People who drive at 80kph on good 100kph National roads

crazygeryy

Atominist wrote: »

On good National roads, with nice wide hard shoulders, with 100kph speed limits, in all weather conditions, and all times of day, I always encounter people driving at 80kph.

My question is... Why?

Why do you Morons do it?

What do you hope to accomplish? Are you trying to save money on fuel?

Why won't you get out of my way when you see me coming up behind you? You just sit there holding everyone up causing tailbacks! :mad:

I drive at the speed limit, if I see some behind me I pull over (if safe to do so). You are dangerous drivers, forcing people to overtake you!

Please tell me your reasons.

i bet your one of those morons that if you are stuck behind a car you can't get passed.you start flashing your lights to try and get the person to move over?

" why don't you get out of my way"

who exactly do you think you are ,that you think we have to get out of your! way.

wexie

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Or the ones that over take you, then turn off a side road 400 yards down the road

It never ceases to amaze me to see someone risk their (and potentially others) life to overtake a slower car in an inappropriate manner and then speed off.

Only to see them one or two cars ahead at the next roundabout/traffic lights/village etc. I always wonder do they realise that the car they came flying past is only 50 meters behind...and was the extra 50 or so meters really worth risking an accident.

If you're in that much of a hurry you should have left earlier, or you need to have a chat with your boss and tell him you're not coping with the pressure.

Bruthal

Fozzie Bear wrote: »

Mine is limited too. That doesn't stop the focking clowns in cars I regularly meet on the M18 motorway forcing me to brake or flash the lights at them to speed up in front of me. A motorway ffs!

I'd think its these sort of fools the OP was talking about?

It wouldnt seem so, as national roads are mentioned in the OP.

corktina

i don't mind if people want to (or are only able to) do 80k...it's the ones who do 98k that bug me....(probably because they have old cars and think 60mph=100km/h)

Drivers are welcome to do what ever speed they want in my book, if they want to speed, well, I'm not a Gard and if they want to dawdle good luck to them. In both cases however, the slower driver should move over to let them pass if they can safely

650Ginge

SV wrote: »

You're choosing to overtake, actually.
So if you're overtaking whilst it's dangerous to do so because you want to go that extra 20km/h more...then you're the dangerous driver.


btw, just because I think it's relevant..over say 20 miles the difference in time you'd save at driving at 80km/h and driving at 100km/h is just under 5 minutes.
If anyone is making any kinda significant fuel saving by driving at 80km/h then I'd say it's well worth it.

Just to further back up the point the average speed of traffic (albeit in the uk) is 64km/h. Also and this is unproven you have more chance of setting on average speed closer to your maximum in you are doing 80 than doing a 100 max. At 80 you don't often have to slow down for bends (I am sure that is going to be miss interpreted), tractors, trucks etc. so the time difference is much less than a straight 80 v 100 over any given distance.

Your fuel useage will be much higher. You will accelerate more often to get back to 100 after the above mentioned obstacles. In most vehicles they will use 40% more fuel at 100 than 80, due to wind and mechanical restistance. I would rather spend it on other things like holidays or motorbikes or going out for dinner.

I am a moron with only a certain amount if money, I spend it how I want and if driving at 86-87 puts €400 in my pocket then I am happy with the few minutes here and there. Unlike the many idiots that buy new cars costing 10's of thousands to save hundred in tax and fuel.

I also arrive much more relaxed.

cpoh1

People are entitled to do whatever speed they like on the road provided they are not posing a danger to other cars - this is aimed at people who drive at dangerously low speeds on roads which can be just as dangerous as a guy doing over the speed limit. This is something that is policed in other countries but not in Ireland for some reason where the overriding opinion seems to be "shure theyre not hurting anyone".

Ive spent quite a bit travelling around europe, australia and spent a lot of time in NZ and it seems to be an Irish thing where fellas just dont like being overtaken. There are slow drivers everywhere but the difference in other countries is that these drivers recognise the desire of others to drive with more progress and move over. Whether thats moving into a hard shoulder momentarily or slowing down a little and pulling in to the left on a straight to allow a guy to complete the manouvre. A lot of people will actually pull over if they see a backlog of cars behind them with no overtaking opportunities ahead.

Guys that travel below the speed limit have a think about the people behind you and ask yourself can I facilitate them in any way, I know I try to let people on their way regardless of the speed im doing.

You are not legally compelled to do so but it sure is the right thing to do.

cpoh1

650Ginge wrote: »

Your fuel useage will be much higher. You will accelerate more often to get back to 100 after the above mentioned obstacles. In most vehicles they will use 40% more fuel at 100 than 80, due to wind and mechanical restistance. I would rather spend it on other things like holidays or motorbikes or going out for dinner.

How long is a piece of string? How many ways can you skin a cat?

78% of statistics are made up on the spot.

padd b1975

freedominacup wrote: »

Are you sure? More than one farmer has been fined for "impeding the progress of other road users" by not pulling in/stopping to allow other traffic pass. It's the fundamental law of the rules of the road, concern for other road users and one of the fundamentals of that is to not do anything which impedes another road users progress. It's not up to you to dictate the speed of other road users. That said the driver most unlikely to hold you up in my experience is a truck driver.

I've sat in your seat also. I drove a small rigid for a few years for work and the most infuriating habit amongst car drivers of a certain type was tailgating because "they were trying to pass you" and when you pull in to allow to overtake they continue to sit there 5-6 feet from your tailgate with indicator on not making any attempt. I had a 5 second rule, if after 5 seconds no stir then my right indicator goes on and that joker can sit there for the next I don't care how many miles I won't be pulling in.

No, to be honest, I'm not 100% sure.

There seems to be a grey area as regards the true purpose of the hard shoulder.

But lets concentrate for a moment on what posters are requesting it to be used for, I don't think any form of traffic travelling at 80km/h should have fingers pointed at them for not moving into a section of road which can often be in poor condition with possible hidden gateways up along that they may not have noticed.

Speaking as a trucker, overhanging branches can make short work of a mirror if driving on the hard shoulder.

Will the driver I allow to overtake by this method stop and offer to explain to my transport manager why the mirror has been ripped off??

Of course he won't:rolleyes:


My motto; if in doubt, stay out!


A massive +1 to the second part of your post.

Supergurrier

I drive at 80 all the time, whats the rush

A Country Voice

cpoh1 wrote: »

1
People are entitled to do whatever speed they like on the road provided they are not posing a danger to other cars - this is aimed at people who drive at dangerously low speeds on roads which can be just as dangerous as a guy doing over the speed limit. This is something that is policed in other countries but not in Ireland for some reason where the overriding opinion seems to be "shure theyre not hurting anyone".

2
......spent a lot of time in NZ and it seems to be an Irish thing where fellas just dont like being overtaken. There are slow drivers everywhere but the difference in other countries is that these drivers recognise the desire of others to drive with more progress and move over. Whether thats moving into a hard shoulder momentarily or slowing down a little and pulling in to the left on a straight to allow a guy to complete the manouvre. A lot of people will actually pull over if they see a backlog of cars behind them with no overtaking opportunities ahead.

3
Guys that travel below the speed limit have a think about the people behind you and ask yourself can I facilitate them in any way, I know I try to let people on their way regardless of the speed im doing.

You are not legally compelled to do so but it sure is the right thing to do.

I agree totally with parts 1 and 3 of your post. If its safe to do so then people should be considerate and allow cars to overtake them where possible.
The one thing I disagree with is on driver behaviour in NZ. I've been there a lot and driven there a lot. What struck me about it was its very similar to here when you get to a passing lane, a guy that was doing 80kmph for the past 6 miles suddenly speeds up to 100kmph for the duration of the passing lane and then slows down to 80kmph again once he's back to single lane traffic. I don't understand the logic behind not wanting people to overtake you, but I see a lot of it on the roads in Ireland too. :rolleyes:

ACV

Lawless2k12

padd b1975 wrote: »

My motto; if in doubt, stay out!

Sorry, I can't let that go! You just ruined Colin McRae's most famous saying for driving :mad:

If you were to use that in the context of women however, you would have my approval :pac:

I agree with what you said though but I never mind a trucker not pulling in as they are on the road so much and it's actually a tough job. And they are probably the best drivers around as they can drive a house through gaps most people wouldn't drive a bike through so I have respect for them.

It's those drivers that go out to have a gawk at the country side, totally oblivious to everything around them. The ones that bomb it through villages at 75/80 and then maintain this exact same speed along the main roads and motorways. I was behind one of them today and they were so oblivious to what was behind them that they didn't even have their mirrors folded out the way hence why they swerved into my lane a roundabout. They didn't even know I existed!

GreeBo

Lawless2k12 wrote: »

I never mind a trucker not pulling in as they are on the road so much and it's actually a tough job. And they are probably the best drivers around as they can drive a house through gaps most people wouldn't drive a bike through so I have respect for them.

It's those drivers that go out to have a gawk at the country side, totally oblivious to everything around them.

So now its ok for people to not let you past as long as you respect them?
Laughable is not the word.

Lawless2k12

GreeBo wrote: »

So now its ok for people to not let you past as long as you respect them?
Laughable is not the word.

All I'm saying is they're on duty and legally they have to go 80kmh. Plus the fact they drive a huge vehicle which I for one wouldn't drive on the hard shoulder because if anything happened to be there there'd be no hope of stopping. When someone is driving 80kmh and is holding me up when they CAN do 100kmh, now that's what gets me. They're allowed do that speed, no argument there, but it's very annoying that they don't give a toss about the snake of a queue behind!

Del2005

ManMade wrote: »

I've been driving for a few months now. It's annoying how many people believe the maximum is the minimum.

This constant quoting of RSAs, paid for by taxpayers, BS of it's a limit not a target is getting old hat now. As the old saying goes actions speak louder than words and all my face to face time with RSA officials has required me to drive at the limit. So untill the RSA removes "Failing to make progress" from their tests, I'll drive to the limit when it's safe to do so.

ManMade wrote: »

If someone is uncomfortable driving at 100 why are they idiots. They are being responsible. Flashing you're lights aint going to make them feel anymore comfortable. Safety/being in control beats driving the limit every time.

I'm uncomfortable in water above my neck as I can't swim, guess what I don't go into deep water. If your not comfortable at 100km/h stay off the 100km/h roads or else use your mirrors. On a lot of roads it's possible to drive to the left of the lane so following traffic can see ahead and pass safer. IMO sitting on the middle line at 80km/h is just as dangerous as the driver who does the risky overtake, as neither are paying attention to the road or traffic. Driving slowly doesn't equal driving safely, no matter what the RSA say.

GreeBo wrote: »

So now its ok for people to not let you past as long as you respect them?
Laughable is not the word.

HGVs and buses can't go any faster by law, drivers of large vehicles also actually use their mirrors while driving so will be aware of traffic behind. They will usually pull to the left if possible. Most of the people who sit at 80km/h, regardless of the limit being higher or lower, haven't the foggiest notion of what's happening on the road.

dh0011

Del2005 wrote: »

This constant quoting of RSAs, paid for by taxpayers, BS of it's a limit not a target is getting old hat now. As the old saying goes actions speak louder than words and all my face to face time with RSA officials has required me to drive at the limit. So untill the RSA removes "Failing to make progress" from their tests, I'll drive to the limit when it's safe to do so.



I'm uncomfortable in water above my neck as I can't swim, guess what I don't go into deep water. If your not comfortable at 100km/h stay off the 100km/h roads or else use your mirrors. On a lot of roads it's possible to drive to the left of the lane so following traffic can see ahead and pass safer. IMO sitting on the middle line at 80km/h is just as dangerous as the driver who does the risky overtake, as neither are paying attention to the road or traffic. Driving slowly doesn't equal driving safely, no matter what the RSA say.





HGVs and buses can't go any faster by law, drivers of large vehicles also actually use their mirrors while driving so will be aware of traffic behind. They will usually pull to the left if possible. Most of the people who sit at 80km/h, regardless of the limit being higher or lower, haven't the foggiest notion of what's happening on the road.

i failed my first driving test on progress and since then see the speed limit as a target to a point but I wouldnt do 100km/h on a sharp bend just because that is the speed limit.
The progress marks on the driving test dont agree with the RSA's ads at all and one of them should change

CiniO

dh0011 wrote: »

i failed my first driving test on progress and since then see the speed limit as a target to a point but I wouldnt do 100km/h on a sharp bend just because that is the speed limit.
The progress marks on the driving test dont agree with the RSA's ads at all and one of them should change

Because driving test is not really about checking if you can drive obeying the law, but it's about checking if you can drive to the rules that they invented (driving testers).

Del2005

dh0011 wrote: »

i failed my first driving test on progress and since then see the speed limit as a target to a point but I wouldnt do 100km/h on a sharp bend just because that is the speed limit.
The progress marks on the driving test dont agree with the RSA's ads at all and one of them should change

I never said I would do that?

visual

dh0011 wrote: »

i failed my first driving test on progress and since then see the speed limit as a target to a point but I wouldnt do 100km/h on a sharp bend just because that is the speed limit.
The progress marks on the driving test dont agree with the RSA's ads at all and one of them should change

Lack of progress is a traffic offenc and its should be enforce by garda as much as speeding.

dh0011

visual wrote: »

Lack of progress is a traffic offenc and its should be enforce by garda as much as speeding.

only on motorways as far as i know
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056172025
and there you have to be over 50km/h

CiniO

dh0011 wrote: »

only on motorways as far as i know
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056172025
and there you have to be over 50km/h

It's not required by law to drive over 50km/h on the motorway.

You obviously could be prosecuted for as was said here before "failing to progress", but you could be done for that the same if doing 40km/h or 60km/h.

There is no magical minimum limit of 50km/h on Irish motorways, in oppose to many other countries which do indeed introduce minimum speed limit, on the continent most commonly of 40km/h.

dh0011

CiniO wrote: »

It's not required by law to drive over 50km/h on the motorway.

You obviously could be prosecuted for as was said here before "failing to progress", but you could be done for that the same if doing 40km/h or 60km/h.

There is no magical minimum limit of 50km/h on Irish motorways, in oppose to many other countries which do indeed introduce minimum speed limit, on the continent most commonly of 40km/h.

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/leader-local/man-in-limerick-court-for-driving-too-slowly-in-tractor-on-the-motorway-1-2419625

this judge seems to disagree with you

CiniO

dh0011 wrote: »

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/leader-local/man-in-limerick-court-for-driving-too-slowly-in-tractor-on-the-motorway-1-2419625

this judge seems to disagree with you

If he does - it's his problem.
But if you really read through the article, it's not the judge who disagrees, but the journalist who wrote:

A minimum speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour applies to Irish motorways.

Which statement is just not true.

There isn't any law setting the minimum speed limit for Irish motorways.

Del2005

dh0011 wrote: »

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/leader-local/man-in-limerick-court-for-driving-too-slowly-in-tractor-on-the-motorway-1-2419625

this judge seems to disagree with you

If the judge disagreed then they'd have fined the person for driving too slowly. The law only states a vehicle has to be able to exceed 50km/h, not that you need to 50km/h.

Seweryn

dh0011 wrote: »

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/leader-local/man-in-limerick-court-for-driving-too-slowly-in-tractor-on-the-motorway-1-2419625

this judge seems to disagree with you

That is some bull-sheyt. Shows the state of this country where a judge can't even interpret our Rules of The Road.

thecomedian

I thought it is illegal for tractors to be on motorways?

Seweryn

thecomedian wrote: »

I thought it is illegal for tractors to be on motorways?

Yes, it is.

guil

Seweryn wrote: »

Yes, it is.

No it's not if they can do over 50kmh

Actually, looking at the road traffic act there's no minimum speed limit

Seweryn

guil wrote: »

no it's not if they can do over 50kmh

True, just checked it. They are allowed in Ireland, but in other countries, tractors can't be driven on motorways.

Just to be clear, the 50km/h requirement is for the maximum speed of the vehicle, not speed that has to be maintained on motorways.

guil

Seweryn wrote: »

True, just checked it. They are allowed in Ireland, but in other countries, tractors can't be driven on motorways.

Just to be clear, the 50km/h requirement is for the maximum speed of the vehicle, not speed that has to be maintained on motorways.

There is nothing to state that though, I know it's on the signs but if it isn't in the act can someone be prosectued for it

Seweryn

guil wrote: »

There is nothing to state that though, I know it's on the signs but if it isn't in the act can someone be prosecuted for it

It purely depends on the judge IMO and his interpretation of ROR. There is no minimum speed on motorways.