Arfcollins
Soft southerner.
- Location
- Fareham
Don't be ridiculous Mikey, if you don't like it don't watch. I don't think we need a prefect.
(Edit due to format error)
Oh dear I have just verbally abused a client but he did deserve it!
- Thread starter Hacienda71
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Don't be ridiculous Mikey, if you don't like it don't watch. I don't think we need a prefect.
(Edit due to format error)
You assume your speedometer is accurate.
I did make some erroneous assumptions, although not necessarily the ones listed.
I assumed that you considered there to be some logic behind your position in lane 2 and I assumed that you would be willing / able (I make no assumptions as to which is the case) to share your logic.
I now assume that your continued silence and the straw men that you are erecting means that you have nothing.
I did make some erroneous assumptions, although not necessarily the ones listed.
I assumed that you considered there to be some logic behind your position in lane 2 and I assumed that you would be willing / able (I make no assumptions as to which is the case) to share your logic.
I now assume that your continued silence and the straw men that you are erecting means that you have nothing.
Arfcollins
Soft southerner.
- Location
- Fareham
My earlier post was not to promote driving in lane 2 but to highlight the bullying misbehaviour of some of the overtakers. You really should read it again, post #34. (Sorry to mention this, Hip Priest. I'd said I'd put a lid on it but Norm has forced my hand
).My speedo reads 74mph when my road speed is 70, checked against sat nav. This is the car by the way not the bike.
We are clearly not going to have a meeting of minds yet on this. Despite what I have said you seem to think I drive exclusively in lane 2. I'll say it again - I don't.
You also seem to believe, though this could be me assuming incorrectly, that it is more acceptable to be the speeding overtaker than to be doing 70 in lane 2. My assumption is based partly on your not having stated your opinion of this from my previous post: <So if that illegal overtake is preceeded by flashing and/or followed by a dangerous cut in I'd be interested to know which driver you think is the more selfish.>
I've explained myself as clearly as I can I think, and I'm really not sure what else you are asking.
ferret fur
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Roseburn
If the other car is travelling faster than you are, how is the 'cut in' going to be dangerous? Rude perhaps, but then who started it?
Solve the problem by not middle lane hogging.
Solve the problem by not middle lane hogging.
Arfcollins
Soft southerner.
- Location
- Fareham
Fixed that for you.
Arfcollins
Soft southerner.
- Location
- Fareham
As a slightly more serious answer, let's replace this motorway scenario with a cyclist taking primary before a pinch point. Car passes and not having enough room cuts across the cyclist too close for comfort. On the basis of your logic as long as the car driver believes he has a right to that bit of tarmac then it was the cyclist who started it.
tongskie01
Active Member
- Location
- blackpool england
i find it safe for me in the middle lane when driving in motorways. middle lane hogging my ass. say that to the lorry drivers. hip priest came from the inner lane to move in the middle so that he can tell that driver to move out of his way...even if im doing 65 in the middle lane, ill keep it that way, as a lot of mototrists overspeed and that gets them out of their tracks. they can flash me all day no prob.
No, because there is a reason for the cyclist to be in primary, even if the car drivers doesn't understand that reason.
So it is very different from driving in lane 2 when lane 1 is clear.
tongskie01
Active Member
- Location
- blackpool england
and so is lane 3.
Driving in lane when 2 when lane 1 is clear effectively reduces the M way to two lanes. Anyone driving properly, in lane ,1 has to change to 2, and then to 3. I drive commercial vehicles, and after a while when it becomes clear that the knob in lane 2 has no intention of driving properly, I just run through in lane 1. Wrong I know but why do these people think it is OK to block TWO lanes of a highway?
ferret fur
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Roseburn
More to the point, an awful lot of accidents involving cyclists occur because the car driver pays absolutely no attention to what they are doing and to the situation around them. That is exactly what middle lane hoggers are doing on a motorway, and it is a type of driving that is particularly dangerous. Especially as they have no idea of why it is wrong.
Hip Priest
Veteran
Erm, no I didn't. I moved from the inside lane to the outside lane, via the middle lane, because I wanted to overtake. I flashed my lights during this process because the driver had forced me to move across two lanes instead of one, by sitting in the wrong lane.
The dangerous thing to do would've been to undertake him or tailgate him, and I did neither.
Hip Priest
Veteran
Absolutely spot-on. The vast majority of incidents I have with cars whilst out cycling are not caused by the stereotypical raging bully in an Audi or white van, but by otherwise decent folk who simply haven't got a clue what they're doing.
They give no room, they pull out on you and yes, they sit in the middle lane of an empty motorway, completely oblivious.
tongskie01
Active Member
- Location
- blackpool england
sorry i thought you came from the fast lane. which in my understanding was the inside lane. you got a point and i retract my argument.
Hip Priest
Veteran
Ah, no worries. Yes, the inside lane is the lane nearest to the hard shoulder. In my mind at least!
Similar threads
