Fuel saving tips thread

tomstickland

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

You should change your driving style then. I pay £120 a corner and get about 40,000 miles from them.

High grip, soft compounds. That was pre-economy drive though.

alastairq

People who drive slowly on motorways and who don't drive according to the conditions, shouldn't drive on motorways at all

Hi...I'm a newby on these forums...and I have come across this thread quite by accident.

I find the above observation somewhat irritating in that it fails to allow for the differences, and wishes, of other road users.

Motorways were built to 'speed up' travelling times between destinations.

A by-product of this 'speeding- up' is that vehicles generally can TRAVEL FASTER with relatively low risk [SAFETY is created by the individual driver], but the real reason for the faster journey times is the lack of any conflicting hazards which normally eat into our average speeds...hazards such as, road junctions, opposing traffic...and certain types of slow-moving vehicles...not to mention, flocks of sheep!

The slowest LEGAL speed limit I am aware of, for a motorway, for a reasonably commonplace vehicle, is 40 MPH! [LGV operating under STGO category 2......ie which as a total weight between 46 and 80 tonnes....and , does not NEED any outriders, flashy lights, or permissions]

The reasons why so many folk have 'trouble' with slower motorway traffic isn't, in my view, to be blamed on the slower vehicle, but on the inability of the majority of other road users to cope correctly and successfully with it.

'Driving to the road and traffic conditions' is mandatory if one wishes to travel faster......but isn't if one wishes to travel at a speed 'within' that which would be the best speed for those given conditions.

Those 'conditions' will also have a different impact on each individual driver...

What one individual is happy and 'able' to cope with, another might feel 'risky'.

Which is why it really isn't wise to pass judgement on the actions of another road user...simply because one wouldn't do that oneself.
After all, none of us actually KNOW what the other driver is seeing, interpreting, thinking...or what their vehicle 'performs' like?

{as an example, how many times do we get annoyed because a vehicle 'in front' will NOT overtake that slower vehicle, when WE can see it is perfectly ok for US to do so? Consider that the other driver may not have such a good view of the road ahead as we do......they may be sat lower.nearer the road, so their height of eye is lower, therefore their view ahead is more restricted......especially a nuisance if the car is a Ferrari? That drier MAY be a beginner....having just passed their test, and possibly it is their first time out, unsupervised? Remember YOUR first time out?? Maybe they are older folk, whose thought processes, actions and reactions will differ significantly from those of a young 20-something driver. ........many, many aspects which affect how other drivers see those 'conditions'....??]

so to suggest, in basic terms, that one should keep off motorways if one 'cannot hack it' is simply not understanding what driving is all about, and suggest there is an element of 'emotion' creeping into one's driving, which should not be there?

[driving at high speed is a selfish act??]

top.position

tomstickland wrote: »

It's not wrong. You're complaining about increased wear on the centre line. That's a downside of over inflating tyres. The benefit is improved handling.
I pay 50pounds per tyre fitted and I don't normally get more than 10K out of a tyre, but I regard them as consumables.

There was no noticeable improvement in handling. This is on a rear wheel drive car. There may be an improvement on front wheel drive, I couldn't comment.
You pay 800 quid for tyres over 40k miles? I pay 320. I've used cheaper tyres and there was a noticeable change in the handling. Maybe there would be a case for slight over-inflation then but I'd sooner pay more and run the tyres at the correct pressure.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

alastairq wrote: »

so to suggest, in basic terms, that one should keep off motorways if one 'cannot hack it' is simply not understanding what driving is all about, and suggest there is an element of 'emotion' creeping into one's driving, which should not be there?

[driving at high speed is a selfish act??]

If you're doing 40 on the motorway while everyone else is doing 70, then unless you have a very good reason you shouldn't be on there.

alastairq

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

If you're doing 40 on the motorway while everyone else is doing 70, then unless you have a very good reason you shouldn't be on there.

why?

taken as a whole, it is VERY unlikely 'everyone else' on any motorway will be ''doing 70''

Some will be breaking the law, and travelling faster than 70.

Some will be travelling anything up to 20 or 30 mph less.

what you are implying is, that it is better to 'penalise' the law abiding driver...who HAPPENS to want to travel at 40 or 50 or 60 mph...for whatever reason...and I'm sure it will be a valid one [I can certainly provide valid reasons for my speed, on ANY occasion]....rather than to actually do something about raising the driving standards of those 'other' drivers who, it would appear from your post, may well be unable to 'cope' with coming across a 'slower' vehicle.

Indeed, if general driving standards are unable to cope with varying traffic speeds, then it is THEY who need to keep off the motorway, NOT the slower driver.......?

If only to beg the question, if the 'rest' struggle to cope, then it is THEY who are in fact,driving too fast for their abilities?

