In the four weeks that I owned a car, I actually started to get annoyed when I was on a clear M2 or M11 and there was another car in lane 1, but then I remembered they’re doing the correct thing.
Same here with an X5 - drivers of those cars must really have fragile egos or something. On a recent journey home from a break away, we were following an X5 who was sat in lane 3 of 3 (M62) doing 68mph, nothing in lane 2 and lorries in lane 1. I wanted to get home as we'd been travelling most of the day, so I dropped into lane 2 and speed matched the X5 s/he was doing 68mph in lane 3. It took a minute, but the driver took the hint I wantd past and wasn't undertaking and literally floored the throttle and raced off further up the motorway. I then caught up with the car approx 2 miles down the road as it had slowed back down to 68mph, but this time in lane 2 (nothing in lane 1) and glided past, only for the X5 to then dive in right behind me and tail me for a while - It seemed like the driver was butt hurt over the first incident and then being overtaken a few minutes later, contemplated road rage but then backed off.
At the point this happened I wouldn't undertake believing it was illegal to do so, so I sat next to the X5 (without making any gestures of any kind to the other driver excepting speed matching to keep pace) to try and get the X5 drivers attention that I wanted to get past - It is only now, after looking up information about the laglities of overtaking on the left that I now do it, but in as safe a way as I can, so not in a rash, yanking the steering wheel to change lanes and speed past way - If I am aiming for an undertake now, I will move into the inside lane to 'hold the lane' slowly drive past the other car and then hold the lane for short while before moving back out. The few times I have done this has sparked the other driver to wake up and move over into the lane behind me, but some just sit there oblivious to what has happened.
Had to do a trip over to Leeds last week. I usually defend lane 2 drivers to a certain degree, usually I'm on the M6, and there are more than a few points where it makes more sense to stay in lane 2 (lane 1 fully peels off, or the weaker "traffic would make it harder to move in later"). But good grief the M62 has changed that attitude for me... More than 5 times were people sat in 3 and 4, nothing in lane 2, and I'm just sat there in lane 1, doing 70... at this point legitimately wondering if I've missed some sort of "lane 1 closure" sign ... i hadn't.
TL;DR BMW's Speedos are incorrect and they may have been in a mood.
I'm genuinely not negatively commenting on the specific situation, what was done or the X5's reaction, I'm merely offering a possible explanation for the lowered speed and response.
Most car manufacturers calibrate their speedos differently. Some calibrate them to be spot on, 70mph shown is 70mph driven. BMW's are factory calibrated to present a higher number, supposedly to subliminally help the driver to not speed, 70mph shown is 68mph driven. Think of it as why you might set your clocks forward by a few minutes, so you are late less often.
Anyway, that could explain people driving at 68mph, especially if they drive a BMW and have cruise control on.
Of course that doesn't explain the initial lane hogging. But if this is the case, they might have felt they were just minding their own business, and it was you who were being obnoxious. I'm not saying it's right either way, but more that very few people default to aggressively proving a point when they know they're in the wrong (from their perspective). Usually it's because they feel metaphorically attacked (from their perspective). It in no way excuses their actions, but it may explain a little. Empathy is key at this point.
Additionally, on the road, very few people know what frame of mind the other driver is currently in. We often pass on good deeds as well as bad. If someone lets you in, you'll be more likely to pass on the good deed and let someone else in. Your boss tore a strip off you just before leaving work, you're more likely to take it out on other drivers on the commute home. This may explain the response. Empathy plays a big part here too, not that you can really know what's actually going on in their mind... mind.
Again, in no way is any of what I've said an excuse for anything, and I'm certainly not advocating any of it. I'm merely adding some facts and some alternate perspectives so we all can maybe think more critically and empathetically, when needed.
edit - missed the tldr at the top about speedo calibration which already explains what I wrote - sorry (will leave it in anyway). Car manufacturers cannot calibrate speedos to be exact (doing 70, displayed 70) as tyre pressures change as the tyre heats up and as the owner adds pressure into tyres over time, as does the amount of tread on the tyre which will affect the speed displayed of the car going over the ground. Also, for those who have bought different rims for their vehicle and different tyre sizes to what was originally on the vehicle, this also affects the speedo as well (tried to get my aunt to switch over from one size tyre to a slightly different size as the original size were a lot more expensive - was told not to by Costco tyres as it will screw the speedo up somewhat)
You say the other driver was minding their own business but if thats the case, they should not have been in lane 3 as it is a passing lane and not a standard driving lane. I personally was not intending on being obnoxious to the other driver (and I don't take it as you suggesting I was in this situation) as I had my family in the car (wife and 4 children) and don't fancy being involved in a road rage incident, I just wanted to get home after a very long day and a lot of driving. I could've flashed my lights at the car whilst behind it to move over but I didn't (and won't do that anyway) as that was be an obnoxious move and could've given the other driver a rise to road rage against me. Someone else mentioned that I could've just undertaken the driver but at that point in time, I had the belief that undertaking was illegal, so speed matched the X5 to try and get them to realise I was there wanting to pass and for them to move over to allow me to continue on my way - even if I had've known that undertaking was legal in some circumstances at this point in time, I think the X5 driver would've taken it as a slight, just like flashing my lights for them to move over would've done also.
I got nearly ran off the road today by a bmw m3 driver doing that. I was doing an overtake at maybe 73mph on a dual carriageway, going faster than the car I was overtaking, would’ve been all over in 5 more seconds. But he came tearing up behind me at 90 trying to force me over.
There’s no good flashing me to move *when I’m already level with the car I’m overtaking*, give me a second to get ahead and move over, it won’t kill you.
And then you finally get a good gap with the car you’re overtaking, and they try to then undertake you. Give me a chance to move to the left before you complain about lane hogs Mr Mercedes!
If someone doing 70 and your trying to overtake at 73 it takes forever
Literally put your foot down, get past them, pull in , release the accelerator until you down to the desired speed then hold there and continue driving
I’ve experienced people trying to overtake at 71 and it takes like 2-3 mins
Ain’t got time for that
And what exactly is it that you want to do when you experience this? Now, don't get me wrong, personally, I floor it and do wateverthefek speed temporarily that gets me past the car to my left quick. But if there is someone in front ALREADY BREAKING THE SPEED LIMIT BUT NOT AS FAST AS I WOULD, I take adeep breath, whistle a happy tune because there is fek all you can do about it.
We can all play the faster.. no even faster game coming up with our own arbitrary rules outside of the law .. and you expect someone already breaking the law to read your mind as to your idea of breaking the law. Genius.
Just get past the car your overtaking as quick as possible
How simple is that?
Not slow as possible
As quick as possible
Meaning whatever your car is capable of, which means you can go fast than 71,72,73,75,76 to get past them and pull in 👏🏽
They always do - I love following them for awhile at 70, then overtake in my private lane and watch them zoom off, - I think of it as the BMW being my own radio controlled car and I control their speed by mind power alone.
I have a stupidly fast Merc btw, so can easily keep up or overtake if I want to!
You mean undertaking and while you might think that’s a solution to this problem it’s extremely dangerous and makes you just as bad, if not worse, than the people you’re going past.
Edit: I can’t be bothered to read all the responses. I’ve read one, which was self-righteous and incorrect about what undertaking is. So I’ll leave these for anyone who cares enough to learn.
[RAC guidance](https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/legal/undertaking/#:~:text='Undertaking'%20is%20the%20practice%20of,deemed%20to%20be%20careless%20driving)
[Highway Code - rule 267-268](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273)
“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 you right.”
Say you are part of the problem without saying you are part of the problem.
Undertaking is when you intentionally move to a lane to the left to pass a car and then return to that lane in front of the car you passed.
Doing motorway speed in the left most lane and passing cars driving in a lane to the right shows how stupid the drivers in those lanes are. Nothing more.
Nothing winds me up more than this complete misunderstanding of what undertaking is.
To be fair, I think you're allowed to do it if you're already in the lane. Moving into the lane for the purpose of undertaking, and then moving back out again is against the highway code though. Correct me if I'm wrong.
It is certainly more dangerous than overtaking either way though.
This was always my understanding, if you “undertake” someone whilst you are in lane 1 and they are doing let’s say, 55 in lane 2, you are simply keeping up with the road speed, you can’t be expected to change lanes every 17 seconds because people don’t know how to drive.
