 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / UK Car Forums / Driving (UK group) / May 2008Let's hear it for...
The complete f.cking w.nker on the A32 yesterday, driving an M3 CSL. He was driving just a few inches behind a classic Royce, but for some reason had decided to straddle the white line, so that he was preventing anyone from overtaking both cars, which were driving at about 20mph. Eventually the Royce driver stopped and the BMW driving twat also stopped, in the middle of the road, got out to speak to the Royce driver, while leaving his car blocking traffic in both directions. Then he returned to his car making waving and grimacing gestures at everyone in sight, got back in and drive off. I thought that would be the last I saw of the twat, but no, he was stopped at the next set of lights, heading the same way I was. Just as the lights changed to green, someone towing a caravan pulled out of a garage near the lights and BMW man ended up behind him. The road from that point on is marked with double white lines for several miles. So, did BMW man sit back, leave adequate braking distance and wait until the road markings returned to dashed lines? Did he buggery, he started the same daft trick, driving astride the double white line, just a few inches from the back of the caravan. He made occasional attempts to overtake, apparently oblivious to the road markings and to the presence of oncoming traffic. He was also oblivious to the fact that the road has double whites because the visibility is terrible as the road twists and turns through a heavily wooded section for a couple of miles. He eventually overtook across double whites on a blind bend forcing the caravan tower to brake hard to let him back in as a truck came into view... and then he sat there in the long queue of traffic for the next twelve miles. All he had gained was being ahead of the caravan. Total, utter, f.cking tosser. > The complete f.cking w.nker on the A32 yesterday, driving an M3 CSL. He > was driving just a few inches behind a classic Royce, but for some [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Total, utter, f.cking tosser. Being in front of a large vehicle that would block your view of the road ahead is certainly preferable to being behind it (lorry-drivers please note - this is the main reason why so many car-drivers are anxious to be in front of you rather than behind you) - though not so much as to justify the risky overtaking maneouvre you describe. > Being in front of a large vehicle that would block your view of the road > ahead is certainly preferable to being behind it (lorry-drivers please > note - this is the main reason why so many car-drivers are anxious to be > in front of you rather than behind you) - though not so much as to > justify the risky overtaking maneouvre you describe. It's also the reason so many car drivers attempt to kill themselves overtaking by 4x4. And then once they have got past they slow down to drive at 50mph where the road is signed NSL (sigh). Allowing a greater distance between them and the vehicle in front never seems to occur to them, they just drive so close that they can't see past my vehicle at all. >> Being in front of a large vehicle that would block your view of the road >> ahead is certainly preferable to being behind it (lorry-drivers please [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >overtaking by 4x4. And then once they have got past they slow down to >drive at 50mph where the road is signed NSL (sigh). The NSL is a limit not a target, Filth. That's why it's NSL not NST. >>> Being in front of a large vehicle that would block your view of the road >>> ahead is certainly preferable to being behind it (lorry-drivers please [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > The NSL is a limit not a target, Filth. That's why it's NSL not NST. Not driving up to the limit when it's otherwise safe is either inconsiderate or just plain incompetent. >>>> Being in front of a large vehicle that would block your view of the road >>>> ahead is certainly preferable to being behind it (lorry-drivers please [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Not driving up to the limit when it's otherwise safe is either >inconsiderate or just plain incompetent. Crap. If anyone wants to go faster, let them overtake. If they're too incompetent to overtake, let them stay where they are. 50mph is not an unreasonable/inconsiderate speed. What's the hurry anyway? The pubs are open all day now. graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>Not driving up to the limit when it's otherwise safe is either >>inconsiderate or just plain incompetent. > Crap. If anyone wants to go faster, let them overtake. If they're too > incompetent to overtake, let them stay where they are. 50mph is not an > unreasonable/inconsiderate speed. On an NSL that's otherwise clear to do the limit, it'll cause you to fail your driving test - failure to make adequate progress. My brother failed one of his tests for exactly that. > graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > My brother failed one of his tests for exactly that. The posted speed limit is irrelevant to pass or fail. The comment is, "Failing to make progress according to road and traffic conditions. I've failed more than one test, without going on a NSL, due to not making such progress. "Brimstone" <brimstone520-ng02@yahoo.