Cycling UK Forum

This is an interesting thread.

"it is completely unacceptable to hold up other road users "

"it is indicative of someone lacking confidence"

"It causes frustration, and after following the slow car for a few miles, people tend to take risks, trying to overtake where it's not really safe"

"you need to be very aware of the other traffic and get out of its way"

"at best you're not a competent, confident driver and at worst you're just plain thoughtless"

"if it incites others to overtake inappropriately, then it can be a cause of collisions"

"Go a bit faster - you never know, you might enjoy it"

I guess drivers often think that when they are behind me, the funny thing is I always get a massive gap behind me when passing speed cameras, even if they were tailgating me 200m before.

I can see both sides to this. There is no reason for a motorist to be intentionally obstructing others. However, I have ended up stuck behind such a driver comparatively rarely. IME many queues develop behind drivers travelling at a safe speed because the following drivers are used to travelling faster. I am tailgated nearly every time I stick to the local posted 20mph limit. The "derestricted" national speed limit for single carriageway roads is a pet hate of mine. Some drivers have an unrealistic (or at least undesirable) expectation of driving along such roads at 60mph where conditions are plainly unsuitable.

As a cyclist, pedestrian, motorist and member of society, I feel that motor speeds are generally too high. The expectation (and perceived entitlement) of proceeding at a given speed creates hostility on the roads. Speed is increasingly being determined by desire to make progress rather than considerations of safe speeds for conditions, the safety of other road users and being able to stop well within a distance which can be seen to be clear.

Incidentally, it is interesting to note the motor-centric terminology we're accepting. We are implicitly accepting the idea that the faster vehicle has a right to proceed at the higher speed. The slower vehicle (active) is "holding up" the faster one (passive). One vehicle being behind another is no more the result of the one vehicle's speed than it is of the other's.

Bicycler wrote:Incidentally, it is interesting to note the motor-centric terminology we're accepting. We are implicitly accepting the idea that the faster vehicle has a right to proceed at the higher speed. The slower vehicle (active) is "holding up" the faster one (passive). One vehicle being behind another is no more the result of the one vehicle's speed than it is of the other's.

Yes - in fact the second vehicle is attempting to overtake. But that manoeuvre itself requires a "when safe" condition.

Bicycler wrote:As a cyclist, pedestrian, motorist and member of society, I feel that motor speeds are generally too high.

I agree with this. I have a car with small wheels and limited grip (a Citroën C1), and if I try to keep up with normal traffic flow on wet roads I sometimes end up dangerously close to the car’s traction limit. It follows that many other cars are also close to their limits, and in many cases their drivers probably have no idea.

For this reason, and others, I do regularly drive a bit slower than the speed limit. I see nothing wrong with that.

French drivers are probably even faster than British ones, though. The motorway speed limits here are also uncomfortably high (130 km/h, with many drivers cruising slightly above that).

'The speed limit is not a target' - Best advice I've been given

Dynamite_funk wrote:'The speed limit is not a target' - Best advice I've been given

You very naughty person!

Don't you realise that drivers are the best people to decide their speed regardless of any laws, road conditions, pedestrians or other road users

There is the posted ‘Speed limit’ and there is the ACPO threshold for conviction.

In a 20, its 20 + 10% + 2 = 24 mph.

In a 30, its 30 + 10% + 2 = 35 mph

In a newly posted 50 Rural limit, its 50 +10% + 2 = 57 mph.

In a rural 50, this gives motorists opportunity to drive at 90 kmh ( 56 mph ) which is the maximum efficiency speed for their vehicle, thus reducing CO2 emissions.

Additionally, there is ‘speedo flattery’ where the displayed speedo reading is higher than the true velocity, maybe by 3 mph.

A motorist driving along with the speedo needle bang on 30, could be rolling at 27. In a 30 posted limit, that driver is driving 8 mph slower than the ACPO summons guidelines for prosecution.

A driver driving at what he thinks is 30, but in reality is 27, WILL annoy a motorist with a more accurate speedometer showing 27 mph.

