driving slow : your views ?

Jamie_Carter

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

Doubtful. He was more than welcome to finish his overtake when he actually caught me up, if he was happy to drive over 60mph. Racing would imply he was somewhere near me in the first place as well.

You were racing simply by the fact that as he tried to overtake you, then you attempted to out accelerate him. That is racing.

Jamie_Carter

almillar wrote: »

nobbysn*ts:


You have an unhealthy attitude towards other drivers. With driving the way it is, I can hardly blame you.
Let's suppose the only reason he tried (like an idiot!) to overtake you was because you were holding him up because you weren't quite at the speed limit. Would you agree that it would be courteous of you to let him go. Are you aware that the Highway Code requires you (let's not get into law/advice) to be courteous to other road users?

Commentaries - these are actually very difficult to do. It's NOT part of the IAM test, but I think it IS part of the police test. Lots of very good drivers go to pieces when they have to 'tell a story' whilst driving. It sounds simple, 'say what you see' but when you do it, you can subconsciously slow down. I've tried it and that happened to me. Wholly inappropriate for the L test.

I've had to do a commentary drive, and it was hilarious. The idea is that you are proving to the instructor that you are fully aware of all your surroundings, the road conditions, and any hazards, or any potential hazard. But as we are capable of computing information far faster than we can translate it into words, then it is very easy to get tongue twisted.

Jamie_Carter

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

Ok, the opinion is obviously once the car behind has committed to overtake, by pulling out, I shouldn't accelerate until he's safely past, as I should enable the overtake. Seems the general consensus, and most people even quoted the highest code to prove under no circumstances should I have accelerated. So, imagine the same scenario, but it's not a car behind me, it's a truck. He pulls out. We still agree, hold back. Let him pass? Under no circumstances accelerate from the 40mph I doing until he's passed? Same scenario remember, same speeds, same overtake, same highway code. Just a truck now.

If he is committed to the overtake, then it can be dangerous to prevent him from doing so.


Lets take a slightly different scenario. Someone pulls out to overtake you, but you then accelerate to prevent him from doing so. This leaves him on the wrong side of the road for far longer than he would have been otherwise. When he committed to the overtake he had plenty of room to do so taking into account the visibility of the clear road ahead. But because you accelerated he can't complete the overtake before another vehicle comes around the corner ahead. If a collision occurs then you could be found partly responsible, and could actually serve time (depending on the exact outcome).

nobbysn*ts

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

If he is committed to the overtake, then it can be dangerous to prevent him from doing so.


Lets take a slightly different scenario. Someone pulls out to overtake you, but you then accelerate to prevent him from doing so. This leaves him on the wrong side of the road for far longer than he would have been otherwise. When he committed to the overtake he had plenty of room to do so taking into account the visibility of the clear road ahead. But because you accelerated he can't complete the overtake before another vehicle comes around the corner ahead. If a collision occurs then you could be found partly responsible, and could actually serve time (depending on the exact outcome).

So as not to cause confusion, lets keep exactly to the scenario as described.

bod1467

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

So as not to cause confusion, lets keep exactly to the scenario as described.

So why did you change it to a truck?

nobbysn*ts

bod1467 wrote: »

So why did you change it to a truck?

So, the same advice from you, hang back. Let the truck complete the overtake as he's moved out already?

bod1467

So, you have the same preconceived idea that you know what anyone was saying?

The words in my post do not in any way say I agree or disagree with your actions - I merely commented on the irony of you complaining about someone describing an alternative scenario - when YOU DESCRIBED AN ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO! :rotfl:

nobbysn*ts

bod1467 wrote: »

So, you have the same preconceived idea that you know what anyone was saying?

The words in my post do not in any way say I agree or disagree with your actions - I merely commented on the irony of you complaining about someone describing an alternative scenario - when YOU DESCRIBED AN ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO! :rotfl:

Ok, if you object to that, it's safe to assume you'll advise accelerating then. Unless you can't decide what you'd do in advance?

bod1467

Nice try but I'm not biting.

nobbysn*ts

bod1467 wrote: »

Nice try but I'm not biting.

Put you down as 'don't know, purely reactive on the moment' then.