Exceed the speed limit? Ever?
Discussion
mph1977 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
mph1977 said:
Pan Pan Pan,
oh dear me, as Von or Reg has previously pointed out if this were the case there would be more minimum speed limits in place ...
it's a Limit not a target.
That comment is quite meaningless, just like the speed kills mantra loved by some politicians. oh dear me, as Von or Reg has previously pointed out if this were the case there would be more minimum speed limits in place ...
it's a Limit not a target.
Please show me where minimum speed limits are applied, Even doing up to 52000 miles a year I cannot really say I have ever been in one.
However you risk being prosecuted for a different offence - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7171154...
Most of the specific minimum speed limits in the UK are, as you say, in tunnels: e.g. Blackwall and Dartford.
WD39 said:
vonhosen said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
WD39 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Just checked several driving test web sites, including those of advanced driving courses, and it seems that driving at 10mph or more below a posted limit is considered to be driving without due care and attention to other road users.
One of the driving test websites stated that where road and weather conditions allow, a driver should always try to drive at the posted limit.
10 mph slower! that's nothing. In our modern motoring world, apart from MW / DC, most of us will be travelling at much lower speeds due to the sheer weight of traffic and other considerations.One of the driving test websites stated that where road and weather conditions allow, a driver should always try to drive at the posted limit.
(unless you happen to live in the Highlands and Islands of course.)
Edited by WD39 on Sunday 10th April 20:47
On test there is far less tolerance for exceeding the limit than driving under it.
We'd already established that long queues behind drivers should result in them pulling over at regular intervals to allow them to pass (as per highway code). That is extreme circumstances though & not just a matter of somebody choosing to drive a bit below the limit.
If someone were to drive at 46 in a 50 the Police wouldn't give them a second glance, it's not very extreme but it's still stopping you doing 50.
If someone were to drive at 36 in a 50 that is far more extreme & will still stand out, but perversely they are less of a problem for you to legally overtake & be on your way than the driver doing 46.
Pan Pan Pan said:
Why do you mention weight of traffic? if traffic is heavy and slow moving, then everyone has to travel at the speed the traffic is moving at. But that is NOT what is being talked about here. What is being referred to here, is where the road is clear, and the conditions suitable for travelling at the posted limit, is when a driver who with a clear road in front of them, decides to deliberately baulk the drivers behind, by travelling at speeds much lower than the posted limit. What sort of person sets out on the roads with the intention of impeding other motorists who wish to travel at the legal posted limit when road conditions and weather permit?
You're not a mind reader.You say what the intent is but you don't know what it is.
It could, for instance, be to increase mpg not to purposely baulk others
Is driving really this complicated?
The old saying If you can`t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen applies. If you cannot drive to the standard of the 85th percentile, then its is better for the majority, if you just bumble along on a bus.
Pan Pan Pan said:
WD39 said:
vonhosen said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
WD39 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Just checked several driving test web sites, including those of advanced driving courses, and it seems that driving at 10mph or more below a posted limit is considered to be driving without due care and attention to other road users.
One of the driving test websites stated that where road and weather conditions allow, a driver should always try to drive at the posted limit.
10 mph slower! that's nothing. In our modern motoring world, apart from MW / DC, most of us will be travelling at much lower speeds due to the sheer weight of traffic and other considerations.One of the driving test websites stated that where road and weather conditions allow, a driver should always try to drive at the posted limit.
(unless you happen to live in the Highlands and Islands of course.)
Edited by WD39 on Sunday 10th April 20:47
On test there is far less tolerance for exceeding the limit than driving under it.
We'd already established that long queues behind drivers should result in them pulling over at regular intervals to allow them to pass (as per highway code). That is extreme circumstances though & not just a matter of somebody choosing to drive a bit below the limit.
If someone were to drive at 46 in a 50 the Police wouldn't give them a second glance, it's not very extreme but it's still stopping you doing 50.
If someone were to drive at 36 in a 50 that is far more extreme & will still stand out, but perversely they are less of a problem for you to legally overtake & be on your way than the driver doing 46.
Pan Pan Pan said:
Why do you mention weight of traffic? if traffic is heavy and slow moving, then everyone has to travel at the speed the traffic is moving at. But that is NOT what is being talked about here. What is being referred to here, is where the road is clear, and the conditions suitable for travelling at the posted limit, is when a driver who with a clear road in front of them, decides to deliberately baulk the drivers behind, by travelling at speeds much lower than the posted limit. What sort of person sets out on the roads with the intention of impeding other motorists who wish to travel at the legal posted limit when road conditions and weather permit?
You're not a mind reader.You say what the intent is but you don't know what it is.
It could, for instance, be to increase mpg not to purposely baulk others
Is driving really this complicated?
The old saying If you can`t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen applies. If you cannot drive to the standard of the 85th percentile, then its is better for the majority, if you just bumble along on a bus.
Their actions despite preventing you driving at the limit would not be deemed unreasonable.
It has to be far more extreme & unreasonable for it to amount to a Sec 3 offence.
You keep trotting out it's against the law to not drive at the speed limit doesn't make it so.
People driving far below the limit & having long queues behind them whilst failing to pull over regularly to release traffic is an entirely different thing to merely not travelling at the limit. even if both mean you can't travel at the limit.
Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 12th April 17:57
Pan Pan Pan said:
WD39 said:
vonhosen said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
WD39 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Just checked several driving test web sites, including those of advanced driving courses, and it seems that driving at 10mph or more below a posted limit is considered to be driving without due care and attention to other road users.
One of the driving test websites stated that where road and weather conditions allow, a driver should always try to drive at the posted limit.
10 mph slower! that's nothing. In our modern motoring world, apart from MW / DC, most of us will be travelling at much lower speeds due to the sheer weight of traffic and other considerations.One of the driving test websites stated that where road and weather conditions allow, a driver should always try to drive at the posted limit.
(unless you happen to live in the Highlands and Islands of course.)
Edited by WD39 on Sunday 10th April 20:47
On test there is far less tolerance for exceeding the limit than driving under it.
We'd already established that long queues behind drivers should result in them pulling over at regular intervals to allow them to pass (as per highway code). That is extreme circumstances though & not just a matter of somebody choosing to drive a bit below the limit.
If someone were to drive at 46 in a 50 the Police wouldn't give them a second glance, it's not very extreme but it's still stopping you doing 50.
If someone were to drive at 36 in a 50 that is far more extreme & will still stand out, but perversely they are less of a problem for you to legally overtake & be on your way than the driver doing 46.
Pan Pan Pan said:
Why do you mention weight of traffic? if traffic is heavy and slow moving, then everyone has to travel at the speed the traffic is moving at. But that is NOT what is being talked about here. What is being referred to here, is where the road is clear, and the conditions suitable for travelling at the posted limit, is when a driver who with a clear road in front of them, decides to deliberately baulk the drivers behind, by travelling at speeds much lower than the posted limit. What sort of person sets out on the roads with the intention of impeding other motorists who wish to travel at the legal posted limit when road conditions and weather permit?
You're not a mind reader.You say what the intent is but you don't know what it is.
It could, for instance, be to increase mpg not to purposely baulk others
Is driving really this complicated?[/quote I say myopic, because all to often, the serial bumbler often drives in a world of their own, and does not even see (or want to see) the queue of hundreds of other motorists built up behind them, (on some roads often over miles and miles, because overtaking is not safely possible)
The old saying If you can`t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen applies. If you cannot drive to the standard of the 85th percentile
In my neck of the woods a queue behind you consists of two cars and a tractor.
The 85th percentile, did I miss that in the Highway Code?
Pan Pan Pan said:
No. not if people obey the law, and the right of others to drive lawfully at the posted limits.
What is that right all about then? Does it mean that no vehicles to which lower national speed limits apply have the right to use the road?You keep going on about long journeys. I hope that you plan them with enough time to cope with expected road and traffic conditions, and enough contingency that you will not be stressed by delays.
Are you equally intolerant of those who choose to drive over the limit?
waremark said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
No. not if people obey the law, and the right of others to drive lawfully at the posted limits.
What is that right all about then? Does it mean that no vehicles to which lower national speed limits apply have the right to use the road?You keep going on about long journeys. I hope that you plan them with enough time to cope with expected road and traffic conditions, and enough contingency that you will not be stressed by delays.
Are you equally intolerant of those who choose to drive over the limit?