In my experience, it seems the gulf between 'urban myth' that surrounds 'driving'.....and sound, approved driving practice, is ever wider?

top.position

I have a second vehicle which struggles to maintain 50 uphill. Doubtless I have the "right" to use it on a motorway but courtesy and common sense tell me not to.

If you can safely drive at the speed limit then, out of courtesy to other road users, you should do so. There are many reasons why you may feel the posted limit is unsafe and then you are justified in driving below the limit. Otherwise, you are preventing others from making progress.
Many a time when I have allowed sufficient time to drive somewhere at the speed limit, only to be held up by someone driving well below it and nowhere to pass. It's very frustrating. I then have to make the choice between exceeding the speed limit on the remainder of my journey or arriving late.

economiser

Reducing my max speed from 80 to 60 on motorways has saved me 20% on fuel at a cost of about 5% in time (3min in the hour!). Haven't found that running the Aircon has made any measurable difference.

mark55man

I agree - thanks to careful driving, and to slowing down a bit (I usually drive 10mph below the speed limit on empty roads, and 2-3 below if they are have other traffic on them - I am lucky my route is rural and never queued up)

I now spend less on Petrol than I did 6 months ago + I have a day work at home a week negotiated on basis of cost of travel and Green issues.

The current cost of fuel has reached the biting point until recently I just absorbed the cost, now it is kicking in and forcing people to do something about it.

alastairq

you can safely drive at the speed limit then, out of courtesy to other road users, you should do so. There are many reasons why you may feel the posted limit is unsafe and then you are justified in driving below the limit. Otherwise, you are preventing others from making progress.
Many a time when I have allowed sufficient time to drive somewhere at the speed limit, only to be held up by someone driving well below it and nowhere to pass. It's very frustrating. I then have to make the choice between exceeding the speed limit on the remainder of my journey or arriving late

whose speed limit are you referring to?

Mine?

Yours?

that LGV's?

what about that bus?


because they're all different...or hadn't anyone noticed?

The statutory speed limit is not a target, simply a ceiling, an speed above which is contrary to the law.

The first criteria of a good driver is the ability to conduct one's vehicle, within the law.

To do otherwise is to contravene the conditions of issue of the Driving Licence.

Or do we have a society where we are selective about which laws we comply with, and which one's we ignore?

If we feel a particular law is inappropriate, then there are proper and legal means available to change things.


Regarding

If you can safely drive at the speed limit then, out of courtesy to other road users, you should do so

there are a million reasons why a driver may NOT wish to do so....the topic if this thread being one of them.

If one cannot overtake, either because one feels it would be risky to do so, or one's driving ability simply isn't developed enough to do so, then that is a fact of life, and must be coped with accordingly.

What I am railling against is this idea that one should not apparently HINDER other traffic...thus one should gallop along as fast as one can.

To me, such an idea is ludicrous, and I would never feel pressurised to do so.

But other, less experienced drivers, [novices for example] might feel obliged to press on, simply because the driver behind is exerting pressure [usually via tailgating]...to the extent that the novice may well exceed their limited abilities.

Older drivers may well feel threatened if they do not comply.

PROGRESS is made if we are moving along.

How fast we move isn't really relevant, as long as nobody's ABILITY to move is prevented.

If one cannot find room to overtake, then the question that SHOULD be asked is, would a higher speed actually be a good idea?

Given the REASONS for not being able to overtake?


The biggest blunder drivers who wish to crack on, make, is to sit far too close to the slower vehicle, for too long.

Apart from deliberately REDUCING their abilities to identify a relatively risk-free overtaking space.....[thus totally eliminating any suggestion of HINDRANCE]....they actually hinder OTHER drivers from overtaking, by lengthening the distance they would need to spend on the other side of the road.

so, who IS the problem driver?

The driver who simply does not wish to drive as fast as possible?

Or the one behind, who is being somewhat thoughtless and selfish?

Consider this......exactly what DIFFERENCE does it make in the scheme of things, if the vehicle in front is a Morris Minor..[or Volvo 740] toddling along quite happily at 50.....or a 44 tonne artic complying with their spped limit [on a single carriageway] of 40 mph?

They ARE are in one's way.

They ARE equally difficult to overtake.... the Minor because a car driver has but a 10 mph speed advantage to pass...[there IS no excuse whatsoever....especially to a court, of exceeding the statutory speed limit].....or the much longer artic, even though one has a 20 mph speed advantage?

A lot to be said for vehicles actually moving more SLOWLY than imagined.....since they are then easier to overtake, remaining within the law?
[those lorry drivers who ignore the limits, really are a pain to pass]

alastairq

BTW...round these parts...it is actually CHEAPER to use a Volvo 740 for a journey, than to use the local buses....and that includes the annual charges as well.

plus, one gets freedom of time choice, and delivery door to door.

Mind, it is a rural area...but even so, if the government, or any pressure group, wish to see reduced vehicle usage, then significant attention needs to be paid to ALL public transport costs...regardless of area.