Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Retarded driving I seen yesterday

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Owen
    Registered Users Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    BlackWizard wrote: »
    Read the thread again stealthyspeeder. It was not a case of hogging the overtaking lane in any way.

    It's not so much this that I disagree with, it's the way he told the experience. 'Im see the Passat coming up behind me, I'm going to make him wait, I'm going fast enough'.

    What if (And I know this is a very very tired old argument) the Passat driver was a doctor on the way to an emergency?


  • Options
    #33
    cormie
    Registered Users Posts: 20,835 ✭✭✭✭cormie


    BlackWizard wrote: »
    But in the OPs case it was not. The OP was in the process of progressively overtaking other cars.

    We don't know that for certain though. The Passat could have cut in front of the OP out of aggression when there was plenty of room to increase the gap and pull back into the overtaking lane without the need for the OP to brake. There's too many variables to call it really and we're not aware of half of them.


  • Options
    #34
    BlackWizard
    Registered Users Posts: 3,282 ✭✭✭BlackWizard


    I think what you are talking about Paintdoctor is just road manners. I'm often overtaking and a car comes up behind me and I'm thinking to myself "I know I know I know.. I'll pull in soon".

    The OP I'm sure would of pulled into the left lane to let him go by if he was able to do so easily and then easily continue to overtake once again without taking too much of a risk or any heavy braking or dangerous lane merging.


  • Options
    #35
    norrie rugger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,656 ✭✭✭norrie rugger


    antodeco wrote: »


    I really need to find this mythical slow lane



    hmm, you never read road signs then?
    "Slow lane ends in 200m" is a favourite of mine.

    You know exactly what I mean, in referrence to the inside lane, and if it is good enough to be used on government road signs, then it should be good enough for you.


  • Options
    #36
    norrie rugger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,656 ✭✭✭norrie rugger


    PaintDoctor wrote: »
    What if (And I know this is a very very tired old argument) the Passat driver was a doctor on the way to an emergency?

    "What if" is not a defense


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    i ve got nothing to add...just want to join the arguement before it gets locked (sooner the better with threads like this which never change anyones attitude) Whoops I said something after all


    oh and another thing...happy chritsmas and safe motoring....:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #38
    BlackWizard
    Registered Users Posts: 3,282 ✭✭✭BlackWizard


    cormie wrote: »
    We don't know that for certain though. The Passat could have cut in front of the OP out of aggression when there was plenty of room to increase the gap and pull back into the overtaking lane without the need for the OP to brake. There's too many variables to call it really and we're not aware of half of them.

    Yup! We can only deal with what we know and the OPs word. I'm just taking the OPs word for now until he says otherwise. He said he was overtaking cars and there was a small gap in the left lane which the Passat used to undertake him causing him to slow down and brake in order to let the Passat enter the overtaking lane.

    I just find it aggressive and dangerous driving from the Passat.


  • Options
    #39
    stealthyspeeder
    Registered Users Posts: 4,663 ✭✭✭stealthyspeeder


    BlackWizard wrote: »
    Read the thread again stealthyspeeder. It was not a case of hogging the overtaking lane in any way.

    He was overtaking other cars.

    I think if you read it again, you find there is space for him to pull into the driving lane, let the car past and start another overtaking manouvere. This is what he should have done. Overtaking is not a continous manouvere, it has a start and a finish, it should end at the first available oppertunity to pull back into the driving lane, not continue indefinately because in a while which you judge appropriate, you will overtake other cars in the driving lane by travelling at your current speed.


  • Options
    #40
    BlackWizard
    Registered Users Posts: 3,282 ✭✭✭BlackWizard


    corktina wrote: »
    i ve got nothing to add...just want to join the arguement before it gets locked (sooner the better with threads like this which never change anyones attitude) Whoops I said something after all


    oh and another thing...happy chritsmas and safe motoring....:rolleyes:

    It's actually a great thread. :confused:

    The only out of norm posts is the OP calling some driver retarded :D


  • Options
    #41
    norrie rugger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,656 ✭✭✭norrie rugger


    PaintDoctor wrote: »
    Despite the fact. Go to the UK, or Germany and sit in the overtaking lane when a faster car is coming up behind you, see what happens then.