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> On an NSL that's otherwise clear to do the limit, it'll cause you to >> fail your driving test - failure to make adequate progress. >> >> My brother failed one of his tests for exactly that. > The posted speed limit is irrelevant to pass or fail. The comment is, > "Failing to make progress according to road and traffic conditions. Exactly. If the road and traffic mean it's appropriate to be driving at the limit, you should be doing so. >"Brimstone" <brimstone520-ng02@yahoo.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much >like they were saying: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >If the road and traffic mean it's appropriate to be driving at the limit, >you should be doing so. And if you don't think it's appropriate - for whatever reason - then you don't have to drive at the National Speed Target. graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>>> On an NSL that's otherwise clear to do the limit, it'll cause you to >>>> fail your driving test - failure to make adequate progress. >>>> >>>> My brother failed one of his tests for exactly that. >>> The posted speed limit is irrelevant to pass or fail. The comment is, >>> "Failing to make progress according to road and traffic conditions. >>Exactly. >> >>If the road and traffic mean it's appropriate to be driving at the >>limit, you should be doing so. > And if you don't think it's appropriate - for whatever reason - then you > don't have to drive at the National Speed Target. Indeed. But in a driving test, it's the examiner's belief as to appropriateness that matters. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >Indeed. But in a driving test, it's the examiner's belief as to >appropriateness that matters. How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive at 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive at > 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? At least one. Buxton, about 1990. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >At least one. Buxton, about 1990. Hopefully he found a more suitable occupation. graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive >>> at 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? >>At least one. Buxton, about 1990. > Hopefully he found a more suitable occupation. Given that others have posted similarly, have you considered the alternative explanation? That you're a crap driver who shouldn't be on the roads and would fail a test if forced to take one tomorrow? >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >That you're a crap driver who shouldn't be on the roads and would fail a >test if forced to take one tomorrow? No, that's never occurred to me. Do you always drive at the National Speed Target? >>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>saying: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > No, that's never occurred to me. Do you always drive at the National > Speed Target? Only if I can't go faster :0)  SignatureAlex "I laugh in the face of danger , then I hide until it goes away" graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>Given that others have posted similarly, have you considered the >>alternative explanation? >> >>That you're a crap driver who shouldn't be on the roads and would fail a >>test if forced to take one tomorrow? > No, that's never occurred to me. Didn't think it would. Perhaps it should. > Do you always drive at the National Speed Target? I drive at a speed that's appropriate for the conditions. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Didn't think it would. Perhaps it should. Why would it? Why should it? >> Do you always drive at the National Speed Target? > >I drive at a speed that's appropriate for the conditions. God gave you a right foot in order for you to be able to accelerate and overtake anyone who's keeping you from getting to the pub. I'm quite happy doing 60 on motorways. If anyone wants to overtake me there's two lanes on my right for them to do so. If they aren't able to overtake me, they have the option of sitting behind me. Either way, I don't care. f.ck 'em. >>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>saying: [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > to overtake me, they have the option of sitting behind me. Either > way, I don't care. f.ck 'em. Yep. Perhaps it would get through to the "cement mixers" if it was put in their language. "It takes a real man to drive at 60 on a motorway, while the boys pile into the congested traffic ahead" Ok, so it could be worded better, but you get my drift. Just one caveat. Don't drive under 55. It is a real pain to the lorries. If you need to go slow and see a truck closing, do try and move off if you possibly can, especially if going up hill. Graham >>>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>>saying: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >you need to go slow and see a truck closing, do try and move off if you >possibly can, especially if going up hill. I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand overtaking. >>>Just one caveat. Don't drive under 55. It is a real pain to the lorries. >>>If [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand >>overtaking. If you are slower than the lorries you shouldn't be on the motorway! >>>>Just one caveat. Don't drive under 55. It is a real pain to the lorries. >>>>If [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >If you are slower than the lorries you shouldn't be on the motorway! Why? What's the minimum speed limit? Would you prefer someone driving slowly where there's no opportunity to overtake? >>If you are slower than the lorries you shouldn't be on the motorway! >>Why? What's the minimum speed limit? Would you prefer someone >>driving slowly where there's no opportunity to overtake? Moped are banned, tractors are banned, if you go slower than the lorries you are a hazard. No point to driving slowly on A roads - uses more fuel than driving a bit faster >>>If you are slower than the lorries you shouldn't be on the motorway! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Moped are banned, tractors are banned, if you go slower than the lorries you >are a hazard. To whom? Why can't the thick c.nts learn to overtake? Even if the speed differential is only 5 mph. >No point to driving slowly on A roads - uses more fuel than driving a bit >faster Depends on the car, the speed, a lot of things. > I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand > overtaking. How the f.ck can we? We have speed limiters you dumb twat. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand >> overtaking. >> >How the f.ck can we? We have speed limiters you dumb twat. You can't overtake someone doing 50 mph, you thick c.nt? Even if it takes you two miles to do it? > >> I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand > >> overtaking. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You can't overtake someone doing 50 mph, you thick c.nt? > Even if it takes you two miles to do it? Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> >> I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand >> >> overtaking. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? I'm not. But I don't see why someone else shouldn't. > >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? > > I'm not. But I don't see why someone else shouldn't. So WTF are you bleating on about? SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? >> >> I'm not. But I don't see why someone else shouldn't. >> >So WTF are you bleating on about? I'm not bleating, thicko. If someone wants to do 50 on a motorway, let them. If a thicko lorry driver can't overtake, let him do 50 too. > >> >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? > >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I'm not bleating, thicko. If someone wants to do 50 on a motorway, > let them. If a thicko lorry driver can't overtake, let him do 50 too. I'm more intelligent than you. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> >> >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? >> >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >I'm more intelligent than you. Don't be absurd. If you were, you wouldn't be driving a lorry. > >> >> >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? > >> >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Don't be absurd. If you were, you wouldn't be driving a lorry. I don't just drive a lorry. I haven't always driven lorries. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> >> >> >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >I don't just drive a lorry. I haven't always driven lorries. Anyone who does drive a lorry is thick. Even if they don't do it 24/7. > >> >> >> >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? > >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Anyone who does drive a lorry is thick. Even if they don't do it > 24/7. Riight. I'd say anyone who made such a comment as yours is a thick retarded bigot. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> >> >> >> >Why are you doing 50 on a motorway? >> >> >> >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Riight. I'd say anyone who made such a comment as yours is a thick >retarded bigot. Of course you would. That's because you're thick. However, driving a lorry is not a prerequisite for being thick - look at the current crop of contenders for "The Apprentice". Some of them are thick and they've never been in a lorry. > I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand > overtaking. How can a lorry which has to have a speed limiter fitted set to 90KPH overtake you, you f.cking retard? Next you'll be claiming you didn't know they had limiters fitted despite the fact there's a sticker on the cab window and we all travel roughly the same speed give or take a few MPH. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand >> overtaking. >> >How can a lorry which has to have a speed limiter fitted set to 90KPH >overtake you, you f.cking retard? I've just answered that, you thick c.nt. >Next you'll be claiming you didn't know they had limiters fitted >despite the fact there's a sticker on the cab window and we all travel >roughly the same speed give or take a few MPH. Except when one of you thick c.nts decides to overtake another thick c.nt. And two lanes are blocked for the next ten minutes. > >> I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand > >> overtaking. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I've just answered that, you thick c.nt. Only by moving the goalposts. > Except when one of you thick c.nts More qualified than you, dumbass. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> >> I know what you mean. Lorry drivers are too thick to understand >> >> overtaking. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >Only by moving the goalposts. Not at all. >> Except when one of you thick c.nts > >More qualified than you, dumbass. To do what? Read the Daily Star? Prove it. graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>>>Given that others have posted similarly, have you considered the >>>>alternative explanation? >>>>That you're a crap driver who shouldn't be on the roads and would fail >>>>a test if forced to take one tomorrow? >>> No, that's never occurred to me. >>Didn't think it would. Perhaps it should. > Why would it? Why should it? Why would it? Good question. Your mind is so closed, there's no reason whatsoever that your unshakable belief in your own infallibility and perfection would ever dream of impinging on your consciousness. Why should it? Because your posts here firmly imply that your standard of driving is not sufficient to pass a test. > God gave you a right foot in order for you to be able to accelerate and > overtake anyone who's keeping you from getting to the pub. <rolls eyes> So anybody who doesn't agree with you that 40 is just right for a nice clear NSL s/c is probably drink/driving, right? FFS. > I'm quite happy doing 60 on motorways. If anyone wants to overtake me > there's two lanes on my right for them to do so. If they aren't able to > overtake me, they have the option of sitting behind me. Either way, I > don't care. f.ck 'em. That's not a problem. Doing 40 on a clear NSL s/c, where 60 is perfectly appropriate IS far more of a problem. Do you wear a trilby whilst you drive your beige Rover 200? Or have you upgraded to a Honda Jazz? >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >Why should it? Because your posts here firmly imply that your standard of >driving is not sufficient to pass a test. Only to a closed mind like yours which 'thinks' limits are targets. >> God gave you a right foot in order for you to be able to accelerate and >> overtake anyone who's keeping you from getting to the pub. > ><rolls eyes> >So anybody who doesn't agree with you that 40 is just right for a nice >clear NSL s/c is probably drink/driving, right? Racing to get to the pub, more like. No wonder your eyes roll. >FFS. Exactly. >> I'm quite happy doing 60 on motorways. If anyone wants to overtake me >> there's two lanes on my right for them to do so. If they aren't able to >> overtake me, they have the option of sitting behind me. Either way, I >> don't care. f.ck 'em. > >That's not a problem. Really? But I'm not achieving the target! In fact, I'm a whole 10 mph below it. I'm going to get where I'm going a day late! > Doing 40 on a clear NSL s/c, where 60 is perfectly >appropriate IS far more of a problem. The 60 isn't mandatory. Why is 40 a problem? You do know how to overtake, don't you? And if there's a double white line down the middle of the road discouraging you from doing so, there's probably a good reason for that. >Do you wear a trilby whilst you drive your beige Rover 200? Or have you >upgraded to a Honda Jazz? And this from someone who drives a 2cv. Do you wear a beret while you're drving it? graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>Do you wear a trilby whilst you drive your beige Rover 200? Or have you >>upgraded to a Honda Jazz? > And this from someone who drives a 2cv. Do you wear a beret while > you're drving it? No. But I do get mildly miffed when I'm stuck behind bimbling fuckwits like you. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >No. But I do get mildly miffed when I'm stuck behind bimbling fuckwits >like you. Well, that's tough sh.t, retardo. Either overtake or continue miffed. I'm totally indifferent to your mental anguish. graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>>>Do you wear a trilby whilst you drive your beige Rover 200? Or have >>>>you upgraded to a Honda Jazz? >>> And this from someone who drives a 2cv. Do you wear a beret while >>> you're drving it? >>No. But I do get mildly miffed when I'm stuck behind bimbling fuckwits >>like you. > Well, that's tough sh.t, retardo. Either overtake or continue miffed. > I'm totally indifferent to your mental anguish. "Driving without due consideration for other road users". 3pts. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >"Driving without due consideration for other road users". 3pts. My indifference to your impatience isn't going to get me any points. Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? There aren't enough points to go round! graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>"Driving without due consideration for other road users". 3pts. > My indifference to your impatience isn't going to get me any points. Unfortunately, you're right - because there is no effective traffic enforcement in this country. > Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? Yes. I've also been stuck behind caravans stuck behind bimbling fuckwits like you. You seem to be forgetting that the appropriate speed for a towing vehicle is lower than for a solo car. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Unfortunately, you're right - because there is no effective traffic >enforcement in this country. There's no reason to "enforce" anything in this instance. If anything, it's your impatience that needs enforcement. >> Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? > >Yes. I've also been stuck behind caravans stuck behind bimbling fuckwits >like you. Diddums. That's what you get for being an impatient arsehole. I hope you tailgated the caravan for at least five miles. >You seem to be forgetting that the appropriate speed for a towing vehicle >is lower than for a solo car. No, I don't. But do you get "miffed" being stuck behind a caravan? graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>>>"Driving without due consideration for other road users". 