To think driving 20 miles under the speed limit is really dangerous?

[Subtext]

There's a long stretch of B road near my parents' place where the speed limit is 60 mph.

I can't tell you how many times I've been stuck behind someone pootling along at 40mph. It happened again today and this time the person I was stuck behind was indicating right for the whole length of the two mile stretch. Ie shit driver.

It's so annoying. And apart from anything else it's really dangerous to drive too slowly. Really boils my piss.

AIBU to think if the speed limit is 60 you should more or less attempt to drive at 60?

It's the 40mph brigade. They just do 40. 40 in a 60 speed limit is annoying, but then they continue to do 40 through the villages which is worse.

Do none of you have HGVs where you live? They are limited to 40mph on single carriageway roads, so where I live I frequently have to travel at 40mph on a road where the limit is 60, until it is safe to overtake - which is not in many places. I would far rather overtake a car doing 40mph than an articulated lorry.

I can't stand what I call the "40 club", regardless of wind, rain, visibility and the speed limit they have to drive at 40 mph, at best it's frustrating, at worst it's downright dangerous.

YANBU

X post with Endo

I always thought it was dangerous because if someone's driving at the speed limit and they come up behind you doing 20mph faster than you, then depending on the conditions and visibility, they could slam right up the back of you. Or at least have to brake dangerously themselves.

Presumably they couldn't see the driver in front because of the sweeping bends?

In that case, I would say it's not a 60 mph road. There are regularly deer, tractors and cars stopped waiting to turn right on the road I mentioned in my post above - and driver doing 60 mph and slamming into one of them would clearly be at fault.

I failed my first driving test for driving too slowly. I was doing 22 in a 30. A lot of slow drivers are also not very confident and hesitant which is dangerous too.

If the limit is 60 then you aren't being unreasonable

If its a national speed limit rd then the safe speed is subjective and drivers will judge it differently so you might be being unreasonable -hard to know without knowing the stretch of rd

if someone's driving at the speed limit and they come up behind you doing 20mph faster than you, then depending on the conditions and visibility, they could slam right up the back of you. Or at least have to brake dangerously themselves.

Er, no, that's a crazy argument.

You have to find an appropriate speed so you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear (Highway Code)

If you can't see the road is unobstructed (potentially by tractors/horses/cyclists/previous accident etc etc etc) the you need to slow down. No danger of running into pootlers then.

Wabbity aren't you meant to brake when taking a corner?

I'm being taught to do exactly that?

I failed my test the other week and one of the reasons was me driving to slow, my instructor never said a word, I now have a new instructor and one of the things he's pointed out is that if its safe to do so ie open road that I should do near to 60, but there is a long winding road that I know and is mostly 60 but I wouldn't feel happy doing it there.

My Mum is a member of the 'drive everywhere at 40' club. I hate being a passenger in her car. She also drives as close to the left verge as is possible meaning the car is scraping against bushes and branches making you jump every couple of minutes when one hits the windscreen with a loud 'thwack'!

There is a 60 limit road not far from me and when I first passed my test I was driving along it, nearing 60, when suddenly, without warning, the road curved round to the left. I very nearly hit a fence and ended up on the wrong side of the road. If I had been familiar with the road I would have been travelling a lot slower and always bear that episode in mind when travelling new roads.

Maybe the people you were stuck behind were not familiar with the road? Or frightened of their accelerator??

All ignoring my comment then? How can it be dangerous to drive at 20mph below the speed limit ie 40mph in a 60mph when it is what HGVs are required to do by law?

I always thought it was dangerous because if someone's driving at the speed limit and they come up behind you doing 20mph faster than you, then depending on the conditions and visibility, they could slam right up the back of you.

YABU Surely you shouldn't drive so fast that you can't take evasive action for what might be ahead?!

I'm more than comfortable driving at 60, depending on the conditions and slow drivers irritate me too. but they do not slow you down significantly, they are not breaking the law and they are not dangerous. The twats who get frustrated and perform dangerous overtaking manoeuvres are the dangerous ones.

Most b roads are categorised for driving at 60 - national speed limit sign - but on many of them to actually drive at that speed would be suicidal

Fwiw, I think the indicator thing is much worse. that really is dangerous as it could induce someone to pull out thinking the other car is going to do something that it doesn't

Oh, just seen that CinnabarRed made the same point. Crikey, I wouldn't like to encounter you on a bend, OP.

Exactly migsy. This road that it's safe to do 60 on, but there may not be time to stop if someone in front of you is doing 40 (or god forbid they break down!) sounds extraordinary.

YABU and yanbu
Plenty of A roads aren't safe for steady driving at 60 and 40-50 is more appropriate. However if you are talking about those idiots who sit there clutching the steering wheel and peering over the windscreen like they are terrified, sticking at 38 all the way along a massive stretch of clear road, yanbu.
I never overtake but I did once after being stuck behind one of these jokers. They had the nerve to beep me! The road ahead was clear, it wasn't like I took a risk. They just beeped me out of chagrin that I insulted their ridiculous driving I think.

YABU. I was thinking about this recently when I was driving around a part of the country where the route to practically everywhere seemed be along a lot of windy B roads. The limit was 60 on virtually all of them but you would have had to be insane to drive at 60 for most of the time because you couldn't see what was coming round corners and over hills. If there was a rule that a 60 limit means you must drive at 60, there would either be carnage or a rapid revision of country road speed limits.

And another thing. People who walk on pavements should be fined, because some pavement users like to run, and runners can't be expected occasionally to wait to get past safely.

Gosh - I wouldn't like to be a cyclist on roads that some of the people on here drive on, if they are worried that they might drive into the back of someone driving slower

You should always drive at a speed that allows you to stop within your zone of visibility. What happens if you go round one of those sweeping corners and there is a a cyclist, a cow, a deer, a broken down car - or, god forbid, a crash caused by someone else who sees the speed limit as a target and has gone into the back of someone, in your way?

YASOOOOOOOONBU. They do my head in.

Yanbu this drives me mad.

I do not understand it and in my opinion they should not be driving and they do cause accidents. It is really frustrating and I get so annoyed with them even though I know it's unreasonable to get so wound up.

It's even worse when they are on the bypass or motorway driving at 40mph. Those drivers scare me

There's a 60mph road out of our village, it's slightly windy but through open fields so you have great visibility. It's annoying when people do 40 the whole way but then still do 40 when it gets to the much more bendy/dangerous 20 and then 30mph section after!! Grr!

I was also told by my driving instructor to not drive to slowly

I've not seen one cogent post on this thread that outlines how driving at 40 in a 60 zone is dangerous. There is scarcely even an attempt to explain.