The WORST drivers, which cars do they drive?

[monkey104]

Let me clarify.

Driver breaks the speed limit.

Shortly afterwards the same driver then undertakes one of the most aggressive pieces of driving I`ve seen in the last few weeks.

Pure co-incidence ?

I don`t think so, do you (genuinely I mean) ?

 

---------- Post added 03-04-2016 at 21:07 ----------

 

 

Don`t worry about it, I`ve researched it and it`s the same posters who are personal and argumentative for the sake of it, so I just put them on my ignore list. I strongly advise all posters to do the same. The ignore button is very worthwhile..... Pulling a thread because people are being annoying on it is very much shooting the wrong target, it may even be what the trolls want. You should either delete all their posts on the thread, or temporarily ban them.

 

Is there any one on your ' do not ignore' list then

[steved32]

4x4 drivers... especially when emerging from junctions...out o' my way!

[Cyclone]

Maybe it did, like I said, I wouldn't think that because it used to be 60 that it hasn't been reduced for a good reason.

 

For the 3rd time. Can you explain HOW. How can a road be safe at 55mph on 11th Nov 2011, and dangerous at 55mph on the 12th Nov 2011?

Choosing to exceed it would make me a bad driver, just as choosing to do 100 in a 30 zone because I think it looks safe and I can handle it would make me bad driver. Incidentally, speeding by accident is also bad driving, somewhere along the lines you are not doing something you should.

I disagree with your statement. Choosing to exceed a speed limit does not automatically make you a bad driver, anymore than sticking to the speed limit makes you a good driver.

 

You are of course correct that driving too slowly can be dangerous, although the danger probably originates most from the impatience of other drivers, they then also are bad drivers.

I didn't make that point at all. I said that driving under the speed limit can still be excessive speed. 45 mph on the snake pass in the snow might be dangerous driving, despite being under the speed limit.

 

Exceeding the speed limit is bad driving. There is no situation where choosing to exceed the limit is not bad driving. Speeding by accident is bad driving because you are not paying due care and attention.

Repeating your assertion doesn't make it true.

 

Give me an example where speeding is not bad driving.

 

Since you think all speeding is by definition bad there's no scenario I can invent where you won't declare it to be bad.

Possibly the most obvious example would be on a motorway, where conditions are good and traffic is light, but it's entirely subjective, there is no proof that driving at 80mph is either good, indifferent or bad driving.

All of which leads me to claim that speed is not indicative of driving quality at all.

If you want to talk about excessive speed instead, then that's different. But excessive isn't determined by the posted limit.

[sgtkate]

For the 3rd time. Can you explain HOW. How can a road be safe at 55mph on 11th Nov 2011, and dangerous at 55mph on the 12th Nov 2011?

I disagree with your statement. Choosing to exceed a speed limit does not automatically make you a bad driver, anymore than sticking to the speed limit makes you a good driver.

I didn't make that point at all. I said that driving under the speed limit can still be excessive speed. 45 mph on the snake pass in the snow might be dangerous driving, despite being under the speed limit.

Repeating your assertion doesn't make it true.

 

Since you think all speeding is by definition bad there's no scenario I can invent where you won't declare it to be bad.

Possibly the most obvious example would be on a motorway, where conditions are good and traffic is light, but it's entirely subjective, there is no proof that driving at 80mph is either good, indifferent or bad driving.

All of which leads me to claim that speed is not indicative of driving quality at all.

If you want to talk about excessive speed instead, then that's different. But excessive isn't determined by the posted limit.

 

There's really no point cyclone. Some people live in a world made of black and white and without exact rules telling them how to behave and live they'd probably implode under the pressure of having to make their own judgements and decisions.

 

Yes speeding is 'bad' driving. It's illegal. Same as driving too close. Too slow. Not indicating. Using the wrong lane. Exiting a roundabout from a different lane from which you entered it. U-turns on main roads. Using a mobile phone. Doing make-up. Changing the radio station. Generally not paying attention.

 

If we were to look at all accidents over the last 10 years, how many do you think speed caused and how many did just generally 'poor' driving cause? Because whilst speeding may well be bad, the list above are responsible for far more accidents than speed ever will be, therefore my definition of bad driving would be the increased accident risk compared to if you weren't doing it. What do you think would happen if all speed limits were removed? Do you think everyone would rag it around at 90mph? Or do you perhaps think that *most* people would make a decision based upon their own brain cells and do a suitable speed for the road. I can't imagine I'd drive at more than 30mph in any built up area and in fact I do 20mph in most sections especially through housing estates and near schools because that's the right thing to do in my mind, I could blast it through doing 30mph though as that's the law. Motorways, yeah I'd likely do 100mph if it was quiet and dry. What exactly is the issue with this?

[L00b]

What exactly is the issue with this?

To understand that, going (again) by my experience yesterday, you'd have to visit enough of other drivers' heads at the material time to form a cohesive picture.

