So, is overtaking illegal now????

Mitch Connor

Wossack wrote:

You're painting all with the same brush here, which I dont think is fair. I understand though, as its usually the bad experiences that stick in peoples minds, and the biker population does have its fair share of muppetry.

I cant turn my main light off btw

as has been pointed out to me previously (as i have made a similar comment recently) the bikers obeying the rules of the road are the ones you are likely to never see, as they will be doing the speed limit the same as you are, so unless they are either right in front or behond you, you'd never actually see them.

In my time driving, i have only seen on biker doing the speed limit (this weekend, he was actually a bit under it) but on the other hand, a saw about 30 this weekend alone, hammering down the road at way over the limit, overtaking on solid white lines and the like. Unfortunately, it is generally only these you see, as they fly past.

_Kaiser_

Exactly..I accept that my comment was a generalisation (hence the words "generally" and "some" in the opening line).

It's nothing to do with being "anti-biker". I've regularly ranted on here about muppets in cars too I would however say that a lot of bikers seem to put themselves (and others) at far greater risk on the roads by the practises I mentioned earlier - especially because a lot of car drivers DO "forget" to look around them.

OldmanMondeo

The biggest problem is with overtaking is that not many people know how to overtake in a safe mannor. The idea of overtaking more than 1 car at a time is seen as dangerous by many drivers and possibly the guar's as well, the idea being that you can not be 100% sure of what is in front of cars/trucks in front of you. Another reason why it is difficult to overtake is because people try to leave a braking distance, but knowing that this will be removed by someone overtaking and moving into this spot, encourages them to close the distance.
Personally I have not problem with people overtaking, as long as it is safe. I would not move into the hard shoulder, apart from the fact this is not considered a driving lane except for emergencies, I try and leave a space on my nearside incause the overtaking goes astray.

craichoe

Pulling into the hard shoulder is a bad idea, imho its just egging the guy behind you to overtake. I was in a car where the guy driving was trying to be courteous by pulling into the hard shoulder, the spanner overtaking was CRAWLING past us when ... BANG .. drove over a massive chunk of tree that had fallen onto the road. Hard shoulder is for breakdowns only !

craichoe

Oh ... To the Anti-Bikers posts ....

Doesn't make sense man ... All the Bad bikers are either in a Wheelchair or Dead !

NeMiSiS

Have had the same myself on many occasion (regarding the original poster),even last night, I overtook a guy doing 40 km/h on an 80 km/h road, and received the same flashing lights, and horn blowing. He was allover the road previously to this, straying up to half his car over a continuous white line.. and going round bends on the wrong side of the road..

People just seem utterly unable to overtake, they do it to slowly - generally, and do not accelerate correctly.. rather they pull to the opposite side of the road, in the same gear they were in .. while dawdling and tailgating.. and don't bother to put the foot down, nor check their mirrors. Then they are surprised when they see a car fast approaching behind them.

As for bikes, it would be rare enough for me to have a problem with someone on a motorbike .. because.. I watch out for them. Most drivers seem blissfully unaware that motorbikes exist.. until they pass them. Recently I saw a guy on a motorbike on the N7, within about 30 seconds, I saw him nearly get leveled 3 times, all he was doing was trying to turn left from just before the Bewleys hotel, it was like he was invisible, even though he was wearing a fluorescent band, and was driving a fairly big bike.. I think when people say they have a problem with motorbikes.. it is more the weekend warrior types..

As with anything to do with Irish roads, the same bull**** will continue until people are educated to drive correctly.. can't seem that happening anytime soon..

TK

Jack Bauer999

i think the scariest thing about this discussion is the people who said they drive with their headlights on during the day to get noticed because
it can be hard to see other cars,

in all fairness how could anyone not notice half a ton of shiny metal 5ft high coming at them in broad daylight.

I mean have people really experienced a car just magically appeared next to then and actually suddenly think
"O golly i never saw that car 50 metres down the road coming at me, where did he suddenly come from!"

The question needs to be seriously asked, how many drivers out there need eye sight tests!





