Seven people overtook me in the space of 20 minutes

[Tankersome]

AIBU to be so bloody annoyed by how easily some people find it to speed?

I live rurally with lots of windy, pot-holed single track roads. I commute into the town every day. The rural roads are all NSL but I drive them around 35mph max - and always pull over on the rare times a car is behind me to let them pass if they like.

When i finally get onto the main road that takes me into town, i get myself up to 60mph and switch on cruise control. It's a lovely straight single-carriageway with no pot-holes so I feel comfortable doing this.

But despite going the speed limit, I'm always overtaken. This morning it was a new record with seven people overtaking me in the space of the 20 minutes I'm on that particular road (it was five last night on the drive home).

They don't just speed to overtake either - they continue along at 70-80mph until they're out of my sight. It's not a busy or congested road whatsoever, and there aren't any pavements. So they probably feel safe going at that speed but it's illegal. I've never once seen a speed camera van parked at the roadside either so there is no incentive for these people to drive within the speed limit.

It just really annoys me. Yes, we all have places to be. But why do some people feel so at ease with speeding like that? And the annoying thing is, it makes me feel like I'm the one in the wrong because it's as though I'm holding people up despite going the fastest speed allowed on the road.

OP, bit drip drip that photo. Not really. She said in her OP the the roads were winding, potholed and single track. And no, it wasn't that road where she was driving at the 60mph and was overtaken by 7 people.

thetemptationofchocolate It wasn't dual carriageway where people were overtaking. She said in the OP that it was "single carriageway"

There seems to be lots of confusion in this thread - are people finding it difficult to distinguish between "single track" and "single carriageway"?

Tractors go this slow 35mph. People overtake them when its safe to do so - what's the problem.

@MereDint

Agreed. I understood exactly the kind of roads described because I have experience of them since childhood, but lots of people are falling over themselves to demonstrate (online ) how great a driver they are, whilst simultaneously showing they are woefully uninformed.

And again - I am perfectly comfortable with speed!

I don't speed and not surprisingly I have never had an accident or speeding fine. Idiots overtake me all the time sometimes even when I am only slow because I am directly behind a learner. There are some very bad drivers around.

Anyway, thank you. I hate this obsession with speeding on roads. Don't let anyone bully you into driving faster if you don't want to.

The obsession is from those who are anti higher speeds (any speed is technically speeding - it is not a pejorative term - it simply means to have speed ;)) and as the stats I linked to and quoted above, speed as a factor of death is statistically really very very insignificant - we should spend more time worrying about people on stairs and steps - I remember running a safety R&D company some years back and looking into stats as to why people end up in A&E - the two biggest reasons: step ladders & trousers!!! - step ladders makes sense, but apparently trousers is because of the number of people who put both legs into one hole, fall over and hit their head against the bed / dressing table / child / cat / etc.

And I agree there shouldn't be such an obsession against speed ;) there are stretches of roads where it would be safe for me to drive at 120mph, and others where 20mph might be better - anyone who drives constantly at: way below the speed limit / exactly at the speed limit (OP) / way above the speed limit has an issue - and it is not the speed, but their lack of observation and sensitivity to the context meaning that they don't vary their speed...

think of driving like music:

• music has louds and softs / fast passages and slow passages / pauses / acceleration / etc. - so should driving
• those who drive well and use the road to its capacity, simply have more dynamic range - the OP doing 60mph on cruise control along an open NSL is rather like listening to Glass' Silent Symphony - acceptable, but boring and with little thought involved - someone who uses the road more appropriately to its context - slowing when necessary, using the space when possible, is more like a decent piece of music - thoughtful and deliberate etc.
• in music there will be times when it is inappropriate to go too fast / too slow / too loud / too soft - so with driving