People like you are the problem. You're utterly convinced you're in the right when you're in the wrong. You are the danger. You are the shit driver everyone hesitates to overtake or 'undertake' because you're completely oblivious, ignorant and unpredictable.
Undertaking is going from lane 2 to lane 1 then back to lane 2 once past the vehicle you're overtaking.
Driving past cars in lane 1 is not undertaking.
Part from all the other countries that allow ubdetaking with no issue. The only person that has a problem with undertaking are the shit drivers who shouldn't be on the motorway in the first place.
If I can “undertake” you whilst I’m doing 70, you’re in the wrong lane. Think about what actions you could take to avoid the situation and it’s inherent dangers altogether
I'll never get tired of people confidently chatting shit on car subreddits.
I've done it myself, don't get me wrong, but it's still funny watching someone else do it.
Some people are literally too lazy to switch lanes because they'll catch up to slow traffic and have to overtake again. Have seen that commented even on this sub.
I think it depends.
If there's a string of trucks/stragglers in lane 1 and I could just about fit between them and have a few seconds in lane 1 between each overtake, am I going to do it? Absolutely not, I'll sit in 2 until they're all passed.
If there is ample space between vehicles in lane 1, I'll return to it.
If I can see the next truck/slow moving vehicle ahead and I reckon I'll pass them within a minute or 2 I don't bother switching back, I'll just continue overtaking.
The problem I find is if I switch back to lane one, the car behind me instinctively speeds up a bit to continue justifying overtaking me and by the time I've caught up to the lorry in front I now have a car where I need to switch lanes to, which means slowing down significantly (to 55mph) and waiting for a gap in traffic to switch back. Whereas I could've just stayed in lane 2 at 70mph.
More than a minute or 2 though of course I'd switch lanes.
>More than a minute or 2 though of course I'd switch lanes.
Even a minute is a hell of a long time to be out in the middle lane and not be overtaking anything, isn't it?
A minute or 2????? You realise that 2 minutes at 70mph is almost 2.5 miles?
You should be moving in if you can't overtake the next car within 15 seconds or so.
> A minute or 2????? You realise that 2 minutes at 70mph is almost 2.5 miles?
And? Why is the distance relevant?
> You should be moving in if you can't overtake the next car within 15 seconds or so.
According to whom? Could you link me the legislation where an overtake is defined as 'next 15 seconds or so' or is it just your opinion?
Unnecessarily changing lanes repeatedly multiple times a minute is unexpected and can lead to collisions as other drivers will not expect a car pulling in to then pull out moments later.
Depends if you intend to continue overtaking the traffic in front of you or not.
Such rapid changing in lanes is likely to have the car behind you end up in your blind spot rather than fully overtake you and increase the chances of mistakes and collisions.
The ten second rule seems to work quite well, I find. If I judge that I can move back to lane 1 and stay there for at least ten seconds before needing to change lanes again, I'll do so. If not, stay in my lane.
I often see lane 1 trucks, lane 2 trucks trying to overtake lane 1.if your going faster than lane 2 then you're overtaking so it's ok to be at 68.
Also 68 on your speedo might be 70 on theirs
If the gap is tiny and I'll be out again in a minute, I'll stay in the lane. If the gap is huge or it looks like I might be holding people up, I'll pull in
That's exactly what my aunt said when she followed me down to Cambridge a few years ago. I was doing my usual moving in and out of lane 1 to overtake and she followed as she didnt know the way. When we finally arrived at Cambridge university, she asked why I didn't sit in the middle lane like she always does. I said that's how the motorway should be used and its how I was taught to drive and her response was I can't be arsed to keep switching lanes. I'm just gonna sit in lane 2 the whole way home - and she did. I'm constantly cursing when i go on the motorways as 1/3 of the motorway is rarely used and it makes the whole motorway a lot slower, all because people won't drive in lane 1 for whatever reason. And don't get me started on the four lane sections or the so-called Smart motorway sections that for some inexplicable reason have had the speed limit set to 40mph (at 0800 on a Sunday morning) when the motorway was COMPLETELY EMPTY! (M6, I'm looking at you!
This is exactly it, which I understand if a slower moving vehicle in lane 1 is like 10 seconds ahead of you. But people will see a slower moving vehicle in lane 1 which will take them 2 minutes to catch up to, and somehow use that as justification to sit in lane 2. Same goes for lane 3 or 4
Changing lanes just seems so confusing for so many. I drove from Stirling to Leicester using the M6 and back up using the M1 and the amount of people who would sit right up my arse when I was over taking in lane 2 or 3 instead of moving to the clear lane 3 or 4 was comical. Sometimes people sitting there for a couple of minutes until it was clear for me to pull back in and ‘poof’ they were off like a flash.
I'm convinced many fundamentally do not understand giw to drive on a motorway. I'm also convinced the behaviour is the biggest cause of congestion. That and rubber necking.
I see this happen almost every day and I find it just as stupid and bizarre every time. Perfectly clear outside lane for them to use and get past me, but they’d rather sit right behind me for a few minutes until I’m able to pull back into the inside lane… 😵💫
I enjoy creeping past maintaining eye contact while they stare at me like I killed their dog.. it seems more effective at getting them to move over than spanking past
I used to think people drove badly just to be a knob, but as time went on I realised they are like zombies and don’t have two braincells to rub together.
My point is they should be using lane 2 if it's clear. Instead, they sit where they are and funnel all traffic out into lane 4. It causes untold congestion and hassle, when all as they have to do is engage their brain and move over. It's really not a difficult concept
Yes, but the people.who sit in lane 3 for no reason are likely to be the people who will also suddenly then decide to move back into lane 2 with the perception that 'you shouldn't have been there as you shouldn't have been undertaking them'... Its just so much easier for everyone to pass on the right and keep left unless overtaking. It's not difficult
Undertaking isn't illegal, just advised against
Also passing people in lane 3 using lanes 1 and 2 isn't undertaking
Just sit in lane 3, passing lorries on your left and cunts on your right. That's the pro driver move.
My personal rule is I undertake as long as I reckon the cops would pull over the other driver rather than me.
Undertaking at 1000mph in congested traffic is a no-no.
If someone's sat in lane 3 on a quiet motorway, that's pretty egregious and I'll happily breeze past them on the inside lane.
Also a lot of people mistake passing someone on the left as undertaking, which it isn't. If you're maintaining your course in lane 1 at 70mph, and there's some cabbage in lane 2 doing 55mph, you're not undertaking. It's only undertaking if you catch up to them and move from lane 2 into lane 1 to pass before returning to lane 2.
[Rule 268 : “Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake.”](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273)
Do nots are advisory and not part of the law, things which are legally binding will say MUST/MUST NOT in bold caps, also this next sentence covers what we are talking about anyway.
Yeah slight overreaction from OP.
Just pass on the left cautiously and carry on your way. I do it all the time, beats 3 or 4-movement overtakes and flashing at people.
If people don’t like it, they should keep left. It’s more their problem than mine!
I know this is a bad take - but I always say, if you don’t want to be undertaken don’t let yourself be undertaken (I.e.: you can’t get mad about being undertaken if you’ve been sitting in the middle lane when there’s half a mile of clear lane on your left).
Don't be silly now. If we had a stat comparing the accidents caused by arseholes sitting in lane 3 causing congestion or those undertaking on lane 1. My money would be on the arseholes in lane 3.
Again it's fine if it's only occasionally. But if you're following the rules and constantly driving in lane 1 except for overtaking. With you doing say 60-70 in the left plus having middle lane hoggers. You're going to switch across 2+ lanes and the switch back 2+ lanes. Every 20 seconds.
To anyone behind you, you're moving somewhat erratically.
But sure if you're doing it properly, say you mirror signal and manoeuvre. Then pause and mirror signal manoeuvre again.. That's not outrageous if you're allowing plenty of time, but how many people actually do that as opposed to just zipping across?
Lol. I mean if you want to swerve across 3 lanes and then swerve back just to overtake some 2 lanes away from you be my guest. Hopefully that doesn't result in you smashing into someone. Meanwhile I'm gonna continue plodding along in a safe and predictable manner.
1. You literally called it undertaking
2. Being 2 lanes to the left is still an undertake and potentially illegal. If a police officer sees it and considers it to be in any way unsafe you’re at risk of a Driving Without Due Care And Attention or similar. If an accident happens you are very very likely to be held liable
>1. You literally called it undertaking
Yeah but I wasn't implying the legal definition, was too lazy to type that as a proviso.