Only a fool would not be able to understand that this is not always possible. Some vehicles which are legally able to run on public roads wont even achieve the 30 mph limit, Some vehicles by their very size and weight have technical speed limits which may be lower than the posted limits applied to them. But as I have pointed out before. this is not about the drivers of those types of vehicle.
This is about those who willfully and arrogantly choose to dawdle on public roads, knowing that their actions will impede the progress of other drivers. Knowing that their action may induce other drivers who wish to travel at the posted limit to carry out overtakes, that they would not have had to, and which in some case may be dangerous.
I go on about long distances, because for work, I was doing up to 52000 miles year, and when having distances of 400 miles plus to cover, could not afford to have some ignorant myopic dithering f*ckwit dawdling in front of me on his two mile trip to the local shops.
Business's rely on its staff reaching meetings, deliveries, sites etc on time, and there are enough reasons why they cannot do this on the roads, without some f*ckwit causing an artificial rolling road block.
If a driver cannot maintain the already low post limits where their health, vehicle type, road, and weather conditions allow, they should seriously consider whether they are suited to operating a motor vehicle in a public place at all.
Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Sunday 17th April 09:17
Pan Pan Pan said:
waremark said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
No. not if people obey the law, and the right of others to drive lawfully at the posted limits.
What is that right all about then? Does it mean that no vehicles to which lower national speed limits apply have the right to use the road?You keep going on about long journeys. I hope that you plan them with enough time to cope with expected road and traffic conditions, and enough contingency that you will not be stressed by delays.
Are you equally intolerant of those who choose to drive over the limit?
Pan Pan Pan said:
Only a fool would not be able to understand that this is not always possible. Some vehicles which are legally able to run on public roads wont even achieve the 30 mph limit, Some vehicles by their very size and weight have technical speed limits which may be lower than the posted limits applied to them. But as I have pointed out before. this is not about the drivers of those types of vehicle.
This is about those who willfully and arrogantly choose to dawdle on public roads, knowing that their actions will impede the progress of other drivers. Knowing that their action may induce other drivers who wish to travel at the posted limit to carry out overtakes, that they would not have had to, and which in some case may be dangerous.
I go on about long distances, because for work, I was doing up to 52000 miles year, and when having distances of 400 miles plus to cover, could not afford to have some ignorant myopic dithering f*ckwit dawdling in front of me on his two mile trip to the local shops.
Business's rely on its staff reaching meetings, deliveries, sites etc on time, and there are enough reasons why they cannot do this on the roads, without some f*ckwit causing an artificial rolling road block.
If a driver cannot maintain the already low post limits where their health, vehicle type, road, and weather conditions allow, they should seriously consider whether they are suited to operating a motor vehicle in a public place at all.
And those that can, but choose not to because it suits their purpose to be doing a different speed at that time & place?This is about those who willfully and arrogantly choose to dawdle on public roads, knowing that their actions will impede the progress of other drivers. Knowing that their action may induce other drivers who wish to travel at the posted limit to carry out overtakes, that they would not have had to, and which in some case may be dangerous.
I go on about long distances, because for work, I was doing up to 52000 miles year, and when having distances of 400 miles plus to cover, could not afford to have some ignorant myopic dithering f*ckwit dawdling in front of me on his two mile trip to the local shops.
Business's rely on its staff reaching meetings, deliveries, sites etc on time, and there are enough reasons why they cannot do this on the roads, without some f*ckwit causing an artificial rolling road block.
If a driver cannot maintain the already low post limits where their health, vehicle type, road, and weather conditions allow, they should seriously consider whether they are suited to operating a motor vehicle in a public place at all.
Where that is out of line with the application of the law they can be dealt with through Sec 3 RTA (however remote the possibility due to low numbers of officers etc.)
Where it isn't out of line with the application of the law they won't be prosecuted through Sec 3 RTA.
The application of the law does not reflect your view of what they are permitted to do without being prosecuted, so it looks like you are going to have to suck it up & allow for journey times working on a lower average speed than you'd like to.
A business plan based & reliant on being able to travel at the speed limit is doomed to failure.
The eloquent and articulate attempts to justify driving over the speed limit are laughable (especially in an advanced driving thread).