    Merge dangerously with the lane that you are overtaking, getting too close to the car in front and causing the car behind to brake suddenly?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    BlackWizard
    Registered Users Posts: 3,282 ✭✭✭BlackWizard


    norrie rugger wrote: »
    "What if" is not a defense

    But what if.. he was a paint doctor? ;)


  • Options
    #43
    Owen
    Registered Users Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    ROFL BlackWizard :D


  • Options
    #44
    norrie rugger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,656 ✭✭✭norrie rugger


    stealthyspeeder wrote: »
    I think if you read it again, you find there is space for him to pull into the driving lane, let the car past and start another overtaking manouvere. This is what he should have done. Overtaking is not a continous manouvere, it has a start and a finish, it should end at the first available oppertunity to pull back into the driving lane, not continue indefinately because in a while which you judge appropriate, you will overtake other cars in the driving lane by travelling at your current speed.

    If the passat "cut up" the car in lane 1, then there was not enough space for the manouvere


  • Options
    #45
    pagalinus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2 ✭pagalinus


    don't worry man... the retard in the passat has probably killed himself on the icey roads by now... so happy days !:)


  • Options
    #46
    craichoe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭craichoe


    PaintDoctor wrote: »
    Not in my experience - this year alone everything I've seen on the Motorways of the UK, Poland, Sardinia, Italy and Germany all suggest I'm not telling porkies.

    Course the really scary thing is I'm off to Poland again on Wednesday, and even though it's -15 there with plenty of snow and ice, there'll still be lemmings booting it in the overtaking lane.

    Its in the German Drivers theory test, your supposed to keep right when possible (Unless the Motorway has restrictions during certain hours, i.e. Trucks not allowed to overtake)

    You do not let a driver in overtaking lane force you unsafely rejoin the lane on the right.

    This is why the recommended speed-limit is 130km/h in Germany.

    If the guy in the Overtaking lane hits you and it is shown he/she was traveling over 130 km/h they are automatically in the wrong.

    Although at that point it doesn't really matter :)


  • Options
    #47
    cormie
    Registered Users Posts: 20,835 ✭✭✭✭cormie


    BlackWizard wrote: »
    Yup! We can only deal with what we know and the OPs word. I'm just taking the OPs word for now until he says otherwise. He said he was overtaking cars and there was a small gap in the left lane which the Passat used to undertake him causing him to slow down and brake in order to let the Passat enter the overtaking lane.

    I just find it aggressive and dangerous driving from the Passat.

    Yeah, sounds like a dangerous move by the passat alright but the "no way Ted" attitude can be the cause of increased danger. Awareness and consideration are key, and I'll say it again, especially in this weather, we've all got to be extra careful.


  • Options
    #48
    KamiKazi
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,201 ✭✭✭KamiKazi


    BlackWizard wrote: »
    He is still over taking. It's not a "fast" lane. Its for overtaking.

    But I agree it's frustrating sitting in your car while someone on front is only doing 5kph more than the other lane while overtaking. But you have to be patient and let the person complete the manoeuvre.


    Where did I say it was a fast lane?

    There is safe and unsafe overtaking, if you can't put the boot down and get by the vehicle you're overtaking promptly you're better off staying in the driving lane and going back to doing your hair / makeup / eating your cereal or whatever.


  • Options
    #49
    stealthyspeeder
    Registered Users Posts: 4,663 ✭✭✭stealthyspeeder


    norrie rugger wrote: »
    If the passat "cut up" the car in lane 1, then there was not enough space for the manouvere
    "No way Ted" I thought but he wasn't gonna wait so he cut into the left lane where there was a gap, floored it and then drove out in front of me again causing me to brake.

    At 120km/h, the passat would have to wait until it could move into the driving lane, (which would indicate that at minimum the OP would have to be a car to a car and a halfs length in front of the car that it just overtook) in order for the Passat to get into the driving lane, the passat woul then have to accelerate from 120 to a speed at which it could get in front of the the OP (in order to be in a situation where "cutting him up" would be possible). Now correct me if im wrong, but I dont think that Passats 120 - ~140 kmph time is blistering quick.

