Driving standards are in melt down Options

[Sherlock]

Based experience over the past few months, but particularly on a drive including the A34 and M27 yesterday, driving standards are falling of a cliff. A good percentage of drivers on the A34 were travelling at over 80/90mph while tailgating, failing to signal when pulling out etc. etc. We saw no less than 3 crashes during the day, one a 5 car pile up with at least two the cars written off. I hope no one was seriously hurt.

I don't mind idiots driving badly if they only kill or maim themselves, obviously, although this is unfair on the emergency services and creates unnecessary costs for the NHS. It's their complete disregard for others' safety that's so offensive.

Clearly no penalties - including their own death/maiming - are going to stop these morons so we need another solution. Something like this, perhaps, http://www.comparethebox.com/black-box-insurance with insurance companies imposing punitive charges on anyone who breaks the limit. I really don't see why such systems shouldn't be compulsory once a drive has accumulated a few points.

I'm sure everyone here agrees with me so perhaps our local MP could take up the cause on our behalf. What possible argument could he put forward against it?

His government are making huge reductions in front-line policing, and road deaths and injuries are already rising, so how else are they going to ensure that standards don't deteriorate further causing yet more unnecessary suffering?

[Darren]

Road policing has been steadily reduced over the last few years because the public complain the police aren't "out catching real criminals".

[Andy Capp]

I don't think the driving standard on A34 was any different when the the police were 'out catching unreal criminals'.

[stewiegriffin]

Driving standards aren't really getting any worse. There are just a lot more cars on the road than there used to be, therefore more bad drivers. Plus there are more hold ups and tailbacks than there were, so people get more short tempered and impatient and take risks they wouldn't have previously taken.

We all know the usual suspects. The fabled Lane Two Owners Club, which convenes its daily meetings on the nations motorways, blinkers on, eyes fixed on the two metres of tarmac in front of their car. Half the hold ups and slow moving traffic on the motorways is caused by those planks.

The uninsured, untaxed, unlicenced pikey in his clapped crapheap. The car is usually worth so little he just buys another one if the police catch him and crush it.

The many, many immigrants who have one licence which the whole family uses.

The mother and four kids who she spends more time keeping under control in the car than looking where she's going.

I don't usually agree with much that Clarkson utters, but he's right about the c*cks migrating to Audis from BMW's. If you encounter a tailgater on the motorway, it'll be Josh/Dan/Ed/Guy the Regional Manager in his A4, about 3 inches from your rear bumper at 80mph. Makes me want to tie him to a lamp post in his dreadful ill fitting Top Man suit and pour a gallon of unleaded over him, before asking if he knows why I'm about to fire up the Zippo. Am I over reacting to that one a bit?

There are many more examples of course. Such as the massive pr**k in a Ford Galaxy who cut across three lanes of roundabout to make the exit he'd missed, nearly taking the front off my car yesterday afternoon.

And if my neighbour in his chavved up Imprezza wakes me up at 7am on a Saturday morning again with his absurd drainpipe exhaust I'm going to empty a can of builders foam into it.

I feel better now.

[Biker1]

And if my neighbour in his chavved up Imprezza wakes me up at 7am on a Saturday morning again with his absurd drainpipe exhaust I'm going to empty a can of builders foam into it.

I think you must live near me!
(It's not me by the way but I hear it! (or something like it))

[JeffG]

The mother and four kids who she spends more time keeping under control in the car than looking where she's going.

Brilliant post altogether, but I picked out the above. Years ago, I had to negotiate the périphérique around Paris, and had banned my family from talking while I concentrated on that nightmare. I can't remember how many lanes there are, but in one of the middle ones, a woman in front braked, stopped, turned around and slapped her dog which was misbehaving in the back seat.

That's something I will never forget

[Biker1]

Was coming from Sainsburys yesterday towards Police Station Roundabout when car in front of me went straight through red lights and into the stream of traffic coming round the roundabout.
If it hadn't been for the quick thinking / braking of the car that nearly hit them it would have been messy

Amazing.

[x2lls]

Snip


I don't usually agree with much that Clarkson utters, but he's right about the c*cks migrating to Audis from BMW's. If you encounter a tailgater on the motorway, it'll be Josh/Dan/Ed/Guy the Regional Manager in his A4, about 3 inches from your rear bumper at 80mph. Makes me want to tie him to a lamp post in his dreadful ill fitting Top Man suit and pour a gallon of unleaded over him, before asking if he knows why I'm about to fire up the Zippo. Am I over reacting to that one a bit?

There are many more examples of course. Such as the massive pr**k in a Ford Galaxy who cut across three lanes of roundabout to make the exit he'd missed, nearly taking the front off my car yesterday afternoon.

And if my neighbour in his chavved up Imprezza wakes me up at 7am on a Saturday morning again with his absurd drainpipe exhaust I'm going to empty a can of builders foam into it.

I feel better now.

Whilst I fully agree with your main points, to pick out particular models of car is not at all rational. It just happens to be the lump of metal containing a moron. (you have three mentioned here alone).

To drive badly, is not bad driving alone, it displays a complete isolation from the society in which you belong. Only today, my wife and I got caught waiting for the train(s) at Thatcham station. We were opposite the football club entrance for about ten minutes in all. I switched off the engine whilst in front there were three cars with their brake lights on the whole time, wasting fuel. THAT'S a moron!!