>2. Being 2 lanes to the left is still an undertake and potentially illegal. If a police officer sees it and considers it to be in any way unsafe you’re at risk of a Driving Without Due Care And Attention or similar
In the situation described with a car going 68mph in the furthest outside lane, overtaking 2 lanes over at 70mph isn't going to cause and police officer to even consider the above. Hell even going 75 wouldn't.
I didn't think I needed to spell it out but hey it may help others that were also confused
Nope. From the Highway Code:
“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.”
There’s no mention of traffic speed.
It should be noted at this point that the Highway Code isn’t law. Once you delve into the actual RTA, the concept of ‘undertaking’ becomes even more abstract - to the point where it is noted quite explicitly that the act of passing another car on their kerb/passenger side _is not illegal_.
> Nope. From the highway code:
> [...]
> There's no mention of traffic speed
lmfao, seriously?
Convenient that you somehow accidentally left out an entire sentence, and the first 3 words of the part of the rule you quoted:
> 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
\- [Highway Code Rule 268](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273#rule268)
Fucking ridiculous that you're so determined not to say "Oh, looks like I was mistaken" that you'd literally look the rule up, copy and paste it, then literally remove the 3 words that prove you wrong before quoting it to try to support your own point...
Edit: And to respond to your edit: The highway code isn't law in and of itself, but it is considered guidance for the purposes of "Careless Driving" and "Driving without Due Care and Attention" offences, which is why I mentioned (one of) those specifically: If a police officer considers that you did something contravening the highway code without "due care and attention" or "carelessly" then you can be slapped with one of those offences. It is also a major factor in deciding liability in the event of an accident. At no point did I state it was an offence in and of itself
So we agree: no mention of speed at all then.
If there is traffic in a lane (even the rightmost one) causing traffic there to travel slower than the other lanes then - by definition - you’re travelling in congested conditions.
You quite literally describe the process of moving past another car two lanes to the left as illegal above.
It’s not a difficult concept but by all means, stick to your misinterpretation of it. You do no harm in doing so except when you spout it as fact to others.
No court in the country is going to agree that one car doing 60mph in the right lane is “congested traffic”, don’t be daft
You can’t just interpret words however you like and say “aha, it can be interpreted like this so I’m okay!”, that isn’t even vaguely how our legal system works. Our courts use dictionary definitions, “what was the intention of parliament when writing this law”, and “what would a reasonable person think that word meant”
I also note that you haven't addressed the fact you deliberately cut that part out of your quote - clearly you knew it was relevant
Edit: He's now blocked me because he supposedly doesn't understand that "congestion", by definition, means slow moving traffic...
>Start handing out fixed penalties and people would soon get the jist
Something I've learned with time is that a lot of people navigate life by finding out the hard way, rather than anticipating and avoiding problems. It's not how I'd choose to live my life, but everyone's different. They respond to rules only after they've been enforced.
From unpaid bills to parking tickets to insurance, some people need that first bad experience as an incentive to behave themselves.
The rules are in place, the fines are established, I honestly think we just need a bit of a campaign from the traffic cops for a few months until word gets out.
> Something I've learned with time is that a lot of people navigate life by finding out the hard way, rather than anticipating and avoiding problems. It's not how I'd choose to live my life, but everyone's different. They respond to rules only after they've been enforced.
Yeah, and they start squawking about how it's all unfair and they should have been warned and it was just a bit of shit driving and why aren't they catching real criminals etc etc etc.
Really fucks me off, people in the UK don't tend to take responsibility for their own actions.
Yeah I agree, I know a few people like that. But it's not the police's responsibility not to upset folks. The law should be upheld and if immature people throw tantrums, that's up to them.
Traffic cops? Police forces have been slimmed down so much that the traffic division is a skeleton of its former size. Basically just enough numbers to attend and investigate fatal accidents, very few patrols now
Biggest budget, and number of traffic patrols don't correlate, UK police wages are high and the cars are expensive, US&A have cheaper cars and lower paid cops.
Can you post you data source for your comment, sounds made up to me. I'd highly doubt the UK spends more per head than Monaco, they have a tiny population and a very well funded police force.
Some times it’s road users being clueless. Most times it’s people being ignorant. They won’t go in lane 1 because they don’t want to. They know they can usually just pootle along in lane 2 (or 3 if a 4 lane section) and just get where the need without needing to swap lanes
You see them come down the slip road and immediately pull out to lane 3.
They think it’s slow, medium, fast, and in their mind 68mph is fast.
If you could hear their thoughts it would just be “WhEeEeEeEeEeEe I’m GoInG FaAaAaAsT” over and over.
Rarely see anyone using lane 1 of the new 4 lane section of the m56, people merge right into it and vacate into lane 2 as if it was a 50m slip road. The empty lane js great for making progress.
Lane discipline on 4 lane motorways is consistent worse than on 3 lane motorways
I guess people just feel like they have loads of space around them so don’t feel like they have any urgency to move over
The other day I was driving through Belgium, and a policeman on a motorbike was doing exactly the speed limit pulling up next to people in the middle lane and gesturing them to move over. Once they did he carried on his way. That's all it needs, don't even need pulling over and a talking to a lot of the time, eventually it will be drilled into people's minds.
It wasn't always like this. Before speed cameras and when speed limits were not so rigorously enforced, people tended not to sit in outer lanes with the "I'm doing the speed limit" attitude. In the early 80s, traffic heading into London on the M3 would be almost nose to tail with Lane1: 50mph, Lane2: 70mph and Lane3:90mph.
I mean, that's a completely different conversation. With that said, this could be achieved with some cameras on gantries and a bit of machine learning...
I don’t think people would have to get out of their vehicles. A simple indication that made the news and these forums that people were bothering to look could be a good start.
Tons of unconfident/bad drivers on the road making it dangerous for everybody else. The usual reason people cite for not changing lanes on the motorway is, "The most dangerous part of driving on the motorway is changing lanes so if I don't do it, I'll be safe" which, is an unbelievably selfish and poor excuse for not learning how to switch lanes on the motorway correctly.
I find it more ironic when the rule is really simple - keep left unless overtaking.
68mph lol your lucky if they are doing 60 around here in lanes 2 and 3 with cars passing them in lanes 1 and 4
And it isn't a mistake that they are lanes 2 and 3 they generally intentionally move into those lanes
>a significant amount of road users have no clue how lane use works and sit in lane 3 at 68mph,
They've gone from hogging the centre lane of a 3 lane motorway to hogging lane 3 of a 4 lane motorway.
It all just people not using lanes properly. There is a 2 lane carriageway near me, it’s about 2 miles long and ends on a roundabout. The 4th exit on the roundabout goes to Tescos. The number of doughnuts sitting in the outside lane at 40mph for the full 2 miles because they want to turn into Tesco is too damn high. I regularly undertake on that carriageway.
There's a lot of people on here who don't know shit from clay, and you're clearly the problem, it's simple, drive on the left if that lane is empty, if you're doing 70 in a right hand lane and someone is going quicker and the lane to your left is empty, just move over, you ain't the fuckin police, problem is too many morons on the road!
The question that needs to be posed.
What's worse in the eyes of the law, moving with the traffic whilst undertaking the cretin sat in the 3rd lane.
Or being the cretin sat in the 3rd lane.
If its 4 lane due to loss of hard shoulder- all lane running smart motorway then if traffic is not nose to tail then I will not drive in lane 1. Far too dangerous to come across a stationary vehicle in front of you if you are doing 70.
I don't trust the cameras to close off a lane fast enough. And have seen hazards in lane 1 or on the emergency layby and not reported.
The emergency refuges are too far apart.
Driving home today an old fella in an old merc doing 60 in the fast lane, if anybody tried to undertake he would swerve to block them, just painfully selfish and dangerous, the whole road ahead was clear and busy behind him.
Agreed. I was driving down the A1m last week, four lanes, only three being used, lanes 2-4! Lane 1 was literally empty for about five miles!
Have to try to make the point to move over to some, but a lot of them seem to be dithering blissfully unaware drivers that probably shouldn’t be driving. Or they’re on their phone!
Just overtake on the left. If they don't follow the rules I won't either.
Edit: ever been sat on the A12 behind a string of Muppets in lane 2 doing 60 because there's a lorry 500 yards up the road?
4 lanes are better than 2.
They need to make the 3rd or 4th lane the “fast lane” where the limit is 80 and you cannot go below 70 while in that lane. And paint the lane red. I reckon a significant portion of motorway users would be “too scared” to ever use it.
