Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: YZ250 on 07 September 2014, 17:15:16
-
If I've got a clear run ahead of me on motorways I tend to use cruise control, more so to maintain a sensible speed. On a long motorway journey yesterday, I'd set the cruise control to 70mph and, as the road ahead was clear, I sat in lane one. Some of the cars that were overtaking me, at a few mph more than me, eased off through lack of concentration, which meant they slowly drifted back so that I glided up the inside of them.
Mrs YZ had a right pop at me, saying that I had undertaken them, which strictly speaking I had. ::) I told her that I had done nothing but maintain the same speed.
My questions are, assuming road ahead is clear:
1. Am I expected to switch cruise off every time some arse in lane two doesn't concentrate and drifts to a slower speed than I'm travelling at?
2. Why do they even bother going past me when they are going to do this?
In my younger days I would have just hoofed it so that I put about ten miles between me and them, but you can't do that these days can you. ;)
Anybody else suffer this?
-
Yep,
If I got time on my hands I tend to cruise it at 76.9 Mph, then all the clock gauges become static, ...except the petrol gauge ::).
-
If other motorists are getting in the way when you have your cruise control on at 70 then it is best to turn it off or do, as Zirk suggests, set it to 75-80. Other than that you note when the car ahead in the middle lane is slowing down and pull out, accelerate to overtake, then once safely past, pull back in and resume using the cruise control.
I personally set it at 80 only when the road is empty, but nowadays that is rare and it is just not safe enough to use. I just adjust my speed to road conditions and the speed other vehicles are travelling at ;)
-
If other motorists are getting in the way when you have your cruise control on at 70 then it is best to turn it off or do, as Zirk suggests, set it to 75-80. Other than that you note when the car ahead in the middle lane is slowing down and pull out, accelerate to overtake, then once safely past, pull back in and resume using the cruise control.
I personally set it at 80 only when the road is empty, but nowadays that is rare and it is just not safe enough to use. I just adjust my speed to road conditions and the speed other vehicles are travelling at ;)
Strictly speaking they are not in my way as my adaptive cruise sees a clear passage ahead. ;D
Surely going over 70mph is illegal though. ;)
-
I think this is based on a misenterpritation of undertaking.
It would be rediculous for you to stop in an empty lane if, for example, the person in the lane to your right stops. By that measure. If lane 3 becomes congested, and slows to 30mph say, then everyone in lanes 1 and 2 should slow and go no faster than 30 even though the road in front is empty.
This is rediculous.
The definition of undertaking is a deliberate move to a left lane instead if a right lane in order to pass another vehicle.
IMO this is all part of the fact that nobody in the uk has been trained on motorway driving, or passed any form of assessment. Couple that with heavily congested roads and all sorts of strange ideas cone up.
All that happened in your thinly discized domestic ;) example was somebody slowed down for no apparent reason.
There are some here that firmly believe that sitting in lane 2 when lane one is empty is perfectly acceptable and their Devine right. Even though keeping left is a major principle of motorway driving, it's 3 points and a fine if caught, and not to mention extremely inconsiderate.
I mention this only because, your person in lane 2 should really be in lane 1.
But then, they've had no training either.
-
?......accelerate to overtake......
Ah yes, that was the bit that got me in trouble recently. ;D
-
If I've got a clear run ahead of me on motorways I tend to use cruise control, more so to maintain a sensible speed. On a long motorway journey yesterday, I'd set the cruise control to 70mph and, as the road ahead was clear, I sat in lane one. Some of the cars that were overtaking me, at a few mph more than me, eased off through lack of concentration, which meant they slowly drifted back so that I glided up the inside of them.
Mrs YZ had a right pop at me, saying that I had undertaken them, which strictly speaking I had. ::) I told her that I had done nothing but maintain the same speed.
My questions are, assuming road ahead is clear:
1. Am I expected to switch cruise off every time some arse in lane two doesn't concentrate and drifts to a slower speed than I'm travelling at?
2. Why do they even bother going past me when they are going to do this?
In my younger days I would have just hoofed it so that I put about ten miles between me and them, but you can't do that these days can you. ;)
Anybody else suffer this?
Apart from the fact its the law they should pull over into lane 1, when they have overtaken you, so when they slow down, you can move over to lane 2 and overtake them.
Maintaining a constant speed in lane 1 and 'undertaking' them isnt considered as undertaking, as long as you stay in lane 1.
An example of undertaking would be ...
lane 3 to lane 2 to get past car in lane 3 then back to lane 3
So in the eyes of law as i see it, you were correct and your other half wrong, technically...i think....and in my example.....if the car in lane 3 wasnt actually overtaking anything....then they could considered as breaking the law....as they should have moved over to lane 2 or 1 as appropriate....
But im sure the law (ex or not) will be along to say im talking 'dangle berries' or not :y
-
It is a fairly common thing for folk to overtake then slow down to less than they were doing before. Just another example of some peoples inability to drive properly and considerately. One we get a lot over here is driving slowly through twisty bits and then they hoof it the minute they see a bit of straight.
The answer Cam of course is to buy or hire a driverless car. You can then be texting, reading, sleeping etc while the car takes the stress out of driving.
-
I think that generally the British have very poor lane discipline. In France drivers are quite happy to move over to let other cars pass, you don't often see the outside lane camel trains that we get here.
I think it is a combination of stubbornesss and self righteousness.
Stubborness " No will will not let him pass, why should I "
Self Righteousness "The speed limit is 70, that's what I'm doing and so should everyone else "
There is a 3rd group that is completely unaware of anything behind them, frequently these are Range Rovers ;D
-
On a trip to Cornwall a few years ago we must of passed the same car on the same stretch 15 times. I'm not saying which but one if the drivers obviously wasn't as confident on un lit sections as there where on sections with street lights. :-X
-
If I've got a clear run ahead of me on motorways I tend to use cruise control, more so to maintain a sensible speed. On a long motorway journey yesterday, I'd set the cruise control to 70mph and, as the road ahead was clear, I sat in lane one. Some of the cars that were overtaking me, at a few mph more than me, eased off through lack of concentration, which meant they slowly drifted back so that I glided up the inside of them.
Mrs YZ had a right pop at me, saying that I had undertaken them, which strictly speaking I had. ::) I told her that I had done nothing but maintain the same speed.
My questions are, assuming road ahead is clear:
1. Am I expected to switch cruise off every time some arse in lane two doesn't concentrate and drifts to a slower speed than I'm travelling at?
2. Why do they even bother going past me when they are going to do this?
In my younger days I would have just hoofed it so that I put about ten miles between me and them, but you can't do that these days can you. ;)
Anybody else suffer this?
Apart from the fact its the law they should pull over into lane 1, when they have overtaken you, so when they slow down, you can move over to lane 2 and overtake them.
Maintaining a constant speed in lane 1 and 'undertaking' them isnt considered as undertaking, as long as you stay in lane 1.
An example of undertaking would be ...
lane 3 to lane 2 to get past car in lane 3 then back to lane 3
So in the eyes of law as i see it, you were correct and your other half wrong, technically...i think....and in my example.....if the car in lane 3 wasnt actually overtaking anything....then they could considered as breaking the law....as they should have moved over to lane 2 or 1 as appropriate....
But im sure the law (ex or not) will be along to say im talking 'dangle berries' or not :y
That was my take on it as well. :y
-
If I've got a clear run ahead of me on motorways I tend to use cruise control, more so to maintain a sensible speed. On a long motorway journey yesterday, I'd set the cruise control to 70mph and, as the road ahead was clear, I sat in lane one. Some of the cars that were overtaking me, at a few mph more than me, eased off through lack of concentration, which meant they slowly drifted back so that I glided up the inside of them.
Mrs YZ had a right pop at me, saying that I had undertaken them, which strictly speaking I had. ::) I told her that I had done nothing but maintain the same speed.
My questions are, assuming road ahead is clear:
1. Am I expected to switch cruise off every time some arse in lane two doesn't concentrate and drifts to a slower speed than I'm travelling at?
2. Why do they even bother going past me when they are going to do this?
In my younger days I would have just hoofed it so that I put about ten miles between me and them, but you can't do that these days can you. ;)
Anybody else suffer this?
Apart from the fact its the law they should pull over into lane 1, when they have overtaken you, so when they slow down, you can move over to lane 2 and overtake them.
Maintaining a constant speed in lane 1 and 'undertaking' them isnt considered as undertaking, as long as you stay in lane 1.
An example of undertaking would be ...
lane 3 to lane 2 to get past car in lane 3 then back to lane 3
So in the eyes of law as i see it, you were correct and your other half wrong, technically...i think....and in my example.....if the car in lane 3 wasnt actually overtaking anything....then they could considered as breaking the law....as they should have moved over to lane 2 or 1 as appropriate....
But im sure the law (ex or not) will be along to say im talking 'dangle berries' or not :y
That was my take on it as well. :y
And mine. :y
You can have an empty motorway & members of the Middle Lane Owners Club will still be in the middle lane ....... no way will I move to lane 3 to overtake them. At best I'll flash them while I'm still in lane 1 to give them the oportunity to move over, other than that I'll stay in lane 1 - assuming of course I'm doing a legalish speed ::) ::)
-
If I've got a clear run ahead of me on motorways I tend to use cruise control, more so to maintain a sensible speed. On a long motorway journey yesterday, I'd set the cruise control to 70mph and, as the road ahead was clear, I sat in lane one. Some of the cars that were overtaking me, at a few mph more than me, eased off through lack of concentration, which meant they slowly drifted back so that I glided up the inside of them.
Mrs YZ had a right pop at me, saying that I had undertaken them, which strictly speaking I had. ::) I told her that I had done nothing but maintain the same speed.
My questions are, assuming road ahead is clear:
1. Am I expected to switch cruise off every time some arse in lane two doesn't concentrate and drifts to a slower speed than I'm travelling at?
2. Why do they even bother going past me when they are going to do this?
In my younger days I would have just hoofed it so that I put about ten miles between me and them, but you can't do that these days can you. ;)
Anybody else suffer this?
Apart from the fact its the law they should pull over into lane 1, when they have overtaken you, so when they slow down, you can move over to lane 2 and overtake them.
Maintaining a constant speed in lane 1 and 'undertaking' them isnt considered as undertaking, as long as you stay in lane 1.
An example of undertaking would be ...
lane 3 to lane 2 to get past car in lane 3 then back to lane 3
So in the eyes of law as i see it, you were correct and your other half wrong, technically...i think....and in my example.....if the car in lane 3 wasnt actually overtaking anything....then they could considered as breaking the law....as they should have moved over to lane 2 or 1 as appropriate....
But im sure the law (ex or not) will be along to say im talking 'dangle berries' or not :y
That was my take on it as well. :y
And mine. :y
You can have an empty motorway & members of the Middle Lane Owners Club will still be in the middle lane ....... no way will I move to lane 3 to overtake them. At best I'll flash them while I'm still in lane 1 to give them the oportunity to move over, other than that I'll stay in lane 1 - assuming of course I'm doing a legalish speed ::) ::)
If you are on a highly congested motorway, such as the M25, M6, etc, where you are in lines of traffic that is also occupying all the lanes then as long as you move ahead at the same speed as the traffic in front of you, you can pass the other vehicles in the lanes to your right that may be stationery, or just moving at a slower speed than the traffic in your lane. That is perfectly acceptable in the eyes of the law.
However, if you are on a freely moving motorway where there are no queues in each lane and there is space to overtake slower moving vehicles in the lanes to the left, or in front of you (i.e. in lane 2, with lane 3 free), then you must overtake in the normal manner, NOT undertake which is illegal. ;)
-
I should clarify that none of these cars had overtaken me, they were in the process of overtaking. They hadn't cleared my car enough to pull back in or for me to overtake them. :y
-
If I've got a clear run ahead of me on motorways I tend to use cruise control, more so to maintain a sensible speed. On a long motorway journey yesterday, I'd set the cruise control to 70mph and, as the road ahead was clear, I sat in lane one. Some of the cars that were overtaking me, at a few mph more than me, eased off through lack of concentration, which meant they slowly drifted back so that I glided up the inside of them.
Mrs YZ had a right pop at me, saying that I had undertaken them, which strictly speaking I had. ::) I told her that I had done nothing but maintain the same speed.
My questions are, assuming road ahead is clear:
1. Am I expected to switch cruise off every time some arse in lane two doesn't concentrate and drifts to a slower speed than I'm travelling at?
2. Why do they even bother going past me when they are going to do this?
In my younger days I would have just hoofed it so that I put about ten miles between me and them, but you can't do that these days can you. ;)
Anybody else suffer this?
Apart from the fact its the law they should pull over into lane 1, when they have overtaken you, so when they slow down, you can move over to lane 2 and overtake them.
Maintaining a constant speed in lane 1 and 'undertaking' them isnt considered as undertaking, as long as you stay in lane 1.
An example of undertaking would be ...
lane 3 to lane 2 to get past car in lane 3 then back to lane 3
So in the eyes of law as i see it, you were correct and your other half wrong, technically...i think....and in my example.....if the car in lane 3 wasnt actually overtaking anything....then they could considered as breaking the law....as they should have moved over to lane 2 or 1 as appropriate....
But im sure the law (ex or not) will be along to say im talking 'dangle berries' or not :y
That was my take on it as well. :y
And mine. :y
You can have an empty motorway & members of the Middle Lane Owners Club will still be in the middle lane ....... no way will I move to lane 3 to overtake them. At best I'll flash them while I'm still in lane 1 to give them the oportunity to move over, other than that I'll stay in lane 1 - assuming of course I'm doing a legalish speed ::) ::)
If you are on a highly congested motorway, such as the M25, M6, etc, where you are in lines of traffic that is also occupying all the lanes then as long as you move ahead at the same speed as the traffic in front of you, you can pass the other vehicles in the lanes to your right that may be stationery, or just moving at a slower speed than the traffic in your lane. That is perfectly acceptable in the eyes of the law.
However, if you are on a freely moving motorway where there are no queues in each lane and there is space to overtake slower moving vehicles in the lanes to the left, or in front of you (i.e. in lane 2, with lane 3 free), then you must overtake in the normal manner, NOT undertake which is illegal. ;)
Not quite sure I agree Lizzie.
I have no hesitation in staying in lane 1 or 2 and proceeding at my current speed passing vehicles on my right hand side.
I would not However move lanes to pass someone on their inside to "gain benefit" as per below.
United Kingdom - The Highway Code discourages undertaking on motorways with some exceptions (rule 268): "Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake". Undertaking is permitted in congested conditions when frequent lane changing is not recommended.[4] On other roads, the Code advises drivers "should only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right" (rule 163).[5] Rule 163 uses advisory wording and "will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted", but may be used in evidence to establishing liability in any court proceedings.[6] On all roads, undertaking is permitted if the vehicles in the lane to the right are queueing and slow moving.[citation needed] Undertaking in an aggressive or reckless manner could be considered Careless Driving or more seriously Dangerous Driving, both of which are legally enforceable offences.[dubious – discuss][citation needed]
-
If I've got a clear run ahead of me on motorways I tend to use cruise control, more so to maintain a sensible speed. On a long motorway journey yesterday, I'd set the cruise control to 70mph and, as the road ahead was clear, I sat in lane one. Some of the cars that were overtaking me, at a few mph more than me, eased off through lack of concentration, which meant they slowly drifted back so that I glided up the inside of them.
Mrs YZ had a right pop at me, saying that I had undertaken them, which strictly speaking I had. ::) I told her that I had done nothing but maintain the same speed.
My questions are, assuming road ahead is clear:
1. Am I expected to switch cruise off every time some arse in lane two doesn't concentrate and drifts to a slower speed than I'm travelling at?
2. Why do they even bother going past me when they are going to do this?
In my younger days I would have just hoofed it so that I put about ten miles between me and them, but you can't do that these days can you. ;)
Anybody else suffer this?
Apart from the fact its the law they should pull over into lane 1, when they have overtaken you, so when they slow down, you can move over to lane 2 and overtake them.
Maintaining a constant speed in lane 1 and 'undertaking' them isnt considered as undertaking, as long as you stay in lane 1.
An example of undertaking would be ...
lane 3 to lane 2 to get past car in lane 3 then back to lane 3
So in the eyes of law as i see it, you were correct and your other half wrong, technically...i think....and in my example.....if the car in lane 3 wasnt actually overtaking anything....then they could considered as breaking the law....as they should have moved over to lane 2 or 1 as appropriate....
But im sure the law (ex or not) will be along to say im talking 'dangle berries' or not :y
That was my take on it as well. :y
And mine. :y
You can have an empty motorway & members of the Middle Lane Owners Club will still be in the middle lane ....... no way will I move to lane 3 to overtake them. At best I'll flash them while I'm still in lane 1 to give them the oportunity to move over, other than that I'll stay in lane 1 - assuming of course I'm doing a legalish speed ::) ::)
If you are on a highly congested motorway, such as the M25, M6, etc, where you are in lines of traffic that is also occupying all the lanes then as long as you move ahead at the same speed as the traffic in front of you, you can pass the other vehicles in the lanes to your right that may be stationery, or just moving at a slower speed than the traffic in your lane. That is perfectly acceptable in the eyes of the law.
However, if you are on a freely moving motorway where there are no queues in each lane and there is space to overtake slower moving vehicles in the lanes to the left, or in front of you (i.e. in lane 2, with lane 3 free), then you must overtake in the normal manner, NOT undertake which is illegal. ;)
Not quite sure I agree Lizzie.
I have no hesitation in staying in lane 1 or 2 and proceeding at my current speed passing vehicles on my right hand side.
I would not However move lanes to pass someone on their inside to "gain benefit" as per below.
United Kingdom - The Highway Code discourages undertaking on motorways with some exceptions (rule 268): "Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake". Undertaking is permitted in congested conditions when frequent lane changing is not recommended.[4] On other roads, the Code advises drivers "should only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right" (rule 163).[5] Rule 163 uses advisory wording and "will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted", but may be used in evidence to establishing liability in any court proceedings.[6] On all roads, undertaking is permitted if the vehicles in the lane to the right are queueing and slow moving.[citation needed] Undertaking in an aggressive or reckless manner could be considered Careless Driving or more seriously Dangerous Driving, both of which are legally enforceable offences.[dubious – discuss][citation needed]
It is illegal to undertake with the exception of the situation I previously described. No one turns right off a motorway, so that exception does not apply. In all normal circumstances if you are feely able to move out to overtake and then move back in you must do so. You will be prosecuted if you are travelling along undertaking when you could easily have overtaken as the law prescribed. ;)
This is what the Highway Code actually states:
"268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake."
-
Except of course when instructed to 'stay in lane'.... ;)
-
Except of course when instructed to 'stay in lane'.... ;)
Indeed, which in particular often applies to road work sections on motorways. ;) :y
-
....
If you are on a highly congested motorway, such as the M25, M6, etc, where you are in lines of traffic that is also occupying all the lanes then as long as you move ahead at the same speed as the traffic in front of you, you can pass the other vehicles in the lanes to your right that may be stationery, or just moving at a slower speed than the traffic in your lane. That is perfectly acceptable in the eyes of the law.
However, if you are on a freely moving motorway where there are no queues in each lane and there is space to overtake slower moving vehicles in the lanes to the left, or in front of you (i.e. in lane 2, with lane 3 free), then you must overtake in the normal manner, NOT undertake which is illegal. ;)
Similar to FranksDad
but in a freely moving motorway where Middle Lane Hogger is sat there for mile after mile after mile ....... and makes no effort to move back to lane 1 when it's been empty for mile after mile after mile ...... if I have room/time to pass by on the inside, then Middle Lane Hogger is also wrong (and now supposedly illegal) for not moving over. ;)
And as Dave says, undertaking in my view is eg moving from lane 2 to lane 1 & then back to lane 2 ....... staying in lane 1 the whole time to 'undertake' is OK to me
-
Trouble is, Andy B, whilst I have the same frustrations as you with middle lane hoggers, you can still get pulled >:(
Suffering the same frustrations, I refuse to answer if on an otherwise empty motorway, if I've actively moved to inside lane and undertake (a proper undertake, defo naughty) in order to embarrass the retard... ...and thus could not say if they then subsequently still carry on blindly in the middle lane >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
....
If you are on a highly congested motorway, such as the M25, M6, etc, where you are in lines of traffic that is also occupying all the lanes then as long as you move ahead at the same speed as the traffic in front of you, you can pass the other vehicles in the lanes to your right that may be stationery, or just moving at a slower speed than the traffic in your lane. That is perfectly acceptable in the eyes of the law.
However, if you are on a freely moving motorway where there are no queues in each lane and there is space to overtake slower moving vehicles in the lanes to the left, or in front of you (i.e. in lane 2, with lane 3 free), then you must overtake in the normal manner, NOT undertake which is illegal. ;)
Similar to FranksDad
but in a freely moving motorway where Middle Lane Hogger is sat there for mile after mile after mile ....... and makes no effort to move back to lane 1 when it's been empty for mile after mile after mile ...... if I have room/time to pass by on the inside, then Middle Lane Hogger is also wrong (and now supposedly illegal) for not moving over. ;)
And as Dave says, undertaking in my view is eg moving from lane 2 to lane 1 & then back to lane 2 ....... staying in lane 1 the whole time to 'undertake' is OK to me
The middle lane hogged is now committing an offence, but so are you if you undertake him. This situation has been tested in a High Court case some years ago when it was ruled that even if a driver stays out in lane 2or3 under no circumstances can you undertake no matter how frustrating it is. You can only undertake in those circumstances if directed by a police officer. That was the ruling and you will be prosecuted if you undertake in those situations. ;)
-
When I used to work night shift in Halifax I travelled along the M62 to Windy Top where it's 4 lanes (I suspect Jason M knows the stretch well) I used to select cruise at around 70 mph ::) in lane 1, I could almost guarantee that there'd be someone near the top of the hill out in lane 3 (because they'd been in the middle lane at the bottom). There's only be two of us on the motorway - no way was I going out to lane 4 & back to overtake some knob that couldn't use a motorway.
Anyway, I see it as my lane is moving faster than his/her lane ..... and that covers me ::)
-
Technically you may pass, from within lane 1 (ie NOT moving into lane 1 with the specific intention of undertaking), any vehicles which are either queueing or you have been instructed to stay in lane by either a written sign or due to traffic management systems such as the variable limits on the M25.
With regard to queueing traffic, I suspect that this would require more than one vehicle in lane 2 (or 3) to be travelling at significantly less than the posted limit.
Incidentally why is it that a car driver might get pulled up for passing on the left, yet motorbicyclists seem to be immune from threading through traffic, which is technically the same thing :-\ and they wonder why they keep getting squished... ::)
-
Just to put this in to perspective, what some of you are saying is...
One of you guys are travelling down the motorway at 70mph in lane one, I can crawl up the side of you in lane two so that I have my back wheels level with your bonnet, I then slow down, which in turn means that you have to slow down otherwise you have undertaken me. ;)
If that's the case, I'm going to have immense fun on my way back down the M6. ;) :y
-
In TB's retard example ie empty motorway, maybe late at night and you come up behind the retard doing 65 in the middle lane. >:( It's tempting to zip by in the inside lane, but I always pull out to the outside lane and then back to the inside lane, just in case the retard decides to move over without looking while I'm undertaking. ::)
I always give the retards plenty of abuse whilst carrying out my exaggerated maneuver! ;)
-
EDIT: Just to put this in to perspective, I know that most are seeing where I'm coming from, but what some of you are saying is...
One of you guys are travelling down the motorway at 70mph in lane one, I can crawl up the side of you in lane two so that I have my back wheels level with your bonnet, I then slow down, which in turn means that you have to slow down otherwise you have undertaken me. ;)
If that's the case, I'm going to have immense fun on my way back down the M6. ;) :y
And to add to that, nobody has changed lanes to undertake, which is naughty, I just stayed where I was, in lane one. To exaggerate my example, hypothetically, a car in lane one is travelling at 60mph, the car in lane two overtakes him at 62mph, so is crawling past. A car in lane three overtakes at 65mph but just as he is drawing past the vehicle in lane two the lane three driver slows down.
Would you automatically expect the vehicles in lane one and two to ease off, so that they couldn't be accused of undertaking.........no, thought not. ;)
That's what kept happening to me. No lane changes, just people slowing down for no reason. :y
-
I have driven all the way from Guildford to Norwich using only Lane 1. I wasn't in any hurry so wasn't speeding, and unusually encountered no lorries as I recall. I did however have to use the hard shoulder for about 100 yards on the M25 when some gimp doing 55 in lane 2 took exception to being passed by me. His deliberate action was to swerve into Lane 1 about 20feet in front of me, and I know this was deliberate as once I had avoided him by moving onto the hard shoulder, he indicated back into Lane 2... breakless arsewit >:(
-
I think this is based on a misenterpritation of undertaking.
It would be rediculous for you to stop in an empty lane if, for example, the person in the lane to your right stops. By that measure. If lane 3 becomes congested, and slows to 30mph say, then everyone in lanes 1 and 2 should slow and go no faster than 30 even though the road in front is empty.
This is rediculous.
.............
Apologies for my example, as Chris had already posted a sensible example above. :y
As said though, none of these cars had actually cleared the front of my car, otherwise I'd have been far more cautious. :y
-
Trouble is, Andy B, whilst I have the same frustrations as you with middle lane hoggers, you can still get pulled >:(
Suffering the same frustrations, I refuse to answer if on an otherwise empty motorway, if I've actively moved to inside lane and undertake (a proper undertake, defo naughty) in order to embarrass the retard... ...and thus could not say if they then subsequently still carry on blindly in the middle lane >:( >:( >:( >:(
my general behaviour is I over take them , come to the front , leave some space first then slam the brakes ;D
-
1. Undertaking is not specifically Illegal.
2. The Highway code is not Statutory legislation so stick it up your chuffer.
3. Undertaking at speed could / would amount to DWDC...
4. ... but as said previously, so is chumping down lane 2 for no reason whatsoever.
;)
-
Incidentally why is it that a car driver might get pulled up for passing on the left, yet motorbicyclists seem to be immune from threading through traffic, which is technically the same thing :-\ and they wonder why they keep getting squished... ::)
Because their journey is more important than yours. And they have a greater understanding of the laws of physics than us mere degree holding mortals. And giving stupid actions stupid names justifies everything ::)
News just in : It really really isn't. They really really don't. And it really doesn't. :y
-
http://www.rac.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?13698-Undertaking#4 (http://www.rac.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?13698-Undertaking#4)
-
Flashed what turned out to be a skoda vrs this morning. Sat in middle lane. Flashed again. No response. Flashed again. Responded with blue lights.
Over took it, pulled to the left lane, 50 yards ahead. Just sat there didn't move. For miles. Muppet.
-
Flashed what turned out to be a skoda vrs this morning. Sat in middle lane. Flashed again. No response. Flashed again. Responded with blue lights.
Over took it, pulled to the left lane, 50 yards ahead. Just sat there didn't move. For miles. Muppet.
Bet you wished you had a camera fitted, wonder if he was hoping you would undertake...... :-\ :-\
-
http://www.rac.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?13698-Undertaking#4 (http://www.rac.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?13698-Undertaking#4)
Good find and interesting reading. :y
Thanks for posting. :y
Flashed what turned out to be a skoda vrs this morning. Sat in middle lane. Flashed again. No response. Flashed again. Responded with blue lights.
Over took it, pulled to the left lane, 50 yards ahead. Just sat there didn't move. For miles. Muppet.
On my way up the M6 on Saturday, two separate pairs of police vans went past at what must have been in excess of 80mph. No big deal I agree, but we get a finger wagged as us for doing it.