Then, in Thacham, I was waiting for my wife for about fifteen minutes whilst she was in the Co-op. I was standing by the rear entrance. There was a car parked with the engine running the whole time. The driver had 'popped' into the shop, leaving a passenger in the car. THAT's a moron.

[stewiegriffin]

Whilst I fully agree with your main points, to pick out particular models of car is not at all rational. It just happens to be the lump of metal containing a moron. (you have three mentioned here alone).

More tongue in cheek than irrational. Sorry if that was lost on you.

Audi drivers are a particularly irksome bunch though. Many of them are also golfers, which says a lot. And none of it complimentary. Especially the clothes. They are prone to wearing polo shirts with the collar turned up. The hallmark of a tw*t, as everybody knows.

And all Imprezza pilots own a Burberry baseball cap. They give them out at the dealers. And they have tribal tatoos around the upper arm. Also the hallmark of a tw*t.

Ford Galaxy drivers just know nothing about cars. Or driving. Or anything.

[Exhausted]

Whilst I fully agree with your main points, to pick out particular models of car is not at all rational. It just happens to be the lump of metal containing a moron. (you have three mentioned here alone).

Unless it's a Volvo of course.

[Berkshirelad]

Whilst I fully agree with your main points, to pick out particular models of car is not at all rational. It just happens to be the lump of metal containing a moron. (you have three mentioned here alone).

To drive badly, is not bad driving alone, it displays a complete isolation from the society in which you belong. Only today, my wife and I got caught waiting for the train(s) at Thatcham station. We were opposite the football club entrance for about ten minutes in all. I switched off the engine whilst in front there were three cars with their brake lights on the whole time, wasting fuel. THAT'S a moron!!

Then, in Thacham, I was waiting for my wife for about fifteen minutes whilst she was in the Co-op. I was standing by the rear entrance. There was a car parked with the engine running the whole time. The driver had 'popped' into the shop, leaving a passenger in the car. THAT's a moron.

I guess that I am one of those morons then; the engine is running to keep the climate control running in my case.

I pay for the fuel; I'll decide how it's used thank you.

Just to say, relative to the OP, that driving standards have fallen as the authorities have moved from proper road policing to policing by scamera.

[x2lls]

I guess that I am one of those morons then; the engine is running to keep the climate control running in my case.

I pay for the fuel; I'll decide how it's used thank you.

Just to say, relative to the OP, that driving standards have fallen as the authorities have moved from proper road policing to policing by scamera.

Well, you made my point then. Thank you.

[Newbelly]

I see the latest Audi advert claims their car makes 2000 decisions a second.

As cars have become much safer through design and technology, I wonder if the unintended consequence is that the driver mentally relinquishes some responsibility.

I seem to remember reading that when the wearing of seatbelts was made compulsory, vehicle-occupant injuries decreased but pedestrian injuries increased - as speeds and risk-taking increased as the driver and occupants felt safer.

[Timbo]

How I see it;

Cars are driven by people and it's people who are idiots. Not a particular brand of car, it's unfair.

Black Box insurance is stupid. Driving within the speed limits does not make you safer. It also charges you up to £40 PER OCCURANCE (so can be daily) you drive between 11pm and 6am. If you brake sharply to avoid a pedestrian you incur points or whatever they call it which if you get so many you get screwed in the butt on price. if you are 17 and literally use your car to go to and from college then it's a good idea but when you are over 19 then forget about it!!!

Normally tailgaiting happens when people don't move out of the frickin' way. So if people used the correct lane 90% of the tailgaiting would stop by default

[Penelope]

I see the latest Audi advert claims their car makes 2000 decisions a second.

As cars have become much safer through design and technology, I wonder if the unintended consequence is that the driver mentally relinquishes some responsibility.

I seem to remember reading that when the wearing of seatbelts was made compulsory, vehicle-occupant injuries decreased but pedestrian injuries increased - as speeds and risk-taking increased as the driver and occupants felt safer.

The safest car would be the one with a big Shiny sharp metal spike in the middle of the steering wheel.

[Strafin]

That is very true!

[Newbelly]

Insurance companies cannot interview and individually profile each insured risk, so have to rely on statistical analysis in respect of claims. If that means a ban on driving between 11pm and 6am for most young/inexperienced drivers (if they wish to be insured) then that may become a fact of life.

We already have static ANPR enforcement, Sat Nav, GPS location for commercial vehicles and anti-theft systems such as Tracker. I do not see there being such a huge leap before it is common for cars to have video recording capability and black boxes – used for accident investigation and insurance purposes and...eventually, road-pricing.

Big Brother?

[Timbo]

Insurance companies cannot interview and individually profile each insured risk, so have to rely on statistical analysis in respect of claims. If that means a ban on driving between 11pm and 6am for most young/inexperienced drivers (if they wish to be insured) then that may become a fact of life.

It applies to everyone who has black box insurance.

When I was younger I managed to insure my cars even while living away from home by myself through a little something called work, and I wasn't on particularly big money then either.. Now at my age it's not to bad..
But you can't help but feel bad for the younger drivers... not all are terrible, most are actually a lot better than some of the more seasoned drivers because they are not "arrogant".. "I've been driving for years I'm the best".