**From now on anyone I see with their light on during the day I will presume is half blind

Mitch Connor

Jack Bauer999 wrote:

i think the scariest thing about this discussion is the people who said they drive with their headlights on during the day to get noticed because
it can be hard to see other cars,

in all fairness how could anyone not notice half a ton of shiny metal 5ft high coming at them in broad daylight.

I mean have people really experienced a car just magically appeared next to then and actually suddenly think
"O golly i never saw that car 50 metres down the road coming at me, where did he suddenly come from!"

The question needs to be seriously asked, how many drivers out there need eye sight tests!





**From now on anyone I see with their light on during the day I will presume is half blind

i wouldn't watch the tv without my glasses on, as it becoems hard tor ead text on the screen - but i am legally allowed to drive without my glasses on, in fact, i passed the sight test easily! Generally i do wear them, but on sunny days i have to put on the sun glasses instead.

NeMiSiS

Nice grey Iirish day.. nice silver car..
You increase your visibility to other road users with lights on, it's wrong to discourage poeple to turn them on because you think if you see people driving with dipped lights on you think they are blind..

TK

Seth Brundle

Jack Bauer999 wrote:

i think the scariest thing about this discussion is the people who said they drive with their headlights on during the day to get noticed because
it can be hard to see other cars,

in all fairness how could anyone not notice half a ton of shiny metal 5ft high coming at them in broad daylight.

I mean have people really experienced a car just magically appeared next to then and actually suddenly think
"O golly i never saw that car 50 metres down the road coming at me, where did he suddenly come from!"

The question needs to be seriously asked, how many drivers out there need eye sight tests!





**From now on anyone I see with their light on during the day I will presume is half blind

read through this: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/327/7429/1455

craichoe

Jack Bauer999 wrote:

i think the scariest thing about this discussion is the people who said they drive with their headlights on during the day to get noticed because
it can be hard to see other cars,

in all fairness how could anyone not notice half a ton of shiny metal 5ft high coming at them in broad daylight.

I mean have people really experienced a car just magically appeared next to then and actually suddenly think
"O golly i never saw that car 50 metres down the road coming at me, where did he suddenly come from!"

The question needs to be seriously asked, how many drivers out there need eye sight tests!





**From now on anyone I see with their light on during the day I will presume is half blind

Holland would disagree:

http://driving.drive-alive.co.uk/driving-in-netherlands.htm

" Lights: There is no obligation but a recommendation to use dipped headlights on open roads and during poor visibility. Motorcycles must use dipped headlights during the day at all times."

So would France and Belgium:
http://www.nurs.co.uk/news/articles/cms/111886698682415026216_1.htm

"2. Headlights in Scandinavia - dipped headlights are required by law at all times on all vehicles in Scandinavia. It is also law for motorbikes in France."

and also
"4. Being seen in Italy - it is law to wear a reflective jacket if you need to leave your vehicle on Italian motorways and you will be fined without one."

Switzerland too:
http://www.driving-abroad.info/driving-in-switzerland

"Spare bulbs must be carried. Headlights must be used in tunnels. Motorcycles must use headlights night and day. Dipped headlights are compulsory day and night."

The AA have a doc too on this:
http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/touring_tips/AA_compulsory_equipment_feb2007.doc

There are studies that have proven driving with dipped headlights increases visibility and reduces road accidents.

Its all about being seen ! Sorry, your completely wrong there buddy

RobAMerc

Dr. Loon wrote:

You do realise the posted limit is an advisory as opposed to a compulsory? You don't HAVE to do 100 where it's posted 100! Overtaking 4 cars in a row is not safe, no matter what all ye eejits are saying. Even if you were in a super car, it's not safe.

Lemmings style?! My God! What were they doing? Driving UNDER the limit? Clearly they didn't know what they were doing. Or maybe they were just driving in a manner that they felt comfortable doing. Maybe.

You come accross as a real car enthusiast sir - welcome to the Motors forum.