 

Me, after trying -again- on my drive up from Folkestone (M20>M25>M11>A1) yesterday afternoon, I just give up

 

The only good drivers that I saw, 2 of them, were a German in a German-plated rental (Hertz)Transit van, and a middle aged couple in a Vauxhall Signum.

 

In both cases fast (marginally faster than most of the traffic at 72-75, but not excessively nor recklessly at 80-83), smart and courteous, consistently and for a long time (German guy 'with me' from Folkestone to past Cambridge, Vauxhall from Dartford to Grantham, we were pretty much pace-setting for one another).

 

The worst/dumbest were, stereotypical accident of all stereotypical accidents, all driving Beemers. Without exception. All 3 incapable of maintaining speed over the merest of distance, and of adjusting to and allowing for conditions (traffic volume, speed differentials, visibility, etc.) and, basically, just being a nuisance to others.

 

I just don't get this (apparent) mentality in British drivers that when you are driving faster than them on cruise control (not much faster, say an extra 5 or 7 mph faster), and so eventually catch up to and overtake them, and then pull back left, still doing the same speed on cruise control, they just 'have to' overtake you again in short order.

 

And then pull back left in front of you. And over the course of the next mile or 2, slow back down to their 5/7 mph slower speed than yours. So that you catch them up again. And have to pass them again. <rinse-repeat>.

 

Are they bored, or just plain stupid?

Edited April 4, 2016 by L00b

[Fogey]

For the 3rd time. Can you explain HOW. How can a road be safe at 55mph on 11th Nov 2011, and dangerous at 55mph on the 12th Nov 2011?

 

Who said it was safe at 55?

How many things could change/be changed on a road overnight?

 

-I disagree with your statement. Choosing to exceed a speed limit does not automatically make you a bad driver, anymore than sticking to the speed limit makes you a good driver.

 

Yes it does. It shows you are unable to drive in accordance with the rules and requirements of the road.

 

-I didn't make that point at all. I said that driving under the speed limit can still be excessive speed. 45 mph on the snake pass in the snow might be dangerous driving, despite being under the speed limit.

 

My apologies, you are correct, being under the limit can be excessive speed, but the speed limit is the absolute maximum you should ever drive. There are no conditions in which you have a reason to speed.

 

-Repeating your assertion doesn't make it true.

 

No, but being true in the first place does.

 

-Since you think all speeding is by definition bad there's no scenario I can invent where you won't declare it to be bad.

 

That is because you are wrong and no such scenario exists.

 

-Possibly the most obvious example would be on a motorway, where conditions are good and traffic is light, but it's entirely subjective, there is no proof that driving at 80mph is either good, indifferent or bad driving.

 

It is bad driving because the limit is 70 and you MUST NOT exceed the speed limit. How hard can it be to control yourself and act in accordance with the law.

 

-All of which leads me to claim that speed is not indicative of driving quality at all.

If you want to talk about excessive speed instead, then that's different. But excessive isn't determined by the posted limit.

 

Not speeding is an absolute requirement. If you're not sticking to the limit then you're not controlling your car properly.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:21 ----------

 

There's really no point cyclone. Some people live in a world made of black and white and without exact rules telling them how to behave and live they'd probably implode under the pressure of having to make their own judgements and decisions.

 

Yes speeding is 'bad' driving. It's illegal. Same as driving too close. Too slow. Not indicating. Using the wrong lane. Exiting a roundabout from a different lane from which you entered it. U-turns on main roads. Using a mobile phone. Doing make-up. Changing the radio station. Generally not paying attention.

 

If we were to look at all accidents over the last 10 years, how many do you think speed caused and how many did just generally 'poor' driving cause? Because whilst speeding may well be bad, the list above are responsible for far more accidents than speed ever will be, therefore my definition of bad driving would be the increased accident risk compared to if you weren't doing it. What do you think would happen if all speed limits were removed? Do you think everyone would rag it around at 90mph? Or do you perhaps think that *most* people would make a decision based upon their own brain cells and do a suitable speed for the road. I can't imagine I'd drive at more than 30mph in any built up area and in fact I do 20mph in most sections especially through h

 

ousing estates and near schools because that's the right thing to do in my mind, I could blast it through doing 30mph though as that's the law. Motorways, yeah I'd likely do 100mph if it was quiet and dry. What exactly is the issue with this?

 

Speeding does make the risk of an accident higher and increases the risk of the accident being more serious. Given that a substantial number of motorists already think its OK to speed, do you think you would see many drivers choosing to try and do 90 in a 30 zone. Given some of the driving I see every day I think there would be more idiots driving excessively fast than perhaps you think.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:23 ----------

 

 

And then pull back left in front of you. And over the course of the next mile or 2, slow back down to their 5/7 mph slower speed than yours. So that you catch them up again. And have to pass them again. <rinse-repeat>.

 

Are they bored, or just plain stupid?

 

This I also just don't get. If you want to overtake, fine, overtake. But why then slow down, to slower than you were doing before?

