Irrational Driving behaviours

[911hope]

Zero Fuchs said:

Thanks. Can you give some examples of mitigating action in everyday scenarios? I'm not taking about the example above where I would approach with caution but for more regular instances where a car might just wipe you out at junction.

For example, I always approach petrol stations with caution for obvious reasons but for more regular junctions in town, if everything looks normal and a car has stopped waiting to enter a main road, what other cues are you looking for if you're in front of a car and they pull out having not seen you? Or just before you're in front of a car?

Edited by Zero Fuchs on Thursday 20th October 09:16

Never believe a left turn signal from someone, you are about to pull out in front of.
The left turn can only be confirmed when the wheels turn.

[Ron240]

7mike said:

Lots of drivers balance the car on the clutch (or creep in an auto) while waiting at junctions. One of the reasons I try to discourage this is that, if the wheels are moving; what message is that sending to passing road users? I feel much more confident passing a vehicle waiting at a side road if I see that the wheels are completely stationary. Either use the handbrake or stay firmly on the foot brake.

I understand the point you are trying to make but unless stopped on an incline there would be no need for any driver to 'balance the car on the clutch.
Also with an auto one naturally holds the car by pressing the foot brake.
Nobody applies the handbrake when briefly stopping at a junction.

[Pica-Pica]

911hope said:

Zero Fuchs said:

Thanks. Can you give some examples of mitigating action in everyday scenarios? I'm not taking about the example above where I would approach with caution but for more regular instances where a car might just wipe you out at junction.

For example, I always approach petrol stations with caution for obvious reasons but for more regular junctions in town, if everything looks normal and a car has stopped waiting to enter a main road, what other cues are you looking for if you're in front of a car and they pull out having not seen you? Or just before you're in front of a car?

Edited by Zero Fuchs on Thursday 20th October 09:16

Never believe a left turn signal from someone, you are about to pull out in front of.
The left turn can only be confirmed when the wheels turn.

Agreed. Front wheel angle is the initial confirmation, just before the vehicle makes the turn (or doesn’t !)

[Pica-Pica]

7mike said:

Lots of drivers balance the car on the clutch (or creep in an auto) while waiting at junctions. One of the reasons I try to discourage this is that, if the wheels are moving; what message is that sending to passing road users? I feel much more confident passing a vehicle waiting at a side road if I see that the wheels are completely stationary. Either use the handbrake or stay firmly on the foot brake.

I rarely see that movement at junctions.

[Pica-Pica]

underwhelmist said:

I’m with 911hope. As a motorcyclist I would say if you’re on a bicycle or motorcycle, never, ever, EVER assume that a driver has properly seen you because they turned their head in your direction and you think you made eye contact. They’re looking for car or not-car, and if you’re on a bike you’re a not-car.

Agreed. As I approach, say, a junction, I look into the distance, then as I near the junction, I look at the near distance IN PARTICULAR for cycles, motorcycles, pedestrians, etc. I recognise that a succession of eye movements and ‘shots’ are required. We have discussed this before, and there are others here who have more knowledge than I in this subject. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saccadic_suppression...

How to correctly look at junctions should be taught more seriously, and with the depth of scientific knowledge, when learning to drive (and repeated in, what I want to see, regular retraining and re-testing)

[Mr Miata]

SlimJim16v said:

Mr Miata said:

- People buying 99 RON petrol when the car manufacturer even says it makes zero difference. Plus if you’re just cruising down a motorway at a constant speed or stick in traffic congestion, what benefit could you even get from it? Bearing in mind all petrol has to meet the same standards.

There are also many reports of better MPG with the 99.

Reports that are sponsored by Shell?

My cars manufacturer has wrote in the handbook, that super unleaded makes no difference to performance or economy. I reckon the manufacturer of the engine are the best qualified to comment.

[Mr Miata]

Ron240 said:

Also with an auto one naturally holds the car by pressing the foot brake.
Nobody applies the handbrake when briefly stopping at a junction.

Volkswagens now automatically apply the handbrake when you come to a stop. Then releases it when you press the accelerator. I think it works well as it stops the car inadvertently rolling on a slope.

[mike74]

People stuck in crawling traffic who then allow cheeky fkers in who have deliberately misused a right turn only lane.

It just makes no sense why you would allow yourself to be such a cuck.

[mike74]

Koyaanisqatsi said:

P675 said:

Koyaanisqatsi said:

Drivers, upon hearing a siren approaching from behind, immediately pulling over wherever they are, thinking that it's helping to allow the vehicle through. A bit of common sense and thinking logically would allow the police/paramedic driver to sail through effortlessly

This drives me quite mad, when they would be better to carry on at the speed limit until a more appropriate place.

The general mentality is 'oh, there is a siren and blue lights, I must immediately stop and bump up onto the nearest kerb'

Braindead fking idiots.

All seems a bit harsh to me.

What if you're in an unfamiliar area where you dont know where the next "appropriate place" might be for the emergency vehicle to just "sail through"?

