Single carriageway overtakes for the sake of overtaking?

[Benbay001]

Do you do them?
When you know there is a dual carriageway a mile in front (for example)?

[kaf]

If it will aid my progress by a useful margin then yes, otherwise what is the point?

[0a]

Yes, if it is safe and I am happy to do so. Why wouldn't you?

[VR46]

If it's safe to do so, yes. Slower cars/drivers are a menace and the sooner you pass them the better.

[The Black Flash]

Sometimes, sometimes not.

[Mastodon2]

When it's safe and appropriate to do so, yes most of the time.

[Benbay001]

It was a matter of curiosity, thank you.

[7mike]

kaf said:

If it will aid my progress by a useful margin then yes, otherwise what is the point?

That would pretty much rule out overtaking then. If I'm being tailgated my some knuckle dragging goon who has only caught up with me because of a slower vehicle ahead I will definitely consider an overtake as a means of increasing safety margins.

[0000]

It's not really for the sake of it - it's to make progress. Who knows what delays you might experience by waiting.

[ScoobyChris]

I'm not sure a d/c being further down the road would make much difference to my immediate decision to overtake. If it's safe and I'm currently travelling slower than I would like to, then why not.

Chris

[creampuff]

Case by case basis. If I had to use full throttle and exceed NSL by a large margin in order to perform the overtake, then probably not, I'd wait for DC.

[Fastdruid]

Yes (if it's safe), never waste an overtaking opportunity, you don't know what may happen down the road (that DC may have road works and be restricted to one lane for example) but you know what is happening now.

[Trif]

Stuck behind someone doing 40-50? I wouldn't bother. Someone doing 25 then the will take the first opportunity.

[BertBert]

I'd overtake wherever I can (safely) regardless of the "gain".

[Benbay001]

Trif said:

Stuck behind someone doing 40-50? I wouldn't bother. Someone doing 25 then the will take the first opportunity.

I dont know where you live, but down here in Dorset, you would never overtake anything if this was your thought process.

[New POD]

If there is space to overtake safely, I will.

I assume that by the time I reach the dual carriageway, something else will be holding me up.

[MC Bodge]

Personally, I enjoy driving and like to drive smoothly at my own pace, not having to follow dithering drivers who slow erratically at unnecessary times and places. (of course, anybody slower is rubbish and anybody faster is a hooligan...)

Over a short journey the difference in time between staying behind the car in front and overtaking will not be that significant, but it is far preferable to have a clear road in front of me. On a longer journey it could make a significant difference.

I overtake where I can do so safely.

Edited by MC Bodge on Sunday 3rd June 10:39

[kaf]

Without there being a recognisable benefit, I would not overtake for one reason, no overtake is ever without risk.

For all the planning and anticipation, accounting for safety etc, there is one thing it is impossible to be fully certain of - the driver you are overtaking!

IMHO Nearly every driving decision is based upon risk/reward. With no reward there is no point in accepting the (even slightly) increased risk.

[deltashad]

Definitely.

Too many times I have waited until the dual carriageway, only to have some dimwit attempt an over take and only just pass the slow moving vehicle, then the road goes into single carriageway again and your left stuck, still behind the slow moving vehicle.

Overtake asap with kick down, then relax, apply cruise control, happy thoughts.

[Vaux]

Fastdruid said:

Yes (if it's safe), never waste an overtaking opportunity, you don't know what may happen down the road (that DC may have road works and be restricted to one lane for example) but you know what is happening now.

This.
Waited once for a short stretch of DC and road maintenance dept. had coned off lane 2 for grass cutting.
Won't make that mistake again.