be increased to 85 mph. Only idiot groups like brake say otherwise.

As for speed limiters. On dual carriage ways, this forces lorries to take upwards of 1 1/2 miles of road at 60 mph or less to overtake another lorry!

DKLS

Cycrow wrote: »

That should be the other way round.
anyone who thinks the speed limits are targets should not have a licence

safety before convenience

my annoyance is at people who use the phase not whether they treat the speed limits as a target or not.

Bit like a couple of the plums at work who ask why I "need" to drive a car with a "huge" engine or the dippy relative who spent 16k to buy a car that did 10 more than the previous car.