Oh dear I have just verbally abused a client but he did deserve it!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Arfcollins

Soft southerner.
Location
Fareham
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.
Fair comment, but what I am highlighting here is how some drivers respond to what they perceive to be an obstructive road user, whether a cyclist or a lane 2 user on the motorway. How the obstruction arises is not the issue.
 

Arfcollins

Soft southerner.
Location
Fareham
When I first raised this subject I made the comparison of poor overtakes on the motorway to punishment passes cyclists suffer. The example that started me off happened to be someone flashing a lane 2 user on an empty motorway and I questioned the reason for the flashing. It seems that some motorway drivers think it is beneficial to do this as it tells the lane 2 user that they are breaking the rules. But from that driver's point of view the overtaker is probably just another bullying speeder, as they might also get the same flashing while they are legitimately using lane 3 and the speeder arrives behind them then.

Only one post, by wakou, had a logical reason that lane 2 drivers can be a problem, because they effectively block the motorway for the commercial vehicles that are banned from lane 3. In contrast most of the responses to my post have been along the lines of 'driver in lane 2 should get the hell over, they are obstructing the road, breaking the rules, are even 'particularly dangerous' but haven't answered the question of whether the danger may actually be caused by the overtaker.

In another post, by Mr Hippo, where he is having a bit of a go at these armchair arguments, a new commuter by the name of Paul says that he is now a better and more considerate driver because of his experiences as a cyclist. I think I am too, and many more of us I'm sure. Why is it that a high proportion (at least of those few that expressed an interest!) seem supportive of the (probably speeding, possibly flashing, maybe cutting back in too close) overtaker? Bearing in mind that they can only overtake if lane 3 is empty, the lane 2 driver was really just an inconvenience.

The wider picture here is that there are all sorts of objects and people and vehicles that can get in your way when driving or cycling. The lane 2 driver was just an example that prompted my post. Surely the thing to do is just accept that they are there, and find a safe way past. Flashing or performing a punishment pass is no benefit to anyone, and is more likely to cause an accident than a correct 'highway code based' pass.
 

Norm

Guest
You say that only one person has posted a logical reason that drivers in lane 2 is a problem (although you seem to ignore that vehicles which are not allowed in lane 3 are also generally subject to a 50mph limit).

However, that is still one more logical reason than you have offered for someone driving in lane 2 of an otherwise-empty motorway.

That is also ignoring:
...the issue of a selfish person who can't be bothered to move into lane 1 and forces anyone overtaking to move into lane 3, greatly increasing the chance of an accident because, as well as many other factors, there are vastly larger blind spots when moving across two lanes rather than just one.
Lane changing accounts for, apparently, 25% of motorway accidents.
 

Arfcollins

Soft southerner.
Location
Fareham
You say that only one person has posted a logical reason that drivers in lane 2 is a problem (although you seem to ignore that vehicles which are not allowed in lane 3 are also generally subject to a 50mph limit).
I don't understand the point you are making.

However, that is still one more logical reason than you have offered for someone driving in lane 2 of an otherwise-empty motorway.

That is also ignoring:
Norm said:
...the issue of a selfish person who can't be bothered to move into lane 1 and forces anyone overtaking to move into lane 3, greatly increasing the chance of an accident because, as well as many other factors, there are vastly larger blind spots when moving across two lanes rather than just one.​
I always change lanes one at a time so my blind spot is not vastly larger. It is the same for each of those manoeuvres. I guess most sensible people would do it this way.

Lane changing accounts for, apparently, 25% of motorway accidents.
I haven't seen the figures so would accept that you may be right. If one of those accidents was caused when someone over took a car doing 70 in lane 2 how would you you apportion the blame for that accident between the lane 2 driver and the speeding overtaker?
 

hydridmatt

Über Member
Whoa - 4 pages on this? Really?

FWIW, I was the victim of a ridiculous pass when I was in primary, and when I confronted the driver he was furious with me. Only when I pointed out the pot hole (that he didn't see) did he realise why I took the position I took. So the guy on the motorway may have seen debris, or a pot hole, or know that the lane split in 500 meters, or know that there was a short or difficult slip road coming up; any of the myriad reasons that we all move to the middle lane on an empty motorway. He could simply have been a middle lane hog, but you don't know what he saw or knew.
 

Arfcollins

Soft southerner.
Location
Fareham
Yes but why stay there?
As hydrimatt rightly says, it doesn't matter why somone is there, they just are. What is more important is whether the overtaker does so responsibly and safely and, if there is an accident, whose behaviour needs improving the most.

Four pages is a lot, and I accept responsibility for dragging this out. But I'm just waiting for Norm to come out of the closet as to who is the greater danger, the lane 2 driver or the speeding overtaker. I've asked him 3 times now without receiving an answer, so at this point I really will put a lid on it. Honest! I really won't say any more. Schtum. Zip.
 

Mad at urage

New Member
Are you claiming that anyone overtaking a centre-lane hogger is speeding? If not, I don't see the relevance of your (straw man) question to Norm. If you are saying that, then you are simply wrong (and your question is therefore irrelevant).
 

fossyant

Ride It Like You Stole It!
Location
South Manchester
This thread has gone totally off topic. Time to split it. Anyone think of an appropriate title ?
 
This thread has gone totally off topic. Time to split it. Anyone think of an appropriate title ?

"How to turn the blame onto someone because they were in a car"
"Anyone overtaking is speeding"
"Legitimisation of bad lane discipline"
"Example of why not to post 'I was driving' related threads on a cycling site"
"I'm a middle lane hog and want to feel better about it"

:boxing:
 

BentMikey

Rider of Seolferwulf
Location
South London
Col, this was meant for the other topic. I don't dislike you at all, I'm sure you're a really decent person in real life. I do dislike your posting behaviour on this forum, and particularly the recent locked topic. That's appalling behaviour, and I do wish you'd stop, it's very aggravating and entirely unnecessary.
 
Top Bottom