I know someone I used to help out, they were 19, had a 2001 or 2002 Vauxhall Corsa 1.2Sxi - Cost them £2350 for a years insurance. The car was only worth £1750!!

[Newbelly]

I know someone I used to help out, they were 19, had a 2001 or 2002 Vauxhall Corsa 1.2Sxi - Cost them £2350 for a years insurance. The car was only worth £1750!!

Well, all power to Jack Straw MP, whom I believe is trying to put a stop to the selling of details and the "accident management company scam" that is increasing the cost of all our policies.

[x2lls]

How I see it;

1 Cars are driven by people and it's people who are idiots. Not a particular brand of car, it's unfair.
Black Box insurance is stupid. Driving within the speed limits does not make you safer. It also charges you up to £40 PER OCCURANCE (so can be daily) you drive between 11pm and 6am. If you brake sharply to avoid a pedestrian you incur points or whatever they call it which if you get so many you get screwed in the butt on price. if you are 17 and literally use your car to go to and from college then it's a good idea but when you are over 19 then forget about it!!!

2. Normally tailgaiting happens when people don't move out of the frickin' way. So if people used the correct lane 90% of the tailgaiting would stop by default

1 .Fully agree.
2. There is NEVER an excuse to tailgate. Period

[Andy Capp]

Normally tailgaiting happens when people don't move out of the frickin' way. So if people used the correct lane 90% of the tailgaiting would stop by default

Faster drivers do not have priority. Tailgating is usually caused by people driving too close to the car in front. It is a speed limit, not a target or a limit that must be conquered.

[stewiegriffin]

Tailgating is usually caused by people driving too close to the car in front.

In much the same way as death is usually caused by not being alive.

[Andy Capp]

In much the same way as death is usually caused by not being alive.

No it isn't.

I was responding to the implication that it was cause by someone driving too slow, rather than someone driving too close.

[On the edge]

Faster drivers do not have priority. Tailgating is usually caused by people driving too close to the car in front. It is a speed limit, not a target or a limit that must be conquered.

Very good point. Most of us think the speed signs mean 'roughly x mph - at all times'

[stewiegriffin]

No it isn't.

Oh yes it is. To this day death remains our nations biggest killer. It's a scandal. What the **** are our politicians doing about it? Nothing, that's what. You might be willing to sit idly by and let this continue but I'm not.

And did you know that all of Newbury's crime is commited by criminals?

As for the thorny subject of immigration, it wouldn't be a problem if so many foreigners weren't coming into the country.

And driving too close to the car in front would never happen if it wasn't for those bloody tailgaters.

[Andy Capp]

Oh yes it is. To this day death remains our nations biggest killer. It's a scandal. What the **** are our politicians doing about it? Nothing, that's what. You might be willing to sit idly by and let this continue but I'm not.

And did you know that all of Newbury's crime is commited by criminals?

As for the thorny subject of immigration, it wouldn't be a problem if so many foreigners weren't coming into the country.

And driving too close to the car in front would never happen if it wasn't for those bloody tailgaters.

Here's another go.

Timbo and I are arguing about who is responsible for tailgating. Tailgating has two components: 2 cars; one in front of the other. Timbo's point was that tailgating is the fault of the car in front going too slow and failing to get out of the way, I'm saying it is the fault of the car behind, driving too close.

[stewiegriffin]

I thought I explained it well enough already, so here's another go.

Timbo and I are arguing about who is responsible for tailgating. Tailgating has two components: 2 cars; one in front of the other. Timbo's point was that tailgating is the fault of the car in front going too slow, I'm saying it is the fault of the car behind, driving too close.

You should know better than to debate the finer points of anything with Timbo. Who, by the way has still to decide upon which car he's going to tell us he owns. Unless he claims to have bought the orange wheeled pratmobile from xjay. Loving the faux teutonic number plate by the way. A wise use of money if ever there was one.

[Timbo]

Stewie, I do not have to tell you what car I own. So stop acting like you are some sort of higher-jury, gosh you are quite the stuck up one.
I would like maintain a modicum of privacy on the forum so refrain from telling you exactly what car I have. I do not have orange wheels on my car. Be happy to meet with you at the hogs head meet though.

Here's another go.

Timbo and I are arguing about who is responsible for tailgating. Tailgating has two components: 2 cars; one in front of the other. Timbo's point was that tailgating is the fault of the car in front going too slow and failing to get out of the way, I'm saying it is the fault of the car behind, driving too close.

I wouldn't say arguing!

I'm not saying it's an excuse but, if you are sat in the outside lane doing 65 when the inside lane is clear, then personally, I would maintain a good distance for a while, maybe a minute or so. If they do not move over, I will give a little flash from a safe distance.
If this does not work, I will close the gap slightly after a period of about 20 or 30 seconds (so about 3 flashes, every 10 seconds).
After this I would either undertake (sue me) or sit on the tail of the car infront**. Nothing annoys me more on the motorway or dual carriageways than people who sit in the middle/outside lane who are not going very fast when there is a perfectly clear inside lane to use.......