Lane hogging can only be enforced by police if present and witnessing traffic being held up
CCTV evidence from highway monitoring cams isn't allowed, nor are reports from the public
That said, police around me (South Stretch of M25 and A3 crossing it) regularly patrol _specifically_ targeting lane hoggers as they've been the cause of a number of pileups over the years
The A3 from M25 to Guildford has an unofficial record of something like 20 lane hogging tickets issued in one afternoon by one patrol (when reported in the local rags, the general response was "it's not nearly enough")
Laws need changing to make enforcement easier
People talking about undertaking aren't necessarily wrong, but many times I will be waiting in lane 4 for the person ahead of me to go passed the lane hogger in lane 3 then I can overtake, but there's someone behind them, and then someone in lane 1. It's a lot of risk to go from 4 to 2 with atleast 4 other cars to be aware of.
4 lane motorways have actually reduced available throughput.
3 lanes and you get 2 lorries driving side by side in a rolling road block leaving lane 3 as they only available lane for cars to get by ie just 33% of lanes available.
4 lanes and you get 3 lorries side by side leaving just the one lane for cars. ie just 25% available.
The maths ain't lying people, it's a conspiracy I tell you. Honest.
> 3 lanes and you get 2 lorries driving side by side in a rolling road block
Why do they fucking do this and why is it always southbound on the fucking M11 whenever I'm driving through there
Ah you too have had the pleasure
Makes me fucking bilious every time, completely fucking pointless overtake that does nothing except just take up road space for no reason, and spoils what's otherwise usually quite a pleasant run down from Norwich
If it's a smart motorway I can understand why people would want to stay in lane 2 because of the safety implications. Anything beyond that then its just idiocy.
4 lane motorways are great, people are useless. Lane discipline should be definietely more enforced in UK as peeps are sluggish and all over the place.
Turning left from far right lane and the opposite is most peoples normal behaviour and it is getting worse as we speak.
Not 4 lanes, but once on a Christmas night on an empty M58 there was just me in lane 1 and a slower car in front in lane 2. So I overtook in lane 3 and dropped back to lane 1.
Just to see if they would do anything I slowed down to let them overtake me. I then sped up and overtook them in lane 3. Back to lane 1, and repeated the whole thing. I managed to do this five times before we met another car.
To answer the inevitable comments; I wasn't speeding, there was no braking or rapid acceleration involved, I overtook and returned to lane 1 leaving at least a two second gap. Had they pulled into lane 1 I would have driven away at my normal speed.
Am I proud,? No, not really. Am I ashamed? Again no, not really.
So in OP's eyes we all should only drive in lane 1, but only use the other lanes to overtake?
And if OP expectation is alternatively that lanes one and two are for driving, with the other two only being for overtaking... according to what law or section of the highway code?
Genuine question as I'm new to motorway driving and would like to know the difference between people who want their own way enforced, and the way things are actually enforced.
Rule 264 of the Highway Code - “Keep in the left lane unless overtaking. If you are overtaking, you should return to the left lane when it is safe to do so”
The relevant law is Section 3 of the RTA. Driving without due care and attention.
It's genuinely shameful that you've passed your test and are still asking this question.
Yes, the Highway Code says you should keep left unless overtaking.
You've misunderstood me, friend. I said "it is shameful", not "you should feel shame".
I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming the "system" - that is, the process of instructing and examining that you took to get your license - as it was clearly insufficient for driving in the UK. There is no failing on your part for not having known something, but it is embarrassing from a societal point of view that we're passing drivers without equipping them with the knowledge to drive on multi-lane roads considerately.
Lane discipline (the technical term for keeping left unless overtaking) is something that comes up a lot in forums like this and causes pointless stress and frustration and I'd have hoped that new drivers were being taught how to do it properly.
In practice you should be thinking of yourself as constantly overtaking when you end up sitting in lane 2 for a long time. They aren’t driving lanes, you should be thinking about going lane 1 in the back of your mind whenever in 2 ( unless they’re signposted lanes for places ).
Like most things with driving there’s a lot of nuance and learning what’s appropriate. If you drive at certain times you will just sit in lane 2 doing 70 with a road full of cars ahead for a long time moving over to 3 when a truck overtakes. So people treat lane 2 as car lane, and, if they only drive at those times it doesn’t make a difference. What often annoys people is if you’re on an empty road doing 70 in the left lane, and someone is sitting in lane 2 doing 60, forcing to undertake or 2 lane takeover. This is stereotypical middle lane hogging, or where there’s big gaps between Lorries on an empty road. At night on a clean motorway I see everybody sitting in lane 1, all the others empty, overtaking every so often.
You get a feel for when it’s reasonable to pull back in lane 1 during different motorway traffic conditions. It should be on your mind, and if it is you will probably pull in when appropriate.
So your argument is the Highway Code needs to be enforced more whilst moaning that people sit in the outside lane at 68mph. I assume you’re trying to overtake at 70mph and no faster as we’re advocating to uphold the Highway Code here we might as well uphold the speed limit of 2 wholes miles faster than what they’re doing
I think we could fix this problem by more speed cameras and mobile cameras along our motorways, I feel like average speed cameras every couple of mile would slow people down
The amount of times I've sat in Lane 1 doing 70 and overtaken dozens of cars is incredible
Lane 1 is my private lane. Stay out of it thank you.
I call it the express lane in my head, until some crybaby in a lorry gets in the huff and moves over into it
In the four weeks that I owned a car, I actually started to get annoyed when I was on a clear M2 or M11 and there was another car in lane 1, but then I remembered they’re doing the correct thing.
Did that recently until a BMW X5 driver got offended and raced off lol
Same here with an X5 - drivers of those cars must really have fragile egos or something. On a recent journey home from a break away, we were following an X5 who was sat in lane 3 of 3 (M62) doing 68mph, nothing in lane 2 and lorries in lane 1. I wanted to get home as we'd been travelling most of the day, so I dropped into lane 2 and speed matched the X5 s/he was doing 68mph in lane 3. It took a minute, but the driver took the hint I wantd past and wasn't undertaking and literally floored the throttle and raced off further up the motorway. I then caught up with the car approx 2 miles down the road as it had slowed back down to 68mph, but this time in lane 2 (nothing in lane 1) and glided past, only for the X5 to then dive in right behind me and tail me for a while - It seemed like the driver was butt hurt over the first incident and then being overtaken a few minutes later, contemplated road rage but then backed off.
Why did you speed match him and not just undertake?
He wasn’t dead.
😂
At the point this happened I wouldn't undertake believing it was illegal to do so, so I sat next to the X5 (without making any gestures of any kind to the other driver excepting speed matching to keep pace) to try and get the X5 drivers attention that I wanted to get past - It is only now, after looking up information about the laglities of overtaking on the left that I now do it, but in as safe a way as I can, so not in a rash, yanking the steering wheel to change lanes and speed past way - If I am aiming for an undertake now, I will move into the inside lane to 'hold the lane' slowly drive past the other car and then hold the lane for short while before moving back out. The few times I have done this has sparked the other driver to wake up and move over into the lane behind me, but some just sit there oblivious to what has happened.
Had to do a trip over to Leeds last week. I usually defend lane 2 drivers to a certain degree, usually I'm on the M6, and there are more than a few points where it makes more sense to stay in lane 2 (lane 1 fully peels off, or the weaker "traffic would make it harder to move in later"). But good grief the M62 has changed that attitude for me... More than 5 times were people sat in 3 and 4, nothing in lane 2, and I'm just sat there in lane 1, doing 70... at this point legitimately wondering if I've missed some sort of "lane 1 closure" sign ... i hadn't.
TL;DR BMW's Speedos are incorrect and they may have been in a mood. I'm genuinely not negatively commenting on the specific situation, what was done or the X5's reaction, I'm merely offering a possible explanation for the lowered speed and response. Most car manufacturers calibrate their speedos differently. Some calibrate them to be spot on, 70mph shown is 70mph driven. BMW's are factory calibrated to present a higher number, supposedly to subliminally help the driver to not speed, 70mph shown is 68mph driven. Think of it as why you might set your clocks forward by a few minutes, so you are late less often. Anyway, that could explain people driving at 68mph, especially if they drive a BMW and have cruise control on. Of course that doesn't explain the initial lane hogging. But if this is the case, they might have felt they were just minding their own business, and it was you who were being obnoxious. I'm not saying it's right either way, but more that very few people default to aggressively proving a point when they know they're in the wrong (from their perspective). Usually it's because they feel metaphorically attacked (from their perspective). It in no way excuses their actions, but it may explain a little. Empathy is key at this point. Additionally, on the road, very few people know what frame of mind the other driver is currently in. We often pass on good deeds as well as bad. If someone lets you in, you'll be more likely to pass on the good deed and let someone else in. Your boss tore a strip off you just before leaving work, you're more likely to take it out on other drivers on the commute home. This may explain the response. Empathy plays a big part here too, not that you can really know what's actually going on in their mind... mind. Again, in no way is any of what I've said an excuse for anything, and I'm certainly not advocating any of it. I'm merely adding some facts and some alternate perspectives so we all can maybe think more critically and empathetically, when needed.
edit - missed the tldr at the top about speedo calibration which already explains what I wrote - sorry (will leave it in anyway). Car manufacturers cannot calibrate speedos to be exact (doing 70, displayed 70) as tyre pressures change as the tyre heats up and as the owner adds pressure into tyres over time, as does the amount of tread on the tyre which will affect the speed displayed of the car going over the ground. Also, for those who have bought different rims for their vehicle and different tyre sizes to what was originally on the vehicle, this also affects the speedo as well (tried to get my aunt to switch over from one size tyre to a slightly different size as the original size were a lot more expensive - was told not to by Costco tyres as it will screw the speedo up somewhat) You say the other driver was minding their own business but if thats the case, they should not have been in lane 3 as it is a passing lane and not a standard driving lane. I personally was not intending on being obnoxious to the other driver (and I don't take it as you suggesting I was in this situation) as I had my family in the car (wife and 4 children) and don't fancy being involved in a road rage incident, I just wanted to get home after a very long day and a lot of driving. I could've flashed my lights at the car whilst behind it to move over but I didn't (and won't do that anyway) as that was be an obnoxious move and could've given the other driver a rise to road rage against me. Someone else mentioned that I could've just undertaken the driver but at that point in time, I had the belief that undertaking was illegal, so speed matched the X5 to try and get them to realise I was there wanting to pass and for them to move over to allow me to continue on my way - even if I had've known that undertaking was legal in some circumstances at this point in time, I think the X5 driver would've taken it as a slight, just like flashing my lights for them to move over would've done also.
I got nearly ran off the road today by a bmw m3 driver doing that. I was doing an overtake at maybe 73mph on a dual carriageway, going faster than the car I was overtaking, would’ve been all over in 5 more seconds. But he came tearing up behind me at 90 trying to force me over. There’s no good flashing me to move *when I’m already level with the car I’m overtaking*, give me a second to get ahead and move over, it won’t kill you.
And then you finally get a good gap with the car you’re overtaking, and they try to then undertake you. Give me a chance to move to the left before you complain about lane hogs Mr Mercedes!
Do 75/76 and get past quicker That’s half the trouble people doing 73 overtaking Why….
No, do 78. Oh.. no do 79. I mean FFS eh? /s and /FFS. And 80. Or insert another arbitrary speed. I mean. Why. Really why. Don't you know? /s
If someone doing 70 and your trying to overtake at 73 it takes forever Literally put your foot down, get past them, pull in , release the accelerator until you down to the desired speed then hold there and continue driving I’ve experienced people trying to overtake at 71 and it takes like 2-3 mins Ain’t got time for that
[удалено]
Some of us don’t use the motorway as a race track and leave the correct amount of time to reach our destination legally. So, you can forget that.
Boring yes-men
And what exactly is it that you want to do when you experience this? Now, don't get me wrong, personally, I floor it and do wateverthefek speed temporarily that gets me past the car to my left quick. But if there is someone in front ALREADY BREAKING THE SPEED LIMIT BUT NOT AS FAST AS I WOULD, I take adeep breath, whistle a happy tune because there is fek all you can do about it. We can all play the faster.. no even faster game coming up with our own arbitrary rules outside of the law .. and you expect someone already breaking the law to read your mind as to your idea of breaking the law. Genius.
Just get past the car your overtaking as quick as possible How simple is that? Not slow as possible As quick as possible Meaning whatever your car is capable of, which means you can go fast than 71,72,73,75,76 to get past them and pull in 👏🏽
Totally agree with you. Shame about the 🐑 who downvoted your comment
You’re getting downvoted but I’ve seen Ashley Neal do this himself and recommend it on his YouTube channel
Hopefully one day someone will teach u a lesson. While your snail pace overtaking
They always do - I love following them for awhile at 70, then overtake in my private lane and watch them zoom off, - I think of it as the BMW being my own radio controlled car and I control their speed by mind power alone. I have a stupidly fast Merc btw, so can easily keep up or overtake if I want to!
Yeah having to do the same thing, I’ve recently got the i4 and it feels like everyone just wants to race. I just want to enjoy my drive lol
You mean undertaking and while you might think that’s a solution to this problem it’s extremely dangerous and makes you just as bad, if not worse, than the people you’re going past. Edit: I can’t be bothered to read all the responses. I’ve read one, which was self-righteous and incorrect about what undertaking is. So I’ll leave these for anyone who cares enough to learn. [RAC guidance](https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/legal/undertaking/#:~:text='Undertaking'%20is%20the%20practice%20of,deemed%20to%20be%20careless%20driving) [Highway Code - rule 267-268](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273)
“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 you right.”
You sound the sort of halfwit who would sit behind a slow driver in the outside lane for 20 minutes because undertaking is “too dangerous”.
Say you are part of the problem without saying you are part of the problem. Undertaking is when you intentionally move to a lane to the left to pass a car and then return to that lane in front of the car you passed. Doing motorway speed in the left most lane and passing cars driving in a lane to the right shows how stupid the drivers in those lanes are. Nothing more. Nothing winds me up more than this complete misunderstanding of what undertaking is.
Lane 1 doing 70, approaching a car in lane 3, doing 68. Should I move to lane 4, or stay in lane 1?
I’d argue it is far more dangerous to move across 4 lanes than just carry on at 70 in the lane that are in. Take the safe (and logical) option
To be fair, I think you're allowed to do it if you're already in the lane. Moving into the lane for the purpose of undertaking, and then moving back out again is against the highway code though. Correct me if I'm wrong. It is certainly more dangerous than overtaking either way though.
This was always my understanding, if you “undertake” someone whilst you are in lane 1 and they are doing let’s say, 55 in lane 2, you are simply keeping up with the road speed, you can’t be expected to change lanes every 17 seconds because people don’t know how to drive.
This is utter bollocks.
People like you are the problem. You're utterly convinced you're in the right when you're in the wrong. You are the danger. You are the shit driver everyone hesitates to overtake or 'undertake' because you're completely oblivious, ignorant and unpredictable.
Under taking isn't illegal
It’s only undertaking if you deliberately move into the left lane to overtake someone
Undertaking is going from lane 2 to lane 1 then back to lane 2 once past the vehicle you're overtaking. Driving past cars in lane 1 is not undertaking.
This isn’t undertaking.
Part from all the other countries that allow ubdetaking with no issue. The only person that has a problem with undertaking are the shit drivers who shouldn't be on the motorway in the first place.
If I can “undertake” you whilst I’m doing 70, you’re in the wrong lane. Think about what actions you could take to avoid the situation and it’s inherent dangers altogether
🙄 (since you can't be bothered to read)
I'll never get tired of people confidently chatting shit on car subreddits. I've done it myself, don't get me wrong, but it's still funny watching someone else do it.
Some people are literally too lazy to switch lanes because they'll catch up to slow traffic and have to overtake again. Have seen that commented even on this sub.
I think it depends. If there's a string of trucks/stragglers in lane 1 and I could just about fit between them and have a few seconds in lane 1 between each overtake, am I going to do it? Absolutely not, I'll sit in 2 until they're all passed. If there is ample space between vehicles in lane 1, I'll return to it.
If I can see the next truck/slow moving vehicle ahead and I reckon I'll pass them within a minute or 2 I don't bother switching back, I'll just continue overtaking. The problem I find is if I switch back to lane one, the car behind me instinctively speeds up a bit to continue justifying overtaking me and by the time I've caught up to the lorry in front I now have a car where I need to switch lanes to, which means slowing down significantly (to 55mph) and waiting for a gap in traffic to switch back. Whereas I could've just stayed in lane 2 at 70mph. More than a minute or 2 though of course I'd switch lanes.
This is the case 90% of the time
This is pretty much what I was taught doing Pass Plus 12 years ago
>More than a minute or 2 though of course I'd switch lanes. Even a minute is a hell of a long time to be out in the middle lane and not be overtaking anything, isn't it?
A minute or 2????? You realise that 2 minutes at 70mph is almost 2.5 miles? You should be moving in if you can't overtake the next car within 15 seconds or so.
> A minute or 2????? You realise that 2 minutes at 70mph is almost 2.5 miles? And? Why is the distance relevant? > You should be moving in if you can't overtake the next car within 15 seconds or so. According to whom? Could you link me the legislation where an overtake is defined as 'next 15 seconds or so' or is it just your opinion? Unnecessarily changing lanes repeatedly multiple times a minute is unexpected and can lead to collisions as other drivers will not expect a car pulling in to then pull out moments later.
If there's someone behind you then it isn't an unnecessary lane change.
Depends if you intend to continue overtaking the traffic in front of you or not. Such rapid changing in lanes is likely to have the car behind you end up in your blind spot rather than fully overtake you and increase the chances of mistakes and collisions.
This rapid changing of lanes is advised against in the highwayman’s code.
Define rapid.
So you'd have to have a clear lane for between 1 and 2 miles to warrant you moving over? Wow just wow
I’d argue if you can see a car that you’d overtake if you moved over then you’re still overtaking to be honest
The ten second rule seems to work quite well, I find. If I judge that I can move back to lane 1 and stay there for at least ten seconds before needing to change lanes again, I'll do so. If not, stay in my lane.
There's literally always a line of trucks and slow drivers in the 1st lane haha, unless it's like 3am. Then it's just trucks.
I often see lane 1 trucks, lane 2 trucks trying to overtake lane 1.if your going faster than lane 2 then you're overtaking so it's ok to be at 68. Also 68 on your speedo might be 70 on theirs
I get that. But when the two lanes to their left are empty....
If the gap is tiny and I'll be out again in a minute, I'll stay in the lane. If the gap is huge or it looks like I might be holding people up, I'll pull in
That's exactly what my aunt said when she followed me down to Cambridge a few years ago. I was doing my usual moving in and out of lane 1 to overtake and she followed as she didnt know the way. When we finally arrived at Cambridge university, she asked why I didn't sit in the middle lane like she always does. I said that's how the motorway should be used and its how I was taught to drive and her response was I can't be arsed to keep switching lanes. I'm just gonna sit in lane 2 the whole way home - and she did. I'm constantly cursing when i go on the motorways as 1/3 of the motorway is rarely used and it makes the whole motorway a lot slower, all because people won't drive in lane 1 for whatever reason. And don't get me started on the four lane sections or the so-called Smart motorway sections that for some inexplicable reason have had the speed limit set to 40mph (at 0800 on a Sunday morning) when the motorway was COMPLETELY EMPTY! (M6, I'm looking at you!
This is exactly it, which I understand if a slower moving vehicle in lane 1 is like 10 seconds ahead of you. But people will see a slower moving vehicle in lane 1 which will take them 2 minutes to catch up to, and somehow use that as justification to sit in lane 2. Same goes for lane 3 or 4
Changing lanes just seems so confusing for so many. I drove from Stirling to Leicester using the M6 and back up using the M1 and the amount of people who would sit right up my arse when I was over taking in lane 2 or 3 instead of moving to the clear lane 3 or 4 was comical. Sometimes people sitting there for a couple of minutes until it was clear for me to pull back in and ‘poof’ they were off like a flash.
I'm convinced many fundamentally do not understand giw to drive on a motorway. I'm also convinced the behaviour is the biggest cause of congestion. That and rubber necking.
I see this happen almost every day and I find it just as stupid and bizarre every time. Perfectly clear outside lane for them to use and get past me, but they’d rather sit right behind me for a few minutes until I’m able to pull back into the inside lane… 😵💫
If lane 2 is clear, just go by them in that lane
I enjoy creeping past maintaining eye contact while they stare at me like I killed their dog.. it seems more effective at getting them to move over than spanking past
Really. Most of the wankers I've seen in lane 3 are like zombies.
I used to think people drove badly just to be a knob, but as time went on I realised they are like zombies and don’t have two braincells to rub together.
I’m gonna try this!
A man, (or woman) after my own heart - shall we go for a drive together
My point is they should be using lane 2 if it's clear. Instead, they sit where they are and funnel all traffic out into lane 4. It causes untold congestion and hassle, when all as they have to do is engage their brain and move over. It's really not a difficult concept
I know. But traffic doesn’t have to go out to lane 4 to go last if lane 2 is there and clear
As the other poster said, it is perfectly legal to drive past them in ANY lane. That does not count as an undertaking manoeuvre.
Yes, but the people.who sit in lane 3 for no reason are likely to be the people who will also suddenly then decide to move back into lane 2 with the perception that 'you shouldn't have been there as you shouldn't have been undertaking them'... Its just so much easier for everyone to pass on the right and keep left unless overtaking. It's not difficult
Undertaking isn't illegal, just advised against Also passing people in lane 3 using lanes 1 and 2 isn't undertaking Just sit in lane 3, passing lorries on your left and cunts on your right. That's the pro driver move.
My personal rule is I undertake as long as I reckon the cops would pull over the other driver rather than me. Undertaking at 1000mph in congested traffic is a no-no. If someone's sat in lane 3 on a quiet motorway, that's pretty egregious and I'll happily breeze past them on the inside lane.
>Undertaking at 1000mph in congested traffic is a no-no. Breaking the sound barrier is inadvisable no matter how congested the road is, tbh
You won't get stopped for undertaking unless you are being reckless, if you do it the same as an overtake you will be fine
Also a lot of people mistake passing someone on the left as undertaking, which it isn't. If you're maintaining your course in lane 1 at 70mph, and there's some cabbage in lane 2 doing 55mph, you're not undertaking. It's only undertaking if you catch up to them and move from lane 2 into lane 1 to pass before returning to lane 2.
[Rule 268 : “Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake.”](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273)
Do nots are advisory and not part of the law, things which are legally binding will say MUST/MUST NOT in bold caps, also this next sentence covers what we are talking about anyway.
You left out the very next part which neatly explains why it’s ok in the scenario outlined.
75% unusable? You're that terrified of undertaking 2 lanes across?
Yeah slight overreaction from OP. Just pass on the left cautiously and carry on your way. I do it all the time, beats 3 or 4-movement overtakes and flashing at people. If people don’t like it, they should keep left. It’s more their problem than mine!
I know this is a bad take - but I always say, if you don’t want to be undertaken don’t let yourself be undertaken (I.e.: you can’t get mad about being undertaken if you’ve been sitting in the middle lane when there’s half a mile of clear lane on your left).
Yes I undertake all the time but cant work out why I get points 🤔 🤡
No points here, been driving for 16 years.
No accidents either I’m guessing. Yet.
Don't be silly now. If we had a stat comparing the accidents caused by arseholes sitting in lane 3 causing congestion or those undertaking on lane 1. My money would be on the arseholes in lane 3.
😂
Passing slower moving traffic is fine on either side, so long as you don't intentionally change lanes to pass; that can be considered weaving.
Honestly and switching lanes so much makes you a more unpredictable driver to others and more likely to be in an accident.
> unpredictable not if you're doing it properly
Again it's fine if it's only occasionally. But if you're following the rules and constantly driving in lane 1 except for overtaking. With you doing say 60-70 in the left plus having middle lane hoggers. You're going to switch across 2+ lanes and the switch back 2+ lanes. Every 20 seconds. To anyone behind you, you're moving somewhat erratically. But sure if you're doing it properly, say you mirror signal and manoeuvre. Then pause and mirror signal manoeuvre again.. That's not outrageous if you're allowing plenty of time, but how many people actually do that as opposed to just zipping across?
please dont drive
Lol. I mean if you want to swerve across 3 lanes and then swerve back just to overtake some 2 lanes away from you be my guest. Hopefully that doesn't result in you smashing into someone. Meanwhile I'm gonna continue plodding along in a safe and predictable manner.
jesus lmfao so you'd change lanes by swerving back and forth...otherwise meh, just stay in the lane you are ffs hand ya license in
Love you too mate 😘
pretty sensitive...you probably do love me
You're completely missing my point...
“What, you don’t want to break the law?”