A cute motorist will analyse his speedo against a satnav to establish a ‘ballpark’ figure for ‘speedo flattery’. He will use this in conjunction with the ACPO guidelines to roll at a speed within the ACPO guidelines which does not obstruct OR is dangerous.

Ayesha wrote:There is the posted ‘Speed limit’ and there is the ACPO threshold for conviction.

In a 20, its 20 + 10% + 2 = 24 mph.

In a 30, its 30 + 10% + 2 = 35 mph

But the legal limit is the posted speed limit. Exceeding the speed limit (20, 30, 40 etc.) is an offence. That some leeway is allowed before the police consider it worthwhile issuing a fine does not alter the legal requirement to stick to the speed limit. Such leeway only exists because of catering to the motor lobby and newspaper hysteria about innocent drivers being victims of a "war on the motorist" when caught inadvertently exceeding a limit by a tiny amount. Suggesting (correctly) that motorists misuse this leeway increasing their speeds to drive exceeding the limit but within the threshold neatly undermines their silly arguments.

Ayesha wrote:A driver driving at what he thinks is 30, but in reality is 27, WILL annoy a motorist with a more accurate speedometer showing 27 mph.

...and with anger management issues(!) The 3mph difference will make such a negligible difference to the progress and overall journey time of the following driver and yet many do get angry. They get angry not because of any real inconvenience caused by the slower vehicle but because of their expectation that they will be able to progress at or above the limit.

Ayesha wrote:A cute motorist will analyse his speedo against a satnav to establish a ‘ballpark’ figure for ‘speedo flattery’. He will use this in conjunction with the ACPO guidelines to roll at a speed within the ACPO guidelines which does not obstruct OR is dangerous.

Except that it would still be illegal to exceed the posted speed limit despite being under the threshold for prosecution. Anyway, all this "cute" motorist will have done is increase his speed and thus create a bigger differential between himself and those travelling at the speed limit or below. In time he becomes accustomed to this speed and builds it into his expectations and becomes more annoyed at the legal motorists he perceives to be an obstruction. A good example of the point I was making earlier about causation.

Furthermore, it’s not true that 90 km/h is the most efficient speed of all vehicles. Most modern vehicles have peak fuel efficiencies at lower speeds, sometimes much lower. (Largely because a great deal of effort has gone into reducing pumping losses at low throttle settings (e.g. by direct injection and down-sizing) in modern engines.)

Bicycler wrote: I am tailgated nearly every time I stick to the local posted 20mph limit.

Also on dual carriageways and motorways when it slows to 50mph for road works, I'm doing 50mph at the sign and will always get loads of overtakers. I'm so used to that, that when I did that on an empty dual carriageway on a Sunday morning it was quite disconcerting to slow to 50mph and *not* have other cars flying past me.

Actually, that's how the tailgating starts. Not only do I obstruct the traffic by sticking to the limit, I selfishly slow to the speed limit by the time I have arrived at the sign. Sometimes I have the audacity to not even brake heavily from 30 but ease off the accelerator over 50 yards or so.

There's a 90 degree corner later in this alleged 20mph zone with a pedestrian island a short distance after. The other week somebody told me how they'd "had to slam on" after going round the corner and finding that "some idiot in a mobility scooter had decided to cross there"

OnYourRight wrote:Furthermore, it’s not true that 90 km/h is the most efficient speed of all vehicles. Most modern vehicles have peak fuel efficiencies at lower speeds, sometimes much lower. (Largely because a great deal of effort has gone into reducing pumping losses at low throttle settings (e.g. by direct injection and down-sizing) in modern engines.)

I'm not sure about that - In my modern(ish) turbo diesel, my economy is pretty constant between 60 and 70 + 10% + 2 mph. Admittedly, it is difficult to find roads where it is possible to drive at slower speeds without regular slowing down and stopping for other road users. Sometimes even for cyclists.

I always stick to speed limits. I don't see why I should break the law in order to be an accessory to the law breaking of others.

A slightly aging but somewhat relevant thread from an advanced driving forum http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4611