**I am an adult and an unfortunately fully grown one at that so do not care what any of you think. I am aware of the law/rules so your chastising does not bother me.

Some people just tailgate because they are *****. And that's not right, but if you are on a dual carriageway or motorway and are not using the left-most lane when possible, and a faster car wants to go by, why cause agro to both yourself and to the other drivers who want to go faster (it's a free-ish world) by not moving over, out of some sort of principle that they are tailgaiting you.
If you want them to stop tailgaiting you and you can move over to the left-most hand lane because it's empty, as you SHOULD be doing by law, then move and destress the entire situation.

[Exhausted]

On a three lane motorway when driving a car, unless the left hand lane is free of lorries chundering along at 56mph, I prefer to stick to the centre lane at 70mph rather than having to keep ducking in and out. The third lane is for the overtakers, so they can move over to pass and then move back again. There is no excuse for tailgating. If the car in front is either not overtaking because there is a line of traffic in front of him or is doing the maximum permitted speed and the right hand lane is reasonably clear of reps expresses then that's where he/she should go rather than forcing me out of the way.
I only move into lane one if I can see my way clear of lorries.
On a two lane such as the Newbury bypass then as far as I'm concerned, I stay in the right hand lane rather than weave in and out of the lorries but will move over if some nubhead is rushing up behind me so long as I won't get trapped in the left hand lane.

[Andy Capp]

On a three lane motorway when driving a car, unless the left hand lane is free of lorries chundering along at 56mph, I prefer to stick to the centre lane at 70mph rather than having to keep ducking in and out. The third lane is for the overtakers, so they can move over to pass and then move back again. There is no excuse for tailgating. If the car in front is either not overtaking because there is a line of traffic in front of him or is doing the maximum permitted speed and the right hand lane is reasonably clear of reps expresses then that's where he/she should go rather than forcing me out of the way.
I only move into lane one if I can see my way clear of lorries.
On a two lane such as the Newbury bypass then as far as I'm concerned, I stay in the right hand lane rather than weave in and out of the lorrbut will move over if some nubhead is rushing up behind me so long as I won't get trapped in the left hand lane.

That is pretty much how I see it. 3 lane motorways like the M4 are so busy these days, that one is nearly always in the middle lane overtaking slower left-hand lane vehicles.

[Biker1]

On a three lane motorway when driving a car, unless the left hand lane is free of lorries chundering along at 56mph, I prefer to stick to the centre lane at 70mph rather than having to keep ducking in and out.

A CLOD!

[Timbo]

On a three lane motorway when driving a car, unless the left hand lane is free of lorries chundering along at 56mph, I prefer to stick to the centre lane at 70mph rather than having to keep ducking in and out. The third lane is for the overtakers, so they can move over to pass and then move back again. There is no excuse for tailgating. If the car in front is either not overtaking because there is a line of traffic in front of him or is doing the maximum permitted speed and the right hand lane is reasonably clear of reps expresses then that's where he/she should go rather than forcing me out of the way.
I only move into lane one if I can see my way clear of lorries.
On a two lane such as the Newbury bypass then as far as I'm concerned, I stay in the right hand lane rather than weave in and out of the lorries but will move over if some nubhead is rushing up behind me so long as I won't get trapped in the left hand lane.

On a 3 lane motorway if you are able to use the inside lane for more than 20 seconds you should move over. With respect I have done about 6 journeys up and down the M4 this last week and have been able to use the inside lane for quite a good chunk of that time, even while doing 80. Admittedly this has not been in rush hour so might be different.

I've unfortunately had to do about 10,000 miles since April this year, most of it up and down the M4, M1, M40, M42, M6, and of course the M25. how we love the M25. I'm simply sharing what I have noticed. It's rare in my experience that there is such a proliferation of lorries that the inside lane is "unusable"

If I am doing 70 I find myself being in the inside lane quite a lot.. Staying in the middle lane because the effort of moving the steering wheel about 3 degrees to the left is probably the worst excuse ever! Aside from "the dog ate my homework..."
unfortunately I have a feeling it's due to people who only ever use the middle and outside lane on the motorway, who are responsible collectively for a majority of road rage and tailbacks/congestion on motorways.



Exhausted in the blue fiesta?


Cars like this, I overtake them and cut back in very close to the inside lane. Sometimes they get the message or they just sit in the middle lane still without caring.
People like this should be shot.

[Andy Capp]

Cars like this, I overtake them and cut back in very close to the inside lane. Sometimes they get the message or they just sit in the middle lane still without caring. People like this should be shot.

I think you should have your licence removed. It is not for you to 'police' motorways as well as it is illegal to drive with defective brakes.

[Timbo]

ps even with my 2 front brakes and 1 rear brake my car would stop quicker than yours.

[Andy Capp]

Hurling insults doesn't improve your argument.

[Andy Capp]

ps even with my 2 front brakes and 1 rear brake my car would stop quicker than yours.

Let's see which one would pass an MOT.

[Biker1]

I think you should have your licence removed. It is not for you to 'police' motorways as well as it is illegal to drive with defective brakes.

While I agree with Timbo on the subject of CLODs which he illustrates well in his images, I do not agree with his methods of dealing with them.