3pts. >>> My indifference to your impatience isn't going to get me any points. >>Unfortunately, you're right - because there is no effective traffic >>enforcement in this country. > There's no reason to "enforce" anything in this instance. If anything, > it's your impatience that needs enforcement. Umm, wrong. I'm not the one causing delay and inconvenience to other road users by failing to give due consideration to them. >>> Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? >>Yes. I've also been stuck behind caravans stuck behind bimbling fuckwits >>like you. > Diddums. That's what you get for being an impatient arsehole. I hope > you tailgated the caravan for at least five miles. I've followed them for a lot more than that in the past. Without any impatience whatsoever. Because they're making progress as well as they can. >>You seem to be forgetting that the appropriate speed for a towing >>vehicle is lower than for a solo car. > No, I don't. But do you get "miffed" being stuck behind a caravan? Only if they're failing to drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions, causing problems by driving without due consideration for other road users. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Umm, wrong. I'm not the one causing delay and inconvenience to other road >users by failing to give due consideration to them. No, you're the one causing danger to other road users by impatient and reckless overtaking. If you're worried about delay, get up earlier. >>>> Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >impatience whatsoever. Because they're making progress as well as they >can. How many Valium did you have to take? >>>You seem to be forgetting that the appropriate speed for a towing >>>vehicle is lower than for a solo car. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >conditions, causing problems by driving without due consideration for >other road users. But they're holding you back and preventing you getting to the pub. What could be more inconsiderate than that? graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>>>>>"Driving without due consideration for other road users". 3pts. >>>>> My indifference to your impatience isn't going to get me any points. >>>>Unfortunately, you're right - because there is no effective traffic >>>>enforcement in this country. >>> There's no reason to "enforce" anything in this instance. If >>> anything, it's your impatience that needs enforcement. >>Umm, wrong. I'm not the one causing delay and inconvenience to other >>road users by failing to give due consideration to them. > No, you're the one causing danger to other road users by impatient and > reckless overtaking. No, I'm not. You're the one who's telling people to get on with it and overtake, because you can't be bothered to give any consideration to other road users or drive at a speed perfectly appropriate, safe and legal. >>>>> Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? >>>>Yes. I've also been stuck behind caravans stuck behind bimbling >>>>fuckwits like you. >>> Diddums. That's what you get for being an impatient arsehole. I hope >>> you tailgated the caravan for at least five miles. >>I've followed them for a lot more than that in the past. Without any >>impatience whatsoever. Because they're making progress as well as they >>can. > How many Valium did you have to take? I've never taken any kind of sedative in my life, thanks. Never felt any need to, as I sleep perfectly soundly at night. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >No, I'm not. Yes, you are. >You're the one who's telling people to get on with it and overtake, You're the one making that decision. The alternative is to slow down and stay where you are. You'll still get to the pub either way. >because you can't be bothered to give any consideration to other road >users or drive at a speed perfectly appropriate, safe and legal. No, because you can't be bothered to give any consideration to other road users who don't want to meet the National Speed Target. >>>>>> Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >I've never taken any kind of sedative in my life, thanks. Never felt any >need to, as I sleep perfectly soundly at night. But not while you're driving, hopefully. graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> How many Valium did you have to take? >>I've never taken any kind of sedative in my life, thanks. Never felt any >>need to, as I sleep perfectly soundly at night. > But not while you're driving, hopefully. No, although it does sometimes require an effort not to when you're stuck behind some oblivious bimbling trilby. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >No, although it does sometimes require an effort not to when you're stuck >behind some oblivious bimbling trilby. Ah, perhaps you need stimulants not sedatives? >>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>saying: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > There's no reason to "enforce" anything in this instance. If > anything, it's your impatience that needs enforcement. Do you ever pull over into laybys to let the accumulated traffic behind you go past? "OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > Do you ever pull over into laybys to let the accumulated traffic behind > you go past? Of course he doesn't. Why should he? After all, they're all just in too much of a hurry to get to the pub... >"OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they >were saying: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Of course he doesn't. Why should he? After all, they're all just in too >much of a hurry to get to the pub... Speak for yourself. >>>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>>saying: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Do you ever pull over into laybys to let the accumulated traffic behind you >go past? If there is one and if it looks like I'm holding up a line of traffic, why not? I'm not in a hurry. >>>Do you ever pull over into laybys to let the accumulated traffic behind >>>you >>>go past? >>If there is one and if it looks like I'm holding up a line of traffic, >>why not? I'm not in a hurry. One thing you do right! What about on pension day? >>>>Do you ever pull over into laybys to let the accumulated traffic behind >>>>you [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >What about on pension day? What's "pension day"? Is that anything like your giro day? >>>One thing you do right! >>> >>>What about on pension day? >> >>What's "pension day"? Is that anything like your giro day? You are a pensioner aren't you? I have a job so there! >>>>One thing you do right! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >You are a pensioner aren't you? No. >I have a job so there! You're a f.cking oik, so there! >>You are a pensioner aren't you? >No. Must be a fuckwit then! >>>You are a pensioner aren't you? > >>No. > >Must be a fuckwit then! Are those the only two kinds of people you come across, retard? >>>>>You are a pensioner aren't you? >>> >>>>No. >>> >>>Must be a fuckwit then! >>Are those the only two kinds of people you come across, retard? Yep - fuckwit! just proven it! As to retard that is so funny, you have a 1 in 100 chance of being more intelligent than me! >>>>>>You are a pensioner aren't you? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >As to retard that is so funny, you have a 1 in 100 chance of being more >intelligent than me! It's obvious to everyone here that you're just an uneducated chav. Probably a boy racer retard. > >>>>One thing you do right! > >>>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > No. So you're a doley. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> >>>>One thing you do right! >> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >So you're a doley. Those are apparently the only two possibilities oop North. >>>>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>>>saying: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > If there is one and if it looks like I'm holding up a line of traffic, > why not? I'm not in a hurry. OK, so how many times over the last 14 days have you interrupted your bimbling to pull into a layby and let people pass ? >>>>>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>>>>saying: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >OK, so how many times over the last 14 days have you interrupted your >bimbling to pull into a layby and let people pass ? What "bimbling"? >>Yes. I've also been stuck behind caravans stuck behind bimbling fuckwits >>like you. I know exactly what you mean!! I have a caravan - I don't hold people up, the people I am stuck behind do. Through mid Wales I managed to get a towing BF to pull over - a huge queue passed him, then I pulled over a few miles later to let the 3 cars following me passed - and they saw me confuse the BFWC > Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? There > aren't enough points to go round! You mean the caravans which HAVE a lower speed limit on all classes of roads in a NSL area? You are aware that a towing vehicle cannot go faster than 60 on a motorway and 50 on a NSL SC A road aren't you? SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? There >> aren't enough points to go round! >> >You mean the caravans which HAVE a lower speed limit on all classes of >roads in a NSL area? Yes. >You are aware that a towing vehicle cannot go faster than 60 on a >motorway and 50 on a NSL SC A road aren't you? Yes, and that's fast enough for anyone. > >> Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? There > >> aren't enough points to go round! [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Yes, and that's fast enough for anyone. Speak for yourself. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> >> Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? There >> >> aren't enough points to go round! [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Speak for yourself. Feel free to overtake if you have to get to the pub faster. >>Ever get stuck behind a caravan in the West Country, idiot? There >>aren't enough points to go round! No I get stuck behind bumbling fuckwits when towing my caravan! > graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I drive at a speed that's appropriate for the conditions. At last. Some sense. Hooray!!! Graham >> graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >> saying: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > At last. Some sense. Hooray!!! But sometimes a speed appropriate to the conditions is greater than that shown on the sticks at the