Idle musings on car safety.

[redsturgeon]

All of the speedos I ever checked on my cars have flattered by around 10%.

John

[richlist]

Well in a 50mph limit I'm gonna set my cruise control to 50mph (if it's safe to do so) irrespective of whether that's a true 40mph or whatever else. Anybody that tailgate s me gets an arm out of the window and is waved past. After all it might be someone in a hurry like a doctor.

[bungeejumper]

Anybody that tailgate s me gets an arm out of the window and is waved past. After all it might be someone in a hurry like a doctor.

Make sure you count your fingers afterwards. In my experience, hand gestures tend to be misunderstood by the sort of people who'll decide to tailgate you. I don't think I've ever seen such a full-on display of lower jaw teeth as one young van driver displayed after I beckoned to him to take priority at a junction. He thought I was V-signing him. Not a good moment.

BJ

[DrFfybes]

You think that's bad - the Toyota has the indicator on the left and wipers on the right. Squirting my windscreen isn't too effective to warn a drifting cyclist or pedestrian that I am approaching.

Re Cruise - we have it on one car and as long trips are usually done at night it does get used. Also living in Devon theM5 can be quiet enough, sometimes.

Paul

All my cars over the last 30 years or so have had this configuration - indicator on the left stalk.

regards

Howard

Yeah, you're correct. In the Toyota the indicators are on the Right, Wipers on the left.

See how easy it is to get confused

Paul

[bungeejumper]

Yeah, you're correct. In the Toyota the indicators are on the Right, Wipers on the left.

See how easy it is to get confused

Speak for yourself. On my 2014 Toyota (Auris, built in Derbyshire), the wipers are on the right and the indicators are most definitely on the left. (I just went out and checked that. Can't even rely on my memory these days.)

What's more, the off/intermittent/full/double speed switch progresses downwards, whereas on the wife's Golf it's upward. Clearly, Toyota have built my dashboard upside down.

Don't even get me started on the rear screen wash/wipe, which entirely defies all logic. (Turn, twist, push, let's twist again like we did last summer. Repeat, experiment, abandon the attempt.)

BJ

[didds]

On the other hand undertaking doesn't bother me at all. It's perfectly legal in some jurisdictions without undue problems. I think the issue in the UK is more that we are not used to it, rather than any intrinsic risk.

and it also depends on what people may mean by "undertaking".

To me it means approaching in the same lane and moving to the LEFT hand lane to pass on the "inside" then (possily) moving back into the original lane. overtaking on the left side if you follow.

As opposed to approaching in the laft hand lane and continuing in that lane and moving onwards in that lane but passing somebody traveling slower on the right hand lane. Which to me is just a lane moving at a different speed than another etc.

Others MMV naturally.

didds

[bungeejumper]

As opposed to approaching in the laft hand lane and continuing in that lane and moving onwards in that lane but passing somebody traveling slower on the right hand lane. Which to me is just a lane moving at a different speed than another etc.

It's the word "somebody" that I'm not so sure of. "A column of somebodies" would be nearer the mark.

Happy to be shot down, but my understanding is that the law has no problem with a situation where an entire lane of traffic is steadily moving faster than the lane to its right. That happens all the time, of course, especially in heavy traffic. It's the ducking-and-weaving undertake that Mr Plod isn't so keen on.

BJ

[didds]

As opposed to approaching in the laft hand lane and continuing in that lane and moving onwards in that lane but passing somebody traveling slower on the right hand lane. Which to me is just a lane moving at a different speed than another etc.

It's the word "somebody" that I'm not so sure of. "A column of somebodies" would be nearer the mark.

Happy to be shot down, but my understanding is that the law has no problem with a situation where an entire lane of traffic is steadily moving faster than the lane to its right. That happens all the time, of course, especially in heavy traffic. It's the ducking-and-weaving undertake that Mr Plod isn't so keen on.

BJ

and that's fair enough. I'd concur that for me it is a little grey. If that left hand lane had vehicles spaced 300m apart (say) all tarvelling the same speed is that an "entire lane" etc? If there are no other vehicles in sight either in front or behind why has the right hand lane any vehicles in it at all?

[jfgw]

It's the ducking-and-weaving undertake that Mr Plod isn't so keen on.

You mean this sort of thing?

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/li ... h-motorway

Although I think the title should be, "WATCH: This is why you should NEVER drive like a complete nut-case and try to squeeze through a gap that isn't big enough on the motorway or anywhere-else".

Regarding the article I cited earlier, https://www.driving.co.uk/news/the-wron ... the-crime/ , I agree with other's comments that the middle-lane-hogger should have been persued rather than the undertaker. It should not normally be possible to undertake in this manner. In most cases, if you can undertake reasonably safely, then the vehicle in front is in the wrong lane.

Julian F. G. W.

[Lootman]

As opposed to approaching in the laft hand lane and continuing in that lane and moving onwards in that lane but passing somebody traveling slower on the right hand lane. Which to me is just a lane moving at a different speed than another etc.

It's the word "somebody" that I'm not so sure of. "A column of somebodies" would be nearer the mark.

Happy to be shot down, but my understanding is that the law has no problem with a situation where an entire lane of traffic is steadily moving faster than the lane to its right. That happens all the time, of course, especially in heavy traffic. It's the ducking-and-weaving undertake that Mr Plod isn't so keen on.

If the only problem is "ducking and weaving" then why is that OK when someone does it in the "fast" lane, but not when they do it in the slow lane? Surely one is the mirror image of the other?

[Howard]

Low profile tyres are the modern fad which I least like. They give a bumpier ride and make it easier to scratch one's alloy wheels when parking next to the kerb. And amazingly many drivers pay extra for these fashion items.*

Luckily both our current cars have higher profile tyres which bulge slightly so our alloys are pristine. Hopefully this will continue.

regards

Howard

*This guy took the low profile fashion a bit far! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... r-50970829

[didds]

Low profile tyres are the modern fad which I least like. They give a bumpier ride and make it easier to scratch one's alloy wheels when parking next to the kerb.

Our old T4 camper came with them. Goodness, they were awful. alloys scrated to buggery, which in itself isnt an issue for us as we're not overly fussed with aesthetics, but its also demonstrated why we had so many flat tyres - and at £100 a pop it was getting tedious as one of other of the four were constantly blowing despite us being anal about tyre air pressures etc.

Eventually I gave up and got a set of "original" steel wheels off FB marketplace (for free!) and stuck standard tyres on them - £60 a pop for the normal tyres and a year later no flats at all. We'd have had a few at least in that timeframe with the awful low profile ones. And a MUCH smoother ride as a result to boot!

I bunged the low profiiles on marketplace (FB) for a tenner each. Snapped up immediately. Good riddance!

didds

[bungeejumper]

but its also demonstrated why we had so many flat tyres - and at £100 a pop it was getting tedious as one of other of the four were constantly blowing despite us being anal about tyre air pressures etc.

Which reminds me. A few days ago, there were no less than eight cars queueing for the free air at our local supermarket, and every one of them had rubber-band tyres. Considering that each driver was going to need six or eight minutes to top up his four road tyres (just don't ask about the spare...), it was plain that some of them were going to be waiting an hour or more in the howling wind for their turn at the pump. That seemed like quite a sacrifice for the sake of a sparrow-fart's worth of air. Especially when you can buy a reliable gauge and a 12v pump for fifteen quid or thereabouts. Mind you, that would have been fifteen quid less to spend at Wetherspoons across the road.

I am happy to take it on trust that expensive cars with refined race-tuned suspensions can get something useful out of the reduced distortion and tighter handling that low profile tyres can provide. But, having ridden twenty miles in my daughter's mid-market Audi, I'd rather arrive at my destination with my senses still intact and my eyes still capable of focusing properly. There's just something so unutterably low-rent about most of the cars that seem to have them as add-ons these days.

Harrumph.

BJ, whose 16 inches have never given grounds for complaint.

[DrFfybes]

It's the ducking-and-weaving undertake that Mr Plod isn't so keen on.

You mean this sort of thing?

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/li ... h-motorway

Although I think the title should be, "WATCH: This is why you should NEVER drive like a complete nut-case and try to squeeze through a gap that isn't big enough on the motorway or anywhere-else".

Regarding the article I cited earlier, https://www.driving.co.uk/news/the-wron ... the-crime/ ,

Julian F. G. W.

Not sure where the video clip was taken but not in the UK - the "undertaker" was (as you say) driving like a ****

Having read the journalist who got the points on the A3, it seems he pulled across 2 lanes to pass on the inside. This is pretty much the definition of "undertaking" and whilst the middle lane hogger was at fault, the chap that was caught was being a bit daft, and probably speeding when he went past.

One thing i have found now we're treating the old car more gently, is that even at 60-65 on the inside lane I will catch up middle lane hoggers. If we're nowhere near a junction and there's nothing coming up behind then sometimes I'll carry on past in the same lane whereupon a small number will pull back in. If it is really quiet I sometimes just sit alongside them to see if they react.

Paul

[didds]

Especially when you can buy a reliable gauge and a 12v pump for fifteen quid or thereabouts.

which is exactly what we did!

didds

[AF62]

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/li ... h-motorway

Although I think the title should be, "WATCH: This is why you should NEVER drive like a complete nut-case and try to squeeze through a gap that isn't big enough on the motorway or anywhere-else".

Whilst being filmed with a potato - not 1080 resolution, not 720, not 480, about 10. Surely if you are going to have a dashcam it is sensible to have a dashcam that is able to record a number plate.

[AF62]

After arriving back from 800+ miles over the last week with no ABS, airbags, traction control, auto braking, lane stray warning, cruise control, or any of the other driver "aids" developed over the last 30 years, it seems it is possible to drive without them. Obviously this requires some restraint, and a gentle 60-70 in the inside lane is more relaxing having largely only to concentrate on vehicles on one side (although incredibly tedious).

...

there does seem to be a large element of "my car has XYZ to get me out of a pickle" so let's discourage people from relying on these features.

Well I was very grateful for the 'Front Assist' system on my car yesterday. I was toddling along a NSL road at 60mph following several cars, and keeping to the '2 second rule' as not in a hurry to get anywhere.

Suddenly the car at the front of the group decides it wants to turn right into a drive and at the same time as putting their indicator on they brake heavily. Result was that the couple of cars immediately following have to slam on their brakes to avoid running in the back of them.

However before I could do anything at all, my car had spotted the problem, lit up the dashboard with the 'ARGH!' symbol, sounded the very loud warning alarm, and then it stamped on the brakes as hard as it could before my foot had even left the accelerator.

Because the cars in front had not spotted the problem as quickly or braked as fast and as heavily, they had to swerve to the left to avoid hitting the car in front of them, whereas I simply stopped in a straight line going from 60 to zero in a very short space.

So no, I quite like XYZ.

[Imbiber]

I hope the car behind you had XYZ...

[Lootman]

I hope the car behind you had XYZ...

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. The problem I have with technology like this is the fear that, in order to respond to every genuine incident, it has to also respond to incidents at the margin. In other words there can be false positives.

And if you're cruising along and suddenly the brakes slam on then, at best, it is disconcerting and, at worst, you get rear ended.

[AF62]

I hope the car behind you had XYZ...

Yes it was like someone had thrown an anchor out the back!