Few road users have ever been taught how to overtake. I wasn't until I did a motorcycle IAM course (I didn't learn on the IAM car course I'd taken some years earlier)
As for speeding in the overtake - yes I sometimes (usually) do.
But I will often reduce my speed in the overtake because it may become too high relative to other vehicles, and also because I need to concentrate on all events around me - not just the road dead ahead.
You don't need great speed here - you do need good observation. That includes spotting the cameras !
|
|
|
I thought about the 80-85 bit yesterday actually. I had to go down to Oxford, and all the responses had me questioning whether I really had had to go that quick.
Fairly obviously, during the overtakes I wasn't looking at the speedo. I was basing the speed on the fact that I'd shifted to fourth during the manoeuvre and kept my foot down. Playing around yesterday on an empty motorway on the way back to establish what revs correspond with what speed, I reckon it's likely that it was more like 70-75, as I'd guess my shift was at more like 65 than 70. Still speeding, but not by as much.
An interesting thread anyway, and feels odd to be on the 'speeding' side for once.
|
Rules, as they say, are there to be broken.
But then again, don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
----------------------------------------------
Aim low, expect nothing & dont be disappointed
|
The thing is that your logic is impeccable. If you overtake as quickly as possible then you're on thw wrong side of the road 'in the danger zone' for the least amount of time.
But once you realise there's one viable excuse for speeding, where do you stop?
Personally I'll continue to drive to conditions, whether that means I go at 10mph above the limit, or 30mph below it.
|
"Absolute Offence". All the elements required to prove the offence are then and there present. A bald tyre is an absolute offence - It is either above or below the legal limits. No insurance is an absolute offence - the vehicle is either insured or it is not. Likewise speeding is an absolute offence - you are either above or below the set limit. Theft is not an absolute offence because the offender has to be interviewed to ascertain certain elements of the definition of theft before the offence can be proved.
Any excuse or reason you may have is what as known as Mitigation. If you then go before a court to plead mitigating circumstances the judge/magistrates may take that into account and deal with you more leniently.
If you go 'not guilty 'you may have what you think is a defence or are challenging the information etc.
Defences are set down in the legislation i.e .emergency vehicles can exceed the speed limits if they hinder the purpose for which they are being used.
So strictly speaking someone gets cut short and then gets caught for speeding is still speeding and should be found guilty but gets reduced sentence because they have mitigating circumstances. The fact that they are found 'not guilty' is a a quirk in the judicial process and should be appealed against by the prosecution, buts its not worth the time cost and effort. Technically speaking the only way you should be found 'not guilty' if you were caught speeding because you got cut short is if it was specifically mentioned as a defence in the regulations. Hope that clears some of the confusion.
--
Fullchat
|
'After following this weaving (enter least-favoured car make) for 11 miles I finally got past your honour despite desperate rearguard manoeuvres by the driver of the (least-favoured car make) and although I realised by then that we were in the middle of Newcastle a red mist had descended your honour....I never exceeded 110mph at any time...'
Is that the sort of thing you mean by mitigation Fullchat?
|
|
I wish I could spend 5 minutes with the guy in a black Golf who overtook a bunch of cars in a 20 zone outside a school, nearly taking out a bunch of kids and a lollipop lady in the process. Never seen such stupid, reckless driving in my life.
|
I still feel slightly good about the car tearing down the road when I pulled out years ago. No cars in sight at all.... so pull out. Then the other car on the breaks (due to speeding) and flashing lights. I accelerate. They then tailgate and behave inappropriately. Shall we say.
I was on the way to pick up step-son but go the wrong way (that's not the new Chinese Roewe mind) on purpose. They tailgate and I memorise their plate and phone 999. Turn off to turn around and they appear and walk to my car when I was turning. Now the good bit...
Whilst window down a foul mouthed expletive filled conversation from them resulted. I say little and they walk off. I was onto 999 at the time and they are recorded (who said handsfree is not worth it). They confirm they heard it all and it was recorded. Continue to chat to police and they someone will call.