roadside..... >>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>saying: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > No, that's never occurred to me. Do you always drive at the National > Speed Target? No, because the conditions sometimes don't allow it. When they do allow it, don't be scared of nose bleeds. -- MrBitsy >>> graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>> saying: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > No, because the conditions sometimes don't allow it. When they do allow it, > don't be scared of nose bleeds. So which is it, then? Is it OK to drive at the NSL (and, by extension, to want to drive it), or not? I ask because another of your posts seems to suggest that it is wrong to wish to get past large, slow vehicles out on the open road (in order to be more able to drive at the NSL for a car - and to be able to see where you are going). > So which is it, then? > > Is it OK to drive at the NSL (and, by extension, to want to drive it), > or not? Both. If you can't see why, you're unfit to drive. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >>>> graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>>> saying: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > more able to drive at the NSL for a car - and to be able to see where you > are going). I suggested keeping a gap ahead to allow one to see past the HGV, rather than up its arse and being able to see nothing. I am not sure why you think this means I think it wrong to pass an HGV. If you search a bit more, you will find posts where I suggest it is fine to go above the NSL when overtaking, to minimise time on the overtake. -- MrBitsy >>>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>>saying: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >No, because the conditions sometimes don't allow it. When they do allow it, >don't be scared of nose bleeds. So when the conditions do allow it, is it mandatory? > National > Speed Target? Can't find that in the Highway code. Can you cite the page and paragraph reference? SignatureCarl Robson Audio stream: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com:8000/samtest Homepage: http://www.bouncing-czechs.com >> National >> Speed Target? >> >Can't find that in the Highway code. Can you cite the page and paragraph >reference? That's purely for the benefit of those here who see limits as targets. > graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > At least one. Buxton, about 1990. Nelson 1990 here... Mike p >>Indeed. But in a driving test, it's the examiner's belief as to >>appropriateness that matters. > > How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive > at 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? Many do, and have failed candidates for it. SignatureDavid Taylor >> Indeed. But in a driving test, it's the examiner's belief as to >> appropriateness that matters. > > How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive > at 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? I was picked up for 45 in a 60, in about 1987, if that's any indicator. "Failing to make progress according to road and traffic conditions", as listed above. >>> Indeed. But in a driving test, it's the examiner's belief as to >>> appropriateness that matters. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >"Failing to make progress according to road and traffic conditions", as >listed above. God forbid we should all be driving along as we did during our driving tests. >>>> Indeed. But in a driving test, it's the examiner's belief as to >>>> appropriateness that matters. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > God forbid we should all be driving along as we did during our driving > tests. Indeed. > How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive > at 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? If it's safe to drive at 60, all of them. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >> How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive >> at 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? >> >If it's safe to drive at 60, all of them. Why? The 60 isn't a mandatory speed. It's just a target. >>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>saying: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive > at 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? None. Graham >>>graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >>>saying: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >None. >Graham That's what I would have thought. But others here seem to have a different opinion. graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> How many examiners do you think would find it inappropriate to drive >>> at 50 mph where the target is 60 mph? >>None. > That's what I would have thought. But others here seem to have a > different opinion. ...formed by direct experience... >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >...formed by direct experience... Based on third hand information from a limited number of occasions. > "Brimstone" <brimstone520-ng02@yahoo.