BTW Everything you write here is pure BS, you are exactly the type of clown I hate to see on this forum and more importantly on the road. Spouting shi*e you hear on the radio, "it's a limit not a target" ( actually this was stolen from the 'dont use your credit card fad a while back') and driving slow is safe - cop on, if people are not happy to drive at 100kph on the main road where its safe enough for others to overtake - YOU SHOULD NOT BE ON THE ROAD - you are obviously incompetent.

jmayo

Why do some drivers assume if you do a multiple car overtaking you are one of those dangerous drivers.
If you have a 1 or 2 mile straight with nothing coming are you meant to continue in the snaking line of cars up each others ars**.
Is tailgating the car in front not dangerous?

As for someone saying you should be able to see car without needing lights on in daylight? It is not always easy to see cars in daylight because your vision can be impreded due to haze, glare or angle of sun, etc.
Some countries require lights on at all times and not just in winter.
The amount of people who either drive with full lights on or not lights at all in this country is a joke.
Regarding motorbikers: Yes the couriers and little b***** just out of nappies on their mopeds do stupid things like undertake, but most bikers are a hell of a lot more responsibile and aware on the roads. They have to be, otherwise they will not be around for long.

OldmanMondeo

This discussion just remided me of a conversation I had over the weekend. I had decided to conduct a little experiment. I drove within the spped limit on each road I used, As in I was just under the limit on my speedo. I kept a careful eye on what traffic was on the road, coming out of junctions etc. I was overtaken by every car that came behind me. We are not talking just boy racers, but everyone, old men, old women, trucks, buses, motorbikes. Now I was not crawling along 20-30 kph under the limit, but as near as you can get to it. Each of these cars would have gotten a speeding ticket had a check point been out. As for the overtaking, I would say 75% passed when there was on-coming traffic... Also passed on Double white lines(unbroken), aproaching junctions.
I have actually seen 1 car been overtaken by 2 cars, i.e. road was 3 abreast with cars.

Jack Bauer999

craichoe wrote:

Holland would disagree:

http://driving.drive-alive.co.uk/driving-in-netherlands.htm

" Lights: There is no obligation but a recommendation to use dipped headlights on open roads and during poor visibility. Motorcycles must use dipped headlights during the day at all times."

So would France and Belgium:
http://www.nurs.co.uk/news/articles/cms/111886698682415026216_1.htm

"2. Headlights in Scandinavia - dipped headlights are required by law at all times on all vehicles in Scandinavia. It is also law for motorbikes in France."

and also
"4. Being seen in Italy - it is law to wear a reflective jacket if you need to leave your vehicle on Italian motorways and you will be fined without one."

Switzerland too:
http://www.driving-abroad.info/driving-in-switzerland

"Spare bulbs must be carried. Headlights must be used in tunnels. Motorcycles must use headlights night and day. Dipped headlights are compulsory day and night."

The AA have a doc too on this:
http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/touring_tips/AA_compulsory_equipment_feb2007.doc

There are studies that have proven driving with dipped headlights increases visibility and reduces road accidents.

Its all about being seen ! Sorry, your completely wrong there buddy

wearing reflective jackets on a motorway is a different matter, i have
no issue with that, a stationary human is not a big shiny metal object
on wheels.

If a person has perfect vision then there's no way in hell you could not
see a car coming at you in daylight on an open road,

I mean ive seen 4x4's with their full lights on driving around dublin on days
with perfect visibility, these are nearly monster trucks for christ sake, its like
not noticing there's an elephant sitting on your lawn, is that not idiotic!

Mitch Connor

jmayo wrote:

Why do some drivers assume if you do a multiple car overtaking you are one of those dangerous drivers.
If you have a 1 or 2 mile straight with nothing coming are you meant to continue in the snaking line of cars up each others ars**.
Is tailgating the car in front not dangerous?

As for someone saying you should be able to see car without needing lights on in daylight? It is not always easy to see cars in daylight because your vision can be impreded due to haze, glare or angle of sun, etc.
Some countries require lights on at all times and not just in winter.
The amount of people who either drive with full lights on or not lights at all in this country is a joke.
Regarding motorbikers: Yes the couriers and little b***** just out of nappies on their mopeds do stupid things like undertake, but most bikers are a hell of a lot more responsibile and aware on the roads. They have to be, otherwise they will not be around for long.

i take it you both drive and bike?