Are you suggesting you should just continue on indefinitely, diligently obeying the speed limit at 20 or 30mph rather than just pulling over, possibly up on to the kerb or verge for a second and allowing it to pass?

[InitialDave]

Mr Miata said:

Reports that are sponsored by Shell?

My cars manufacturer has wrote in the handbook, that super unleaded makes no difference to performance or economy. I reckon the manufacturer of the engine are the best qualified to comment.

But the fact it's super unleaded isn't the critical point. It's that it now has lower ethanol content than normal unleaded, and increased ethanol content does give lower mpg.

Does it give enough of a decrease in mpg to justify the extra expense of super instead? That's the real question.

[donkmeister]

InitialDave said:

Mr Miata said:

Reports that are sponsored by Shell?

My cars manufacturer has wrote in the handbook, that super unleaded makes no difference to performance or economy. I reckon the manufacturer of the engine are the best qualified to comment.

But the fact it's super unleaded isn't the critical point. It's that it now has lower ethanol content than normal unleaded, and increased ethanol content does give lower mpg.

Does it give enough of a decrease in mpg to justify the extra expense of super instead? That's the real question.

Also just because one car's handbook says "don't waste your money on super" doesn't bear any relevance to the cars whose handbooks say "well you CAN run it in regular, but you won't get the full performance of the engine".

Unfortunately all my cars have to be run on super... I'd love to save a few quid, but on one daily it's simply not compatible with E10, the other daily treats 95 as a "get you home " fuel with reduced performance, and my odds n sods simply don't get used often enough that I want my fuel to be any more hygroscopic than it has to be, so E5.

[swisstoni]

I just use super for everything, lawn mowers, the lot. They all just seem to start and run better with it.

With cars that stand unused for ages I think the higher octane stuff lasts longer so that they have a better chance of starting.

This could all just be in my head of course, but I'm happy

[7mike]

Pica-Pica said:

7mike said:

Lots of drivers balance the car on the clutch (or creep in an auto) while waiting at junctions. One of the reasons I try to discourage this is that, if the wheels are moving; what message is that sending to passing road users? I feel much more confident passing a vehicle waiting at a side road if I see that the wheels are completely stationary. Either use the handbrake or stay firmly on the foot brake.

I rarely see that movement at junctions.

Really? There's plenty of drivers who can't even keep their vehicle still in a queue on the flat at traffic lights.

[5s Alive]

Pica-Pica said:

How to correctly look at junctions should be taught more seriously,

Nearly fell foul of this yesterday. I consider myself to be pretty good at anticipating what other drivers will do but got this wrong and almost ran into the back of another car. Ditto for the car following me.

A703
https://maps.app.goo.gl/cwPmwV5LkTQSAkhu6

Straight (wet) road with good visibility. Old Skoda Fabia pulled out of the first opening on the left when we were almost on him, circa 55mph but off the throttle as there was a fairly wide farm vehicle coming the other way. Braking hard (but no abs) I assumed (wrongly) that he would accelerate up to speed but no, he almost stopped to pull into the opening immediately after. In doing so he swung to the right as if about to reverse in and prevented passing on the right. Avoided flat out emergency braking as the following car didn't have a good view of what was happening and only just managed to avoid contact. I could have braked harder fractionally sooner but saw him look straight at us before pulling out.

[QJumper]

InitialDave said:

Mr Miata said:

Reports that are sponsored by Shell?

My cars manufacturer has wrote in the handbook, that super unleaded makes no difference to performance or economy. I reckon the manufacturer of the engine are the best qualified to comment.

But the fact it's super unleaded isn't the critical point. It's that it now has lower ethanol content than normal unleaded, and increased ethanol content does give lower mpg.

Does it give enough of a decrease in mpg to justify the extra expense of super instead? That's the real question.

That seems to be true in my experience. My mpg is broadly similar whether I use regular or premium, except when I fill up with Esso premium (which is zero ethanol), where I get a 3-5 mpg improvement.

[Red Devil]

Pica-Pica said:

underwhelmist said:

I’m with 911hope. As a motorcyclist I would say if you’re on a bicycle or motorcycle, never, ever, EVER assume that a driver has properly seen you because they turned their head in your direction and you think you made eye contact. They’re looking for car or not-car, and if you’re on a bike you’re a not-car.

Agreed. As I approach, say, a junction, I look into the distance, then as I near the junction, I look at the near distance IN PARTICULAR for cycles, motorcycles, pedestrians, etc. I recognise that a succession of eye movements and ‘shots’ are required. We have discussed this before, and there are others here who have more knowledge than I in this subject. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saccadic_suppression...

See also the first video in this article - https://osullivan-law-firm.com/why-you-dont-see-mo...

Pica-Pica said:

How to correctly look at junctions should be taught more seriously, and with the depth of scientific knowledge, when learning to drive (and repeated in, what I want to see, regular retraining and re-testing)

A good start would be a saccadic test for elderly drivers - https://smw.ch/article/doi/smw.2015.14098
It could be linked to d/l renewal at 70 (and every 3 years thereafter).
The basic 'can you read a number plate at 20 metres without spectacles?' is inadequate.