Bearing in mind a Sunday, traffic police (Volvo V70 with two fully kitted officers) finally knock on at 11:30pm. Confirm some details and say they have checked where the other car is and will call on them.
And the best bit... the traffic police call on the speeding, p**t of a driver after 11:30pm on a Sunday. Hope he liked that :-)
|
How about turning this on its head. The police are happy to prosecute drivers who speed, what about those who drive slowly, in a long queue, switched off, listening to the radio or arguing with the wife. And surely there is some rule about the distance left between cars, because most of the queuesters must be breaking it. I would argue that they are more dangerous than a driver who is alert, switched on and wants to drive at the legal limit.
I can understand lorries going slowly - although why they can't pull over once in a while to let people pass I don't know - even our local farmers are starting to do that. What I can't understand are the blokes in big engined relatively new BMWs who potter along A roads at 35-40 mph.
What is the point? And why do they always speed up when you start to overtake them? (A very good reason for the chap who started this strand's action - if you do stick to the legal limit when you start overtaking there's a good chance you won't get past - he will just keep pace with you)
In Ireland when you come up behind a slow moving car they pull over to let you pass, France, Italy, Greece drivers are more aware and are considerate of other road users. In the UK we seem to be locked into the queue mentality - and woe betide anyone who 'wants to push in'.
|
BMWs who potter along A roads at 35-40 mph.
At 40 mph you are not pottering imagine hitting a wall at that speed ,the law in the uk is that you travel at the slowest persons pace unless it is safe to overtake and after all the stress of overtaking you only get to your destination a couple of car lengths faster.
|
Even two cars "pottering along" at 40 give a closing speed of 80 and probably an impact speed of 50-60, quite enough to kill.
Impact speeds on these roads are generally higher than those on motorways (just completed a speed awareness course)
|
|
I knew this would go on and on and on. Regards Peter
|
If I want to overtake, then I do it in the safest way possible, if I exceed the speed limit for that period so be it. If I get caught then I accept the penalty.
There's nothing worse than trundling along behind a dawdler after a 12 hour night shift to make you fall asleep at the wheel. I've lost count of the amount of cars, tractors and milk tankers I've overtaken the last four mornings on my way home to bed
22 years with a full licence, clean for the last 17 years (1 sp30 when I was 18)
|
Even two cars "pottering along" at 40 give a closing speed of 80 and probably an impact speed of 50-60, quite enough to kill.
Yes, but what people are saying politely is that 'impacts' are more not less likely if people drive around in mesmerised tailgating queues at 40mph and react indignantly, slowly and moronically to being overtaken.
|
>> ,the law in the uk is that you travel at the slowest persons pace unless it is safe to overtake and after all the stress of overtaking you only get to your destination a couple of car lengths faster.
i beg to differ......overtaking is not at all stressful to me, in fact I quite enjoy it......... it keeps me more aware, hones my skills and makes a long journey infinitely more interesting
furthermore, i reckon my regular North London to NW Scotland journey is shorter by a good 30-45 minutes by a good healthy bout of overtaking from Glasgow to Fort William.... and when you combine the 'divers boot' driving up the preceding motorway bits i reckon i can knock off an hour and a half'....the difference between a good journey and a bad one.
|
I agree. Someone with far more knowledge and ability than us has decided that the roads are safe at 60 - so why do 40?
Cars are safer, have better brakes, suspension and handling than ever, even the basic family saloon is built to be capable of more than 100 mph.
Yep, I will drive quickly along A roads, especially the ones I know well. We country folk are used to using A roads, and they are our only link with the outside world for business as well as pleasure. But I won't drive dangerously, which is more than can be said for those motorists who decide to close the gap between themselves in car in front when someone else tries to overtake. And I will slow down going through villages - not because of speed cameras, but because I live in one.