As a matter of interest, do you find doing both has made you a better driver? As you say above, a biker needs to be more responsible and aware of the road - does this translate in a large way to your driving, in that you find you observation of the road ahead is better, and your reactions better too? Also, along with observastion and awareness, do you find yourself more able to predict what action a motorist ahead will take from their "body" language, if you know what i mean?

I have never riden a bike, and wouldn't trust myself to not end up in hospital within 30 mins of getting on one, but i'd be interested in your response, or that of anyone who both rides and drives.

craichoe

Jack Bauer999 wrote:

wearing reflective jackets on a motorway is a different matter, i have
no issue with that, a stationary human is not a big shiny metal object
on wheels.

If a person has perfect vision then there's no way in hell you could not
see a car coming at you in daylight on an open road,

I mean ive seen 4x4's with their full lights on driving around dublin on days
with perfect visibility, these are nearly monster trucks for christ sake, its like
not noticing there's an elephant sitting on your lawn, is that not idiotic!

I like the way you completely skimmed around the rest of my post because you know you are wrong. My point is about visibility and being SEEN not seeing others, thats the whole point of driving with DIP's during the day.

Why is it a LEGAL requirement in these European countries then ? and what are you basing your answer on ? Do you have any reference to back up your claim ? Or is this just a "This is what i think" answer.

_Kaiser_

Jack Bauer999 wrote:

wearing reflective jackets on a motorway is a different matter, i have
no issue with that, a stationary human is not a big shiny metal object
on wheels.

If a person has perfect vision then there's no way in hell you could not
see a car coming at you in daylight on an open road,

I mean ive seen 4x4's with their full lights on driving around dublin on days
with perfect visibility, these are nearly monster trucks for christ sake, its like
not noticing there's an elephant sitting on your lawn, is that not idiotic!

Go out to a road where the traffic isn't all crawling along at 20-50 km/h in a built-up area. I suggest the N3.

Now, drive out as far as Dunshaughlin even and tell me if it's not easier to see the cars coming towards you on the straight between the County Club and the Ratoath turnoff that have their lights on. This road is straight, long, good visibility, but a perfect example of why dipped lights are a good idea - sun in your eyes, overhanging trees etc.

As others have said, studies prove that it works.

Idleater

Kaiser2000 wrote:

I find that bikers are generally some of the worst offenders on the roads myself.

erm, there were 3 pages of posts before I posted the Bike bit.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

They tear past you at whatever speed they like and regardless of traffic conditions,

now, if you are doing 80, stuck up the bumper of some other cage, then yes, it does appear that a motorcycle making progress around you is doing a considerable speed. However, noone seemed to comment about Unkel's post where he said he would happily break whatever speed limit in order to overtake a queue of 4 cars "safely".

Kaiser2000 wrote:

they cut in and out of traffic (frequently from the inside) without warning or indicating,

making progress. and there is no need to indicate if it serves no purpose. Indicating is merely a signal of intent, it does not confer a right of way. therefore, with or without indicating any manouvre can be made - perfectly legally.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

they practically live on the other side of the white line,

well, if we can overtake what is the problem? just because you can't overtake, (see above) doesn't make it illegal for a motorcycle to do so.
And, while I am at it, if you mean a solid white line, then I do condone any motorcycle on the "wrong" side of it, but on several main roads, it is possible for a motorcycle to overtake safely and legally, while remaining on their own side of the solid white line.

Kaiser2000 wrote:

and always seem to have the single headlight on main beam (although part of the problem may be that they're mounted higher?).

Explained above, but to your credit, you have actually seen the bike, which to your credit, not a lot of other cage drivers seem to be able to manage.

rocky

OldmanMondeo wrote:

This discussion just remided me of a conversation I had over the weekend. I had decided to conduct a little experiment. I drove within the spped limit on each road I used, As in I was just under the limit on my speedo. I kept a careful eye on what traffic was on the road, coming out of junctions etc. I was overtaken by every car that came behind me. We are not talking just boy racers, but everyone, old men, old women, trucks, buses, motorbikes. Now I was not crawling along 20-30 kph under the limit, but as near as you can get to it. Each of these cars would have gotten a speeding ticket had a check point been out. As for the overtaking, I would say 75% passed when there was on-coming traffic... Also passed on Double white lines(unbroken), aproaching junctions.
I have actually seen 1 car been overtaken by 2 cars, i.e. road was 3 abreast with cars.

The speedometers on most cars are over-estimating your speed. For example on the micra I drove this weekend, at 110km/h shown on the speedo, the GPS reported 100km/h. And I wasn't varying the speed. On the fiesta some time ago, at an indicated 170 (it was a once off ), GPS reported 157.

Idleater

Tauren wrote:

i take it you both drive and bike?

As a matter of interest, do you find doing both has made you a better driver? As you say above, a biker needs to be more responsible and aware of the road - does this translate in a large way to your driving, in that you find you observation of the road ahead is better, and your reactions better too? Also, along with observastion and awareness, do you find yourself more able to predict what action a motorist ahead will take from their "body" language, if you know what i mean?

I have never riden a bike, and wouldn't trust myself to not end up in hospital within 30 mins of getting on one, but i'd be interested in your response, or that of anyone who both rides and drives.

I would tend to agree with you, but I can't allow myself to say anything about being a "better driver".

I have a tendency to take note to observe, and I take particular note of positioning on the road. Smoothness and control. All bike traits, which were taught to me when I did the RoSPA advanced course. I drive the cage in a "new light" compared to the bike. Basically because as I outlined above, in the cage, you get a chance to overtake maybe 1 or 2 cars, then you catch up with the next 100m queue. In 30 km of driving, the car that overtook me made up all of 2 seconds (2 second rule).

L.

jmayo

Maybe Jack Bauar has 20/20 vision and never encounters setting sun (still daylight), haze, fog, shadows from trees and hedges etc.
You are still in daylight officially but it can be very hard to see car approaching.
I have found some of it depends on the car colour where it works like military camouflage in some lights.

No taureen I do not bike but I have numerous friends that do and are serious about it.
I do find that bikers (people that are seriously into bikes not eejits on mopeds zipping around their estate or some of those couriers that trying to get around city streets as fast as can) have a greater appreciation for traffic.
One friend stated you can never assume anything and you cannot switch off because car users generally do not check their mirrors half the time and they do not look for bikes when entering roads or turning.
That is reason bikes have lights on so that they stand out to motorists who are generally looking for big shiny metal object coming at them rather than narrow profile of bike plus biker.
I have to admit I have done it myself and had to apologise to biker that I cut off.
The only argument I could render was a bike has much greater acceleration and can suddenly appear in your mirror but still not excuse.
Having driven with bikers I do find they notice things better but maybe that is just the guys I hang out with?

You do not have to be a biker to sometimes predict what a driver will do, if you are following a car for few minutes you can get a fair idea of whether or not you need to be wary of them.

You can spot the ones that are going to do something stupid and often you find these are the ones adhering strictly to the speedlimits.

_Kaiser_

nereid wrote:

now, if you are doing 80, stuck up the bumper of some other cage, then yes, it does appear that a motorcycle making progress around you is doing a considerable speed. However, noone seemed to comment about Unkel's post where he said he would happily break whatever speed limit in order to overtake a queue of 4 cars "safely".

I meant situations where bikers will fly past far exceeding the posted speed limit

making progress. and there is no need to indicate if it serves no purpose. Indicating is merely a signal of intent, it does not confer a right of way. therefore, with or without indicating any manouvre can be made - perfectly legally.

By your logic I should be able to undertake at will, indicating optional, to "make progress". Are bikers not bound by the same Rules of the Road as the rest of us? In fact, is it not more dangerous if a biker undertakes then cuts in front of a "cage" (charming term by the way) to then overtake the car in front?

Well, if we can overtake what is the problem? just because you can't overtake, (see above) doesn't make it illegal for a motorcycle to do so.

See above. Just because you CAN doesn't mean it's legal, or safe, to do so.

And, while I am at it, if you mean a solid white line, then I do condone any motorcycle on the "wrong" side of it, but on several main roads, it is possible for a motorcycle to overtake safely and legally, while remaining on their own side of the solid white line.

Again, are bikers not subject to the same Rules as the rest of us? Should they not overtake only when it is safe (and legal) to do so?

Explained above, but to your credit, you have actually seen the bike, which to your credit, not a lot of other cage drivers seem to be able to manage.

Yep, very true, and hence why I'd say it's even more important that bikers adhere to the Rules, for their own safety if nothing else!

OldmanMondeo

rocky wrote:

The speedometers on most cars are over-estimating your speed. For example on the micra I drove this weekend, at 110km/h shown on the speedo, the GPS reported 100km/h. And I wasn't varying the speed. On the fiesta some time ago, at an indicated 170 (it was a once off ), GPS reported 157.

Totally under stand that, I must borrow a gps for the next time. But you can generally guess the speed of overtaking cars, so if I was on a strech of 80kph, I guess most were traveling at 100kph. In fact, I was on the motorway one morning last week, traveling around 110kph (On the inside lane) and my car was shaken by a merc passing. Guess his speed was nearer 95MPH, as was the car behind him.

Biro

Overtaking when it's safe to do so should be a safe operation. Whether its two, three or four cars really. I don't remember ever taking on 4 cars, but I have gone by three who would all have been doing maybe 30kph or more below the speed limit, and after exiting a bend onto a very wide mile or more straight with no oncoming cars I would have overtaken, after maybe pausing for a second or two to analyse if any of the cars in front were about to do the same. I hate overtakers who jump the gun.
On the thing of using electricity and consuming more fuel... the point of someone who said that there is only 5 watts more consumed by the fulls, true enough it's 55w dips and 60w fulls usually, but a good few cars have two seperate bulbs for each, like mine, meaning that both are on when the fulls are on, therefore an extra 120w is drawn on fulls over the dips. I also don't know how the load on the alternator affects the turning force required to turn it, but I do know that on idle it does have an effect on the revs of the engine, and also there is a guy I know with a '02 1.25 zetec fiesta who says that if he turns on both the front and back screen heaters the car will actually slow a little if going downa hill, without touching the brakes, so its obviously affecting the engine somewhat there. And therefore safe to assume that it's affecting fuel consumption.
However... I think that saving petrol by not using lights is a bad move. Adjusting your driving style is the biggest factor in fuel consumption, and if you are going as far as to cut back on lights then you're at a stage where you need to consider downgrading the car to a smaller size engine. I'd feckin take out the seats and spare wheel to save fuel quicker than I'd turn off lights. Or better yet, I'd stay at home.

Mitch Connor

nereid wrote:

I would tend to agree with you, but I can't allow myself to say anything about being a "better driver".

I have a tendency to take note to observe, and I take particular note of positioning on the road. Smoothness and control. All bike traits, which were taught to me when I did the RoSPA advanced course. I drive the cage in a "new light" compared to the bike. Basically because as I outlined above, in the cage, you get a chance to overtake maybe 1 or 2 cars, then you catch up with the next 100m queue. In 30 km of driving, the car that overtook me made up all of 2 seconds (2 second rule).

L.

cheers for the reply (and jmayo)

By better driver i ment better yourself as opposed to the general population, but that is by the by.

jmayo

Jeeze if the reason to not use dipped headlights is one of fuel saving then why not freewheel down hills as well.
Sure you might as well make use of gravity rather than engine.
Only thing beware steering and brakes may be a problem with no engine power.

Esel

Biro, are you saying that some cars on full headlights actually have dips on as well? Never heard of that, and seems a bit crazy to me.

mike65

BE SAFE, BE SEEN

is a good motto as is

RUNNING LIGHTS DO NOT CAUSE A DRAG ON YOUR ENGINE OUTPUT - REALLY!

but thats a bit to long to be a slogan!

Mike.

_Kaiser_

mike65 wrote:

BE SAFE, BE SEEN

is a good motto as is

RUNNING LIGHTS DO NOT CAUSE A DRAG ON YOUR ENGINE OUTPUT - REALLY!

but thats a bit to long to be a slogan!

Mike.

That's why all those signs as you leave a town don't say "INAPPROPRIATE Speed Kills" - it's just not as catchy I suppose! :rolleyes: