Well no obviously not, and the inaccuracy/discrepancy in consumer market speedometers will be more than 2mph anyway.
It needs to be said, because there are people out there who will insist that 2mph under the limit is intolerably slow. Obviously there isn't a hard-and-fast cutoff in most cases (there are a few minimum speed limits out there), but there's a reason why the standard is 'making reasonable progress', not 'driving at the maximum safe speed'.
Where I grew up, there was a single-track back road that went from a 30mph limit to a 60mph limit - then immediately entered a series of blind 'S' bends beginning with a very tight 90 degree corner. Most people using that road braked when the speed limit increased - and those that hadn't, were already well below the 30mph limit.
There's an extra danger driving on unfamiliar NSL rural lanes that must be appreciated; the locals know every twist, dip and crest of the road - not only where visibility is poor, but much more importantly where glimpses of the road ahead show that it is 'probably' clear. Anybody not familiar with the road naturally proceeds at an approriate cautious pace, but the locals following them apply pressure because they know what the road ahead is 'probably' to be like.
While I agree to an extent, my driving instructor told me to drive to 'limit points' - that is, I should always be able to stop in the distance of road I can see in front of me. Locals need to drive like this because while they may know every twist and bump, they don't know when there's going to be a cyclist, pedestrian, horse, deer, sheep or skip parked around a corner. Non-locals need to drive like this for the same reason but also because they don't know every twist and bump.
Precisely. A safe speed is being able to stop within the limit of your vision of a clear road. On NSL rural roads, that still leaves the risk of the other person being responsible, - car of similar weight or tractor. The problem is that you in a car cannot account for the other driver's behaviour, so will likely come off a lot worse than the tractor/truck/Land Rover coming the other way.
I blame automatics for the braking thing. They put it in Drive and leave it there then use their brakes rather than using 2 or 1. My sister does that.
I don’t use anything other than D when driving, but there’s no need for braking all the time if you anticipate. The comments about spatial awareness are germane, I think, because when I had a stroke I was immediately banned from driving, but demonstration of spatial awareness (signed off by my GP) were what allowed me to drive again.
There is only the Drive function on many (most?) modern automatics, no more 1-2-3 function. There’s a sport mode but that’s it. My car is a Defender 90, new as of December ‘24.
Sure, or if overtaking in a lane designated for traffic coming in the opposite direction (or one of the old S3 'suicide lane' roads).
Sorry. Havent driven an automatic this century.
You do also get the other variation - the locals know that such-and-such a point is where the sheep always get out/there's a bad patch/three cars have gone on their roof in the last two years - and moderate their driving accordingly. The result is locals switching between driving with reckless speed, then braking suddenly, with no obvious reason as far as the visitor is concerned.
AIUI, traffic policing is seen as being expensive, unpopular with the public, and 'not proper police work', so it's an easy cut any time funds are running short. The result is that there are very few roads policing units in much of the country.
2 or 1 are really only for going down steep hills to provide engine braking, there's no other reason not to have the vehicle in Drive otherwise.
Do the police keep the fines levied, or do they go to the Exchequer? If the police keep the income, they could possibly be self-financing.
General funds, AIUI. Letting police keep fines creates a set of perverse incentives.
All fines go directly to the Exchequer, for reasons which should be obvious. This will then distribute some money back to bodies like the Road Safety Partnerships, but the police don't get a say in the allocations. I drive frequently on motorways and traffic cars, both marked and unmarked are often visible, even if less so than previously.
How can you tell they're a local, other than the fact they're driving like a lunatic?
That and what they drive is often a significant clue!
I'm not sure this is a great tactic.
It’s not tailgating, just using how much they slow down as a guide for how tight the corner is rather than driving blind. Means you can be smoother. You usually know if they are reasonable or dangerous from how they behaved behind you and whilst overtaking.
I didn't say it was
Yes but as I pointed out, this is far from flawless, in fact if you did this on a driving test you could end up failing - if the driver in front takes a corner too quickly, you do too, you both end up in a hedge. That's not a good thing.
I'd also caution against relying on the angles suggested by satnav/online maps to be quite honest. There's a corner near our village which is a tight 90 degree turn, but if you check it on Waze it looks quite gentle. Possibly why there's been police tape on the outside of it for the past few weeks after a Corsa ended up in the hedge.
Indeed, I think this is not dissilimar to following limit points, just a slightly different definition.
I used to drive manuals all the time where I always felt a sense of failure if I slowed down actually having to use the brakes.
Oh yes.