[Timbo]

Telling you to shut your face isn't an insult.
You must have had a fun time at school.

As for improving your argument, neither does talking about things which I presume you have no knowledge * of due to your obvious non-understanding of what is safe and what is not safe! (* mechanics that is).

I agree Biker1 it's probably not the responsible thing to do. It's just my one real bug-bear on the road.. Not an excuse though I know

[Timbo]

Let's see which one would pass an MOT.

Mine would with it's new pads and new, free moving calipers.
What part of "emergency/temporary fix" do you not understand. Maybe your life is empty enough to not have to drive to do things but unfortunately mine is busy.

[Andy Capp]

Telling you to shut your face isn't an insult.
You must have had a fun time at school.

As for improving your argument, neither does talking about things which I presume you have no knowledge * of due to your obvious non-understanding of what is safe and what is not safe! (* mechanics that is)

Driving with defective brakes is an endorsable offence. It doesn't take any intelligence to know that.

[Timbo]

I didn't say it was legal. I said it was a temporary fix.
Thick as two short planks. Simple minds though.

[Andy Capp]

Mine would with it's new pads and new, free moving calipers.
What part of "emergency/temporary fix" do you not understand. Maybe your life is empty enough to not have to drive to do things but unfortunately mine is busy.

What is it about driving a car with defective brakes do you not understand?

[Andy Capp]

I didn't say it was legal. I said it was a temporary fix.
Thick as two short planks. Simple minds though.

So therefore, you should not have driven the car.

[Exhausted]

A couple of still pics as in Timbo's post, don't really show the circumstances. If in the first picture, the two lanes are both popping along at 70mph as normally happens on the busy M4 during the 'rush hours' then moving left would not resolve any problem for the car behind. I'm not sure why you want to be angry with other road users who by experience know that dodging about in traffic to gain a couple of spaces probably only gains a couple of minutes at the end of the journey.
In the second picture I fail to see why you need to teach the driver a lesson. I have no idea what speed he was doing but what you suggest is a life threatening manouver and anyway, just overtake in the empty third lane and quietly get on with your journey. You will arrive less stressed and your heart rate will remain at a normal level boding well for your longevity.
And as far as Biker is concerned, don't shout.

[JeffG]

Just a brief foray into this two-person argument.

If I am driving in the nearside lane of a quiet 3-lane motorway, and I come up behind some idiot sitting in the middle lane, I too will pull right over to overtake then return to the nearside lane as quickly as it is safe to do so.

[stewiegriffin]

Exhausted, when traffic is moving freely, lanes 2 & 3 are solely for the purpose of overtaking. Nothing else. You appear to be bewilderingly ignorant of that most basic of facts.

Plonking youself in the middle lane so as to avoid a bit of lane changing as you appear to think is fine, does nothing but cause traffic behind you collectively to slow down. There have been several studies of the effects of drivers like you on traffic flow. The percentages vary but they reckon approx 30% of slow moving traffic on motorways is caused by poor lane discipline.

Please buy (and read) the highway code.

[Exhausted]

Just a brief foray into this two-person argument.

If I am driving in the nearside lane of a quiet 3-lane motorway, and I come up behind some idiot sitting in the middle lane, I too will pull right over to overtake then return to the nearside lane as quickly as it is safe to do so.

That's the correct answer. However, I do not drive in the centre lane if the left lane is clear, that is bad manners.

[Strafin]

Just a brief foray into this two-person argument.

If I am driving in the nearside lane of a quiet 3-lane motorway, and I come up behind some idiot sitting in the middle lane, I too will pull right over to overtake then return to the nearside lane as quickly as it is safe to do so.

I just stay in the near side lane and pass. Some times they get the message and pull back in afterwards, if I stay in the near side lane I normally find myself getting everywhere quicker anyway.

[Exhausted]

I just stay in the near side lane and pass. Some times they get the message and pull back in afterwards, if I stay in the near side lane I normally find myself getting everywhere quicker anyway.

I'm sorry to say that that really is a dangerous attitude. An undertaking car might not be seen in the centre lane driver's mirror if he/she decides to move to the left after checking the rear view mirror. At even 30mph that will put both cars off the road if contact occurs and that would be your fault. Undertaking should only happen if all three lanes are moving slowly and this means at less than 15mph.

[JeffG]

I just stay in the near side lane and pass.

I do that sometimes. Especially if I am approaching my exit and the lane is clear right to the exit. Actually, the Americans have the right idea and pass legally in any lane. Then it doesn't really matter if someone hogs a lane.

They also have "right turn on red after stop" at traffic lights in many states, which is a great idea. It would be left here, of course, but often a safe manoeuvre.

[Exhausted]

I do that sometimes. Especially if I am approaching my exit and the lane is clear right to the exit. Actually, the Americans have the right idea and pass legally in any lane. Then it doesn't really matter if someone hogs a lane.

Still a dodgy move for the reasons I have given and this is not America. Just because they do it over the pond where they never travel at more than 50mph, it wouldn't work here.

They also have "right turn on red after stop" at traffic lights in many states, which is a great idea. It would be left here, of course, but often a safe manoeuvre.

That might work. It certainly works for cyclists who in most cases are colour blind anyway.