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:34 ----------

 

Is it childish to sit in the fast lane of the motorway at 70 (speedo reading) preventing others from passing because you are "in the right" in a sort of petty way? Or is that ok?

 

---------- Post added 03-04-2016 at 22:25 ----------

 

I suspect someone may have to quote that post before it is read

 

---------- Post added 03-04-2016 at 22:49 ----------

 

 

I'm not sure what u mean by "bad". Do you mean naughty or dangerous? Or some other inference?

 

Sitting in the right hand lane is something you shouldn't really be doing at any speed. You should be overtaking. If the left hand lanes are clear you should move over. Anybody hogging the right hand lane is breaking the highway code and is a bad driver.

 

If you think its Ok to speed on the motorway, is the guy doing 80 and hogging the right hand lane selfish because the guy tailgating him wants to do 90? or 100?

I have to admit as I postulate this scenario that I can only envision BMW and Audi's being involved.

[RonJeremy]

Not speeding is an absolute requirement. If you're not sticking to the limit then you're not controlling your car properly.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:21 ----------

 

 

Speeding does make the risk of an accident higher and increases the risk of the accident being more serious. Given that a substantial number of motorists already think its OK to speed, do you think you would see many drivers choosing to try and do 90 in a 30 zone. Given some of the driving I see every day I think there would be more idiots driving excessively fast than perhaps you think.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:23 ----------

 

 

This I also just don't get. If you want to overtake, fine, overtake. But why then slow down, to slower than you were doing before?

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:34 ----------

 

 

Sitting in the right hand lane is something you shouldn't really be doing at any speed. You should be overtaking. If the left hand lanes are clear you should move over. Anybody hogging the right hand lane is breaking the highway code and is a bad driver.

 

If you think its Ok to speed on the motorway, is the guy doing 80 and hogging the right hand lane selfish because the guy tailgating him wants to do 90? or 100?

I have to admit as I postulate this scenario that I can only envision BMW and Audi's being involved.

 

The worst part of that scenario is the tailgater. Lock em up. Followed by the lane hogger.

[monkey104]

Not speeding is an absolute requirement. If you're not sticking to the limit then you're not controlling your car properly.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:21 ----------

 

 

Speeding does make the risk of an accident higher and increases the risk of the accident being more serious. Given that a substantial number of motorists already think its OK to speed, do you think you would see many drivers choosing to try and do 90 in a 30 zone. Given some of the driving I see every day I think there would be more idiots driving excessively fast than perhaps you think.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:23 ----------

 

 

This I also just don't get. If you want to overtake, fine, overtake. But why then slow down, to slower than you were doing before?

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:34 ----------

 

 

Sitting in the right hand lane is something you shouldn't really be doing at any speed. You should be overtaking. If the left hand lanes are clear you should move over. Anybody hogging the right hand lane is breaking the highway code and is a bad driver.

 

If you think its Ok to speed on the motorway, is the guy doing 80 and hogging the right hand lane selfish because the guy tailgating him wants to do 90? or 100?

I have to admit as I postulate this scenario that I can only envision BMW and Audi's being involved.

 

ah. That's what all those emergency service drivers are doing wrong then. Driving beyond the speed limit and not being in control of their vehicles.

You need to contact the Home office and tell them all their ' blues and twos' drivers are out of control. They may listen to you with all your experience and insight.

[RonJeremy]

Not speeding is an absolute requirement. If you're not sticking to the limit then you're not controlling your car properly.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:21 ----------

 

 

Speeding does make the risk of an accident higher and increases the risk of the accident being more serious. Given that a substantial number of motorists already think its OK to speed, do you think you would see many drivers choosing to try and do 90 in a 30 zone. Given some of the driving I see every day I think there would be more idiots driving excessively fast than perhaps you think.

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:23 ----------

 

 

This I also just don't get. If you want to overtake, fine, overtake. But why then slow down, to slower than you were doing before?

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 19:34 ----------

 

 

Sitting in the right hand lane is something you shouldn't really be doing at any speed. You should be overtaking. If the left hand lanes are clear you should move over. Anybody hogging the right hand lane is breaking the highway code and is a bad driver.

 

If you think its Ok to speed on the motorway, is the guy doing 80 and hogging the right hand lane selfish because the guy tailgating him wants to do 90? or 100?

I have to admit as I postulate this scenario that I can only envision BMW and Audi's being involved.

 

so Fogey... Bad meaning Naughty or bad meaning dangerous? Which is it?

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 20:39 ----------

 

ah. That's what all those emergency service drivers are doing wrong then. Driving beyond the speed limit and not being in control of their vehicles.

You need to contact the Home office and tell them all their ' blues and twos' drivers are out of control. They may listen to you with all your experience and insight.

 

:hihi:

Lock em up too

[Fogey]

so Fogey... Bad meaning Naughty or bad meaning dangerous? Which is it?

 

---------- Post added 04-04-2016 at 20:39 ----------

 

 

:hihi:

Lock em up too

 

Naughty driving and dangerous driving are both bad driving.