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much > like they were saying: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > If the road and traffic mean it's appropriate to be driving at the limit, > you should be doing so. Not all vehicles have the same ability at speed. I can comfortably, although illegally drive at 80 on a motorway in my old Sierra, but my van is only happy at 60. I'm sure the average Metro is uncomfortable at 70. A top Merc would be equally safe at 120, given low traffic density and a driver that knows how to keep a safe distance and slow down well ahead when approaching the slower traffic so as not to spook everyone when closing fast. To account for slow moving traffic on a motorway, its vital that the fast cars are limited to a reasonable amount, so the closing speed is not too quick. Until lorries are allowed to go at 70 (arguably not an unreasonable speed for HGV's these days), then its dangerous to increase the limit for cars. Reality check. Its never going to happen. There is not an MP alive who would put their name to increasing the speed limit. Graham > I'm sure the average Metro is uncomfortable at 70. Hmm. I remember my old one (one of the original 1.3s) was fine at 90. Noisy, as you expect for a car of that age, but the handling wasn't nerve-wracking. Low-power headlamps on some of the twistier bits of the A1 (the DC bits, so not _that_ twisty) made it a bit more exciting, but that wasn't really the car. clive >Not all vehicles have the same ability at speed. I can comfortably, although >illegally drive at 80 on a motorway in my old Sierra, but my van is only [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >speed for HGV's these days), then its dangerous to increase the limit for >cars. My first car was a rust-bucket of an Austin 1300. It was certainly 'comfortable' at 70mph. I did once get it to 100mph (on the speedo). I had a Metro GTi which could certainly cruise in the 90mph range. I once managed York to Liverpool in about an hour, which meant an _average_ of 90-100mph. I personally think there's an argument in favour of high speed differentials. I've never driven in Germany, but people tell of the lane discipline that comes from seeing a 155mph Merc or Porsche going from a dot on the horizon to filling up the rear view mirror in seconds. A 20-30mph differential is easier to appreciate than a 5-10mph one. SignatureHugo Nebula "If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this, just how far from the pack have you strayed?" > Until lorries are allowed to go at 70 (arguably not an unreasonable > speed for HGV's these days) I don't think we'll see that, given that the 56 mph limiters have been introduced. I agree with you though. > > Until lorries are allowed to go at 70 (arguably not an unreasonable > > speed for HGV's these days) > > I don't think we'll see that, given that the 56 mph limiters have been > introduced. I agree with you though. I don't. Rocking and rolling down the motorway at 70MPH with a load on the back swaying about ain't much fun. Those "smooth" motorways aren't that smooth actually. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >>I don't. Rocking and rolling down the motorway at 70MPH with a load on >>the back swaying about ain't much fun. Those "smooth" motorways aren't >>that smooth actually. Conor, it is caused by wear and tear from lorries! middle lane is usually better! > Conor, it is caused by wear and tear from lorries! I'm not talking about rutting. I treat that as a form of autopilot. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >>> Conor, it is caused by wear and tear from lorries! >>> >>I'm not talking about rutting. I treat that as a form of autopilot. I nearly burst out laughing at that statement! The mways I use generally are not too worn. >>>> Conor, it is caused by wear and tear from lorries! >>>> >>>I'm not talking about rutting. I treat that as a form of autopilot. > >I nearly burst out laughing at that statement! That's what retards do. >The mways I use generally are not too worn. Be sure to stop and carefully examine the surface in the fast lane next time. > > Conor, it is caused by wear and tear from lorries! > > > I'm not talking about rutting. I treat that as a form of autopilot. You can take the man out of Yorkshire, but first you have to separate him from the sheep. >> > Conor, it is caused by wear and tear from lorries! >> > >> I'm not talking about rutting. I treat that as a form of autopilot. > >You can take the man out of Yorkshire, but first you have to separate >him from the sheep. You can take the man out of Italy, but first you have to separate him from his mamma! > Until lorries are allowed to go at 70 (arguably not an unreasonable > speed for HGV's these days), then its dangerous to increase the limit for > cars. No thanks. 70 feels quite scary in a 44 tonner. We feel all the bumps and rocky bits of road far more than cars do. SignatureConor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >On an NSL that's otherwise clear to do the limit, it'll cause you to fail >your driving test - failure to make adequate progress. You won't fail for driving at 50 mph where the limit is 60 mph. >My brother failed one of his tests for exactly that. Doing 20 mph in a 60 mph zone? graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>On an NSL that's otherwise clear to do the limit, it'll cause you to >>fail your driving test - failure to make adequate progress. > You won't fail for driving at 50 mph where the limit is 60 mph. >>My brother failed one of his tests for exactly that. > Doing 20 mph in a 60 mph zone? I wondered how long it'd take for somebody to know better than me what happened. >graz@gmail.com (Graz) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >saying: |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message