[Strafin]

I'm sorry to say that that really is a dangerous attitude. An undertaking car might not be seen in the centre lane driver's mirror if he/she decides to move to the left after checking the rear view mirror. At even 30mph that will put both cars off the road if contact occurs and that would be your fault. Undertaking should only happen if all three lanes are moving slowly and this means at less than 15mph.

Of course I would expect anybody pulling across any lane to check their mirrors first, but of course some people don't. But most of the time, in fact all the times I have done this nobody has pulled across, why would they if they are middle lane focused? On the same note though, I do see a lot of people who indicate start to come across (right, to overtake), and then check their mirrors before suddenly pulling back in when they realise someone is there!

[Strafin]

The totally correct thing to do would obviously be slow down, leave a massive gap, pull out behind them, go across two lanes, overtake, indicate to come back and then manoeuvre back across two lanes again.

[Berkshirelad]

Just because they do it over the pond where they never travel at more than 50mph.

Where in heaven's name to you get that stupid idea from...?

[Exhausted]

Where in heaven's name to you get that stupid idea from...?

Does one always have to draw a winking eye

[blackdog]

I'm not saying it's an excuse but, if you are sat in the outside lane doing 65 when the inside lane is clear, then personally, I would maintain a good distance for a while, maybe a minute or so. If they do not move over, I will give a little flash from a safe distance.
If this does not work, I will close the gap slightly after a period of about 20 or 30 seconds (so about 3 flashes, every 10 seconds).
After this I would either undertake (sue me) or sit on the tail of the car infront**. Nothing annoys me more on the motorway or dual carriageways than people who sit in the middle/outside lane who are not going very fast when there is a perfectly clear inside lane to use.......

When have you come across a car in the outside lane doing 65 when the inside lane is clear? On motorways they are rarely going less than 80 unless it is really congested.

[Timbo]

Seems that I agree with Strain and JeffG.
Nice to know there are some people who actually understand driving...........

[Timbo]

A couple of still pics as in Timbo's post, don't really show the circumstances. If in the first picture, the two lanes are both popping along at 70mph as normally happens on the busy M4 during the 'rush hours' then moving left would not resolve any problem for the car behind. I'm not sure why you want to be angry with other road users who by experience know that dodging about in traffic to gain a couple of spaces probably only gains a couple of minutes at the end of the journey.
In the second picture I fail to see why you need to teach the driver a lesson. I have no idea what speed he was doing but what you suggest is a life threatening manouver and anyway, just overtake in the empty third lane and quietly get on with your journey. You will arrive less stressed and your heart rate will remain at a normal level boding well for your longevity.
And as far as Biker is concerned, don't shout.

Not threatening. I know how long my car is and will pull back past them as closely as is possible without being unsafe or causing an acident.
You do seem to be a bit ignorant to how motorways work. In both circumstances all of the cars pictured in the middle lane SHOULD be in the left hand-most lane irrespective of speed

[Andy Capp]

Not threatening. I know how long my car is and will pull back past them as closely as is possible without being unsafe or causing an acident.

Until the time you do.

[Timbo]

Then that'll be a sad day indeed.

[Exhausted]

Not threatening. I know how long my car is and will pull back past them as closely as is possible without being unsafe or causing an acident.
You do seem to be a bit ignorant to how motorways work. In both circumstances all of the cars pictured in the middle lane SHOULD be in the left hand-most lane irrespective of speed

Possibly, but why do you feel you need to force your superior knowledge of motorway driving on everybody who doesn't fit your plan. It's not your job. Just relax and act like a reasonable human being.

[HJD]

Just because they do it over the pond where they never travel at more than 50mph,

What gives you that idea, have you ever driven over there !!

[Exhausted]

What gives you that idea, have you ever driven over there !!

Oh for goodness sake......

It was a joke, I know they now travel at 65mph but it used to be much lower.

Ignore the Blues Brothers, it really isn't like that.

[Strafin]

Sometimes 75!

[NORTHENDER]

Very many states in the US have a 75 MPH limit and in two states it is 80. As I have said before on this forum they liked you to ride the Big 50 for safety and economy. The 50 campaign took place years ago.

[Timbo]

Possibly, but why do you feel you need to force your superior knowledge of motorway driving on everybody who doesn't fit your plan. It's not your job. Just relax and act like a reasonable human being.

I just expect people to know that they should use the left hand lane where possible. There's really no reason for it and no excuse to not.. my issue is normally they are the kind to just stare ahead, tunnel vision..

[Exhausted]

I just expect people to know that they should use the left hand lane where possible. There's really no reason for it and no excuse to not.. my issue is normally they are the kind to just stare ahead, tunnel vision..

If you really want to get your message across as part of your crusade, then get one of those illuminated boxes on your rear screen that pops up a suitable message that will make naughty drivers understand the error of their ways.

If there were more drivers around, like you, who are prepared to educate us in the error of our ways, I'm sure the roads and motorways would be a safer place.

Me, I have learned the errors of my way and will never move from the left hand lane and will allow you to drive by in your souped up, large braked vauxhall at ninety miles an hour, secure in the knowledge that with your considerate driving we will all be safer even though you feel that modifying your brakes is the same as having a bulb out.

Thank you and goodnight. Work tomorrow, see you on the M4 perhaps.

[Sherlock]

1 .Fully agree.
2. There is NEVER an excuse to tailgate. Period

Quite. Anyone who argues otherwise is unfit to drive.

Just to clarify what was happening on Friday, the tailgating occurred when cars and lorries were overtaking quite long lines of lorries. Often the cars overtaking were travelling at 70mph plus but were then aggressively tailgated by others which arrived in the overtaking queue at 80/90 mph. Those at the head of the tailgating queues had nowhere to go and yet were having headlights flashed at them.

I don't usually drive particularly slowly but the behaviour of a small number of incredibly stupid drivers on Friday stood out and I stuck at 50mph behind the slower traffic in the inside lane allowing plenty of space in case one of the morons triggered a crash. Having narrowly avoided a huge multiple vehicle pile up on the M6 many years ago (I was able to slip through on the inside lane) I try not to take chances. Walking back to that pile of mangled vehicles and people, the M6 suddenly silent apart from screams and sobs, is something I'll never forget.

[JeffG]

The 50 campaign took place years ago.

It used to be "Not over 55" when the oil crisis was on. (Crisis, what crisis?)

[Biker1]

And as far as Biker is concerned, don't shout.

Who's shouting?
It's an acronym - usually typified by CAPITAL LETTERS!

[Strafin]

Quite. Anyone who argues otherwise is unfit to drive.

Absolutely, the key to good driving in my book, is making sure you allow others the room to make their own mistakes.

[NORTHENDER]

It used to be "Not over 55" when the oil crisis was on. (Crisis, what crisis?)

We all know that the states have different rules from state to state and these can be a bit confusing at times, turning right on red lights being one of them. In general I find the driving in small town America is quite good and drivers much more polite to each other. City driving is city driving wherever you go, dog eat dog, bayonets fixed and charge.

[Timbo]

If you really want to get your message across as part of your crusade, then get one of those illuminated boxes on your rear screen that pops up a suitable message that will make naughty drivers understand the error of their ways.

No because that would truly make me a bit of a ****.

If there were more drivers around, like you, who are prepared to educate us in the error of our ways, I'm sure the roads and motorways would be a safer place.

To be honest if everyone used the correct lane and had better lane disclipline the motorways probably would be a safer place - the irony.

Me, I have learned the errors of my way and will never move from the left hand lane and will allow you to drive by in your souped up, large braked vauxhall at ninety miles an hour, secure in the knowledge that with your considerate driving we will all be safer even though you feel that modifying your brakes is the same as having a bulb out.

Thank you and goodnight. Work tomorrow, see you on the M4 perhaps.

Excellent. Although that is not what I'm saying. I'm just saying don't hog the middle lane because there is a lorry 1500 yards ahead, you're doing 65 and he's doing 56 that's a good 2 minutes before you catch and pass him. So move over!!
Again with the brakes.. lol........... In terms of legality it's exactly the same. I don't drive a Vauxhall.

Hope you had a pleasant evening. My journey to work is about 1.2 miles so... no.

[Jayjay]

The totally correct thing to do would obviously be slow down, leave a massive gap, pull out behind them, go across two lanes, overtake, indicate to come back and then manoeuvre back across two lanes again.

I have done that and I know it is the correct thing to do, but must admit most of the time I undertake the middle lane hogger.

[x2lls]

It appears to me that no matter how much you try to describe your own experience on here, it is never truly picked up on. There are even times when a reply completely distorts the original description.

No wonder there is chaos on the roads.

[Exhausted]

I have done that and I know it is the correct thing to do, but must admit most of the time I undertake the middle lane hogger.

One of the most dangerous manoeuvres that anyone can make on a motorway. I would hope that an unmarked up behind you will let you know the error of your ways one day hopefully before you cause a major.

[andy1979uk]

One of the most dangerous manoeuvres that anyone can make on a motorway. I would hope that an unmarked up behind you will let you know the error of your ways one day hopefully before you cause a major.

Depends how slow they are going, sometimes its not really undertaking as in you just drivr past them because they are donig 55 in the middle lane.

[Jayjay]

One of the most dangerous manoeuvres that anyone can make on a motorway. I would hope that an unmarked up behind you will let you know the error of your ways one day hopefully before you cause a major.

So I am doing 70 in the inside line. You are doing 60 in the middle [u]overtaking[u] lane - and you think I am in the wrong!

[Strafin]

One of the most dangerous manoeuvres that anyone can make on a motorway. I would hope that an unmarked up behind you will let you know the error of your ways one day hopefully before you cause a major.

Most countries allow it, so I don't think it is. I would say one of the most dangerous things you can do is change lanes without checking your mirrors.

[Berkshirelad]

One of the most dangerous manoeuvres that anyone can make on a motorway. I would hope that an unmarked up behind you will let you know the error of your ways one day hopefully before you cause a major.

Quite why 'an unmarked' would do anything is interesting. It is not illegal to overtake on the left if traffic in a lane to your right is moving more slowly.

What would cause comment from the Police is deliberately moving lanes to overtake on the nearside.