    This would mean there was a car and a half length in front of the car the OP overtook + the distance it took for a Passat at full throttle from 120 kmph to get in front of the OP. If the OP had not taken the "No way Ted" high horse, I'll police the roads option, he could have pulled in safely in this distance and let "Ted" pass, then get back to driving correctly and overtaking the next car.


  • Options
    #50
    norrie rugger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,656 ✭✭✭norrie rugger


    stealthyspeeder wrote: »
    At 120km/h, the passat would have to wait until it could move into the driving lane, (which would indicate that at minimum the OP would have to be a car to a car and a halfs length in front of the car that it just overtook) in order for the Passat to get into the driving lane, the passat woul then have to accelerate from 120 to a speed at which it could get in front of the the OP (in order to be in a situation where "cutting him up" would be possible). Now correct me if im wrong, but I dont think that Passats 120 - ~140 kmph time is blistering quick.

    This would mean there was a car and a half length in front of the car the OP overtook + the distance it took for a Passat at full throttle from 120 kmph to get in front of the OP. If the OP had not taken the "No way Ted" high horse, I'll police the roads option, he could have pulled in safely in this distance and let "Ted" pass, then get back to driving correctly and overtaking the next car.
    roosterman71 wrote: »
    True

    I judged it unsafe to pull into a line moving close to 120kph when I was moving faster than it and going to be overtaking it in less than 5 seconds. The guy behind me pulled into the gap, cutting off 1 car on the inside and then doing the same to me.


    There may have been enough room to pull in but we are going on the word of the OP, on this situation and it seems that there was not enough room to safely perform this manouvere.

    If you are meant to leave "2 seconds" of drive time between both the car in front and, also, behind; what is the distance of this @ 120kmh? (including the length of the OP's car)

    Edit
    Terrible at math but it seems to be approximately 135 Metres: so if there was not this amount of room, he should not have pulled in


  • Options
    #51
    roosterman71
    Registered Users Posts: 5,394 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    I'll just clear up a few things.

    Firstly, it was around 5 yesterday evening so there wasn't much ice, and the gritters were out at that time doing their jobs.

    I was driving along at the aforementioned speed in the "driving lane". Ahead was a queue of traffic so I moved into the overtaking lane. At this point, there was lights behind, but I couldn't make out what lane they were in due to their distance back. It certainly didn't look like anyone was coming along at excessive speed.
    I passed 4/5 cars and at this stage the passat was up my exhaust flashing. After the 6th car (which I was passing while he flashed), there was a gap which I deemed unsuitable to pull into as I was moving faster than the next car (I'd have to pull in and brake to avoid being stuck to their boot). I decided the best course of action was to pass the remaining 2 cars and then pull into the free inside lane.
    The passat though pulled in and seemed to cut off the car I'd just overtaken (they decelerated so I assume they hit the brakes). He then pulled along side me and continued on and then pulled back out into my path causing me to also brake. Another 10 seconds and I'd have cleared all the cars and pulled in.

    I'm not one for policing the roads, but I am entitled to overtake as much as the next guy. And as I was doing it more than rapidly then I can't see why I'm being accused of road policing and the like. Alot of driving is about decision making, and I stick 100% to my decision not to pull into a lane of slower moving traffic, hit the brakes just to let someone go past when a few seconds later the road would be available when my manouver was done.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    cormie
    Registered Users Posts: 20,835 ✭✭✭✭cormie


    Thanks for clearing that up. Passat driver definitely in the wrong here. As you described, you were right to stick to your decision to continue to overtake. No matter how much faster you were going than the cars you were overtaking. The fact of the matter is, if you're going even just a little faster, it's fair to overtake. People complain about slow vehicles overtaking other slow vehicles but it's fair for them to do this. In my luton transit, it's terribly slow to overtake but when there is a suitable gap I'll do it. If I'm gained on in the time I'm half way through the manoeuvre, it's fair for me to complete it. If I'm gained on before, I'll move back in and wait again.


  • Options
    #53
    Pkiernan
    Registered Users Posts: 4,315 ✭✭✭Pkiernan


    My reaction to this situation would depend on what I was driving.

    If driving the old battered pickup, then the car behind would be performing a real-life brake system check when the dog/child/horse/slower vehicle he didn't see appeared magically in front of me.

    If driving my nice car, then I would just move over when safe to do so.

    A lot of drivers fail to appreciate how dangerous the act of driving can be. After 22 years of driving, I tend to stick to the left most lanes whenever possible.


  • Options
    #54
    omega man
    Registered Users Posts: 4,758 ✭✭✭omega man


    In fairness I think the OP was in the right in this case. It's the 3 lane M50 scenario that is really raising my blood pressure! The OP's example happens now and then (always will sadly) but not on the scale of the 'mass' ignorance of drivers on the M50 etc.


  • Options
    #55
    folan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭folan


    *dont mention the war*


  • Options
    #56
    HermitHorace
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭HermitHorace


    I had to endure some lady strolling along at just over 30mph in parts on the N7 in tipp. Now yes there was some snow on the ground but come on, 30 mph! She quite happily strolled away with 15+ cars accumulating behind her.

    When I eventually passed her out, she looked at me as if I was a lunatic.

    People like her will never be in an accident but will cause some.


  • Options
    #57
    antodeco
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 13,449 ✭✭✭✭antodeco


    norrie rugger wrote: »
    hmm, you never read road signs then?
    "Slow lane ends in 200m" is a favourite of mine.

    You know exactly what I mean, in referrence to the inside lane, and if it is good enough to be used on government road signs, then it should be good enough for you.

    Firstly, nothing the Government does is good enough for me at this point, but this is not the political forum. The slow lane you referenced in your OP, was on a Motorway. There is NO slow lane on a motorway. Yes, I did know what you meant, but doesnt mean it you are correct in your understanding. If its good enough for you, it doesnt mean it exists.


  • Options
    #58
    norrie rugger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,656 ✭✭✭norrie rugger


    antodeco wrote: »
    Firstly, nothing the Government does is good enough for me at this point, but this is not the political forum. The slow lane you referenced in your OP, was on a Motorway. There is NO slow lane on a motorway. Yes, I did know what you meant, but doesnt mean it you are correct in your understanding. If its good enough for you, it doesnt mean it exists.

    There is a difference in referring to the overtaking lane as the "fast lane" and the inside lane as slow lane, as that is where you are meant to drive.
    Calling the overtaking lane the Fast Lane indicates that you are allowed to remain driving there, as long as you are going fast. Calling it the slow lane is a figure of speech, incorrect technically but gets the meaning through.

    Being pedantic and having an insulting manner in your responce post, is not conducive to discussion, as it completely takes a tangent from the discussion at hand


  • Options
    #59
    antodeco
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 13,449 ✭✭✭✭antodeco


    norrie rugger wrote: »
    There is a difference in referring to the overtaking lane as the "fast lane" and the inside lane as slow lane, as that is where you are meant to drive.
    Calling the overtaking lane the Fast Lane indicates that you are allowed to remain driving there, as long as you are going fast. Calling it the slow lane is a figure of speech, incorrect technically but gets the meaning through.

    Being pedantic and having an insulting manner in your responce post, is not conducive to discussion, as it completely takes a tangent from the discussion at hand

    I do believe it was your pedantics and insulting manner of my original post that started this. First stone and all that. Anyway, I agree with you, this is holding nothing for the post. Agree to disagree over representative terminology and move on?


  • Options
    #60
    BlackWizard
    Registered Users Posts: 3,282 ✭✭✭BlackWizard


    Thread has kinda lost it's momentum... The OP needs to give us some extra vague information that could imply anything, from which we will tear each other apart over who is right or wrong. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    roosterman71
    Registered Users Posts: 5,394 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    BlackWizard wrote: »
    Thread has kinda lost it's momentum... The OP needs to give us some extra vague information that could imply anything, from which we will tear each other apart over who is right or wrong. :)

    Am, it was a black passat :D


Advertisement