If you want to go slow that's fine, but please look in the mirror every so often to see how big the queue is behind you, and pull off on a lay-by to let us past every once in a while - it's just common courtesy.
|
A car use mirrors and pull into a layby, never seen it, a tractor maybe, a car never.
|
A car use mirrors and pull into a layby, never seen it, a tractor maybe, a car never.
My MIL, who is a bit of a slow driver, does it regularly.
|
A car use mirrors and pull into a layby, never seen it, a tractor maybe, a car never.
I'm a relatively new convert to driving on Scottish roads.....they do it all the time there........lorries, coaches, everyone in fact......narrow bit of road, soemone faster catches you up, pull in and let people past)....some roads have police signs instructing you to pull in......it's only the thick English tourists that don't bother......(and i'm an English tourist).
|
|
I've seen it too, but very seldom... the horse trucks and trailers that cover the roads of Surrey and Sussex at weekends cause appalling tailbacks and never, ever, get out of the way to let people past.
|
">the law in the uk is that you travel at the slowest persons pace unless it is safe to overtake<"
Is it possible to do otherwise without a collision? I think you are probably referring to one of the unwritten laws of physics: If car A is following car B, and the speed of car A is greater than the speed of car B, then a collision will result at point C (eventually).
I enjoy overtaking, it's life affirming, it improves my family life and it makes me more intelligent. Mimsers who do not pull over to let me past are guilty of inconsiderate driving.
|
Pulling over to let someone past is something I regularly do, but only if they tailget me. I hate tailgaters. What annoys me is when people tailgate, then I let them past and they go at exactly the speed I was going - had that with a white van the other day.
I think this is because when drivers see a car up ahead they then have a target to get behind. Some of those drivers unfortunatly don't know how dangrouse tailgating is.
The kind of driver who comes up fast behind me but stays at a considerable distance from my rear bumper I tend to ignore, assuming that they arn't that bothered in passing.
-----------------------------------------------
Torque means nothing without RPM
|
>>The kind of driver who comes up fast behind me but stays at a considerable distance from my rear bumper I tend to ignore
So, you reward bad driving by pulling over, and punish good driving by staying out?
|
I agree with NC, I can't understand your reasoning MK124, "I'm holding the driver behind up but he's giving reasonable space so I'll continue to do so"
|
|
I can see MK124's point of view. I will "make progress" when the road ahead is clear. If I then catch someone up and they are travelling at a "reasonable" pace, at or not far below the speed limit, then I will follow them at a safe distance. I weigh up their speed, other traffic in front of them, distance left to travel etc.
|
I know you are both right, I thought about whilst writting my above post. May I just point out it is a failure of human nature. I often come across the same attitude on the motorway. Tailgate someone and they will let you pass, follow at a considerable distance and they stay in lane 3. I agree we should keep to the left lane where possible, but how many people do that on the roads?
I do try not to reward bad driving, but if there is a pfd behind me, I should let them go for the sake of my health. I know the theory of what your both saying, but in practise I don't think people drive, lets just say, as well as theory predicts.
-----------------------------------------------
Torque means nothing without RPM
|
I am trying to say if you behave like a pfd and are agressive to road users you will find a majority of them will let you pass sharpish. Rewarding bad behavour? Yes.
-----------------------------------------------
Torque means nothing without RPM
|
I fully agree mk124, I often find myself thinking that I can't wait to let the idiot behind me get past and make his way to the scene of the accident!, however, I just hate the idea of letting them profit in this way, because it is only going to make them more of a bully on the road.
Having said that, I do tend to pull into passing places and gate-holes quite a bit on narrow roads, because I tend to want to drift slowly along enjoying the countryside - more often than not, that's why I choose to be on the back road to begin with. As I'm fairly intensive in my use of the mirror, I don't often keep anyone waiting for long, I try to anticipate when they will be catching up with me.