The only potentially credible conversation about speed limits is one where a collective of 'advanced' drivers might challenge a local authority's speed rating of a particular stretch of road - should they disagree with the rating.
Even then, some stretches of road are being rated at lower limits for calming or speed/flow reasons.
There is no justification for exceeding the speed limit - ever.
This twaddle about exceeding the speed limit in exceptional circumstances and / or 'when safe to do so' e.g., to complete an overtake, only exposes the fact that the overtake should not have been attempted in the first place.
The only potentially credible conversation about speed limits is one where a collective of 'advanced' drivers might challenge a local authority's speed rating of a particular stretch of road - should they disagree with the rating.
Even then, some stretches of road are being rated at lower limits for calming or speed/flow reasons.
There is no justification for exceeding the speed limit - ever.
This twaddle about exceeding the speed limit in exceptional circumstances and / or 'when safe to do so' e.g., to complete an overtake, only exposes the fact that the overtake should not have been attempted in the first place.
WD39 said:
DukeDickson said:
WD39 said:
Yes, travelling at a speed which is safe and safe for only them. This perspective does not take into account other drivers.
This is the unpredictable factor.
Since I left my 'boy racer' days behind me and became a 'slower' driver, (not tortoise speed) and kept to the posted limits I have become a more relaxed driver and am at last enjoying it and not charging about in a thoughtless and irresponsible manner.
That is not to say that I don't exceed the limit on occasion, but it's rare and not a default position.
I hope that you get the right advice.
Going a bit quicker at the right times than the generally accepted norm isn't remotely thoughtless or irresponsible. I can pretty much guarantee that without actually thinking as such, .
I certainly hope that you 'think' before exercising the right hoof.This is the unpredictable factor.
Since I left my 'boy racer' days behind me and became a 'slower' driver, (not tortoise speed) and kept to the posted limits I have become a more relaxed driver and am at last enjoying it and not charging about in a thoughtless and irresponsible manner.
That is not to say that I don't exceed the limit on occasion, but it's rare and not a default position.
I hope that you get the right advice.
Going a bit quicker at the right times than the generally accepted norm isn't remotely thoughtless or irresponsible. I can pretty much guarantee that without actually thinking as such, .
Edited by WD39 on Sunday 10th April 20:46
I sit on my arse all day more or less every day, but I still think way more than I ever should, cover lots of miles, sometimes go slowly, sometimes do anything but, yet, have managed 0.5m (and counting) post IAM miles.
I think I have a decent idea of when to do funeral and when to do Fergie after a curry!
anonymous said:
[redacted]
dunning -kruger writ large ... now what;s that;s statistic in the first few chapters of Roadcraft aobut how mant drivers consider themselves better than average ... I would suggest the only person who will not benefit from 'civilian' driver development is an emergency services driver driving for an provider who is fully compliant with the best practices in driver training regarding ongoing development and re assessment
waremark said:
I think his point is that IAM training can be very worthwhile in spite of the constraint of having to keep within the speed limit.
Exactly , to suggest that 'civilian' driving development organisations are not relevant or credbile becasue they publically have to toe the line on when it is acceptable to exceed the speed limit is an indication that the writer has a inflated opinion of their driving ability.AH33 said:
sasha320 said:
There is no justification for exceeding the speed limit - ever.
Im really confused.You drive an RS4 and are on pistonheads.
Have I missed something here?
sasha320 said:
Just change your number plate and / or car.
I was flashing indiscriminately for a while ski season, saw nothing inthe post all winter and simply changed my 'cherished' plates for the next season.
In fact I have 3 plates and by the time I get to the second / third plate I've changed the car.
These measures are to mitigate being stopped at the border.
If I felt that the Swiss could pursue me ala DVLA then I wouldn't bother witj the plates.
All of that said, last season I kept within the limit all season because it was just easier to do so.
I was flashing indiscriminately for a while ski season, saw nothing inthe post all winter and simply changed my 'cherished' plates for the next season.
In fact I have 3 plates and by the time I get to the second / third plate I've changed the car.
These measures are to mitigate being stopped at the border.
If I felt that the Swiss could pursue me ala DVLA then I wouldn't bother witj the plates.
All of that said, last season I kept within the limit all season because it was just easier to do so.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff