Slow drivers on country lanes
Discussion
Pan Pan said:
IF they hold up those who want to legally travel at the posted limit, then the answer is no, they do not have the right to travel at their speed of choice. They should either travel at the speed of the 85th percentile and abide by the rules of the road, and if they cannot do this, either pull over to let those who wish to, exercise `their' legal right to travel at the posted limit, or get off the the roads.
What do you think the 85th percentile speed actually is down these country lanes, and do you think it supports your case? Pan Pan said:
They should either travel at the speed of the 85th percentile and abide by the rules.
You do know that the vast majority of people travel more slowly than the 85th percentile, right? You also know that travelling at the 85th percentile often means NOT abiding by the rules?Edited by Mave on Thursday 25th September 18:52
Reason why I crashed officer? Working out WTF 85th percentile meant - had to keep recalculating every time I saw another vehicle . Some people drive slowly on narrow roads - often because it is he only sensible and safe way to drive and - shock- sometimes because they want to even though it incurs the wrath of people who thought they bought the road with their car.
They rarely have any concept of anything happening outside of the car or the fifty yards in front of them. That's why even on a twisty A road I often find myself having to change down at the slightest incline buggering up even an economical cruise home. Now I don't need to drive like my pants are on fire but I would like to do better than average 26mph over a twelve mile stretch of uncongested a road that is predominantly signed for 50mph and can be travelled mostly far faster than that.
Pan Pan said:
IF they hold up those who want to legally travel at the posted limit, then the answer is no, they do not have the right to travel at their speed of choice. They should either travel at the speed of the 85th percentile and abide by the rules of the road, and if they cannot do this, either pull over to let those who wish to, exercise `their' legal right to travel at the posted limit, or get off the the roads.
Just as they can prosecute those who travel too fast, the police can equally prosecute those who deliberately cause a rolling road block obstruction on public roads.
Utter nonsense.Just as they can prosecute those who travel too fast, the police can equally prosecute those who deliberately cause a rolling road block obstruction on public roads.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Pan Pan said:
IF they hold up those who want to legally travel at the posted limit, then the answer is no, they do not have the right to travel at their speed of choice. They should either travel at the speed of the 85th percentile and abide by the rules of the road, and if they cannot do this, either pull over to let those who wish to, exercise `their' legal right to travel at the posted limit, or get off the the roads.
Just as they can prosecute those who travel too fast, the police can equally prosecute those who deliberately cause a rolling road block obstruction on public roads.
Utter nonsense.Just as they can prosecute those who travel too fast, the police can equally prosecute those who deliberately cause a rolling road block obstruction on public roads.
Whilst the first part is, I agree, utter bilious nonsense
Whilst you lot are b
hing with each other, my tip to the OP if he wants to "enjoy" these lanes is, get out of bed a bit earlier. At 5am in the summer, the sun is showing it's face, and the dawdlers are still tucked up in bed. Britain's roads are too crowded to hoon around during normal waking hours, so do your hooning when others are asleep.
hing with each other, my tip to the OP if he wants to "enjoy" these lanes is, get out of bed a bit earlier. At 5am in the summer, the sun is showing it's face, and the dawdlers are still tucked up in bed. Britain's roads are too crowded to hoon around during normal waking hours, so do your hooning when others are asleep.TwigtheWonderkid said:
Pan Pan said:
IF they hold up those who want to legally travel at the posted limit, then the answer is no, they do not have the right to travel at their speed of choice. They should either travel at the speed of the 85th percentile and abide by the rules of the road, and if they cannot do this, either pull over to let those who wish to, exercise `their' legal right to travel at the posted limit, or get off the the roads.
Just as they can prosecute those who travel too fast, the police can equally prosecute those who deliberately cause a rolling road block obstruction on public roads.
Utter nonsense.Just as they can prosecute those who travel too fast, the police can equally prosecute those who deliberately cause a rolling road block obstruction on public roads.
Whilst the first part is, I agree, utter bilious nonsense the second is to some extent true
The police can and gave dealt with drivers who have caused large tailbacks for whatever reason and failed to give opportunity to assist people to overtake when opportunities have been presented.
But the key is large tailbacks and a single vehicle or even a couple of vehicles delayed in the circumstances subject of the thread does not qualify and his argument is, as you and others have said, completely risible.
That poster needs to take a good hard look at their attitudes.
I'd like to point out that I saw no wagons on my commute today so I hogged lane 1 at 55, I even passed someone at 60, also on cruise, up a hill.
It's just easier to drink tea at 55 than 155.
This place is hillarious, I'm sure if I posted a thread about me doing 70 and people getting in my way in lane 2 I'd get a load of stick, "doing the speed limit! what a total prick" , "typical bmw wker"
I still don't understand how me doing the same speed as the traffic in lane 1 is such an issue? I can maintain my speed V having to speed up for the people in lane 2 doing 90+ first thing in the morning.
I can't afford to run it, that's why I bought one and I'm running it.
And just because I commute at less than the speed limit means I can't afford the car? how exactly does that work? I commute this way as people are generally terrible during commuting periods.
It's just easier to drink tea at 55 than 155.
This place is hillarious, I'm sure if I posted a thread about me doing 70 and people getting in my way in lane 2 I'd get a load of stick, "doing the speed limit! what a total prick" , "typical bmw w
ker"I still don't understand how me doing the same speed as the traffic in lane 1 is such an issue? I can maintain my speed V having to speed up for the people in lane 2 doing 90+ first thing in the morning.
All that jazz said:
We already knew that as they were all in lane 2 trying to get past you dawdling along causing mayhem because you can't afford the running costs of your motor.
Oh yes, the horror of running it!I can't afford to run it, that's why I bought one and I'm running it.
And just because I commute at less than the speed limit means I can't afford the car? how exactly does that work? I commute this way as people are generally terrible during commuting periods.
Edited by MuZiZZle on Friday 26th September 11:17
Edited by MuZiZZle on Friday 26th September 11:18
kuro said:
Took my mx5 down to my local beach with my youngest daughter today. Looking forward to the drive as the weather is still good. Unfortunately on the way there and back I was stuck behind slower than a slow thing drivers.
Now I dont want to drive like an F1 driver but I do want to travel at a reasonable pace and enjoy the car, In the end I was nearly screaming. Do these people not realise the frustration they cause.
http://youtu.be/E6rY1-pbeNM?t=1m30s Now I dont want to drive like an F1 driver but I do want to travel at a reasonable pace and enjoy the car, In the end I was nearly screaming. Do these people not realise the frustration they cause.
11 pages and nobody posted this. I am disappoint.
Very sweary so NSFW
Edited by mp3manager on Friday 26th September 15:01
MuZiZZle said:
I'd like to point out that I saw no wagons on my commute today so I hogged lane 1 at 55, I even passed someone at 60, also on cruise, up a hill.
It's just easier to drink tea at 55 than 155.
This place is hillarious, I'm sure if I posted a thread about me doing 70 and people getting in my way in lane 2 I'd get a load of stick, "doing the speed limit! what a total prick" , "typical bmw wker"
I still don't understand how me doing the same speed as the traffic in lane 1 is such an issue? I can maintain my speed V having to speed up for the people in lane 2 doing 90+ first thing in the morning.
I can't afford to run it, that's why I bought one and I'm running it.
And just because I commute at less than the speed limit means I can't afford the car? how exactly does that work? I commute this way as people are generally terrible during commuting periods.
I think that the issue is one of reasonableness. It is reasonable to drive at 55 in lane 1 and 70 in lane 2. It may be reasonable to drive in lane 3 at 70 during rush hour if you can manage that. But being in the wrong lane and disrupting traffic is unreasonable. It's just easier to drink tea at 55 than 155.
This place is hillarious, I'm sure if I posted a thread about me doing 70 and people getting in my way in lane 2 I'd get a load of stick, "doing the speed limit! what a total prick" , "typical bmw w
ker"I still don't understand how me doing the same speed as the traffic in lane 1 is such an issue? I can maintain my speed V having to speed up for the people in lane 2 doing 90+ first thing in the morning.
All that jazz said:
We already knew that as they were all in lane 2 trying to get past you dawdling along causing mayhem because you can't afford the running costs of your motor.
Oh yes, the horror of running it!I can't afford to run it, that's why I bought one and I'm running it.
And just because I commute at less than the speed limit means I can't afford the car? how exactly does that work? I commute this way as people are generally terrible during commuting periods.
Edited by MuZiZZle on Friday 26th September 11:17
Edited by MuZiZZle on Friday 26th September 11:18
When the speed is far lower than the legal limit and what the conditions allow - that's unreasonable.
GavinPearson said:
I think that the issue is one of reasonableness. It is reasonable to drive at 55 in lane 1 and 70 in lane 2. It may be reasonable to drive in lane 3 at 70 during rush hour if you can manage that. But being in the wrong lane and disrupting traffic is unreasonable.
When the speed is far lower than the legal limit and what the conditions allow - that's unreasonable.
Lane 3? what is this wizardry? we only have 2 lanes on the A1 up here.When the speed is far lower than the legal limit and what the conditions allow - that's unreasonable.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff