Why do they do it?

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:12 pm

Dual carriageway road. HGV in lane one doing 55.99999 mph.

Second HGV pulls out into lane two and proceeds to overtake... at 56 mph.

One of my personal bÃªtes noire and this morning the overtaking event took 8.5 miles.

In fact it took longer because I joined the motorway just as the overtake began and had to leave 8.5 miles later whilst the overtake was still in progress.

WHY do they do it? Any HGV drivers on here who can rationalise it please?

Or is it "Just because they can"?

I understand the trucker's reluctance to lose revs and forward momentum but surely they know that they are running close to their governed top speed? What on earth is the point of pulling out?

Had there been a Police vehicle in the area this morning, HGV 2 would certainly have been pulled over for obstructing the motorway.

From my experience I would have to think that such an action would be considered careless / inconsiderate driving as defined by section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

dreaddan · Post by **dreaddan** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:17 pm

someone has explained it before, cant remember who rob maybe?
Basicly it's cuz there cnts! no serisly, it's because that .1mph makes a big difference in a days drive.
And can be the difference in going home at the end of the day or not making back because you've run out of driving time.
Dan

mg-richard · Post by **mg-richard** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:18 pm

i have decided next time this happens im going to honk like mad see what they do

618ireland · Post by **618ireland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:19 pm

Witnessed similar today driving to Dublin, took ages for him to complete the overtaking. All to common site on Irish roads, totally mindless and selfish too. Completely unrelated, over 242 miles the 400 returned 52.9mpg, I am quite pleased with that as about 70 miles was motorway (120km/hour) and I took a scenic detour through 2 little towns on the way.

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:31 pm

dreaddan wrote:someone has explained it before, cant remember who rob maybe?
Basicly it's cuz there cnts! no serisly, it's because that .1mph makes a big difference in a days drive.
And can be the difference in going home at the end of the day or not making back because you've run out of driving time.
Dan

I've heard that excuse Dan and to be honest, it just doesn't ring true. In fact, unless there are supporting figures, my calculations would lead me to believe that such an excuse is utter balderdash.

The point is, that some 8.5 miles down the road, they are still in parallel with the truck in lane 1 so what time have they gained that they would have lost by staying behind the first truck in lane 1?

They know they are on their governed top speed so it just doesn't make sense.

Further, what right do they think they have to block the entire road and form a 56 mph rolling road block for mile after mile?

I'mn sure the hundreds of car and van drivers in their wake could raise a fairly strong argument about themselves being delayed by such (apparently) thoughtless, arrogant actions.

618ireland · Post by **618ireland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:35 pm

mg-richard wrote:i have decided next time this happens im going to honk like mad see what they do

God knows, 2 of them sandwiched my Dad a few years back, the one in front slowed quickly, he had to brake hard and the one behind closed in. Most are decent but some are right fcuking mongs.

618ireland · Post by **618ireland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:37 pm

I agree the time saving element is total horse Sh**e, as we all know any time gained on a motorway or clear stretch of road is ALL lost at the next set of lights or roundabout or town or village etc.

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:39 pm

618ireland wrote: Most are decent but some are right fcuking mongs.

Not absolutely my first choice of words but I echo the sentiment

618ireland · Post by **618ireland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:50 pm

Concise and straight to the point

mach1rob · Post by **mach1rob** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:01 pm

Raistlin wrote: Or is it "Just because they can"?

Yes

It's a tough call just who is at fault, be it the truck on inside who won't back off to let the faster truck in, or the truck on outside who wont back off because he's lost the advantage

Ok Paul, here's your example, the other day when you came out and met me on the A449, now, if say I'd of managed to attain 1 MPH more for 2-3 hours over a total of 10 hours driving, instead of only getting to Penkridge, I may have got a few more laybys closer

rover220 · Post by **rover220** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:06 pm

mach1rob wrote:
Ok Paul, here's your example, the other day when you came out and met me on the A449, now, if say I'd of managed to attain 1 MPH more for 2-3 hours over a total of 10 hours driving, instead of only getting to Penkridge, I may have got a few more laybys closer

wow, a whopping 10 miles over a 10 hour day, its just not worth the hassle it causes imo

mach1rob · Post by **mach1rob** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:09 pm

rover220 wrote:
mach1rob wrote:
Ok Paul, here's your example, the other day when you came out and met me on the A449, now, if say I'd of managed to attain 1 MPH more for 2-3 hours over a total of 10 hours driving, instead of only getting to Penkridge, I may have got a few more laybys closer
wow, a whopping 10 miles over a 10 hour day, its just not worth the hassle it causes imo

Wow! Difference of making it home at night or having to park in a layby

So you gotta slow down for a while BIG DEAL! Why do you have to be there yesterday?

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:11 pm

mach1rob wrote:
Raistlin wrote: Or is it "Just because they can"?

Ok Paul, here's your example, the other day when you came out and met me on the A449, now, if say I'd of managed to attain 1 MPH more for 2-3 hours over a total of 10 hours driving, instead of only getting to Penkridge, I may have got a few more laybys closer

Completely blown out of the water by today's example Rob - what did he gain in staying alongside that he would have lost by following in train?

At the point where I left the M54, the guy had neither gained or lost anything but had succeeded in blocking the road for 8.5 miles.

mach1rob · Post by **mach1rob** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:16 pm

He gained nothing, I'll freely admit that, BUT think of that extra fuel economy you got sat at 56 compared to 80

OK hows this for a solution, take every single truck off the road so car drivers aren't inconvenienced at any time they're on the road!

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:19 pm

mach1rob wrote:He gained nothing, I'll freely admit that, BUT think of that extra fuel economy you got sat at 56 compared to 80

OK hows this for a solution, take every single truck off the road so car drivers aren't inconvenienced at any time they're on the road!

Now come on Rob - you know damned well that is an unwarranted reaction owing to the fact that you haven't got a good answer to the question in hand

But seriously, it is more dangerous than inconvenient - you KNOW there are people who will drive up your @rse in an attempt to speed you up - even when they can see the dirty great 44 Tonne monster in front of you.

mach1rob · Post by **mach1rob** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:29 pm

Not at all! It seems that no one likes to be inconvenienced by having to wait behind a truck for any time, so fine lets take all vehicles that have limiters so that's coaches as well off the road so you can all fly about at 70-80.

Oh but then once the forecourts run out of fuel you won't be able to drive, but then, you probably wouldn't have the energy to drive because you have no food in the house cos the shops are empty. I could continue. Small price to pay having to sit at 56 for a while now and again.

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:31 pm

mach1rob wrote:Not at all! It seems that no one likes to be inconvenienced by having to wait behind a truck for any time, so fine lets take all vehicles that have limiters so that's coaches as well off the road so you can all fly about at 70-80.

Oh but then once the forecourts run out of fuel you won't be able to drive, but then, you probably wouldn't have the energy to drive because you have no food in the house cos the shops are empty. I could continue. Small price to pay having to sit at 56 for a while now and again.

Give it a rest you reactionary old git

You KNOW there is no argument about trucks carrying everything we need.

You've also admitted that there is NO DEFENCE for this idiot's actions.

Don't try deleting the evidence either

618ireland · Post by **618ireland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:38 pm

rover220 wrote:
mach1rob wrote:
Ok Paul, here's your example, the other day when you came out and met me on the A449, now, if say I'd of managed to attain 1 MPH more for 2-3 hours over a total of 10 hours driving, instead of only getting to Penkridge, I may have got a few more laybys closer
wow, a whopping 10 miles over a 10 hour day, its just not worth the hassle it causes imo

Also you are bound to hit some traffic somewhere to wipeout your gains, although sometimes your slight gains may get you to a bottleneck just before it turns into a bottleneck so it may be occassionally worth it

mach1rob · Post by **mach1rob** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:46 pm

618ireland wrote: Also you are bound to hit some traffic somewhere to wipeout your gains, although sometimes your slight gains may get you to a bottleneck just before it turns into a bottleneck so it may be occassionally worth it

Traffic is the worst thing (see the thread on highway agency numpties

) and yeah can screw your day up completely, but like you say 1-2 mph more could mean you miss it by minutes and go straight through. Happened to me other week, I missed the woman being run over on M3 buy matter of minutes, had I been 5 mins behind I'd of been sat on the motorway not moving for about 6 hours!

daz500 · Post by **daz500** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:53 pm

Why can't all truckers drive at night-time and then they wouldn't bother us and they'd have the roads all to themselves

rover220 · Post by **rover220** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:57 pm

mach1rob wrote:
. Happened to me other week, I missed the woman being run over on M3 buy matter of minutes, had I been 5 mins behind I'd of been sat on the motorway not moving for about 6 hours!

its not just truckers and co that suffer form things like this, you make it sound like it is.

618ireland · Post by **618ireland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:57 pm

daz500 wrote:Why can't the truckers drive at night-time and then they wouldn't bother us and they'd have the roads all to themselves

Presume you realize that loads of haulage is done at night

rover220 · Post by **rover220** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:58 pm

618ireland wrote:
daz500 wrote:Why can't the truckers drive at night-time and then they wouldn't bother us and they'd have the roads all to themselves
Presume you realize that loads of haulage is done at night

it was a tongue in cheek comment me thinks

618ireland · Post by **618ireland** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 9:59 pm

rover220 wrote:
618ireland wrote:
daz500 wrote:Why can't the truckers drive at night-time and then they wouldn't bother us and they'd have the roads all to themselves
Presume you realize that loads of haulage is done at night
it was a tongue in cheek comment me thinks

was thinking that

mach1rob · Post by **mach1rob** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:04 pm

rover220 wrote:
mach1rob wrote:
. Happened to me other week, I missed the woman being run over on M3 buy matter of minutes, had I been 5 mins behind I'd of been sat on the motorway not moving for about 6 hours!
its not just truckers and co that suffer form things like this, you make it sound like it is.

Really? I thought all the cars sat next to me in the jam were just there for the fun of it

rover218is · Post by **rover218is** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:11 pm

Its so frustrating and as you say Paul it always seems to be on that stretch of the M54 from Wolves to Cosford......and beyond for me in Telford.

I can understand Rob's points about we all want to be there a bit quicker, Rob's 1mph can make a big difference to his daily run and we (car drivers) like to sit it about 70-80, but to sit there for 8.5+ miles holding up hundreds of motorists behind them whilst they exchange glances through the side windows because neither can gain any distance to finalise this attempt to gain time is JUST PLAIN SELFISH

Garry

Post by **Punx0r** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:12 pm

Don't give us that poor-trucker guff rob

My dad drives HGV and rants about just this kind of thing. 8.5+ miles is more than I've heard of before and I know he'd be fuming if he had to sit there that long when driving a car.

Most car drivers are ok with slow overtakes, but when they fail to actually make any progress and refuse to give up people understandably get pissed off!

mach1rob · Post by **mach1rob** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:22 pm

I never said 8 odd miles was ok

I agree, once you find that you're not getting past then you back off and move back in behind and wait for the next hill!

Anyways I'm off as I have to work tomorrow blocking up the highways and byways of the UK

Roboscot · Post by **Roboscot** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:27 pm

Punx0r wrote:Most car drivers are ok with slow overtakes, but when they fail to actually make any progress and refuse to give up people understandably get pissed off!

In this case I think the reasonable thing to do is for the truck in the slow lane to back off 1mph for the other one to pass - the fact that truck 2 was up his @rse in the first place suggests he will then proceed to pull away once ahead even if its just 0.1mph quicker. All truck 1 has lost is a lorry length.

What is even more infuriating is when they do it on a hill

Roboscot · Post by **Roboscot** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:31 pm

mach1rob wrote:wait for the next hill!

I hadnt read that when I made my post about hills lol!

BlueRover · Post by **BlueRover** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:42 pm

Could have turned into another RT Mods War methinks.

Simply put as Rob has said before in another thread, all truckers drive on the limiter.

Problem is, some trucks limits are inaccurate. If every truck was governed to do exactly 60mph max, monitored by GPS, then a: they'd never catch each other up and b: there'd be no opportunities to overtake. Then there could be exclusive truck lanes and no hold ups for car drivers.

Bikernut · Post by **Bikernut** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 11:38 pm

On the plus side...once you do manage to get past offending trucker,isn`t it a beautifully clear motorway in front of you

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 12:00 am

BlueRover wrote:Could have turned into another RT Mods War methinks.

Meaning?

talkingcars · Post by **talkingcars** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 12:17 am

Most LGV's (and PSV's) are fitted with limiters that are linked to the speed shown on the speedo, as we all know speedos vary in acuracy, in my experience using sat nav in our small fleet of 6 lorries this can be upto 10%

Not all limiters are set at 56mph, some are as low as 50mph (Tescos trucks for instance), or as high as 60mph.

Different trucks have different engines running from as low as 80bhp up to well over 600bhp so they all have different abilities to climb hills, accelerate etc.
The body type also makes a big difference, our wagon and drag is a nippy beast without the drag and a 480bhp artic tractor unit without a trailer is faster than quite a few car drivers if driven quickly. Flatbeds are more slippery than box trailers.........weather conditions can come in here as well......

The weight of the load makes a big diffrence as well, when loaded with 12 tonnes of building materials our crane lorries "would" be off the speedo down some hills in neutral!

A night in a layby or tucked up at home with the Mrs, I know where I would rather be

As for pulling out to overtake on a hill, you think it is frustrating as a car driver to have to slow down for a slower vehicle, imagine how frustrating that is if you will not be able to regain your momentum so will speed the rest of the hill constantly changing gear. with a big heavy truck clutch. and with a big heavy gear lever. and possibly having to swap between rations......

Now to the point of the original post, what a pair of xylophones? well, if the driver in the outside lane backs off and falls back in behind he could well cause an accident, with limited rearward vision and not knowing if there is a car hidden from veiw feet from the rear bumper it would be dangerous to slow down. And the driver in the inside lane, what was he doing wrong???

However if I am ever in that situation I do give in, eventually, well after a few hundred yards, it is especially easy if you are being overtaken as all you have to do is lift off the gas and then go straight back on, you loose just enough momentum to let the other lorry pass.

Post by **Punx0r** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 12:40 am

Do away with the limiters IMO. Not only would it solve this problem, but I bet it'd prevent some cases of falling asleep at the wheel too. At 3am when they've got the road to themselves being able to crack on a bit and do 65mph would be good all round. Not to mention that they'd actually be able to use their 60mph speed limit in the motorways.

I read an article a while back (pretty sure if was on safespeed) that stated since the introduction of limiters, HGV's have become the second worst improving group* for accidents - only beaten by born-again bikers.

IMO it's a good example of why fitting limiters to cars would be a bad idea.

* The idea being that accident rates are generally always decreasing for many reasons, but some don't show as much improvement as they should.

Rovertech 2.0

Why do they do it?

Why do they do it?

Re: Why do they do it?

Re: Why do they do it?

Re: Why do they do it?

Re: Why do they do it?

Re: Why do they do it?

Re: Why do they do it?

Re: Why do they do it?

Re: Why do they do it?