Reading Mens Health magazine, I note that a policeman advises that a safe distance between us and the car in front is one foot per mph in a speed limit, (his words) except on national limit roads, when it is one yard per mph.
On motorways he says the distance should be 2 seconds.
"When the car in front passes an overbridge, count 1,001, 1002. If you reach the bridge before you finish counting, you are too close".
At the Cheshire Show many years ago, Cheshire Police Road Safety Unit had a big placard advising on the "two second rule".
I had assumed that it works for all speeds. Any thoughts?
|
My driving instructor told me 2 seconds under normal conditions at whatever speed, 4 in the wet and 6 in thick fog, snow or ice.
I usually try to keep to it as a rule, mainly because it'll give the guy tailgating me more time to wake up and realise I'm starting to slow down.
M.
|
Great advice, and a good rule of thumb; however have you tried to leave 2 secs on the M25!
Once when I was getting fed up with cars cutting me up I drove at what I thought was "too close" to the car in front. Would you believe that TWO cars pulled into the gap at the same time!!!
Now I just chill and let them get on with it. The only difference between the inside and outside lane is the density of cars per given Km.
|
|
|
|
One yard per mile per hour is a two second gap, near as makes no odds. the two second rule is just a shorthand for estimating the distance.
Use whichever is easier for you.
The main problem with leaving a proper gap is the pr@ who belts past and fills it, however, in my experience they are often going off at the next turning anyway!
|
|
|
At 70mph, with the 2 sec rule the gap will be about 68.5 yds. As Graham said if you were to leave this sort of gap all the time you would end up going backwards.
On the M6 (as well as other m'ways I presume) they have chevrons painted on the road saying that there should be 2 in between each car. Does anyone know the distance between them?
|
CM wrote:
>
> At 70mph, with the 2 sec rule the gap will be about 68.5 yds.
> As Graham said if you were to leave this sort of gap all the
> time you would end up going backwards.
CM,
Suppose you let 60 cars pull in front of you, and none of them leave at the next exit. Once you are all spaced out at your two second gaps you are only 2 minutes later than you otherwise would have been,
Chill, Winston.
|
|
Like Graham I really don't mind people jumping in fornt of me too much. I have been driving long enough not to worry (and now that I have a sprog life has different priorities). But I do not like idiots diving in between me and the gap I leave as this gap is for my security and not his (usually men) benefit.
|
|
|
|
Hmmm! did not QUITE sound like "going backwards" to me either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I should have qualified it, as Markymarkyn says, to say that 2 secs/1yard is for good conditions only.
|
|
|
There's an item on the 4car website talking about leaving a safe distance between you and the vehicle in front.
I'd always used the 2 second rule - it's easier to remember and, in my case, judge than distance.
The Highway Code recommends at 30mph a distance of 23m, and at 70mph a distance of 96m. However, applying the two second rule at 30mph gives about 26.8m, and at 70mph a more worrying 62.6m.
It doesn't take too much effort to see that the 2 second rule underestimates the gap you should leave at just above 40mph.
Despite this difference, the 2 second rule could be easier to apply (and remember) than a set of distances from 12 to 96m.
|
|
|
|
Whatever happened to public information films? This sort of advice used to appear on TV - 'Only a fool breaks the 2 second rule'. If the government are serious about improving driving standards, they ought to consider bringing these back. Nothing sophisticated, just basic stuff about how to overtake, go round corners, join motorways, and all the other stuff that isn't covered in the driving test, and which it is pretty obvious that a lot of drivers simply don't know. The government spends an awesome amount of money on advertising, most of which seems to be aimed at encouraging people to claim benefits, go on taxpayer funded training schemes etc. Putting some of this money into driver education might actually pay for itself.
|
|
Oh yes. Can I suggest Middle lane driving for the first Info Film, followed by Fog Light and then.....
|
|
going the whole wy around a roundabout on the outside
|
old duffer yesterday, nearside lane going in to roundabout. Indicates right, then goes straight on. Watched him do it twice so it was no accident Argh!
Sorry I've hijacked again, these pet hates must have been discussed a thousand times. To the point - Bring Back Public Info Films!
|
|
Well here in Essex I think the vast majority of drivers think that indicators are nice orange fashion items put on the 4 corners of cars to look good - not to actually use, especially at roundabouts. Another favourite is people cutting across a roundabout when they are going straight on and your are inside them turning right, had an old duffer do it to me the other day, should have seen his face when I gave him a toot - I think he was a sleep or something.
|
|
|
|
The point that everybody appears to have missed is that "2-seconds" is good thinking, but is (as the copper said), not needed in 30 limits.
2 seconds in a 30 is nearly 5 (yes FIVE) car lengths. (88ft)
3 car lengths is enough.
Make it 4 in a 40 - and 2 seconds from there on up.
|
Oi Potter
I thought you weren't keen on people presuming to make up their own rules?
|
|
|
|
Stopping distances
Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. You should
leave enough space between you and the vehicle in front so that you can pull up safely if it suddenly slows down or stops. The safe rule is never to get closer than the overall stopping distance (see Typical Stopping Distances diagram below)
allow at least a two-second gap between you and the vehicle in front on roads carrying fast traffic. The gap should be at least doubled on wet roads and increased still further on icy roads
remember, large vehicles and motorcycles need a greater distance to stop.
Use a fixed point to help measure a two second gap
Typical Stopping Distances
20
MPH
6 metres 6 metres = 12 metres
(40 feet)
or 3 car lengths
30
MPH
9 metres 14 metres = 23 metres
(75 feet)
or 6 car lengths
40
MPH
12 metres 24 metres = 36 metres
(120 feet)
or 9 car lengths
50
MPH
15 metres 38 metres = 53 metres
(175 feet)
or 13 car lengths
60
MPH
18 metres 55 metres = 73 metres
(240 feet)
or 18 car lengths
70
MPH
21 metres 75 metres = 96 metres
(315 feet)
or 24 car lengths
Thinking Distance
Braking Distance
average car length = 4 metres
|
|
|
Trevor
It does no harm to kepp a minimum of 2 seconds, even at 30 mph, particularly in town where for an appreciable portion of the time you are not looking at the vehicle in front but rather checking for pedestrians, cyclists, side roads etc. and, oh yes, looking at your speedometer.
|
|
|
CM
It used to be easier in feet because the distance = the speed represented by a number of feet plus once the speed at 20, 1.5 at 30, 2 at 40, 2.5 at 50 and so on.
So 50 mph= 50+(2.5x50) = 50 + 125 = 175ft. QED
This, of course, all relates to an Austin 7 driven by a pensioner ! ;-)
|
|
|
Just as important is your re-action time.
If this is more than the National Average of 0.68 of a second, you could be up the chough before you realise.
So - yet more distance.
DVD
|
|
|
See Trevor, you seem to have found another place where the "DoT" is wrong:
> 30 MPH
9 metres 14 metres = 23 metres (75 feet)
or 6 car lengths
vs
> 2 seconds in a 30 is nearly 5 (yes FIVE) car lengths. (88ft)
3 car lengths is enough.
Oops, there i go hi-jacking again!
|
Sorry - again either mis-read or mis-quoted.
Do you do this on purpose?
NO NO NO - the DOT is not WRONG.
READ IT.
IT says in the HC -
(Rule 105) . . . 2 second gap WHERE THERE IS FASTER TRAFFIC.
My statement stands.
As of course does the advice from the copper in the first posting of this thread.
Most "grown-ups" seem to want to ask for advice or give it (based on facts or extensive experience (HJ) or best current practice.)
One or 2 people seem to only want to pick holes in anybody who does not agree with their warped "logic".
|
Trevor Potter wrote:
> Sorry - again either mis-read or mis-quoted.
>
> Do you do this on purpose?
>
> NO NO NO - the DOT is not WRONG.
>
> READ IT.
>
> IT says in the HC -
> (Rule 105) . . . 2 second gap WHERE THERE IS FASTER TRAFFIC.
Ahhhhh, so it doesn't say 6 car lengths after all.
> My statement stands.
>
> As of course does the advice from the copper in the first
> posting of this thread.
Yup, no mention of six car lengths, then.
> Most "grown-ups" seem to want to ask for advice or give it
> (based on facts or extensive experience (HJ) or best current
> practice.)
Would this be a reference to people who say things like:
"if your blood alcohol level is above the limit but falling (the morning after) you are not impaired"
What gobbldegook is this?
or:
Really? that's odd, because I have been an advanced driving instructor for 15 years and I have not found any of these "diametrically opposed" issues.
And then go on to diametrically oppose themselves by following up with:
OK. it has taken ADI a long time to catch up with teaching the concept of "missing-out" gears, but they have now.
> One or 2 people seem to only want to pick holes in anybody
> who does not agree with their warped "logic".
Hmmmmmmmmmmm
Perhaps you mean people who say things like:
"And that the highway code does change, and not always for the better."
Really? would you like to give examples?
Well, you did ask me to point them out to you!
Warped logic indeed!
> Do you do this on purpose?
I do. Not to further my case, just to test it.
Being an insecure individual, full of self doubt, I am continually questioning myself, and my beliefs. I need reassurance that I'm likely to be right after all.
But I'm beginning to realise why that might wind up the opposition so much (obvious really I suppose - Mark).
So I'll desist for a while now, and crawl back into my lair.
Until someone rattles my cage again.
|
|
|
And - why do you crawl to HJ?
There are other experts here - as well as HJ - and altho' you mention teaching/testing advanced driving, you fail to state your qualifications to be regarded as such...
If someone asks an opinion, you are fre to give yours, for what its worth, as are we to question and where appropriate deride it...
If you want to give opinion and have it regarded as gospel, better go and do some more instructing?
|
|
|
|
|
CM WROTE:Use a fixed point to help measure a two second gap
Typical Stopping Distances
20
MPH
6 metres 6 metres = 12 metres
(40 feet)
or 3 car lengths
70
MPH
21 metres 75 metres = 96 metres
(315 feet)
or 24 car lengths
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Put simply, at x mph, stopping distance = x + x*x/20 feet
RV
|
|
|
One of the bike mags had an article on stopping distances in the wet between a bike and a car. The bike was something like a Yamaha R1 and the car a 306, I must admit I can't remember exactly what they were. The bike stopped faster and both stopped faster than the dry stopping distances quoted in the Highway Code. If I can find the info I will post it later as a new thread.
Bill
|
|
Bikes stop faster because they are lighter (the simple laws of friction coefficients don't apply precisely to tyres). The corollary is that heavier vehicles (e.g. 4x4's and especially lorries) take longer to stop, so the Highway Code is only a guide. I suspect that 4x4's are involved in more accidents, as they also make their drivers feel invulnerable. Not a rant - just an observation.
|
|
|
|