If I have half a mile of open road in front of me - and on the assumption that everything else stacks up (in good health and not tired / solid, reliable car / no turnings / no mud on road / etc. etc.) then there is absolutely nothing unsafe about taking that road at 30mph / 60mph / 90mph / 120mph

now, add in mud on road / other drivers / low light levels / etc. - that same stretch of road hasn't changed per se - but my approach to it must - so, it may no longer be safe to do the same speed - if just other drivers, then 30mph may not now be safe, if mud on road or low light levels, then 60 / 90 / 120 might not be safe...

the issue with the OP's post - (other than the fact that she came across as a little bit self-righteous and everyone else is wrong - and mixed that up with glaring issues as to her own driving which then came across a bit hypocritically - and then drip-fed the type of road... etc.) is that there is a clear lack of understanding of the need to drive to the context and that safety is about context and speed combined, not speed as an arbitrary figure...

So, no-one is bullying the OP - the road she posted for her initial max of 35mph turns out to be no better than a farm lane - which was not clear in the original post - but even so, cruise control on at 60mph and then complaining that others overtake just demonstrates how unaware she is of how to drive to the context... golden rule - cruise control should never be used on a car where you might need to vary your speed - this is a key example of that

YANBU. People who speed rely on the rest of us to move and slow and manoeuvre to keep them safe, and allow them to drive like idiots and stay alive. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen idiots overtake dangerously , and other cars have all taken evasive action to prevent a huge accident, while the idiot speeds off into the distance telling him/herself what a clever safe driver they are!

It gobsmacks me that people are challenging the OP for "only" going at max 35mph on narrow single track roads. I'm surprised that anyone who claims that she is "wrong" to know better than the powers-that-be who decided on the NSL passed their tests, given that the Highway Code actually explicitly states that it is an absolute maximum and that it doesn't mean it is safe to drive at this speed in all conditions

https://www.gov.uk/speed-limits

(And user - if you'd RTFT, you'd have known that the photo that the OP posted wasn't of the NSL stretch of road that she was complaining that people had overtaken her on while she was going at 60mph, but demonstrative of the sort of single track road that she drives on at a maximum of 35mph before she gets on to the single carriageway road)

I can think of many roads in Scotland where I wouldn't be able to safely get above 35mph due to restricted sight lines - due to either or all bends, blind crests and high banks. Best case scenario is that you could come across a herd of cattle, a flock of sheep, cyclists or walkers in the road around the corner and you need to be able to stop before hitting them. Worst case is that you meet another car coming the other way - possibly even a numpty who thinks it is safe to go at 50mph. With a combined velocity of 85mph, that's an accident waiting to happen. I don't know about others, but I'd prefer not to have an accident.

I hope those who think it is ok to go above 60mph because the road and car conditions allow it don't ever go on the A77 to Stranraer or the A9 up to Inverness. Single carriageway roads (or sections) - but average speed cameras ensuring that you will get a ticket if you go above the speed limits. In fact, iirc, you could even lose your licence in a single trip as you could get a separate speeding ticket for each section in which you knew better broke the speed limit

YANBU about the rural roads. I grew up with similar lanes to the one pictured, and it's terrifying how many people think NSL = this road is certified safe to drive at 60mph. There seems to be this nanny-state mentality that the government has risk-assessed each metre of road and come up with a precise speed limit, when, in reality, most rural roads (especially lanes) are completely ignored by the council etc unless local residents make a fuss.

The most common accidents in our area were people rolling their cars after taking corners too quickly, head-on collisions with other cars at blind bends, lot of ice/water-related skids (always worse on lanes which have poor drainage, or fields' run-off, and which are rarely gritted), and hitting deer. Almost all of them were caused or worsened by excessive speed.

And I've noticed even people who drive with adequate caution around the windiest, narrow lanes tend to lose their heads a bit when they get onto a main road, so YANBU about that, either. I've done it too often myself: half an hour of inching around tractors and blind bends, then woo hoo, THE PROPER ROAD. You are genuinely thrilled to use fourth or even fifth gear. So our local main road has a particularly high accident rate, too.

There seems to be lots of confusion in this thread - are people finding it difficult to distinguish between "single track" and "single carriageway"?

