Why do people tailgate?

[earlestownflya]

why old people are less likely to drive like tits?...i agree with the statement,it's absolutely true...i know it through experience,not just assumptions

 

[Dan B]

why old people are less likely to drive like tits?...i agree with the statement,it's absolutely true...i know it through experience,not just assumptions

Sorry, your question isn't making any sense. I understand you're not disputing that older people are generally more careful drivers, are you looking for reasons that might be the case or for evidence of it being the case? One of those is irrelevant, the other is redundant.

 

[Andy_R]

Sorry, your question isn't making any sense. I understand you're not disputing that older people are generally more careful drivers, are you looking for reasons that might be the case or for evidence of it being the case? One of those is irrelevant, the other is redundant.

@Dan B Why bother arguing with an idiot? He'll only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

 

[earlestownflya]

Sorry, your question isn't making any sense. I understand you're not disputing that older people are generally more careful drivers, are you looking for reasons that might be the case or for evidence of it being the case? One of those is irrelevant, the other is redundant.

i wanted the evidence,you can't supply it..some advice....get a few more years under your belt,get out more,see more,do more,then pehaps you can comment on these matters

 

[Dan B]

@Dan B Why bother arguing with an idiot? He'll only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience

You have a point and his subsequent posts only serve to reinforce it

 

[swansonj]

My Brompton is in the boot of my car at this very moment, and when i finish work today, I'm off up to the Lake District. Good enough?

although I confess i am primarily walking and the Brompton is primarily for pub duty of an evening...

And here's the evidence:

 

[bozmandb9]

[QUOTE 3935401, member: 9609"]@Dan B @bozmandb9
I was very curious as to the question that was raised earlier in the thread regarding at what speed does fuel consumption start to rise if you drive more slowly - so this week I have noted down some figures when travelling into our local town. there is a very quiet stretch of road, 1.9 mile long 30' ascent 12 descent., there has been no noticeable wind on any of the days. Vehicle 2L 170hp 4x4 Yeti with one of those amazing VW diesel engines and a 6 speed DSG box.
On each occasion I selected a different gear and set cruise when the revs were at 1500rpm and monitored the mpg
6th gear (51mph) - 69 mpg
5th gear (44mph) - 78.7 mpg
4th gear (32mph) - 80.7 mpg
3rd gear (23mph) - 66.4 mpg

(the 3rd gear test was cut short to 1.7 mile as a vehicle was approaching and I wasn't wanting to pratt about at such a low speed)[/QUOTE]

That's interesting, be good to re-do the 3rd gear test, and possibly try some other speeds. I suspect from what I've read that you'll see an economy peak at around 30, and another at around 55. I think you'll see economy fall below a certain speed. Oh, and of course bear in mind the only way you can only really know fuel economy is based on miles measured between brimmed tanks.

I think the main point was that it's not a linear reduction in fuel economy with increase in speed, since there are many other factors, such as gearing efficiency, engine revs at any given speed, and below a certain speed, the 'fixed cost' effect, i.e. reduction in energy expended for motion will be proportionately less compared to just running the car.

When you think about it, if you cycled in your granny gear, you may not encounter much wind resistance, but you probably would not find it an efficient way of cycling.

 

[DaveReading]

if you cycled in your granny gear, you may not encounter much wind resistance

I'm not so sure about that.

 

[buggi]

familiarity breeds contempt. they've done it, got away with it just down to luck. the more they do it, the less it seems a risk. they'll carry on with their behaviour until their luck changes.

strangely, my brother seems to have stopped doing it since he got his 4x4. I have heard of this weird phenomenon with other friends. The bigger the car (and the more comfier) the more relaxed they feel. put them in a small car and they want to whizz around like some kind of hot rod.

 

[Smurfy]

[QUOTE 3927426, member: 9609"]precisly 90kmh ? that's a European fudge, it may be a good compromise between economy and speed, but I suspect the most economical will be considerably below that figure. may be as low as 20 or 30 depending on wind resistance.[/QUOTE]
I think 40-50 is probably the sweet spot for many cars, as I suspect that the benefits of using 5th gear slightly outweigh the aerodynamic benefits of going slower while using a lower gear. Certainly all my best MPG has been obtained on A roads, rather than motorways, which seems to suggest that efficiency drops off above about 50.

It seems the US Department of Energy agree with me.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.jsp

 

[Smurfy]

[QUOTE 3935401, member: 9609"]@Dan B @bozmandb9
I was very curious as to the question that was raised earlier in the thread regarding at what speed does fuel consumption start to rise if you drive more slowly - so this week I have noted down some figures when travelling into our local town. there is a very quiet stretch of road, 1.9 mile long 30' ascent 12 descent., there has been no noticeable wind on any of the days. Vehicle 2L 170hp 4x4 Yeti with one of those amazing VW diesel engines and a 6 speed DSG box.
On each occasion I selected a different gear and set cruise when the revs were at 1500rpm and monitored the mpg
6th gear (51mph) - 69 mpg
5th gear (44mph) - 78.7 mpg
4th gear (32mph) - 80.7 mpg
3rd gear (23mph) - 66.4 mpg

(the 3rd gear test was cut short to 1.7 mile as a vehicle was approaching and I wasn't wanting to pratt about at such a low speed)[/QUOTE]
Any particular reason for 1500rpm? Maybe interesting to try 2000. And if that shows much difference then it would be worth adding 1750 and 2250.

 

[Brandane]

Anyway; why do people tailgate? I am surprised that no-one seems to have mentioned the main reason for it IME - it's to intimidate those selfish (or stupidly unaware nobbers) who sit in the middle lane (or increasingly, the right hand lane) of motorways when they are not overtaking anything. FFS; use the left lane unless overtaking, it's quite easy!!
I will admit to experiencing a slight rise in blood pressure when I see this happening; especially when driving a large vehicle which is not allowed in the rightmost lane when there are 3 or more lanes (a fact of which 40 mph middle lane hoggers seem to be blissfully unaware). I would love to tailgate them straight into oblivion, but being the mild mannered, law abiding chap that I am, I will of course leave it for others to do. It's not big, and it's not clever, but it IS a reason why people tailgate - which I believe was the OP's question.

 

[ComedyPilot]

[QUOTE 3935988, member: 9609"]the sort of idiotic tailgating that really hacks me off, and the type I had to tolerate the other week; - heading south on the A1 in north northumberland, single carriageway road, in front of me car and caravan, in front of him a couple of trucks, in front of them lots of cars and lorries, all travelling along at about 50, not a hope in hell of overtaking anyone - behind me a some brain dead twat in an artic tailgating me, probably coming under 10m or under half second gap - why arnt the police and courts dealing with these morons?
I'm not that fussed about other cars tailgating me, it may be isn't the safest but in an emergency situation it will probably just be metal getting bent - when a 44 ton truck is involved the poor sod in the small car is dead.[/QUOTE]

I agree

 

[Dan B]

Anyway; why do people tailgate? I am surprised that no-one seems to have mentioned the main reason for it IME - it's to intimidate those selfish (or stupidly unaware nobbers) who sit in the middle lane (or increasingly, the right hand lane) of motorways when they are not overtaking anything.

If there's room for them to pull over to the left lane but they won't, there's also room for you to pull over to the left lane instead of driving behind them. And if traffic is moving slowly in lanes but your lane is going faster than theirs , it's perfectly legal to pass them on the left. No need to get all wound up about it.

 

[Brandane]

If there's room for them to pull over to the left lane but they won't, there's also room for you to pull over to the left lane instead of driving behind them. And if traffic is moving slowly in lanes but your lane is going faster than theirs , it's perfectly legal to pass them on the left. No need to get all wound up about it.

That is NOT what rule 268 of the Highway Code says. You are only allowed to pass on the left "in congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds". That does not mean it is ok to pass on the left when you come upon Mr Sunday driver in his Nissan Micra sitting at 40 mph in the middle lane of a motorway outwith a congested area. I see it frequently. I realise you might be a southerner more accustomed to the M25 car park situation, but away from there it is quite common to have uncongested motorways.

Highway code rule 268 ....

Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.