On fast main roads, dual carriageways and motorways, I drive a bit faster! ;-)
Number_Cruncher
|
Personally I will overtake at any point that I consider safe to do so and as a matter of course I will drop a gear , foot down and try and get past the slower moving vehicle as quickly as possible.I find that I am concentrating on the road ahead and not looking at the speedo during an overtake.
If I am travelling behind a slower moving vehicle I will always leave enough room for an overtaker to come in front of me. I too hate the 'non overtakers' who sit tucked up behind the slow mover at the head of the queue and won' t let you in - or even worse , the type who do not check their mirrors and then suddenly pull out on you as you are trying to overtake them.
I also leave that space to pull out slightly and get a better view of the road ahead and ensure it is clear before my own overtake commences. You cannot get a good view ahead if you are tucked right up behind another vehicle and you may lose that chance to make progress.
|
|
There's another good reason to leave a decent gap to the car in front: when you do see an overtaking opportunity coming up, you can start to accelerate before you can pull out, so that you are already travelling at overtaking speed when you do. All helps to reduce the time you are on the wrong side of the road.
|
Depending on the car you've got, it's often very difficult to complete a safe, commited overtake without exceeding the speed limit.
I just cannot comprehend overtaking without using the maximum power of my car. When I am on the wrong side of the road, I wish to get on the CORRECT side of the road as soon and safely as possible. This means I put my foot to the floor, and safely pass the car in the front. With 230bhp, this often means that, in theory, the speed limit would be exceeded if I was to do this.
Is there anyone here who CAN overtake with consideration to the speed limit? When I'm overtaking, my mind is on one thing and one thing alone. Getting back on the right side of the road as quickly and safely as possible. Taking my eyes of the road in such a situation to double check my speed is not something that would even cross my mind.
It is this which means I often 'miss' many overtakes especially in mobile camera van infested areas..
Frankly, I think pulling out to overtake a car travelling at 45mph whilst also ensuring you never exceed 60mph is downright dangerous.
|
|
On one hand I am told that the IAM do not condone exceeding the speed limit under any circumstances. On the other I'm told to pass as quickly and safely as possible. On local runs (10-20 miles or so) the time gained by overtaling is minimal unless the overtakee is very slow for the road. Not worth the bother. On longer runs it may be safe to overtake and worth it with due respect to safety ( signage, junctions, enterences/exits visibility etc). A good eye needs to be kept for 'safety cameras' as that is the kind of place they tend to occupy. Make more money there
|
There is another overtaking technique that enables you to not break the speed limit. Drop back behind the car you wish to overtake (which has the advantage of generally giving you a better view of the road ahead - not just cars, but driveways, and other hazards) and then do your acceleration on the correct side of the road. You should be aiming to be at the speed limit as you approach the position where you move to the other side of the road to overtake. If all is still safe, move over and overtake, maintaining your progress at the speed limit. Move back as soon as it is safe.
The advantage of this technique is that you spend less time on the wrong side of the road and you've already done your acceleration before committing to the manouvere. If circumstances have changed, brake, and wait for the next opportunity. I'd be surprised if this technique is any slower than the "floor it and get past as soon as possible" approach.
I think a lot of overtaking accidents are dreadful because someone thinks that just have enough time and hit someone corner to corner whilst under full acceleration. Adrenalin is not your friend when overtaking (or driving generally). Doing the overtake in a controlled and planned fashion is safer.
Terry...
|
Hi Terry
Yes, it's good technique you outline & gives you in some ways the effect of an 'extra'
50bhp or 100Nm of torque. One other benefit sometimes too: some overtakee's
like to play the dangerous game of speeding up a bit if they see you in the opposite lane
doing the more conventional manoeuvre - whereas the
above mitigates that extra risk, as you're by them before they can react.
woodbines
btw - I think A. Tom Topper in 'Very Adavanced Driving' gives this the thumbs-up too.
|
|
|