Single track is single carriageway...

Single track = wide enough for one car, not two (one in each direction) won't have white lines down the middle - but some roads without white lines are still wide enough for two cars, so are not single-track. Single-track roads must be signposted as such.

single carriageway = no divider (grass / raised area / barrier / etc.) between the carriageways, can have many lanes in either direction, but still be single carriageway

dual carriageway = divider between the two carriageways (i.e. you can't overtake using the other side of the road) - but can have any number of lanes in each direction - so dual carriageway could still have one lane in each direction, or more...

Single-track is simply about the width, it has no bearing on visibility or ability to drive at any specific speed - you can have a single-track road across the open moors where you can see miles ahead, and you can have normal roads (wide enough for cars in both directions) where they are windy and visibility is low...

no such definition by its nature specifies the safe speed - in law the NSL is different between dual and single carriageway - but single track roads are simply single carriageway, and still hold a 60mph NSL unless signed at a different speed limit...

YANBU. People who speed rely on the rest of us to move and slow and manoeuvre to keep them safe, and allow them to drive like idiots and stay alive. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen idiots overtake dangerously , and other cars have all taken evasive action to prevent a huge accident, while the idiot speeds off into the distance telling him/herself what a clever safe driver they are!

You are conflating two things:

• speed
• dangerous driving

dangerous driving (e.g. inappropriate speed) is always wrong / silly / dangerous

speed is not inherently wrong / silly / dangerous - unless used inappropriately

you don't get to define what is inappropriate - the Law defines what is illegal, but interestingly doesn't automatically define illegal as dangerous - that requires different evidence...

and on the assumption that everything else stacks up (in good health and not tired / solid, reliable car / no turnings / no mud on road / etc. etc.)

Except this is a very big assumption.

I am a generally fast driver. If somewhere is NSL, I go at that speed if it’s safe to do so. This morning I was on a road I know, which is NSL, for about 5mins. Most of that time, I drove between 15 and 30 mph. Like some country roads, it’s not wide enough in places for 2 cars unless you go slightly onto the verge. It’s full of bends too. If you go round a bend at speed and a car is coming the other way, you’d crash into it, no doubt at all. Even if a rural road is wide enough for two cars, all you need is a cyclist and an approaching car as you go round that bend and someone or something is going to get crunched. I am gob smacked at the posters who think it’s dangerous to go at 35mph on a winding country road.

Re-reading some of the more recent posts, it does indeed seem that people are confusing single track, single carriageway and dual carriageway.

Just so that people are clear and don't need to go back and reread the Highway Code :

Single track = only room for one car at a time. Requires passing places for a car going the other direction to pass.

Single carriageway: a road with cars going both directions at once. NSL (if signposted) is 60 mph.

Dual carriageway: a road with cars going both directions but the different directions are separated by some sort of barrier (may just be a grass strip but could be crash barriers). NSL (if signposted) is 70mph.

To confuse matters still further, a single carriageway may have 2 lanes going each way - and a dual carriageway may only have one lane going each way (A77 used to have examples of both, but the section I'm thinking of is now motorway)

anyone who drives constantly at: way below the speed limit / exactly at the speed limit (OP) / way above the speed limit has an issue - and it is not the speed, but their lack of observation and sensitivity to the context meaning that they don't vary their speed

This is so true. I live on a 40mph A road which I drive daily. The amount of cars who stick rigidly to 35mph is unbelievable, completely oblivious to anything around them, such as children, delivery vans, workers on the road, etc, i.e. too fast when there are hazards and too slow otherwise, meaning frustration and overtaking. Then, when the road turns into a 30mph, they just carry on at 35, so basically they have zero awareness of what's around them and don't even notice the signage! I vary my speed according to the road conditions, not the signage, which may well mean as little as 20 in the 40 areas (if there are hazards).

you are driving in an unsafe manner if you are doing 35 in a 60

My issue wouldn't be with your driving at 35mph on a single track country road, if anything it's not unusual or uncalled for.

My issue would be with you using cruise control on a single carriageway at 60mph with other vehicles close to you. If you're being overtaken by 5-7 vehicles every journey the road is not clear enough to use something that would impair your ability to moderate your speed quickly. Having to take off cruise control is another step in dealing with a situation that is urgent. As otherwise said, you're also probably realisitically driving at 55-58mph, not 60.

you are driving in an unsafe manner if you are doing 35 in a 60

No, you aren't. A single track with passing places rural line with high sides and sightlines of less than 30 yards will often be NSL.

CBA to read the lot. People who think you drive to the speed limit regardless of road conditions obviously a) have sex with a mechanic so get free fixes b) ditto for their petrol and c) are a bloody menace.

Honey

Not necessarily. Depends entirely on the conditions , it could well be that 35 is too fast for the single track road shown in the picture, if there are bends, traffic coming the other way, pedestrians, cyclists, horses, tractors, mud, etc etc.

If that many people overtook you then its a sure sign you are going too slowly

Having to take off cruise control is another step in dealing with a situation that is urgent.

Cruise control cancels by touching the brakes, as I'm sure you realise.

But that's actually one of the reasons why it's undesirable on minor roads. People get used to it cancelling on application of the brakes, so they brake when otherwise they would just lift off the accelerator. That causes the people behind to brake when they, in fact, should just have lifted off, and so the ripple goes back. There is a lot more brief flashing of brake lights on busy motorways than there was twenty years ago, and I'm sure that's down to widespread use of non-adaptive cruise control.

And cruise control on manuals is a bloody menace on hilly roads, because people don't notice their speed decaying uphill and then struggle to get it back up again because they don't realise they need to change down.

The road you're being overtaken on is presumably a 60mph limit and therefore if you're doing somewhere between 55 and 60 then there's no issue with you being slow.
If people overtaking you are doing 70+ in a 60 limit, they are of course driving too fast. But most people do go a bit over the 60/70 limit. You only have to look at a free flowing motorway. I'd be more cautious on a 60mph single carriageway road than a motorway ot tbh a dual carriageway I know well.

Well i know who i would rather meet on some of our local roads.
Op doing 35 rather than some clever dick who thinks he is Jim Clark and who sees nsl as the prescribed speed for every road without a specific speed limit sign on it. Having had some near misses due to these idiots i wish the driving test could include rural roads as some people just dont have the sense they were born with.

pb was just reading yesterday that there has been a reduction in accidents and fatalities based over a 3 year stretch since the cameras were introduced on the A9 (though it's been closed at least twice in the last few weeks becasue of accidents). However the thinking is that at least part of that is due to HGVs being allowed to go at 50 instead of 40 so as to help with the frustration element (although I bet that doesn't help when you get those very short sections of two lanes/overtaking lane when it will now mean less cars can get past as the lorry is already doing 50!).

So, both reducing and increasing speed has helped with safety in this case.

For me, if you are ever conducting a manoever that causes someone else to brake then you shouldn't have done that. e.g. pulling out into traffic/overtaking etc.

To gingham..
Mind you I think it would help if the 'end of restriction' signs were replaced with ones showing the actual limit for that road!

Well it certainly doesn't work in 30 zones does it?
And it's usually the school run parents up my arse when I'm going 30 in a 30 zone, in a built up area towards the school. Or the jackass who goes at 40 regardless of the set limit.

Funnily enough, if there's a mobile camera, they all clearly know the speed limit then and stick below it. ( whilst getting on social media to warn all of their other mummy friends about the nasty policeman, I always say something in response...cannot resist )

Op, I live in a similar rural environment and with very similar roads. I love driving fast, I'm a petrol head. BUT, my wants don't come above others safety. I'm a cyclist also and it is fucking scary how people drive, honestly it is.

I think you are driving appropriately for the roads you encounter. After all the speeds set are LIMITS not TARGETS!!