And I (of course) disagree that it is one of the most dangerous manoeuvres that anyone can make on a motorway - I take it that you have never driven on the M25

[Biker1]

One of the most dangerous manoeuvres that anyone can make on a motorway. I would hope that an unmarked up behind you will let you know the error of your ways one day hopefully before you cause a major.

With new legislation coming in it is more likely that the "unmarked" will pull over and book the CLOD.
I understand that centre lane hogging is to be made an offence, and about time!

[Timbo]

I think it is already an offence.
Driving in the middle lane would be classed as careless driving...

Although it's from the Daily Fail...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-21...tailgating.html

There is simply no excuse for sitting in the middle lane when you can use the inside lane. It's just ignorance.. no excuse.

http://www.howmotorwayswork.co.uk/middle_lane.htm

[Biker1]

Thanks for finding the link Timbo.
I knew I'd seen or heard it somewhere.
Now they need to fine those lorries that take about 3 miles to overtake on a 2 lane dual carriageway!

[JeffG]

I particularly like this quote:

Hugh Bladon, of the Association of British Motorists pressure group, said: 'A 50 per cent increase is excessive.
'People are struggling to pay their mortgage and feed their families. We shouldn't be piling more pressure on them.

... when their mortgages are being subsidised by savers with the current ridiculously low interest rates.

[Strafin]

I particularly like this quote:

... when their mortgages are being subsidised by savers with the current ridiculously low interest rates.

Wait, are you taking a very active thread off topic with a whine about not not getting enough free money?

[andy1979uk]

I particularly like this quote:

... when their mortgages are being subsidised by savers with the current ridiculously low interest rates.

I take it you dont have a mortgage then Jeff

[Timbo]

I particularly like this quote:

... when their mortgages are being subsidised by savers with the current ridiculously low interest rates.

Well no offense to those struggling on a mortgage, but if you can avoid a fine by driving in the correct lane then... surely it's easier to simply.. DRIVE IN THE CORRECT LANE?

After all you won't get fined for a minute or so, but if you sit in the middle lane for, 2 miles, for example, on an empty/quiet motorway, a fine is deserved in my eyes.

[blackdog]

Well no offense to those struggling on a mortgage, but if you can avoid a fine by driving in the correct lane then... surely it's easier to simply.. DRIVE IN THE CORRECT LANE?

After all you won't get fined for a minute or so, but if you sit in the middle lane for, 2 miles, for example, on an empty/quiet motorway, a fine is deserved in my eyes.

To be honesty I don't care if someone sits in the middle lane on an empty/quiet motorway - it's easy enough to overtake in the outside lane in those circumstances.

[Timbo]

Although it is in contradiction of what is basically the first-law of motoring? That is, use the furthest left hand lane at all times unless overtaking?

[Biker1]

To be honesty I don't care if someone sits in the middle lane on an empty/quiet motorway -

But why would they do that?
What's the point?
And anyway it is usually at busier times that they do it.

[Andy Capp]

But why would they do that?
What's the point?
And anyway it is usually at busier times that they do it.

If it is busier, then they'd have a legitimate right to be there, wouldn't they? They might be overtaking.

[blackdog]

If it is busier, then they'd have a legitimate right to be there, wouldn't they? They might be overtaking.

Which is the point really - hogging a lane when the motorway isn't busy causes no real inconvenience; hogging a lane when the motorway is busy(ish) does hold up traffic, but the hogs have a reason (they are slowly overtaking the traffic in the inner lane).

[Timbo]

It's the principle. If they don't use the correct lane when it's quiet do you really think they will when it's busy?

[Andy Capp]

It's the principle. If they don't use the correct lane when it's quiet do you really think they will when it's busy?

I'm not sure I understand the logic here!

[Strafin]

Running a red light is OK if there is nobody around then?

[Timbo]

I'm not sure I understand the logic here!

What I'm saying is, if they can't use the correct lane when it's quiet (thus absolutely no reason why to NOT use the correct lane) do you think they would when there is a lorry on the far horizon that they won't get past?

[Biker1]

If it is busier, then they'd have a legitimate right to be there, wouldn't they?

Only if the inside lane was occupied and they are overtaking.
You know as well as I do that this is often not the case.

They might be overtaking.

But more often they are not!

[Newbelly]

Only if the inside lane was occupied and they are overtaking.
You know as well as I do that this is often not the case.

But more often they are not!

I agree, Biker1.

"Middle lane cruisers" are lazy and/or selfish drivers, no matter how busy the motorway is.

[Andy Capp]

Only if the inside lane was occupied and they are overtaking. You know as well as I do that this is often not the case. But more often they are not!

I'm not sure that is true. When the motorway is busy then all lanes tend to get occupied.

"Middle lane cruisers" are lazy and/or selfish drivers, no matter how busy the motorway is.

Rather like drivers who insist they have a right to travel at over 80 mph, and I'd guess I see more of those than 'genuine' middle lane hoggers. When the outside lane is empty, I find middle lane hoggers are of little consequence to me.

[Newbelly]

I'm not sure that is true. When the motorway is busy then all lanes tend to get occupied.


Rather like drivers who insist they have a right to travel at over 80 mph, and I'd guess I see more of those than 'genuine' middle lane hoggers. When the outside lane is empty, I find middle lane hoggers are of little consequence to me.

What is a "genuine" middle lane hogger?