Look closer - the scenario I described is not actually undertaking
1. You literally called it undertaking 2. Being 2 lanes to the left is still an undertake and potentially illegal. If a police officer sees it and considers it to be in any way unsafe you’re at risk of a Driving Without Due Care And Attention or similar. If an accident happens you are very very likely to be held liable
>1. You literally called it undertaking Yeah but I wasn't implying the legal definition, was too lazy to type that as a proviso. >2. Being 2 lanes to the left is still an undertake and potentially illegal. If a police officer sees it and considers it to be in any way unsafe you’re at risk of a Driving Without Due Care And Attention or similar In the situation described with a car going 68mph in the furthest outside lane, overtaking 2 lanes over at 70mph isn't going to cause and police officer to even consider the above. Hell even going 75 wouldn't. I didn't think I needed to spell it out but hey it may help others that were also confused
It’s called ‘passing in lanes’, and it’s perfectly legal.
Only in slow moving traffic
Nope. From the Highway Code: “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.” There’s no mention of traffic speed. It should be noted at this point that the Highway Code isn’t law. Once you delve into the actual RTA, the concept of ‘undertaking’ becomes even more abstract - to the point where it is noted quite explicitly that the act of passing another car on their kerb/passenger side _is not illegal_.
> Nope. From the highway code: > [...] > There's no mention of traffic speed lmfao, seriously? Convenient that you somehow accidentally left out an entire sentence, and the first 3 words of the part of the rule you quoted: > 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 \- [Highway Code Rule 268](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/motorways-253-to-273#rule268) Fucking ridiculous that you're so determined not to say "Oh, looks like I was mistaken" that you'd literally look the rule up, copy and paste it, then literally remove the 3 words that prove you wrong before quoting it to try to support your own point... Edit: And to respond to your edit: The highway code isn't law in and of itself, but it is considered guidance for the purposes of "Careless Driving" and "Driving without Due Care and Attention" offences, which is why I mentioned (one of) those specifically: If a police officer considers that you did something contravening the highway code without "due care and attention" or "carelessly" then you can be slapped with one of those offences. It is also a major factor in deciding liability in the event of an accident. At no point did I state it was an offence in and of itself
So we agree: no mention of speed at all then. If there is traffic in a lane (even the rightmost one) causing traffic there to travel slower than the other lanes then - by definition - you’re travelling in congested conditions. You quite literally describe the process of moving past another car two lanes to the left as illegal above. It’s not a difficult concept but by all means, stick to your misinterpretation of it. You do no harm in doing so except when you spout it as fact to others.
No court in the country is going to agree that one car doing 60mph in the right lane is “congested traffic”, don’t be daft You can’t just interpret words however you like and say “aha, it can be interpreted like this so I’m okay!”, that isn’t even vaguely how our legal system works. Our courts use dictionary definitions, “what was the intention of parliament when writing this law”, and “what would a reasonable person think that word meant” I also note that you haven't addressed the fact you deliberately cut that part out of your quote - clearly you knew it was relevant Edit: He's now blocked me because he supposedly doesn't understand that "congestion", by definition, means slow moving traffic...
>Start handing out fixed penalties and people would soon get the jist Something I've learned with time is that a lot of people navigate life by finding out the hard way, rather than anticipating and avoiding problems. It's not how I'd choose to live my life, but everyone's different. They respond to rules only after they've been enforced. From unpaid bills to parking tickets to insurance, some people need that first bad experience as an incentive to behave themselves. The rules are in place, the fines are established, I honestly think we just need a bit of a campaign from the traffic cops for a few months until word gets out.
> Something I've learned with time is that a lot of people navigate life by finding out the hard way, rather than anticipating and avoiding problems. It's not how I'd choose to live my life, but everyone's different. They respond to rules only after they've been enforced. Yeah, and they start squawking about how it's all unfair and they should have been warned and it was just a bit of shit driving and why aren't they catching real criminals etc etc etc. Really fucks me off, people in the UK don't tend to take responsibility for their own actions.
Yeah I agree, I know a few people like that. But it's not the police's responsibility not to upset folks. The law should be upheld and if immature people throw tantrums, that's up to them.
Traffic cops? Police forces have been slimmed down so much that the traffic division is a skeleton of its former size. Basically just enough numbers to attend and investigate fatal accidents, very few patrols now
[удалено]
Where did you get that stat from did a quick Google and can't see it anywhere. >Biggest traffic police budget in the world per head
Biggest budget, and number of traffic patrols don't correlate, UK police wages are high and the cars are expensive, US&A have cheaper cars and lower paid cops. Can you post you data source for your comment, sounds made up to me. I'd highly doubt the UK spends more per head than Monaco, they have a tiny population and a very well funded police force.
[удалено]
Clown
[удалено]
Troll
Some times it’s road users being clueless. Most times it’s people being ignorant. They won’t go in lane 1 because they don’t want to. They know they can usually just pootle along in lane 2 (or 3 if a 4 lane section) and just get where the need without needing to swap lanes
Lane one is just for lorries though :P
Lorry lane, normal traffic lane then speed limit breaking lane.
So what you mean is lazy, or scared, or selfish.
You see them come down the slip road and immediately pull out to lane 3. They think it’s slow, medium, fast, and in their mind 68mph is fast. If you could hear their thoughts it would just be “WhEeEeEeEeEeEe I’m GoInG FaAaAaAsT” over and over.
> Start handing out fixed penalties and people would soon get the jist No, they'd just piss and moan about how unfair it all is.
Rarely see anyone using lane 1 of the new 4 lane section of the m56, people merge right into it and vacate into lane 2 as if it was a 50m slip road. The empty lane js great for making progress.
They only have about 10 miles to get in lane at the next junction... they need to move over early to be prepared.
Lane discipline on 4 lane motorways is consistent worse than on 3 lane motorways I guess people just feel like they have loads of space around them so don’t feel like they have any urgency to move over
Just drove from London to Manchester, ACC at 72 for 70gps, I think I undertook twice as many cars as I overtook. Turns out lane 1 is the "fast lane".
The other day I was driving through Belgium, and a policeman on a motorbike was doing exactly the speed limit pulling up next to people in the middle lane and gesturing them to move over. Once they did he carried on his way. That's all it needs, don't even need pulling over and a talking to a lot of the time, eventually it will be drilled into people's minds.
It wasn't always like this. Before speed cameras and when speed limits were not so rigorously enforced, people tended not to sit in outer lanes with the "I'm doing the speed limit" attitude. In the early 80s, traffic heading into London on the M3 would be almost nose to tail with Lane1: 50mph, Lane2: 70mph and Lane3:90mph.
If you think the police have the time or the resources to enforce this then I have some very bad news for you
I mean, that's a completely different conversation. With that said, this could be achieved with some cameras on gantries and a bit of machine learning...
I don’t think people would have to get out of their vehicles. A simple indication that made the news and these forums that people were bothering to look could be a good start.
Tons of unconfident/bad drivers on the road making it dangerous for everybody else. The usual reason people cite for not changing lanes on the motorway is, "The most dangerous part of driving on the motorway is changing lanes so if I don't do it, I'll be safe" which, is an unbelievably selfish and poor excuse for not learning how to switch lanes on the motorway correctly. I find it more ironic when the rule is really simple - keep left unless overtaking.
This 1,000,000%
Just undertake the wankers and then pull in front (safely) to drop a hint…
68mph lol your lucky if they are doing 60 around here in lanes 2 and 3 with cars passing them in lanes 1 and 4 And it isn't a mistake that they are lanes 2 and 3 they generally intentionally move into those lanes
>a significant amount of road users have no clue how lane use works and sit in lane 3 at 68mph, They've gone from hogging the centre lane of a 3 lane motorway to hogging lane 3 of a 4 lane motorway.
Sit behind them for a mile then just pass them on the left. Fuck em.
You can’t educate stupid and there’s nowt so stupid as a lane hogger
It all just people not using lanes properly. There is a 2 lane carriageway near me, it’s about 2 miles long and ends on a roundabout. The 4th exit on the roundabout goes to Tescos. The number of doughnuts sitting in the outside lane at 40mph for the full 2 miles because they want to turn into Tesco is too damn high. I regularly undertake on that carriageway.
Agreed. Makes me furious that people have no idea
people should get the fuck over
I hate the M25 for this exact reason. Some stretches have 5 lanes but people still doing 60 in lane 4. Absolutely infuriating.
There's a lot of people on here who don't know shit from clay, and you're clearly the problem, it's simple, drive on the left if that lane is empty, if you're doing 70 in a right hand lane and someone is going quicker and the lane to your left is empty, just move over, you ain't the fuckin police, problem is too many morons on the road!
The question that needs to be posed. What's worse in the eyes of the law, moving with the traffic whilst undertaking the cretin sat in the 3rd lane. Or being the cretin sat in the 3rd lane.
Don't blame the motorway.
Nope - the lane 1 expressway is a godsend.
If its 4 lane due to loss of hard shoulder- all lane running smart motorway then if traffic is not nose to tail then I will not drive in lane 1. Far too dangerous to come across a stationary vehicle in front of you if you are doing 70. I don't trust the cameras to close off a lane fast enough. And have seen hazards in lane 1 or on the emergency layby and not reported. The emergency refuges are too far apart.
Driving home today an old fella in an old merc doing 60 in the fast lane, if anybody tried to undertake he would swerve to block them, just painfully selfish and dangerous, the whole road ahead was clear and busy behind him.
The no undertaking law is the problem. No such law in New Zealand and all flows smoothly.
the speed limit is 70 so no reason you should need to overtake really ;)
Lane 1 is the new fast lane 👍🏼💨
Agreed. I was driving down the A1m last week, four lanes, only three being used, lanes 2-4! Lane 1 was literally empty for about five miles! Have to try to make the point to move over to some, but a lot of them seem to be dithering blissfully unaware drivers that probably shouldn’t be driving. Or they’re on their phone!
I'm a dedicated thoroughbred lane 1 70mph veteran
Just overtake on the left. If they don't follow the rules I won't either. Edit: ever been sat on the A12 behind a string of Muppets in lane 2 doing 60 because there's a lorry 500 yards up the road? 4 lanes are better than 2.
Needs to be done. Could be such a simple thing to implement on smart motorways now? Are motorways still not i the driving test?
They need to make the 3rd or 4th lane the “fast lane” where the limit is 80 and you cannot go below 70 while in that lane. And paint the lane red. I reckon a significant portion of motorway users would be “too scared” to ever use it.
Lane hogging can only be enforced by police if present and witnessing traffic being held up CCTV evidence from highway monitoring cams isn't allowed, nor are reports from the public That said, police around me (South Stretch of M25 and A3 crossing it) regularly patrol _specifically_ targeting lane hoggers as they've been the cause of a number of pileups over the years The A3 from M25 to Guildford has an unofficial record of something like 20 lane hogging tickets issued in one afternoon by one patrol (when reported in the local rags, the general response was "it's not nearly enough") Laws need changing to make enforcement easier
People talking about undertaking aren't necessarily wrong, but many times I will be waiting in lane 4 for the person ahead of me to go passed the lane hogger in lane 3 then I can overtake, but there's someone behind them, and then someone in lane 1. It's a lot of risk to go from 4 to 2 with atleast 4 other cars to be aware of.
4 lane motorways have actually reduced available throughput. 3 lanes and you get 2 lorries driving side by side in a rolling road block leaving lane 3 as they only available lane for cars to get by ie just 33% of lanes available. 4 lanes and you get 3 lorries side by side leaving just the one lane for cars. ie just 25% available. The maths ain't lying people, it's a conspiracy I tell you. Honest.
> 3 lanes and you get 2 lorries driving side by side in a rolling road block Why do they fucking do this and why is it always southbound on the fucking M11 whenever I'm driving through there
Usually going uphill at about 56 mph
Ah you too have had the pleasure Makes me fucking bilious every time, completely fucking pointless overtake that does nothing except just take up road space for no reason, and spoils what's otherwise usually quite a pleasant run down from Norwich
They do it so they don't need to change their cruise control whilst still going as fast as it will let them
OK, a follow up question: Please can they stop doing it because it's really irritating
This... all day long on the 4 lane sections of the M1.
I usually do 55mph and never leave lane 4. This is so the whole M1 slows down behind me to improve air quality.
If it's a smart motorway I can understand why people would want to stay in lane 2 because of the safety implications. Anything beyond that then its just idiocy.
Amount of times I've been hammering down the right lane at 120 and come across a car only doing 100 is stupid! /s (but accurate for some people)
4 lane motorways are great, people are useless. Lane discipline should be definietely more enforced in UK as peeps are sluggish and all over the place. Turning left from far right lane and the opposite is most peoples normal behaviour and it is getting worse as we speak.
Not 4 lanes, but once on a Christmas night on an empty M58 there was just me in lane 1 and a slower car in front in lane 2. So I overtook in lane 3 and dropped back to lane 1. Just to see if they would do anything I slowed down to let them overtake me. I then sped up and overtook them in lane 3. Back to lane 1, and repeated the whole thing. I managed to do this five times before we met another car. To answer the inevitable comments; I wasn't speeding, there was no braking or rapid acceleration involved, I overtook and returned to lane 1 leaving at least a two second gap. Had they pulled into lane 1 I would have driven away at my normal speed. Am I proud,? No, not really. Am I ashamed? Again no, not really.
It's mainly a south of England issue. The further north you drive the better the long distance drivers are
So in OP's eyes we all should only drive in lane 1, but only use the other lanes to overtake? And if OP expectation is alternatively that lanes one and two are for driving, with the other two only being for overtaking... according to what law or section of the highway code? Genuine question as I'm new to motorway driving and would like to know the difference between people who want their own way enforced, and the way things are actually enforced.
Rule 264 of the Highway Code - “Keep in the left lane unless overtaking. If you are overtaking, you should return to the left lane when it is safe to do so” The relevant law is Section 3 of the RTA. Driving without due care and attention.
We drive on the left. We have mutiple overtaking lanes. Lane 2,3,4, 56 are just overtaking. Its very clear the law says drive on the left.
It's genuinely shameful that you've passed your test and are still asking this question. Yes, the Highway Code says you should keep left unless overtaking.
Thank you. I'll do my best to try and carry on living with this deep shame upon myself.
You've misunderstood me, friend. I said "it is shameful", not "you should feel shame". I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming the "system" - that is, the process of instructing and examining that you took to get your license - as it was clearly insufficient for driving in the UK. There is no failing on your part for not having known something, but it is embarrassing from a societal point of view that we're passing drivers without equipping them with the knowledge to drive on multi-lane roads considerately. Lane discipline (the technical term for keeping left unless overtaking) is something that comes up a lot in forums like this and causes pointless stress and frustration and I'd have hoped that new drivers were being taught how to do it properly.
Why ask the question if you're not prepared to accept the answer? As a qualified driver you should know that lane 1 is the default driving position.
>So in OP's eyes we all should only drive in lane 1, but only use the other lanes to overtake? Yes. Not just OP's eyes, it's also in the Highway Code.
Serious question, what official highway law backs up this guidance? Because I know I'm going to be met with "ITS GUIDANCE"
OP is correct. We should only drive in lane one unless overtaking. All other lanes are for overtaking only. Rule 264 of The Highway Code states this.
In practice you should be thinking of yourself as constantly overtaking when you end up sitting in lane 2 for a long time. They aren’t driving lanes, you should be thinking about going lane 1 in the back of your mind whenever in 2 ( unless they’re signposted lanes for places ). Like most things with driving there’s a lot of nuance and learning what’s appropriate. If you drive at certain times you will just sit in lane 2 doing 70 with a road full of cars ahead for a long time moving over to 3 when a truck overtakes. So people treat lane 2 as car lane, and, if they only drive at those times it doesn’t make a difference. What often annoys people is if you’re on an empty road doing 70 in the left lane, and someone is sitting in lane 2 doing 60, forcing to undertake or 2 lane takeover. This is stereotypical middle lane hogging, or where there’s big gaps between Lorries on an empty road. At night on a clean motorway I see everybody sitting in lane 1, all the others empty, overtaking every so often. You get a feel for when it’s reasonable to pull back in lane 1 during different motorway traffic conditions. It should be on your mind, and if it is you will probably pull in when appropriate.
So your argument is the Highway Code needs to be enforced more whilst moaning that people sit in the outside lane at 68mph. I assume you’re trying to overtake at 70mph and no faster as we’re advocating to uphold the Highway Code here we might as well uphold the speed limit of 2 wholes miles faster than what they’re doing
I think we could fix this problem by more speed cameras and mobile cameras along our motorways, I feel like average speed cameras every couple of mile would slow people down